Flagler County

1. Flagler County John Seaton, School Psychologist/District RtI Team Leader Lori Highsmith, Behavior Specialist Teresa Shipp, Guidance Counselor Natascha Terry, School Psychologist

2. District Demographics • 10639 Total Students (not including Adult Ed) • .04% American Indian • 10.6% Hispanic • 2.6% Asian • 15.4% Black • 64.1% White • 6.8% Not Reported • 21.6% ESE Students (including ESE Pre-K) • 2.6% ELL Students

3. RtI Hierarchy • RtI is a joint venture of the curriculum and ESE departments in Flagler County. Although ESE tends to take the lead as far as development of policies and procedures, forms, and training, our RtI database is found on the Curriculum and Instruction Department page of our website and the two departments work in tandem on all aspects of RtI.

4. District RtI Leadership Team • Staffing Specialists • Elementary Guidance Counselors/Alternative Middle School Guidance Counselor • District Behavior Specialists • Elementary Principals • Middle School ESE & General Ed Teachers • Elementary Academic Coaches • High School Assistant Principals • Charter School Teachers • School Psychologists • ESE Director • District Curriculum Specialist Meets once per month for three hours

5. RtI “Supports” • Administration – School Leader • Sets vision for PS/RtI process in their school • Allocates resources • Monitors staff support/climate • Facilitates review of fidelity of implementation • Guidance Counselors – Coordinator/Facilitator • Collaborate with teachers to track documentation • Schedule students for TPST meetings • Facilitate meetings

6. Academic Coach • Intervention Facilitator • Data Analysis • Academic Problem Solving Expertise • Support colleagues via mentoring and coaching • Monitors fidelity of intervention • Behavior Specialist • Collaborates with TPST to perform FBA’s and develop PBIP’s • Observes students to help identify intervention strategies, identify barriers to intervention success, collect behavior RtI data

7. School Psychologists – Case Manager • Monitors procedural compliance • Ongoing consultation • Identifying team training needs and providing same or obtaining other appropriate trainers • Data interpretation • Student observations • Evaluate student’s relevant academic, behavioral & emotional functioning • Provide small group behavioral interventions

8. Classroom Teachers – • Identify, implement, document, and analyze evidence-based academic and behavioral interventions • Differentiate Instruction • Collaborate with parents and other school personnel in data collection and analysis • Provide fidelity of implementation • Parents – • Collaborative member of RtI Team • Provides relevant home/community/medical/social information • Accesses appropriate community resources

9. School-Based RtI Implementation Structure • Leadership Teams tie PS/RtI and PBS together • Facilitate scheduling of personnel • Facilitate scheduling of interventions • Many members serve on school-based RtI Core Team

10. Leadership Source(s) • Flagler County’s RtI Project is a product of a 50/50 collaboration between general education and exceptional student education. This shared structure has existed since the earliest stages of RtI in Flagler County and has facilitated our success with the implementation of RtI to date. • Our district primarily funds RtI through the general budget. In addition, Title I funds allow the use of academic coaches to support RtI implementation.

11. Rationale for RtI Implementation in Flagler County • Through the implementation of RtI, our district hopes to achieve: • success for all students, • avoid having any children “fall through the cracks”, • truly leave no child behind, and • provide teachers with the supports they need to do their jobs effectively.

12. Our district mission is “Raising Student Achievement Every Day, Every Way” That says it all. RtI is viewed as an integral piece of the district’s plan for bringing that mission to reality.

13. RtI is not specifically addressed as part of our district evaluation process, but it is certainly the vehicle to monitor individual student growth. And it is the expectation at each of our schools that RtI be used to evaluate programs and personnel.

14. District RtI Plan • Our district RtI plan was developed with the guidance of the RtI staff at P. K. Yonge Developmental Research School in Gainesville. Throughout late 2006 and early 2007, our team participated in regular training and collaboration sessions with the PK Yonge team, who facilitated the formation of the district RtI plan. • In the spring of 2007, our district team developed a 5-year RtI Implementation Plan. Implementation was actually completed in just over three years.

15. Current Status of RtI Implementation • 5 elementary, 2 middle, 2 high, 3 charters, 1 alternative school • RtI was fully implemented in our elementary schools as of July 1, 2009. Implementation is in its initial stages at the middle and high school levels. • Academic coaches have helped support the implementation of academic PS/RtI in our elementary and middle schools, but behavioral RtI has been an uphill struggle. • Elementary schools have embraced the integration of academic and behavioral RtI more so than has secondary. Of particular importance to the success of integrating academic and behavioral RtI is WHO at the school is driving it!

16. Facilitators to Successful RtI Implementation • Comprehensive and fluid RtI Manual • Shared Curriculum & ESE Responsibility • Having an ESE Directory and Curriculum Dept staff who are knowledgeable about RtI • Consistent grading guideline for elementary reading and math allows for comparison across grade levels and schools • Giving teachers a greater voice in developing supports for students • Partnerships with local & state agencies, e.g. SEDNET, FDLRS, NEFEC, etc. • Sharing RtI successes among schools within the district • Support from Administration at many sites

17. Barriers • Class size has impacted schools having the flexibility with staff to support RtI implementation. • Lack of standardized Tier 1 curriculum and grading guidelines at secondary level • Lack of centralized data • Lack of administrative support at some sites • Dwindling resources (financial and human) • Inability to make the necessary paradigm shift • Lack of understanding: • Differentiated Instruction • Accommodations vs. Interventions • How data drives decisions • Fair doesn’t always mean equal

18. Addressing Topic Areas • LEADERSHIP: • We are addressing leadership issues on both a district and school level • Full representation on our District RtI Team from each school • Working with principals to bring them all on board with RtI, particularly secondary • Seeking more active support from our Superintendent and other directors. Currently, we have “passive” support, but we are looking for more “active “ support.

19. K-12 ALIGNMENT - How is the district addressing RtI implementation across all levels? • MIS system increasing automation to ease transfer of data and increase consistency of recording data • Developing standardized procedures for transfer of hard copy RtI information when students move from one school to another • Ongoing professional development opportunities provided for administrative, instructional, and non-instructional staff • Annual review of procedures and forms to discover what worked, what didn’t work, and what changes need to be made to the process so that it works for everyone involved.

20. EVALUATION/ACCOUNTABILITY • Levels of implementation • SAPSI completed 3x yr • Perceptions of Skills Survey completed 2X yr • Beliefs Survey completed 1x yr • Perceptions of Practices Survey completed 2x yr • Implementation integrity • Addressing on an ongoing basis • Struggling with how best to monitor it and address it

21. Professional development • Good pool of in-house experts • Many offerings, but they are not mandatory • Those who need to participate often do not • Staff skills, satisfaction • Perceptions of Skills Survey completed 2X yr • Beliefs Survey completed 1x yr • Informal in-house surveys • Student outcomes • GMADE/GRADE/FCAT/FAIR • Gradebook • Performance Matters

22. System outcomes (e.g., attendance, ESE placements) • Attendance issues are being addressed by the District RtI Team in its monthly meetings • School-based teams are also using attendance data when discussing interventions, movement among the tiers, and referrals for ESE staffings. • ESE placements have decreased 79% from the same time two years ago (our last year using only the discrepancy method for ESE eligibility). • COACHING- several of the Title I schools are using academic coaches to support RtI implementation.

23. DATA-BASED PROBLEM-SOLVING/DATA SYSTEMS • Skyward (our management information system) • Performance Matters starting SY 2011-2012 • Currently, data is still located in several different places, and some is not accessible at all to people who need it, but we are working on resolving these issues. • SUSTAINABILITY • This continues to be an issue with dwindling human and financial resources • Elementary level staff has, by and large, embraced RtI and its sustainability is not in question. • Secondary level staff are still too new to the process

24. Flagler County is extremely proud of the PS/RTI system it has developed. Although we continue to experience the same “growing pains” as everyone else, we believe we have created a system that is well on the way to making our mission (Raising Student Achievement, Every Day, Every Way!) a reality.

25. The End