(District Name)
(School Name)
Response to Intervention Plan
Fall, 2010
(Name) School RTI Model
Tier 1 General Education
General education teachers will use scientifically research-based reading and mathematics programs in
their classrooms. Scientifically research-based reading curriculum and instruction must include instruction in
phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Essential components of scientifically
research-based math curriculum and instruction include conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, strategic
competence, adaptive reasoning, and productive response. Core and supplemental reading and math curriculum
instruction should be scientifically research-based and include the above mentioned core components.
Documentation of independent peer-reviewed research studies should be readily available and should be from
strong sources, such as peer-reviewed journals, review by credentialed panels, and independent alignment with
Illinois Learning Standards (Appendix A). If strong sources are not readily available, then moderate sources,
such as field studies by the curriculum publisher, should be used. In the event that the current curriculum is not
scientifically-based, a committee will be formed to research curriculum and instruction that can be implemented
in a timely manner.
At least two different measures of fidelity (Appendix B), such as principal observation, peer-check
measures, self-check measures, content specialist measures, or curriculum supervisors measures, should be
conducted regularly and the results of the measures should be readily available for review. The fidelity
measures should include the following information: length of time curriculum has been in place, amount of
teacher training in current curriculum, length of time the student was taught the curriculum, degree to which the
instructional methodologies and techniques are used, and degree to which the instructional procedures and
materials are used.
Note: General education classroom teachers will use curriculum-based materials to deliver Tier 1
interventions. The minimum target for Tier 1 is 75% of students meeting or exceeding the cut score for Tier 1 in
any reading or math skill area. If the data reveal that the curriculum-based materials are not working for the Tier
1 students (ie, less than 75% of students are in Tier 1), then other approved interventions (Appendix C) will be
used. All interventions used should be research-based, and the research documentation should be readily
available. Pofessional development activities will be provided for staff with emphasis on scientifically researchbased interventions.
STEP 1: Screening (Responsibility: general education with support)
Benchmarking will occur in reading and math with all student grades K-12 in fall, winter, and spring.
Reading benchmarks will focus on phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension.
Math benchmarks will focus on conceptual understanding, procedural fluency, strategic competence, adaptive
reasoning, and productive response.
“At-risk” students will be those students who score below the 25th percentile on national norms or in
some cases, school norms. The Fall benchmark period will be used to identify at-risk students. For
Kindergarten students, the Fall benchmark period will be used to gather baseline data. The Winter benchmark
will be used to identify Kindergarten at-risk students because of the vastly different experiences that such
students bring with them into the first few weeks of school. Other students who do not meet the above criteria
also could be entered into the “at-risk” population through teacher recommendation provided that the student
scores below the 25th percentile on national norms and/or is in the bottom 25 percent of the class. The intent is
not to limit the number of children receiving intervention and monitoring, but to ensure adequate resources to
provide such services for those most in need. If more than 10 percent of the class is “at-risk,” begin with the
lowest 10 percent and gradually add other students to the intervention Tiers as possible with the available
resources.
STEP 2: Modification of general education program
Classroom teachers will supplement the general educational program with building approved
interventions (Appendix C) which include but are not limited to providing Differentiated Instruction in order to
increase student progress. Tier I interventions will be carried out in the general education classroom by the
classroom teacher.
Classroom teachers will inform parent of concerns and remedial strategies by utilizing the Tier
I Intervention Parent Contact Form. It should be noted that this is not obtaining parent permission, but only to
inform and invite the parent to become a part of the intervention team.
STEP 3: Monitoring responsiveness to general education (Responsibility: general education with
support)
“At-risk” students are assessed with curriculum-based measurement probes (three to four probes,
median-plotted) and data-charted at a minimum of every two weeks and whenever a possible advance to the
next Tier of support is being considered by the classroom teacher. The “targeted” students’ progress is
compared to national and class norms. Inadequate progress is defined as making less weekly progress than a
grade-level student at the 25th percentile and functioning in the bottom 10th percent of the class. The School
Psychologist will be available to assist in data interpretation. If a student is making inadequate progress the
teacher will evaluate the adequacy of the current intervention plan. After evaluation the teacher should either
change or add an additional scientifically research based intervention for another 6 to 8 week period (In this
step, a minimum of 2 interventions should be implemented with fidelity.) or if the plan was deemed adequate,
make a referral to the Response to Intervention Team (make sure to include a fidelity check) The classroom
teacher will inform the parent of the current rate of progress and either plan to change the Tier I intervention or
refer the student to the Response to Intervention Team.
If a student is behind, but making progress, an additional 6 to 8 week period of interventions may be provided to
close the achievement gap. The classroom teacher and/or interventionist will evaluate the adequacy of the
current intervention plan and consider changing or adding additional interventions in order to make adequate
progress. The classroom teacher will inform the parent of the current rate of progress, the additional time for
interventions, and any changes in the intervention program.
"It is misleading to represent RtI as lengthy means-to-an-end procedure to determine eligibility, the RtI process
provides intervention strategies for the student much earlier than in the traditional system, and the eligibility
process is designed to refine the student's intervention plan -- not to wait until the student has a special
education label to intervene. Furthermore, it is the primary intent to ensure that students receive high quality,
effective instruction and intervention strategies as early and effectively as possible. Thus, it is not a way to
avoid providing special education services. Rather, it should result in a more timely provision of services to
address the students' needs." (ISBE 2010, Frequently Asked Questions about Special Education Eligibility and
Entitlement within a Response to Intervention (RtI) Framework. Springfield, IL)
Exit process for Tier 1.
The process to determine adequate progress is as follows: The student must score at or above the 25th percentile
during the final week of the 6 to 8 week Tier I intervention period. The interventions will discontinue and the
student will be progress monitored on a weekly basis for the next three weeks. If the student continues to make
weekly progress at or above the growth rate of a grade-level student at the 25th percentile for each of the three
weeks, the student will be determined to have made adequate progress. Once adequate progress is met, the
student is no longer considered “at-risk” and Tier I interventions are no longer required. The classroom teacher
will inform the parent that adequate progress has been made and will no longer require Tier I interventions.
Tier II Implementation of Supplementary, Diagnostic Intervention
STEP 4: Referral to Response to Intervention Team, diagnostic intervention (Responsibility: general
education with support)
A Tier II Intervention increases the intensity, frequency and possibly the intervention attempted. A
typical Tier II plan might include 20 to 30 minute sessions 3 to 4 times per week in addition to instructional
practices already in place. Tier II interventions must also be carried out in a small group of 3 to 6 students. The
size of the group may slightly vary based on available resources in addition to the requirements of the
intervention being attempted. These interventions may be carried out in the classroom or in an intervention
room.
The RTI process must be documented by the Response to Intervention Team. Prior to the RtI Team
meeting the team may need to gather additional data from a teacher interview, parent interview and classroom
observation. A key question to be addressed by the teacher interview is whether the teacher has gathered
sufficient data and if additional information needs to be obtained before meeting with the RtI Team (The local
RtI team will determine how much data is sufficient). A key component of the classroom observation is to
determine the treatment fidelity of the Tier I interventions (is the intervention being carried out properly). If the
Response to Intervention Team determines that the intervention program at Tier I was not done with fidelity or
data gathered is insufficient, the referral to Tier II may be postponed until the interventions have been
implemented with fidelity and data gathered. The Response to Intervention Team will support the teacher
throughout this process.
The parent is kept informed throughout the Tier II process and is invited to the intervention team
meeting. Again, it should be noted that parental permission is not asked for, nor needed, as this is a general
education function. Parental input is acquired throughout the process, and parents are given a copy of the Tier
II intervention plan and kept informed by the classroom teacher and if necessary, RtI Team members, of the
student’s progress.
The first objective of the Response to Intervention Team is to define and refine the problem in
objective and measurable language. For example, suppose Johnny is struggling in his basal reader and is said to
be making minimal progress. The problem could be defined as difficulty in reading fluency or the problem
could be better defined (and more easily understood) if written as, Johnny is reading 15 words correctly per
minute from second-grade level passages (national norms place him below the 25th percentile) and his rate of
progress during Tier I is .5 words per week (below the growth rate for students at the 25th percentile) and in
comparison to classmates in the bottom 10 percent of his class.
Rate of growth is an essential concept during the Tiers and monitoring allows the Response to
Intervention Team to judge the amount of progress the student is achieving under current conditions. Goal
setting is used to determine the rate of growth necessary to bring the student to appropriate grade instructional
level in a reasonable amount of time. Monitoring the progress toward goals is based upon objective data
obtained from other students on that instructional level.
A second objective of the Response to Intervention Team is to identify the focus of the intervention. If
the student’s progress is well below classmates, then an individual intervention for that particular student needs
to be considered. If the student’s growth rate is comparable to classmates and over-all class growth is good,
then additional time in the current program needs to be considered. If the student’s progress is not significantly
below class norms, but overall class progress is significantly below overall district growth, then a classroom
intervention rather than an individual intervention needs to be considered. One way to quantify this example is
to look at the median student in the class. If that student is in an “at-risk” range, then no referral should be
made, since instructional intervention needs to begin at the classroom level.
Motivation is a third area to be considered by the Response to Intervention Team at this step. Is there a
skill problem (student does not have component skills) or a performance problem (student has skills but does
not consistently perform)? Are there behavioral modifications/incentives that can be utilized to increase
performance/learning?
Tier II non-responders receive a minimum 9 to 12 week supplementary intervention. A Tier II
intervention is a validated, relatively intense treatment used with non-responding students. For example: Four
20-minute sessions per week in the area of deficiency will be required, in addition to instructional practices
already in place. The school will be utilizing various support personnel (Title I, Reading Improvement Staff,
School Psychologist, School Social Workers, and Learning Behavior Specialists) and available supplementary
programs including, but not limited to, software programs such as Lexia and Reading Plus. Each Tier II
intervention will be individualized for the needs of the student and designed to help the student make adequate
progress in a reasonable amount of time.
Treatment fidelity will be monitored by a designated representative of the Response to Intervention
Team, typically the School Administrator.
STEP 5: Monitoring response to diagnostic treatment (Responsibility: general education with support)
The Response to Intervention Team will determine which of the team members will monitor student
progress with the administration of a weekly curriculum-based measurement probe in the deficit areas. The
school psychologist will be available for support and technical knowledge throughout the Tier II process.
General guidelines for the Response to Intervention Team to reconvene to determine plan effectiveness are no
sooner than 9 weeks and no later than 12 weeks after the plan was initiated. Although progress will be
determined on a case-by-case basis some general guidelines for the team are as follows:
Inadequate progress is defined as making less weekly progress than a grade-level student at the 25th
percentile and functioning in the bottom 10 percent of the class. School psychologists will be available to assist
in data interpretation. If a student is making at inadequate progress the Response to Intervention Team will
evaluate the adequacy of the current intervention plan. After evaluation the Response to Intervention Team may
either attempt a different intervention plan by utilizing different or adding additional interventions that are to be
implemented at a Tier II intensity level (20 to 30 minutes per day 3 to 4 times per week in addition to core
instruction) for an additional 9 to 12 week period or the team may determine to attempt interventions that are to
be implemented at a Tier III level (30 to 60 minutes per day 5 times per week in an individualized group 1:1,
1:2 or 1:3 in addition to core instruction). The Response to Intervention Team will inform the parent of the
current rate of progress and either the plan to change the Tier II intervention or implement a more intensive Tier
III intervention.
If a student is behind, but making progress, an additional 9 to 12 week period of interventions may be
provided to close the achievement gap. The Response to Intervention Team may either attempt a different
intervention plan by utilizing different or adding additional interventions that are to be implemented at a Tier II
intensity level (20 to 30 minutes per day 3 to 4 times per week in addition to core reading instruction). The
Response to Intervention Team will inform the parent of the current rate of progress, the additional time for
interventions, and any changes in the intervention program.
The process to determine adequate progress in Tier II is as follows: The student must score at or above
the 25th percentile during the final week of the 9 to 12 week Tier II intervention period. The Tier II
interventions will discontinue, the student will return to the Tier I support plan, and the student will be progress
monitored on a weekly basis for the next three weeks. If the student continues to make weekly progress at or
above the growth rate of a grade-level student at the 25th percentile for each of the three weeks, the student will
be determined to have made adequate progress. Once adequate progress is met, the student is no longer
considered requiring Tier II support and Tier I interventions will continue for 6 to 8 more weeks until the
student meets the Tier I adequate progress criteria. The Response to Intervention Team will inform the parent
that adequate progress has been made and will no longer require Tier II interventions.
Tier III Implementation of More Intensive Supplementary, Diagnostic Intervention
STEP 6: More intensive diagnostic intervention
A Tier III Intervention increases the intensity and frequency and possibly the intervention attempted. 30
to 60 minute sessions per day in the area of deficiency will be required in addition to instructional practices
already in place.
This Tier could involve continuation of an intervention in Tier II that showed progress but not at the rate
necessary to close the achievement gap, or it could add to or replace a Tier II intervention. Thus, the intensity
of the treatment would be increased, or a new intervention could be introduced because of a lack of response.
The group size also is reduced in Tier III from a size range of 3-6 students in Tier II to a size range of 1:1, 1:2
or 1:3. Some promising research shows that the grouping may result in better results than a 1:1 process. What
differentiates Tier III from Tier II is the intensity and frequency of the intervention.
The function of the Response to Intervention Team at this time is to review the previous definition of the
problem and to refine or redefine the problem if necessary. The parent is invited to the team meeting. The
intervention team reviews the data to this point and verifies that the treatment fidelity has been maintained. In
the event that treatment fidelity has not been maintained, then the student does not move to Tier III and the
school administrator addresses with the interventionists at Tier II the reasons for not maintaining treatment
fidelity. If the reason for not maintaining treatment fidelity was based upon resources, then the school
administrator redeploys the resources necessary to achieve and maintain treatment fidelity. If the teacher
interview, parent interview and classroom observation (A classroom observation by the School Psychologist in
addition to the Building Principal or Curriculum Coordinator is recommended at this point) were not completed
in Tier II, these diagnostic procedures are to be completed at this point. A problem-solving approach is utilized
by the Response to Intervention Team to generate additional diagnostic information that can be used in
planning.
A Response to Intervention Team Member will inform parent of interventions used in the classroom.
Treatment fidelity will be monitored by a designated representative of the Response to Intervention Team and
reported to the School Administrator.
STEP 7: Monitoring response to diagnostic treatment (Responsibility: general education with support)
The Response to Intervention Team will determine which of the team members will monitor student
progress with the administration of a weekly curriculum-based measurement probe in the deficit areas. The
school psychologist will be available for support and technical knowledge throughout the Tier III process. The
Response to Intervention Team will reconvene no sooner than 9 weeks and no later than 12 weeks after the plan
was initiated to determine effectiveness. Although progress will be determined on a case-by-case basis some
general guidelines for the team are as follows:
Inadequate progress is defined as making less weekly progress than a grade-level student at the 25th
percentile and functioning in the bottom 10 percent of the class. School psychologists will be available to assist
in data interpretation. If a student is making inadequate progress the Response to Intervention Team will
evaluate the adequacy of the current intervention plan. Progress needs to be closely monitored at Tier III by
members of the Response to Intervention Team, including the School Psychologist. If sufficient progress is not
being made, the Response to Intervention Team needs to consider current rate of growth and change over time,
variance of skills from grade-level performance, diagnostic information obtained from problem-solving process,
and fidelity of treatment. The Response to Intervention Team will then determine whether to implement
additional interventions or to refer the student for a special education evaluation.
If a student is behind, but making progress, an additional 9 to 12 week period of interventions may be
provided to close the achievement gap. The Response to Intervention Team may either attempt a different
intervention plan by utilizing different, or adding additional, interventions that are to be implemented at a Tier
III intensity level. The Response to Intervention Team will inform the parent of the current rate of progress, the
additional time for interventions, and any changes in the intervention program.
The process to determine adequate progress in Tier III is as follows: The student must score at or above
the 25th percentile during the final week of the 9 to 12 week Tier III intervention period. The Tier III
interventions will discontinue, the student will return to the Tier II support plan, and the student will be
monitored on a weekly basis for the next three weeks. If the student continues to make weekly progress at or
above the growth rate of a grade-level student at the 25th percentile for each of the three weeks, the student will
be determined to have made adequate progress. Once adequate progress is met, the student is no longer
considered requiring Tier III support and Tier II interventions will continue for 6 to 8 more weeks until the
student meets the Tier II adequate progress criteria. The Response to Intervention Team will inform the parent
that adequate progress has been made and will no longer require Tier III interventions.
STEP 8: Consider Referral for Special Education Evaluation [Step 1 for special education consideration
of disability]
Students that do not respond to Tier III interventions or have been proven to require Tier III
interventions to maintain adequate progress (even those who are parentally placed private school students or
students who are home-schooled) may be referred by the district to receive an individual evaluation that
addresses all of the eligibility determination, evaluation, and procedural safeguards specified in IDEA and the
need for special education services. Once the referral is completed, the building principal and school-based
problem-solving team will determine if the referral is appropriate. If the referral is determined to be
appropriate, the evaluation team will design an evaluation that considers the information that has already been
gathered through the Tiered RTI process and if needed what additional information is necessary to determine
eligibility. Parent consent must be obtained before the team can proceed with the evaluation. Once the
evaluation is completed the Individualized Education Program (IEP) Team will meet to review the information
gathered, determine eligibility, and determine educational programming. Per Federal regulations and state
rules, a referral for special education can be initiated at any time for a student who is suspected of having a
disability. Illinois administrative rules prohibit the district from using a student's participation in a process that
determines how he or she responds to scientific, research-based interventions as a basis for denying a parent's
request for an evaluation [23 IL Admin. Code 226.130]. If the district does not agree that a special education
evaluation is warranted, a written notice must be provided to the parents that informs them of this decision and
explains the reasons why it has been determined an evaluation is not indicated. Informed parental consent for a
special education evaluation must be obtained any time a special education evaluation is to be conducted.
However, informed parental consent is not required for activities such as universal screening, intervention
delivery, and progress monitoring which are implemented during the RtI process as part of the general
education program.
School districts must use a variety of assessment tools and strategies that may assist in determining
whether the student is a student with a disability. The student must also be assessed in all areas related to the
suspected disability, including, if appropriate, health, vision, hearing, social/emotional status, general
intelligence, academic performance, communicative status, and motor abilities. Such terms as "if appropriate"
establishes the authority of the school team of which the student's parent is a member. A comprehensive
evaluation is determined on an individual basis in accordance with a student's needs and may include the
following:
interview, observation of the student in specific, relevant settings, error analysis of work
samples, CBAs/Functional Academic Assessments, including CBMs and CBE, progress
monitoring data, results from state and local assessments, functional behavior assessments,
behavior rating scales, and vocational assessments. In conducting an evalution, the team may
not use any single measure or assessment as the sole criterion for making a disability
determination and for determining an appropriate educational program. Neither state rules nor
federal regulations addressing special education evaluation requirements, specify that a
particular type of assessment (e.g. an intelligence/IQ test) or assessment of cognitive processing
must be conducted.
Special education eligibility generally refers to a student's qualification for special education services as
a result of falling within and having his/her educational performance affected by one of the 13 federal disability
categories described in IDEA (34 CFR 300.8) as determined through the special education evaluation process.
Eligibility determination is addressed in the federal regulations at 34 CFR 300.306, with additional
requirements for SLD addressed at 34 CFR 300.311 and in the state special education rules at 23 IL Admin
Code 226.130(b). Entitlement is a term generally used in conjunction with a student's right to procedural
safeguards and provision of special education services based upon the determination that the student qualified
for special education services under IDEA. (ISBE 2010, Frequently Asked Questions about Special Education
Eligibility and Entitlement within a Response to Intervention (RtI) Framework. Springfield, IL)
Eligibility determination is ultimately the responsibility of the IEP team. There are three Determinant Factors
that teams must consider when making eligibility determinations. All three of the Determinant Factors must be
present in order to for a student to be made eligible for SLD.
1. The learning difficulties are not the result of lack of appropriate instruction in reading.
a. To determine "appropriate" instruction in reading the following criteria must be met:
i. The curriculum must be scientifically research-based
ii. The curriculum must be implemented with integrity & fidelity
iii. The curriculum must demonstrate positive outcomes for the majority of students.
iv. Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of reasonable intervals
b. Core curriculum and supplemental instruction shall be determined to be scientifically researchbased if in includes the following components:
i. Includes essential components of Reading instruction (phonemic awareness, phonics,
fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension) and is appropriate for the group of students
receiving the intervention
ii. The practices and programs of the curriculum have been thoroughly and rigorously
reviewed to determine whether they produce positive educational results in a predictable
manner based on objective, external validation from multiple sources.
c. The curriculum shall be determined to be implemented with integrity & fidelity if supported by:
i. Principal's observation of teacher performance through classroom visits and observations
conducted during the instructional period for the targeted content/subject area on a
regular basis.
ii. Staff carrying out the supplemental interventions is adequately trained and demonstrates
proficiency with the interventions.
iii. The curriculum and supplemental instruction is delivered with a high degree of fidelity,
with sufficient intensity, and for a sufficient length of time, as evidenced by progress
monitoring data. Specific information about the frequency and intensity of the
interventions delivered should be documented.
iv. Checklists of integrity of instruction completed by teachers as self-check measures
v. Checklists of integrity of instruction completed among teachers or the problem solving
team as peer-check measures.
vi. Completion of checklists by content specialists or curriculum supervisors working with
teachers (coaching support)
d. The curriculum shall be determined to demonstrate positive outcomes for the majority of
students if the following criteria are met:
i. A minimum of 75% of all students are meeting grade level benchmarks as determined by
either state testing or local CBM assessment.
ii. If the student is a part of a subgroup (i.e. ethnic minority, low income, etc) a minimum of
75% of the students within the subgroup must be meeting grade level benchmarks as
determined by either state testing or local CBM assessment in addition to the above
requirement.
e. Data that demonstrate that prior to, or as a part of, the referral process, the student was provided
appropriate instruction in regular education settings delivered by qualified personnel.
i. Data-based documentation of repeated assessments of achievement at reasonable
intervals, reflecting formative assessment of student progress during instruction, which
was provided to the child's parents
ii. Evidence of local universal screening/benchmark data that are collected on all students at
multiple times during the year.
iii. Evidence of progress monitoring data collected to determine the effectiveness of
interventions that were delivered.
iv. Evidence that universal screening/benchmark data and progress monitoring data have
been provided to the student's parents.
2. The learning difficulties are not the result of lack of appropriate instruction in math.
a. Requirements for this factor are the same as reading with the exception that the curriculum shall
include essential components of Math instruction (conceptual understanding, procedural fluency,
strategic competence, adaptive reasoning and productive response)
3. The learning difficulties are not the result of Limited English Proficiency (LEP). Key factors include:
a. Primary Language Determination
i. All students must be screened to determine if their primary home language is other than
English. If so, the student's acquisition of and proficiency in the English language
(listening, speaking, reading, and writing) must be assessed and considered.
b. Student Outcomes
i. To rule out LEP as a determinant factor for an individual student, the IEP must have
evidence that the core curriculum is effective for 75% of the subgroup of students
identified as LEP.
If any of the three Determinant Factors are not present or validating evidence is not able to be provided,
students cannot be made eligible for services under IDEA.
In addition to the determinant factors the IEP team must also consider the Exclusionary Criteria. The team must
document evidence (either through the screening process, or if necessary, conduct a more extensive evaluation
to eliminate them from consideration) that a student's response to instruction is not primarily a function or result
of a:





Visual, hearing, or motor disability
Cognitive Disability
Emotional Disability
Cultural Factors
Environmental or Economic Disadvantage
The team may utilize the following resources to document evidence for Exclusionary Criteria (this is not an
exhaustive list)





Visual, hearing, or motor disability
o Vision & hearing screening, performances in P.E.
Cognitive Disability
o Adaptive behavior scales
o Academic classroom performance data (in class tests/assignments, MAP, CBM, ISAT, etc.)
o Review of Records, parent & teacher interviews, observations
Emotional Disability
o Attendance records, Office Discipline Referrals (SWIS Data)
o SSBD (Systematic Screener for Behavior Disorders)
o Review of Records, parent & teacher interviews, observations
Cultural Factors
o Social Developmental Study (SDS)
o Rates of Improvement chart from AIMSweb or other academic screener
o Other disaggregated data (e.g., ISAT/PSAE)
Environmental or Economic Disadvantage
o Social Developmental Study (SDS)
o Rates of Improvement chart from AIMSweb
o Other disaggregated data (e.g., ISAT/PSAE)
If any of the above Exclusionary Criteria are the primary basis for the student's learning difficulties the
student cannot have a primary eligibility of specific learning disability.
In addition to the Determinant Factors and Exclusionary Criteria,the IEP team must also consider the
Inclusionary Criteria. The team must document evidence that the student demonstrates a discrepancy in his
learning compared to peers, lack of educational progress in spite of an adequate RtI intervention plan or
adequate progress that is only able to be maintained with the ongoing support of the Tier III RtI intervention
plan, and instructional need.
To be eligible for specific learning disability, the student has one or more significant academic skill deficits
compared to age level peers or grade level benchmarks.


"Significant" deficits shall be defined as those below the 25th percentile on grade level benchmark
scores.
The student is making insufficient progress in response to research/evidence-based interventions or is
making adequate progress that is only possible when the student has been provided and continues to
need curriculum, instruction, and environmental interventions that are significantly different from
general education peers and of an intensity or type that exceed general education resources.
Students shall be considered eligible for special education services in the event the student does not reach the
25th percentile on nationally normed curriculum based assessments in their deficit area after the Tier III
intervention plan and this is not primarily due to any of the Determinant Factors or Exclusionary Criteria.
Students shall be considered eligible for special education services in the event it has been demonstrated that a
student can only maintain performance above the 25th percentile with the ongoing support of the Tier III
intervention plan and this is not primarily due to any of the Determinant Factors or Exclusionary Criteria.
Appendix A: Sources for Research
US Department of Education What Works Clearninghouse
Florida Center for Reading Research
WIDA
Appendix B: Fidelity Checklists
Illinois ASPIRE Integrity Checklists
Oregon RtI Fidelity Checklists
Iowa Heartland Area Education Agency Treament Integrity Checklists
Appendix C: Interventions
What Works Clearinghouse Reports
What Works Clearinghouse Quick Reviews
Florida Center for Reading Research Grades K-1 Reading
What Works Clearinghouse Primary Grades Reading
Florida Center for Reading Research Grades 2-3 Reading
Florida Center for Reading Research for Grades 4-5 Reading
What Works Clearinghouse Elementary and Middle School Math
What Works Clearinghouse High School General
What Works Clearinghouse High School Drop-out Prevention
What Works Clearinghouse Secondary Reading