Martin County School District
MTSSS Leadership Institute
June 2011
Tabathia Baldy, District RtI Coordinator
Lynnette Hallonquist, District Reading Coordinator
Paula Lewis, School Psychologist
Liz Tetreault, Elementary School Assistant Principal
Located along the Treasure Coast
http://www.insideflorida.com/map/florida-counties-map/
District Demographics

Approximately 18,000 Students
11,577 Caucasian
 1408 African American
 4260 Hispanic
 53 Indian
 289 Asian
 406 Multi-Racial
 7 Pacific Islander

Demographics
2%
2%
Caucasian
24%
African American
Hispanic
8%
Multi-Racial
64%
Asian
Demographics Continued
41% of students are Economically
Disadvantaged
 13% of students are English Language Learners
 16% of students are Students with Disabilities

Martin County Schools
3 High Schools
 5 Middle Schools
 12 Elementary Schools
 2 Charter Schools
 4 Special Program Sites

Department of Juvenile Justice Site
 Residential Hospital Setting
 Alternative Education Setting
 Separate Day School (ESE)

District Organizational Chart
Superintendent
of Schools
Executive
Director of
Instructional
Services
Executive
Director of
Human
Resources and
Professional
Development
Executive
Director of
Exceptional
Students
Education
Assistant
Superintendent
for Leadership
and Development
Organizational Chart (continued)
Executive Director of
Instructional Services
Director of Elementary
Programs & School
Improvement
Response to
Intervention
Coordinator
Reading &
Language
Arts
Coordinator
PS/RtI
Coaches
Reading
Coaches
Director of Adult, Secondary
and Virtual Education
Programs
Math
Coordinator
Science
Coordinator
Assessment &
Accountability
Coordinator
Why Instructional Services?
A paradigm shift is needed
 In order for stakeholders to realize PS/RtI is not
simply a “track” to ESE, they must see it as a
General Education Initiative designed to ensure
ALL students receive the support they need to
meet expectations.
 We want to send a clear message that PS/RtI is
not about placing a student, it is about effective
instruction for all.

Funding Sources

2009/2010 – ARRA

2010/2011 – ARRA & CEIS

2011/2012 – CEIS
Rationale for Implementation



Our goal is to provide all students effective &
appropriate instruction/intervention in a more timely
manner using both historical and real time data.
We hope to implement a streamlined system in which
students are matched to an intervention which
provides them with the level of intensity and duration
necessary for them to accelerate their learning to
achieve benchmark expectations.
We hope that individuals and teams of personnel use
the problem solving process to identify appropriate
instruction for all students.
Our Mission



The mission of the Martin County School District, in
partnership with family and community, is to equip
students with the skills and knowledge necessary to
become responsible citizens through comprehensive
learning experiences and innovative environments that
extend beyond traditional walls.
Implementation of RtI allows schools in Martin County
to develop a framework for supporting the unique
academic and behavioral needs of all students.
It encourages instructional and support staff to
collaborate on best instructional practices.
District Expectations

It is the district expectation that ALL schools
will use the problem solving process when
developing their school improvement plans
and reflect on how students are responding to
instruction/interventions to inform their
instructional decisions at an individual,
classroom and school wide level.
Development & Structure



Spring 2009 - Martin County formed a District PS/RtI
Leadership Team which met periodically to develop our
district RtI plan.
Membership included the Assistant Superintendent,
Executive Director of Instructional Services, Executive
Director of Exceptional Student Education, Director of
School Improvement, Reading and Math Curriculum
Coordinators, School Psychologist, Behavior Analyst,
teacher union representation, and others as interested
participate in the process.
The plan was structured using the “Response to
Intervention Blueprints: District Level Edition”, NASDSE.
Current District Based
Leadership/Problem Solving Team
Current Implementation Status
Martin County is at full implementation status.
 All 12 Elementary Schools
 All 5 Middle Schools
 All 3 High Schools
 All School Based Leadership/Problem Solving
Teams have received training in PS/RtI and either
have a coach assigned to their school or can
request one as needed…


However, levels of implementation vary across
schools.
Integration of RtI: A & B
The School Based PS/RtI Team problem solves
around ANY student in need of intervention,
regardless of the need being academic or
behavioral.
 Teams are fluid.



Academic and behavioral specialists will participate in
problem solving process depending on identified need.
Many PS/RtI team members are also PBIS team
members.

We would like to move forward in blending these
teams into one fluid team.
Integration of RtI: A & B
 Our
goal is to
always look at
the “Whole
Child” when
problem solving.
Integration of RtI: A & B
School level
teams are
progressing
faster than
district level
teams to
integrate
PS/RtI & PBIS.
Instructional
Services
Exceptional
Students
Education
PS/RtI
PBIS
PS/RtI Supports
District Team provides Professional
Development for all School Based
Leadership/Problem Solving Teams.
 RtI Coaches support School Based
Leadership/Problem Solving Teams, classroom
teachers, and students on a daily basis.
 RtI Coordinator continuously arranges
additional effective Professional Development.

PS/RtI Supports

High Quality Progress Monitoring & Intervention
Materials have been purchased.

Will be used in the future as well
High Quality Professional Development has been
provided on how to effectively use these
materials.
 Coaches attend trainings alongside teachers to
provide continuous support and coaching .
 Teaming is often used as a system of supports.

PS/RtI Supports

Coaches and Coordinator formally meet each
month to problem solve and reflect on
implementation.


Coaches give insight to the district coordinator
about the actual implementation level of each
school site.
RtI Bulletin

During Year 1 implementation, the RtI
Coordinator would send out a bulletin
periodically to address reoccurring concerns & to
build a common language.
PS/RtI Supports

Collaboration is key









School Psychologists
ESE Specialists
Reading, Writing, & Math Coaches
Behavior Specialists
Guidance Counselors
Administrators
Teachers
Parents
Outside Agencies
PS/RtI Coaches
Act as liaisons between SBLT & District
 Facilitate the Problem Solving Process at the
school level
 Provide consistent coaching and modeling for
teachers
 Analyze academic and behavioral data
 Conduct non-threatening observations and
provide timely feedback and suggestions

RtI Coaches
Display student responses to
instruction/intervention graphically for SBLT
team
 Maintain accurate records of all students
receiving interventions and their responses
 Consult with & support teachers in identifying
appropriate interventions
 Are a consistent presence at the schools

School Based PS/RtI Teams
Facilitator


Administrator
Parent



Instructional
Support
Classroom
Teacher



Data
Coach
Recorder
Time
Keeper




Principal
Assistant Principal
RtI Coach
Reading Coach
Writing Coach
School Psychologist
Guidance Counselor
Behavior Specialist
Math Specialist
ESE Teacher/Team Leader
Parent Liaison
Classroom Teacher(s)
SBLT Organizational Structure

Each school has a set day, time, & place for PS/RtI
Meetings (e.g. Tuesdays @ 2:20 in the conference
room)




Usually when the School Psychologist is available
This works best when administration ensures this
time remains “sacred,” and does not allow for other
events to be scheduled during this time.
It becomes part of the school’s organizational
structure.
Of course, many teams need to meet in addition to
these regularly scheduled times.
Ensuring fidelity of the process?
Coaches facilitate most meetings
 A common language is encouraged



Avoid admiring the problem
Paperwork & Procedures follow the 4 steps of
Problem Solving and guide teams
Form #194 (academic interventions & SOME
behavioral interventions)
 Form #196 (behavioral interventions when an
FBA/BIP is needed)

Form # 194
Available on Outlook Forms to any district
employee
 Schools have copies available in specified
location
 Used to problem solve around academic
concerns and behavioral concerns that do not
require an FBA/BIP

Page 1: Summary of Concerns
Page 2: Gap Analysis
Page 3: Problem Identification & Analysis
Page 4: Intervention Design
Page 5: Response to Intervention
Page 6: Signatures & Parent Contact
Form # 196
Available on Outlook Forms to any district
employee
 Used to problem solve around behaviors that
require intensive intervention
 Aligns a Functional Behavior Analysis/Behavior
Intervention Plan (FBA/BIP) with the Problem
Solving Process
 Adapted from the ERASE form (PBIS)

Page 1: Problem Identification
Page 2: Problem Analysis (FBA)
Page 3: Intervention Design (BIP)
Page 4: Intervention Design (BIP)
(continued)
Page 5: Response to Intervention
Facilitators of Success
Unwavering Support from District
Superintendent, Assistant Superintendent &
Directors
 Size of District

Not too big, not too small
 Allows for infrastructure conducive to
implementation
 Allows for relationships to be built among school
level & district level staff

Facilitators of Success (continued)

ARRA funds
Purchase of high quality intervention materials as
well as PD for implementation
 Salaries for personnel to facilitate implementation
 Allowed for layers of Professional Development
based on need and target audience


teachers, support staff, administrators, etc.
Facilitators of Success
Internal coaches to support schools on a
consistent basis
 Effective and ongoing Professional Development
 People with open minds ready to embrace a true
paradigm shift
 Department of Education Monitoring Visit



Opportunity to reflect on our practices & identify
strengths and needs
Continuous support from USF/RtI Project
Facilitators of Success
Administrators who are active participants in
the Problem Solving Process & set the
expectation for all teachers to be active
participants as well
 Collaboration at the school level for
streamlining initiatives
 Conducting “Planning for Next Year Meetings”



Ensures students in need receive interventions from day
one
Emphasizes the importance of using careful thought when
placing students for next school year
Barriers to Success

Lack of true understanding by Key
Stakeholders


More opportunities for learning for all
stakeholders are needed
Old procedures still exist that prohibit true
paradigm shifts from occurring

All departments should reassess & reflect on all
policies, procedures, and practices yearly
Barriers to Success
Overcoming the mindset of
“A label = Help”
 Poorly designed interventions lead to poor
responses



This leads to a lack of buy-in
Over or Under Problem Solving

A balance is needed
Barriers to Success
Lack of collaboration among some district
level teams
 “Us vs. Them” mentality

Professional conversations must happen
 We must be willing to step out of our comfort
zones and truly assess where we are and where
we need to be

Barriers to Success

Loss of ARRA Funds
We must be creative with funding
 Continue to conduct needs assessments to
determine where funds are best utilized

We are addressing…

And monitoring the progress of:
Leadership
 K-12 Alignment
 Coaching
 Evaluation/Accountability
 Data-Based Problem Solving/Data Systems
 Sustainability


Our goal is to always reflect on our progress
and look for means of improvement.
Leadership
Elementary
School
Based
Leadership
PS/RtI Teams
High School
Based
Leadership
PS/RtI Teams
District
Leadership
PS/RtI
Team
Middle
School
Based
Leadership
PS/RtI
Teams
Leadership

PS/RtI Coordinator & PS/RtI Coaches


Sends the message that “this is important” and
“you have support”
Relationships are built

Administrators can contact the coordinator or
any coach at anytime
Curriculum Coordinators often integrate RtI
into their Professional Development
 Consistent message is shared

K-12 Alignment
Added Secondary PS/RtI Coaches this school
year
 Elementary and Secondary Coaches will
communicate needs of transitioning students &
monitor their progress.
 A Secondary PS/RtI Team/Cohort has been
established.
 Schools have shown interest in further
development (e.g. participation in pilot programs).

Coaching
PS/RtI Coaches are highly trained in the
problem solving process, literacy, content
areas, and behavior.
 Coaches work as a team and arrange
schedules to meet needs of all schools.
 Coaches collaborate with PBIS, Literacy, and
Content Area Coaches to streamline
initiatives.

Coaching
Each School has an RtI Coach assigned
 2010/2011 (9 Coaches)





1 High School Coach (3 schools)
2 Middle School Coaches (5 schools)
6 Elementary School Coaches (12 schools)
2011/2012


Budget allows for 5 coaches
Even though the presence of a coach will be less, it is
important to remain a presence in each school on a
weekly basis
Data Based Problem Solving/Data
Systems

Performance Matters



Online data base
FCAT scores (3-12th grade)
District Benchmark Test Scores (3rd – 12th Grade)




Reading, Math, Science
Allows for item analysis per benchmark on FCAT &
District Benchmark Assessments (3rd – 12th Grade)
Allows for sorting by AYP subgroup, gender, grade,
grade level, teacher, et c.
Recently added FAIR Data from PMRN (K-12) and
attendance data
Data Based Problem Solving/Data
Systems

SWIS (School -Wide Information System)



Behavioral Data
Moving to RtI:B database for 2011/2012
PMRN (Progress Monitoring & Reporting
Network)

FAIR data
TERMS (attendance, suspensions, CEIS reporting)
 Pinnacle (grades, attendance)


Includes “Parent Viewer”
Data Based Problem Solving/Data
Systems

Online Data Management Systems for
Progress Monitoring of Reading
Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System
 Fountas & Pinnell Leveled Literacy Intervention

Evaluation/Accountability

All school based teams were encouraged to
use the SAPSI.
6 Elementary Schools participated
 3 Middle Schools participated


Professional Development is provided on an
ongoing basis in schools by PS/RtI Coaches &
for SBLT’s by District Team.

Collaboration among coordinators to streamline
PD as needed
Evaluation/Accountability
Each coach maintains an intervention log for
each school they serve.
 Excel document allows for sorting by grade,
gender, ethnicity, teacher, AYP subgroup,
intervention, previous retentions, attendance
issues, meeting dates, et c.

Evaluation/Accountability: Outcomes
More students are receiving interventions in a
more timely manner.
 Attendance rates have increased.
 Retentions have decreased.
 Initial Referrals for Comprehensive Evaluations
have decreased.
 Students are responding positively to the
majority of interventions.

Number of Elementary Students Who Have Received
Interventions during the 2010/2011 School Year
1200
1067
1080
982
1000
909
731
800
592
646
600
413
400
200
125
0
By Sep 30 By Oct 31 By Nov 30 By Dec 31 By Jan 31 By Feb 28 By Mar 31 By Apr 30 By May 31
Martin County School District
Attendance
160 Day Comparison
Percentage of Students Maintaining at or above 90% Attendance Rate
Percentages Include Excused and Unexcused Absences
94.0%
93.7% 93.9%
92.9%
92.5%
93.0%
92.0%
90.5%
90.3%
91.0%
90.0%
2009SY
88.9%
2010SY
89.0%
87.7%
88.0%
87.6%
87.0%
86.0%
85.0%
84.0%
Elementary Schools
Middle Schools
High Schools
2011SY
22% Reduction in Retentions from
2008/2009 to 2009/2010
Number of Retentions in Martin County
400
365
350
284
300
250
200
150
100
50
Data Not Available
0
2008/2009
2009/2010
2010/2011
3 Year Comparison of Elementary School Referral
Rates
400
390
350
300
250
74%
Reduction
from 08/09
200
150
101
70%
Reduction
from 08/09
117
100
50
0
2008/2009
2009/2010
2010/2011
Number of Students Referred for Evaluation
90% of 2010/2011 Elementary
School Interventions were Effective
117
(10%)
Number of Students Who
Received Interventions
Number of Students
Referred for
Comprehensive Evaluations
(90%)
1080
Sustainability

Compliance vs. Culture


Although we are at full implementation status, we
are not positive that it would continue without
the supports we currently have in place.
If we know change takes a minimum of 3 – 5
years to take effect, why would we stop
providing support after only 2 years?
We have made so much progress...
http://dailykarate.wordpress.com/2009/05/14/hitting-a-plateau/
But have a lot of work ahead…
http://dailykarate.wordpress.com/2009/05/14/hitting-a-plateau/
Sustainability
We believe the key to sustainability is support.
 We are striving to keep coaches in schools so
that administrators and teachers are
supported in their efforts to implement PS/RtI
with integrity and fidelity.
 We are striving to continue providing high
quality Professional Development, not just on
Problem Solving, but also on how to improve
effective instruction for all students.

Sustainability
Our goal is NOT to maintain our current level
of implementation.
 Our goal is to IMPROVE upon our current
level of implementation.
 We must continue to build capacity at the
school level so that their ability to Problem
Solve can continue to evolve, even with the
decrease in the presence of coaches.

Planning for Sustainability…
 Personnel
15 % of IDEA
Grant will be
used for CEIS
15%

CEIS
SWD
85%
Coordinator &
5 Coaches
 Professional
Development
 Intervention Materials
 Social-Emotional &
Behavioral Support
Moving Forward
Provide more opportunities for learning for all
stakeholders
 Move from just “Parent Involvement” to a
true understanding by all parents
 Build relationships across departments to
ensure collaboration at the district level
 Encourage all schools to use Problem Solving
in all areas

Moving Forward
Begin to have difficult conversations in a
professional manner
 Begin problem solving systemically
 Create a balance between over problem
solving and under problem solving
 Become more proactive in celebrating
successes publicly

Questions?