Fidelity Integrity Assessment (FIA)

Transcription

1 Fidelity Integrity Assessment (FIA) Version 1.1 SWIFT Center University of Kansas This document was produced under U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education Programs Grant No. H326Y120005, University of Kansas, Beach Center on Disability. Grace Zamora Durán and Tina Diamond served as the OSEP project officers. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the positions or policies of the Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service or enterprise mentioned in this publication is intended or should be inferred. This product is public domain. Authorization to reproduce it in whole or in part is granted. While permission to reprint this publication is not necessary, the citation should be: National Center on Schoolwide Inclusive School Reform: The SWIFT Center (Nov 2013). Fidelity Integrity Assessment. Lawrence, KS: Author.

2 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.1 Purpose of the SWIFT FIA The SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment (FIA) is used by teams at school sites to consistently monitor their progress on SWIFT implementation. This self-assessment checklist examines current status and priority for improvement of SWIFT implementation. The 22 FIA items are associated with the SWIFT domains, core features, and SWIFT Fidelity of Implementation Tool (FIT) items. The following table shows SWIFT domains, core features, and related FIA items/improvement areas. SWIFT Domain SWIFT Core Feature SWIFT FIA Item / Improvement Area Administrative Valued Leadership Strong and Engaged Site Leadership Leadership Empowered Decision Making Strong Educator Support System Educator Coaching and Learning Personnel Evaluation Multi-tiered System of Support Inclusive Academic Academic Supports Academic Data-based Decision Making for Academics Inclusive Behavior Behavior Supports Behavior Integrated Education Framework Family & Community Engagement Inclusive Policy Structure & Practice Fully Integrated Organizational Structure Positive and Strong School Culture Trusting Family Partnerships Trusting Community Partnerships Strong LEA (e.g., District)/School Relationship LEA (e.g., District) Policy Framework FIA assessment results are summarized and can be used for: Monitoring progress over time, Identifying and prioritizing improvement needs, Internal decision making, and Short-term action planning (for the period before the next SWIFT FIA administration). Data-based Decision Making for Behavior Tier I for All Non-categorical Service Delivery Full Access for All Students Shared Responsibility Family Opportunities to Participate Partnerships with Families Community Collaboration Community Benefits LEA (e.g., District) Support LEA (e.g., District) Addresses Barriers LEA (e.g., District) Process for RBP (Research-based practice) The summary of results is mainly used to develop a short-term action plan or to revise an annual action plan (if it is necessary) for implementing SWIFT throughout the school. SWIFT FIA Guide 1

3 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.1 Conducting the FIA Who completes the FIA? The FIA is designed to be used by a trained school leadership team with support from a SWIFT coach. The FIA is a quick team self-assessment checklist to monitor SWIFT implementation status at a school, and its items are briefly described without detailed scoring criteria. It is required for a school team to receive SWIFT implementation training before they start using the SWIFT FIA and conduct the SWIFT FIA by discussing school s progress in presence of a SWIFT coach or someone (e.g., SWIFT LEA facilitator, SWIFT LEA coordinator) who clearly understands the SWIFT domains, core features, and related expectations. When and how often should the FIA be completed? FIA results are used on a regular basis to monitor short-term action plans, prioritize needs for improvement, and generate next action steps. It is recommended for a school leadership team to complete the FIA during every 3rd or 4th team meeting (i.e., every 6 or 8 weeks, at least every 3 months) to discuss progress and barriers with regard to the SWIFT implementation. How is the FIA completed? Schedule minutes on the school leadership team meeting agenda to complete the FIA procedure. Before beginning the FIA procedure the leadership team reviews previously completed short-term action plan items and revisits long-term goals and expectations guided by the SWIFT-FIT and with assistance from a coach. The school leadership team reviews each descriptive statement on the FIA and examines current status (i.e., Not,,, or ) based on the completions of previous short-term action plans and other evidences found in possible resources listed on the FIA. The team also evaluates priority of improvement (i.e., Very,,, or ) for each statement. Scoring and Summarizing the Results Score and summarize the current progress (Current Implementation Status only) The Current Status of each item in the FIA is assessed on a 0-3 scale. 0 = Not or in Exploration: Our school does not have anything in place to meet the stated description. Although our school has discussed the issue (e.g., explored existing strengths and barriers and examined the degree to which the item description meet the needs of our school), nothing is in action with clear objectives. 1 = : Our school has started working on improvement of the FIA item with a clear plan. Our leadership team has defined protocols to develop the feature and personnel are assigned primary responsibility for planning and coordinating the plan. 2 = : Our school began implementation and is now getting better. All implementation components are in place and the transformation efforts started making systemic changes. 3 = : Our school has all features described in the item, and all components to make the implementation a success are fully integrated and functioning. Our school maintains and improves skills through the system. SWIFT FIA Guide 2

4 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.1 FIA results are summarized into 1) a total score, 2) individual SWIFT domain scores, 3) individual SWIFT core feature scores, and 4) individual item scores. Scores are determined by calculating the percentage of points for a FIA item. See the tables below for a score summary sheet and an example of calculating scores. SWIFT FIA Score Summary Sheet SWIFT Domains SWIFT Core Features SWIFT FIA Items / Improvement Areas Administrative Leadership Multi-tiered System of Support Integrated Education Framework Family & Community Engagement Inclusive Policy Structure & Practice Strong and Engaged Site Leadership Strong Educator Support System Inclusive Academic Inclusive Behavior Fully Integrated Organizational Structure Positive and Strong School Culture Trusting Family Partnerships Trusting Community Partnerships Strong LEA (e.g., District)/School Relationship LEA (e.g., District) Policy Framework Item Scores Valued Leadership / 3 % Empowered Decision Making / 3 % Educator Coaching and Learning / 3 % Personnel Evaluation / 3 % Academic Supports / 3 % Academic / 3 % Data-based Decision Making / 3 % Behavior Supports / 3 % Behavior / 3 % Data-based Decision Making / 3 % Tier I for All / 3 % % of Implementation Core Feature Scores / 6 % / 6 % / 9 % / 9 % / 6 % Non-categorical Service Delivery / 3 % Full Access for All Students / 3 % Shared Responsibility / 3 % / 6 % Family Opportunities to Participate / 3 % Partnerships with Families / 3 % / 6 % Community Collaboration / 3 % Community Benefits / 3 % / 6 % LEA (e.g., District) Support / 3 % LEA (e.g., District) Addresses / 6 % / 3 % Barriers LEA (e.g., District) Links Initiatives / 3 % LEA (e.g., District) Process for RBP / 3 % / 6 % SWIFT FIA Total / 66 % Domain Scores / 12 % / 18 % / 12 % / 12 % / 12 % SWIFT FIA Guide 3

5 SWIFT Domains SWIFT Core Features SWIFT FIA Items / % of Implementation Improvement Areas Item Scores Core Feature Domain Scores Scores Strong and Engaged Valued Leadership 2 / 3 67 % Administrative Site Leadership Empowered Decision Making 1 / 3 33 % 3 /6 50 % Leadership Strong Educator Support Educator Coaching and Learning 2 / 3 67 % System Personnel Evaluation 2 / 3 67 % 4 /6 67 % 7 / % Inclusive Academic Academic Supports 2 / 3 67 % Academic 0 / 3 0 % 4 /9 44 % Multi-tiered Data-based Decision Making 2 / 3 67 % System of Inclusive Behavior Behavior Supports 2 / 3 67 % Support Behavior 1 / 3 33 % 5 /9 56 % 9 / % Data-based Decision Making 2 / 3 67 % Fully Integrated Tier I for All 1 / 3 33 % Integrated Organizational Structure 1 /6 44 % 3 / % Education Non-categorical Service Delivery 0 / 3 0 % Framework Positive and Strong Full Access for All Students 1 / 3 33 % School Culture Shared Responsibility 1 / 3 33 % 2 /6 17 % Trusting Family Families Opportunities to 0 / 3 0 % Family & Partnerships Participate 2 /6 33 % Community Partnerships with Families 2 / 3 67 % 2 / % Engagement Trusting Community Community Collaboration 0 / 3 0 % Partnerships Community Benefits 0 / 3 0 % 0 /6 0 % Strong LEA (e.g., LEA (e.g., District) Support 2 / 3 67 % District)/School LEA (e.g., District) Addresses 3 /6 50 % Inclusive Policy 1 / 3 33 % Relationship Barriers Structure & 4 / % LEA (e.g., District) Policy LEA (e.g., District) Links Initiatives 0 / 3 0 % Practice Framework LEA (e.g., District) Process for 1 /6 44 % 1 / 3 33 % RBP SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.1 SWIFT FIA Scoring Example SWIFT FIA Total 25 / %! Summarized results can provide graphic display of total, core feature, and each FIA item scores. The figure below shows an example chart for improvement in the SWIFT FIA total score across time. 100% 90% 80% SWIFT FIA Total 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 1/14/14 3/15/14 5/17/14 SWIFT FIA Guide 4

6 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.1 The figures below provide examples of the progress display on domains and core features across time. Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Domain 1: Administrative Leadership Domain 2: Multi-tiered System of Support Domain 3: Integrated Education Framework Domain 4: Family and Community Engagement Domain 5:Inclusive Policy Structure & Practice Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% SWIFT FIA Guide 5

7 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.1 The figure below provides an example of a progress bar for individual FIA items. Inclusive Academic Inclusive Behavior 70% 70% 60% 60% 50% 50% 40% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% Academic Supports Academic Data-based Decision Making 0% Behavior Supports Behavior Data-based Decision Making Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Time 1 Time 2 Time 3 Prioritize improvement needs The FIA is designed to evaluate priorities for improvement as an option as well as SWIFT implementation status. While the implementation status is assessed, team members can briefly discuss the importance of the item and evaluate its priority for improvement. No point value is assigned for the priority for improvement, rather these assessments are visualized along with current status on a scatterplot (see example on page 7) to prioritize action plan items. Each item s priority for improvement is assessed on the following scale. : All team members agree that a FIA item (i.e., improvement area) is critical to the success of their school. For example, a team can rank a FIA item very high because improvement of the item can be a foundation to assist their school in creating changes in other areas, directly connected to teaching and learning, or a big impact with relatively small efforts. The team may need immediate actions to meet the full implementation status of the item. Although the item has been fully implemented, urgent action planning may be necessary to revise or update it. : A FIA item is still very important to improve, but does not have 100% agreement of very high from a team. : A team agrees that their school is considering improvement of an item but not immediately. Very : No need exists to improve a FIA item within a short-term period, perhaps because the FIA item is already fully implemented and no further is action needed before the next FIA administration. A school also can rank an item very low even with low implementation status if they need more time to investigate its importance and impact on their school needs. The results from the FIA can be displayed in a scatter plot to visualize improvement needs at a school. The following figure provides an example of the scatter plot display. In the scatter plot, the x-axis represents the values of current implementation status and the y-axis represents the values of priority of improvement. Each FIA item is represented by its implementation status and priority of improvement. The vertical and horizontal reference lines divide items into quadrants. SWIFT FIA Guide 6

8 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.1 The top left section in the scatter plot shows items that are perceived as high importance and less implemented. The top right section shows items that are perceived as high importance and more implemented. The bottom left section contains items of low importance and less implemented items. Finally the bottom right section displays items that are perceived as low importance and more implemented. A school team can initiate discussion and prioritize next action steps based on the scatter plot display. In this particular example, a school team may need to focus more on improvement of full access for all students, culturally responsive supports, and working with LEA (e.g., district) for better support, research-based practices, and linking multiple initiatives. SWIFT FIA Guide 7

9 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.1 Develop the SWIFT short-term action plan FIA results are useful information for another short-term action plan targeting the next 6 to 8 weeks. The following figure shows a cycle of SWIFT assessments (i.e., SWIFT FIT and FIA) and their relationship. Each FIA administration activity involves regular reviews of short-term goal completion and setting the next implementation goals. SWIFT FIG SWIFT FIT! Fall/Spring SWIFT FIA! (continues! every 6 or 8 weeks)! SWIFT FIT & FIA Cycle Generate annual & short-term action plans Revise or generate new short-term action plan SWIFT FIA Review completion of shortterm action plan Mapping back to FIT Short-term goals and action plan can be generated after the team 1) reviews current progress on each improvement area, 2) finds major strengths from the FIA results, 3) prioritizes major areas in need of improvement, 4) brainstorms possible activities to improve the areas in need of improvement, and 5) identifies appropriate resources including responsible personnel. The following is suggested as an example format to document short-term goals and resources. The format includes related SWIFT-FIT items, which eventually can be connected to the SWIFT Field Introduction Guide (FIG) or the SWIFT Field Guide. This format allows a school team to map back to detailed information and guidance on full implementation status. SWIFT FIA Guide 8

10 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.1 SWIFT Short-term Action Plan Core Features FIA Items / Improvement Associated FIT Items Strong and Engaged Site Leadership Strong Educator Support System Inclusive Academic Inclusive Behavior Fully Integrated Organization al Structure Areas 1.1 Valued Leadership 1.2 Empowered Decision 2.1 Coaching & Learning 2.2 Personnel Evaluation 3.1 Academic Supports 3.2 Academic 3.3 Data-based Decision (academic) 4.1 Behavior Supports 4.2 Behavior 4.3 Data-based Decision (behavior) 5.1 Tier I 1.1, 1.2, 1.5 Actions/Goals a. 1.3, 1.4 a. 2.1, 2.2 a. 2.3 a a. 3.11, 3.12 a a a a a. 5.1, 5.3, 5.4 a. Responsible Person(s) Resources Timeline Improvement Priority Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very SWIFT FIA Guide 9

11 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.1 Core FIA Items / Associated Actions/Goals Features Improvement FIT Items Areas Responsible Person(s) Resources Timeline Improvement Priority Positive and Strong School Culture Trusting Family Partnerships Trusting Community Partnerships Strong LEA (e.g., District)/Scho ol Relationship LEA (e.g., District) Policy Framework 5.2 Noncategorical Service 6.1 Full Access for all 6.2 Shared Responsibility 7.1 Family Opportunities 7.2 Partnerships with Families 8.1 Community Collaboration 8.2 Community Benefits 5.2 a. 6.2, 6.3 a. 6.1, 6.4 a. 7.1, 7.4, 7.5 a. 7.2, 7.3 a. 8.1 a. 8.2 a. 9.1 LEA Support 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, LEA Addresses Barriers 10.1 LEA Links Initiatives 10.2 LEA Process for RBP a. 9.4 a. 10.1, 10.2, 10.3, 10.5 a a. Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very Very SWIFT FIA Guide 10

12 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.0 Date of Completion: Participants: SWIFT-FIA FIDELITY INTEGRITY ASSESSMENT Current Implementation Status Priority for Improvement Strong and Engaged Site Leadership 1.1 Our school has valued leadership to implement and sustain system transformation that continuously improves teaching and learning. Valued Leadership Not Our school has a leadership team comprised of a principal and educator representatives that meets twice a month, reviews school-wide data, incorporates family and community partners, and makes decisions regarding instructional supports. Review leadership team meeting minutes for past several months Review sample data summaries used by the Leadership Team Perceptions of Leadership Team members 1.2 All educators and families in our school contribute to core school decisions with empowered opportunities through the principal and the leadership team. Empowered Decision Making Not Educators and families have regular opportunities to express their ideas to address school issues, and the principal and Leadership Team (LT) use those ideas to support teaching and learning. Review leadership team meeting minutes or other similar documents Review written procedures for key school teams Strong 2.1 Our school Not SWIFT FIA Assessment 1

13 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.0 Educator Support System provides sufficient supports for instruction (professional learning and instructional coaching) to improve teaching and learning. Educator Coaching and Learning 2.2 In our school, personnel evaluation is supportive and useful for educators to build instructional knowledge and skills. Personnel Evaluation Our school provides professional development, with coaching and performance feedback on use of evidence-based instructional practices (math, reading, behavior) for all educators at least twice a year during their first 2 years and also continuously available by request. Review record of coaching FTE available to the school Review professional learning log and need assessment Perception of educators Not Our personnel evaluation is supportive and results in the identification of strengths and specific areas of improvement in teaching and learning, and the evaluation procedure includes input from a variety of sources such as interviews, observation, and documents. Review sample educator evaluations Report from educators Inclusive 3.1 Our school has Not SWIFT FIA Assessment 2

14 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.0 Academic school-wide systems to promote academic success for all students, and respond with additional support for students who do not demonstrate success. Academic Supports 3.2 Our school personnel use multilevel instructional strategies for both reading and math to include all students with various needs in the general education curriculum activities. Academic In our school, grade level educators are working with specialized educators as a team to screen and monitor students progresses and identify students at-risk of poor learning and provide research-based multi-tiered interventions with fidelity to supplement Tier 1 core curricular instruction (i.e., grade level instructions) in both reading and math. Review grade-level and instructional support team meeting minutes Review Tier I math and reading curricula Review core Tier I instruction guide including instructional fidelity record and schedules of universal screening and progress monitoring Review Tier II & III intervention guide including instructional fidelity record and rules to enter and exit Not All educators in our school are knowledgeable about and use inclusive instructional practices such as universal design for learning (UDL), differentiated instruction, and flexible grouping to include all students in the core curriculum. Tier II and Tier III instructional supports are available for students who need more intensive support. Review school expectations of multi-level instruction and UDL Review sample lesson plans Universal screening data for reading and math collected at least twice a year. Progress monitoring data for students receiving Tier II and Tier III academic supports 3.3 Our school Not SWIFT FIA Assessment 3

15 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.0 Inclusive Behavior identifies and prioritizes instructional interventions based on analyzing multiple sources of academic data. Data-based Decision Making (Academic) 4.1 Our school has school-wide systems to promote effective social behavior for all students. Behavior Supports al decisions for academic are based on data, which are regularly and consistently collected and used to 1) identify students who need more or less intensive supports, 2) provide appropriate interventions with the multi-level support system, and 3) check if interventions are implemented as planned. Review grade-level or instructional support team meeting minutes Review inventory of tool(s) used to assess fidelity of implementation Review process and content for data collection, summary and use for decision-making Not In our school, grade level educators are working with specialized educators as a team to implement school-wide systems of positive behavior support including development and teaching of school-wide behavioral expectations, recognition systems, consequence systems, data-based decision-making, and organizational foundations to ensure sustainability. Review behavior support team meeting minutes Review current Tier I fidelity of behavior support implementation (e.g. PBIS) 4.2 Our school Not SWIFT FIA Assessment 4

16 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.0 provides researchbased multi-tiered interventions based on functions of behavior with fidelity. Behavior 4.3 Our school identifies and prioritizes instructional interventions based on analyzing multiple sources of behavior data. Data-based Decision Making (Behavior) Our school has research-based behavior interventions available at both Tier II and Tier III levels, and procedures are in place to generate effective intervention strategies from relevant assessments, and monitor behavior progress and intervention fidelity. Universal screening data collected at least annually Fidelity data documenting implementation of Tier II and/or Tier III PBIS Review functional behavioral assessments Review sample Tier II & Tier III behavior support plans Review sample progress monitoring data for students receiving Tier II & III supports. Not All instructional decisions for behavior are based on data, which are regularly and consistently collected and used to 1) identify students who need more or less intensive supports, 2) provide appropriate interventions with the multi-level support system, and 3) check if interventions are implemented as planned. Review grade-level or instructional support team meeting minutes Review inventories for multi-tier level instruction for behavior Action plan for improved implementation Fidelity measures for all three tiers of PBIS implementation Student outcome measurement systems for all three tiers Fully 5.1 All students in our Not SWIFT FIA Assessment 5

17 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.0 Integrated Organizational Structure Strong and Positive School Culture school participate in the general education curriculum instruction/activities of their grade level peers. Tier I for All 5.2 Our school embraces noncategorical service delivery to support diverse needs of students. Non-categorical Service Delivery 6.1 All students including those with IEPs in our school have equal access to general education curriculum and extracurricular learning activities with appropriate supports. Full Access for All Students All students (including those with IEPs, 504 plans, and English learners) in our school are participating in the general education curriculum of their grade level peers with the assistance of collaborative learning strategies (e.g., peer-assisted learning). Specialized educators (including paraeducators) are responsible and have roles to educate all students (including those without special needs) in collaboration with general educators. Review specialized educator and para-educator schedules Review sample schedules for students taking alternative test Not Our school has policy for non-categorical services delivery and there is evidence in the language being used that reflects this delivery. Review documents regarding non-categorical language policy Review materials sent home, provided to students, and posted in the school Not All students in our school have full access to participate in grade-level classroom activities using collaborative teaching at all grades, and extracurricular learning activities both at school and outside of typical school hours are accessible for all students with appropriate supports available if necessary for students with special needs. Review sample collaborative planning and co-teaching schedules Report from educators and families of students with special needs SWIFT FIA Assessment 6

18 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.0 Trusting Family Partnerships 6.2 All school personnel (i.e., instructional & other personnel) have shared responsibility and employ culturally responsive practices to educate all students in our school. Shared Responsibility 7.1 Our school provides families with opportunities/resourc es to participate in the decision-making of their child s education. Family Opportunities to Participate Not All instructional educators are responsible to educate all students including those with IEPs, 504 plans, and English learners with culturally appropriate practices, and other school personnel (security guards, paraeducators, psychologists) also have shared responsibility to participate in the teaching and learning of all students. Review culturally responsive practices assessment results Review educator job descriptions Not Families in our school receive information regarding school system and instructional practices (including student support and progress data for both academics and behavior), and have opportunities to participate in decision making regarding their children s education. Review survey results or other documents to solicit feedback from families Review a procedure for providing information to families 7.2 All personnel in Not SWIFT FIA Assessment 7

19 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.0 Trusting Community Partnerships our school understand the importance of building positive partnerships with their students families. Partnerships with Families 8.1 Our school collaborates with a variety of community partners to match resources and services in the community with identified school needs. Community Collaboration 8.2 Our school offers various resources to benefit the surrounding community Community Benefits All school personnel understand the importance of family partnerships, assess/monitor the quality partnership status between parents and educators/school staff, ensure family input is solicited and utilized to make decisions about school governance and provide opportunities for families to serve on committees/teams that address school governance. Review quality partnership assessment results (family perception of the quality of partnership) Not Our school has community partners that we connect with to help address identified needs through the provision of necessary resources to school staff, students, and families, and this partnership is evaluated on regular basis. Review a procedure for utilizing community partner resources Not Our school offers school space, resources, and volunteer opportunities to benefit our community. Review school space and resource availability for community use Review school activities to train volunteers SWIFT FIA Assessment 8

20 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v. 1.0 Strong LEA (e.g., District) /School Relationship LEA (e.g. District) Policy Framework 9.1 Our LEA (e.g. District) actively and adequately supports our schools implementation of SWIFT features. LEA (e.g. District) Support 9.2 Our LEA (e.g. District) addresses and removes policy and other barriers to success. LEA (e.g. District) Addresses Barriers 10.1 Our LEA (e.g. District) supports SWIFT practices by linking multiple initiatives, revising policies, and extending successful implementation cases to other schools. LEA (e.g. District) Links Initiatives Not Our District actively supports our implementation of SWIFT through District personnel attending schoollevel meetings and leadership discussions, assessing needs, responding to identified professional learning requests in a timely manner, and engaging community partners in our transformational systems and practices through community development and education. Review need assessment results, sample professional learning logs, and District reports Not Our District has a clear process to address policy and other barriers in collaboration with building leadership team representative(s). Review a procedure to address policy and other barriers Not Our District assesses/reviews current initiatives and policies to find the best way to improve school support (e.g., linking multiple initiatives and revising policies) with a formal process, and has a clear plan to extend successful SWIFT feature implementation to other schools. Review a procedure for assessing current initiatives SWIFT FIA Assessment 9

21 SWIFT Fidelity Integrity Assessment [FIA] v Our LEA (e.g. District) uses schoolbuilding information to support, and ensure training regarding research and/or researchbased practices. LEA (e.g. District) Process for RBP Not Our District has a clear plan and process to effectively support research-based instructional practices in our school and monitor its progress with various data to provide additional information, support, and professional learning. Review a procedure for selecting research-based practices Review District reports SWIFT FIA Assessment 10