District Readiness - Examples from Practice


SISEP Active States

Focus Area(s): 

How District Leadership Uses Data to Assess Readiness for Effective Use of Innovations
Large Urban District Example

The Greater Louisville Education Cooperative supports Jefferson County Public Schools (JCPS) in the development of a stakeholder data report using the district data stored in the Kentucky Data Dashboard. JCPS has 150 schools with more than 101,000 students. See the full JCPS Stakeholder Report.

Using District Capacity Assessment Data for Action Planning
Readiness is an on-going process to sustain through leadership turnover

In October of 2018, the district celebrated their readiness and re-commitment of leadership following personnel and leadership changes. They used their District Capacity Assessment data to celebrate their attention to training teachers and the School Implementation Team’s use of a Decision Support Data System monthly, or Kentucky’s Plan-Do-Study-Act process (download related PowerPoint Presentation and Note Taking Template). Areas for future growth included Systems Intervention (reporting barriers to the team with the authority and resources to solve the barrier for Practice-Policy Improvement Cycles) and Fidelity (using fidelity data to improve practice). They set a goal and identified who would do what, by when, so they could monitor their progress and communicate their visible commitment and active involvement to strengthen critical implementation infrastructure variables (i.e., Implementation Drivers) by analyzing, communicating, and responding to data.

 Graph of District Capacity Assessment data across three time points
District Capacity Assessment
Readiness to use Implementation Drivers 

  • Leadership - Active involvement in facilitating and sustaining systems change to support implementation of the effective innovation through strategic communication, decisions, guidance, and resource allocation.
  • Competency - Strategies to develop, improve, and sustain systems to support educators’ ability to implement an Effective Innovation as intended in order to achieve desired outcomes. Competency Drivers include: Fidelity, Selection, Training, and Coaching.
  • OrganizationStrategies for analyzing, communicating, and responding to data in ways that result in continuous improvement of systems and supports for educators to implement an effective innovation. Organization Drivers include: Decision Support Data System, Facilitative Administration, and Systems Intervention.

Triangle showing the implementation drivers


How District Leadership Uses Practice-Policy Feedback Loops to Create Readiness, Scale, and Sustain Effective Innovations for Decades
Mid-size Suburban District Example

Sadler & Sugai (2009) describe how Tigard Tualatin School District (17 Schools, with 12,000 students at publication) used Practice-Policy Feedback Loops to scale and sustain their Effective Behavior and Instructional Support (EBIS) innovation, 24 years to this day. 

Policy Makers Sustain Practice

  • From 1996 to 1999, the district’s Effective Behavior Supports (EBS) program progressed from a pilot study involving eight schools to a school board–approved districtwide adoption.
  • In January 2001, the EBS initiative was scaled to a districtwide initiative, or EBIS – an integrated systems-level adoption, use, and evaluation of behavior and academic achievement, particularly in early reading. The school board gave priority to the initiative by using EBIS language and processes in their overall strategic plan. For example, the plan included a calendar of alternating monthly leadership team meetings, team-training, behavioral capacity building, and school support activities for accurate and sustained implementation. Systems for information sharing and Data-Based Decision Making and Action Planning were established for use by Teacher Teams, teacher leaders, principals, and district leadership. The attention to critical implementation components resulted in improved outcomes and sustainability of the EBIS model for 24 years to this day.


Seventy-five percent (341 of 456) of students who met the DIBELS benchmark at the end of first grade in 2002 did, in fact, exceed the state reading benchmark at the end of third grade in 2004 (Sadler & Sugai, 2009).

Office Discipline Referral (ODR) data were not available at the initiation of EBS in 1996, so a calculation of a non-EBS baseline was not possible. In general, the district’s ODR rates were maintained at substantially lower rates than what was reported for a sample of 1,010 elementary schools in the School Wide Information System (www.swis.org) database for the 2005–2006 academic year (0.37 per 100 students per day) (Sadler & Sugai, 2009).


Sadler, C., & Sugai, G. (2009). Effective Behavior and Instructional Support: A district model for early identification and prevention of reading and behavior problems. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 11(1), 35-46.