1. The Missouri—Show Me Outcomes Story

3. Missouri Integrated Model (2007 SPDG)

4. What we overcame: Administrative Turnover…Though the MIM project encountered relatively few setbacks, one barrier to implementation was administrative turnover within participating schools and districts. While the intended purpose of the MIM was to “integrate” tiered initiatives, this did not occur during this SPDG/MIM cycle. During the final phases of the SPDG/MIM cycle, an Alignment Team was formed. The purpose of this team was to discuss the challenges and solutions to implementing multiple types of 3-tiered models across the state. With the conclusion of the SPDG/MIM grant, the work of this Alignment Team did not end. Instead, this team has morphed into the MTSS Team.

5. What we have to celebrate: Overall, the MIM proved to be a highly successful initiative. Data show that throughout the MIM funding period, – Both academic and behavioral achievement improved for students with disabilities in participating buildings. – Teachers in MIM buildings showed increased participation in professional development and adoption of the 11 essential features. – Self-reported data from all students and the parents of students with disabilities showed increases in satisfaction with the education provided, parental involvement, and student engagement in classroom and school activities. All of these data support the conclusion that the MIM succeeded in accomplishing its stated goal of improving statewide and district level systems of educational support for children and youth with disabilities.

6. What we have to celebrate:

9. Missouri Collaborative Work (2012 SPDG)

10. What we did or will do differently next time: 1. Collaboration, Data, and Leadership are the trifecta. Effective leadership who ensures effective collaboration and use of data are critical to school improvement culture. When beginning the work of integrating initiatives to form one three-tiered system, it is important to carefully consider the presence, effectiveness, and available supports regarding each of these. If gaps exist in any of these three areas, then address them first before moving on.

11. What we did or will do differently next time: 1. Collaboration, Data, and Leadership are the trifecta. How did this lesson learned influence our current project? Collaborative Data Teams, Data-based Decision- making and Leadership are focus areas in our Collaborative Work (CW). All school staff are involved and receive HQPD/Coaching.

12. What we did or will do differently next time: 2. The change process is fragile, so plan for sustainability at the beginning. Having external Implementation Facilitators was an important piece to moving schools through the change process. However, it is easy for this role to drift from a facilitator role to a primary implementation support role. The sustainability of the improved implementation, cannot assume the long- term presence of the external Implementation Facilitator. Returning to #1, leadership is critical. The external Implementation Facilitator can provide valuable assistance during the formative process; however, internal building leadership should take the lead in school-wide implementation.

13. What we did or will do differently next time: 2. The change process is fragile, so plan for sustainability at the beginning. How did this lesson learned influence our current project? Project focuses on developing capacity at all levels, but especially at the district & building levels in the form of developing internal experts/coaches and providing them with a variety of tools/resources.

14. What we did or will do differently next time: 3.It is a continuous study-plan-do cycle. The cycle of reflecting on data, planning for improvement, and taking action is continuous and each of the three steps is important. Reflecting on data can be challenging for novice teams without a collaborative structure or an established process for making data-based decisions (see #1 above). However, it is a critical step and should be facilitated while the team builds the skills to be independent. The planning step is also important, but can be challenging when (a) there is insufficient data to drive action planning and/or (b) the team lacks a leader with focus feasibility and prioritizing action steps. When the study and planning stages of the cycle are hindered as described above, the do-stage can also be compromised. However, despite the mentioned challenges with data review and action planning, it is important that teams take action. In the words of Karen Blase, co-director of the National Implementation Research Network, “Get started then get better.”

15. What we did or will do differently next time: 3.It is a continuous study-plan-do cycle. How did this lesson learned influence our current project? In the CW we demand action. Too often teams hesitate to leave their comfort zone by staying in the “study” and “plan” phases of the cycle. We took Karen Blasé to heart when she said “Get started, then get better”.

16. What we did or will do differently next time: Focus, focus, focus…the tools developed by the MIM project were very helpful to buildings, however, we did not guide them enough in the selection of activities/interventions. How did this lesson learned influence our current project? Our current project is very focused in the activities and interventions allowed.

17. What we did or will do differently next time: Communicate, communicate, communicate…the wisdom of “repeated exposures” and “let the data do the talking” cannot be overstated. How did this lesson learned influence our current project? Our current project has a communication plan and works to communicate often and through a variety of means with everyone involved in the project. We also make a concerted effort to focus on data for decision- making at every level.

18. What we did or will do differently next time: Go big or go home… The MIM project only worked with 27 schools. That is a very small number when considering the total number of schools in the state. How did this lesson learned influence our current project? The current project started with 270 buildings, is currently working with 350 buildings and expects to add an additional 50-75 buildings next year. That will be about 1/5 of the buildings in the state. We are developing tools/resources to help adults as well as children be “visible learners”.

19. What we did or will do differently next time: 2013-2014: 350 Collaborative Work Buildings By the numbers 51 High Schools 44 Jr. High/Middle Schools 253 Elementary Schools 1 Early Childhood Center 1 Alternative School Students, teachers and administrators involved: 156842 PreK-12 Students 20865 Students with Disabilities 2229 Special Education Teachers 10573 General Education Teachers 529 Administrators

20. Professional Development to Practice The contents of this presentation were developed under a grant from the US Department of Education to the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (#H323A120018). However, these contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the US Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. Professional Development to Practice Questions? Contact Us Ronda Jenson (jensonr@umkc.edu) Pam Williams (pam.Williams@dese.mo.gov) Ginger Henry (ginger.henry@dese.mo.gov) www.mimschools.orgwww.moedu-sail.org