MTSS Sustainability Assessment
Most districts donāt have an intervention problem; they have a coherence problem. Tutoring, PD, and curriculum run side by side but rarely compound. This 20-minute assessment rates the 30 core ingredients of a sustainable MTSS across six components, then shows you where one focused action would do the most for students.
MTSS Sustainability Assessment
Rate the five core ingredients in each of the six MTSS components. Your component scores and Readiness Profile are calculated automatically as you go.
How to complete the assessment
- Review the core ingredients and evidence examples for each component.
- Rate each ingredient: 0 = not in place, 1 = partially in place, 2 = consistently in place.
- Your five ratings total to a component score out of 10 and appear in the Scoring Summary below.
- For each component, choose the first ingredient you will act on.
Note: If implementation varies across settings, select the lower rating that best reflects the typical experience. When all 30 ratings are complete, enter your name and email to view your Readiness Profile and receive a copy by email.
A: Leadership, Infrastructure, and Communication
Leaders set the vision, expectations, structures, resources, and accountability needed to sustain MTSS, establishing shared responsibility across educators and staff.
A representative leadership team connects the MTSS vision to improvement priorities.
Evidence: Plans, leadership records, and staff communications show a shared vision tied to district and school priorities.
A communication plan defines common language, responsibilities, expectations, decisions, and feedback loops.
Evidence: Role descriptions, onboarding, communication, and supervision clarify responsibilities.
The master schedule protects time for core instruction, intervention, assessment, team problem-solving, learning, and coaching.
Evidence: Schedules provide timely intervention without removing essential core instruction.
Staffing, funding, technology, materials, and resources align with student and implementation needs.
Evidence: Budgets, staffing, technology, materials, and learning investments reflect identified needs.
Leaders use implementation data, outcomes, and feedback to guide learning, resources, and improvement.
Evidence: Leadership records show how implementation data and staff feedback guided resource and improvement decisions.
0 = not in place Ā· 1 = partially in place Ā· 2 = consistently in place
Component Rating
Ingredients rated 0 or 1 appear here. Choose the first one you will act on.
+ Add supporting evidence / notes
B: High-Quality Core Instruction with HQIM and HQIP
High-quality core instruction gives every student access to rigorous, standards-aligned academics and explicit behavioral, social-skill, and executive-function development.
Core academic, behavioral, social-skill, and executive-function materials and practices are defined across grades and settings.
Evidence: An instructional framework defines Tier 1 materials, practices, and expectations.
Materials align with grade-level standards, learning goals, developmental expectations, and a clear scope and sequence. Most core instruction time is spent on grade-level learning.
Evidence: Approved materials and planning resources align with grade-level standards and student needs.
Instruction uses research-proven practices suited to each content area, including explicit teaching, modeling, guided and independent practice, engagement, differentiation, and grade-level scaffolding.
Evidence: Walkthroughs, observations, and student work show consistent instructional practices and grade-level scaffolding.
Educators receive job-embedded learning, coaching, planning time, and implementation tools.
Evidence: Coaching and planning help educators use materials and respond to student needs.
Teams use classroom, screening, outcome, and implementation data to strengthen Tier 1 and investigate conflicting results.
Evidence: Teams compare student and implementation data and document instructional adjustments.
0 = not in place Ā· 1 = partially in place Ā· 2 = consistently in place
Component Rating
Ingredients rated 0 or 1 appear here. Choose the first one you will act on.
+ Add supporting evidence / notes
C: Tiered Instruction and Intervention
A coherent tiered system coordinates academic, behavioral, and social-skill support from targeted intervention.
The continuum distinguishes universal instruction, supplemental core support, targeted intervention, and intensive support. Instructional resources are mapped across tiers so learning stays coherent.
Evidence: A documented continuum maps each level of support and the resources used at each level.
A manageable intervention menu addresses common needs and fits available staff and schedules.
Evidence: The intervention menu addresses the populationās common academic, behavioral, and social-skill needs.
Screening results lead promptly to diagnostic assessment or intervention with embedded pre-assessment.
Evidence: Entry procedures move students from screening to assessment or intervention promptly.
Each intervention defines its focus, materials, provider, group size, frequency, duration, dosage, setting, and progress monitoring.
Evidence: Schedules, staffing plans, and records confirm the intended delivery and intensity.
Teams review fidelity and student response before continuing, adjusting, intensifying, fading, or ending support.
Evidence: Teams review progress, attendance, dosage, and fidelity data before changing support.
0 = not in place Ā· 1 = partially in place Ā· 2 = consistently in place
Component Rating
Ingredients rated 0 or 1 appear here. Choose the first one you will act on.
+ Add supporting evidence / notes
D: Assessment, Progress Monitoring, and Decision Rules
An assessment framework identifies student strengths and needs, guides instruction, monitors growth, and evaluates outcomes through shared, timely decision rules.
The assessment framework includes valid, reliable, accessible measures, each with a defined purpose.
Evidence: A written framework lists each measure, purpose, schedule, use, and interpretation.
All students complete academic, behavioral, and social-skill screening on a common schedule.
Evidence: Records show timely screening for all students, including students who are absent or newly enrolled.
Progress monitoring measures the skill being taught at a frequency matched to support intensity.
Evidence: Progress-monitoring tools align with the target skill and intervention intensity.
Educators can access current classroom, intervention, attendance, dosage, fidelity*, and outcome data.
Evidence: Current student and implementation data are available during team meetings. *Fidelity data show whether an intervention was delivered as designed, such as the planned frequency, duration, group size, and materials.
Shared entrance and exit criteria guide when support begins, continues, changes, intensifies, fades, or ends.
Evidence: Written decision rules prompt action and guide instructional adjustments.
0 = not in place Ā· 1 = partially in place Ā· 2 = consistently in place
Component Rating
Ingredients rated 0 or 1 appear here. Choose the first one you will act on.
+ Add supporting evidence / notes
E: Teaming and Data-Based Problem-Solving
Effective teams, including PLCs, use a consistent, collaborative process to understand needs, select support, and evaluate results, with clear roles and routines.
A linked structure defines responsibilities for Tier 1, Tier 2 and 3, and individual student-support teams.
Evidence: A documented structure distinguishes each teamās responsibilities.
Teams meet regularly with defined roles, shared agendas, minutes, and routines.
Evidence: Calendars, agendas, notes, and participation records show consistent meeting routines.
Members bring the expertise, student knowledge, operational knowledge, and authority needed to act.
Evidence: Membership includes the knowledge and authority needed for decisions.
Teams use a focused process to examine the need, select a response, and begin support promptly.
Evidence: Records show focused analysis followed by timely support.
Plans define the support, owner, start date, monitoring process, and review date.
Evidence: Action plans identify the support, owner, timeline, expectations, outcomes, and review date.
0 = not in place Ā· 1 = partially in place Ā· 2 = consistently in place
Component Rating
Ingredients rated 0 or 1 appear here. Choose the first one you will act on.
+ Add supporting evidence / notes
F: Family and Community Engagement
Families, students, and community partners help create and sustain effective support through clear, accessible, two-way communication.
Families understand how the MTSS structure works, including tiers, screening, and how decisions are made.
Evidence: Family-facing materials explain tiers, screening, and the decision process in plain language.
Schools use timely, plain-language, accessible, culturally and linguistically responsive communication.
Evidence: Communications define terms, use accessible formats and languages, invite responses, and name a contact.
Schools tell each family which supports their student receives, why, the goals, and how the student is progressing.
Evidence: Families receive regular updates on their studentās supports, progress, and service changes.
Families and students give feedback on the MTSS structure and their supports, and teams use it.
Evidence: Surveys, conferences, or meeting notes show family feedback and how it shaped decisions.
Documented referral, consent, coordination, and follow-up processes connect community and school supports.
Evidence: Agreements, referral records, consent procedures, and follow-up show coordinated support.
0 = not in place Ā· 1 = partially in place Ā· 2 = consistently in place
Component Rating
Ingredients rated 0 or 1 appear here. Choose the first one you will act on.
+ Add supporting evidence / notes
Your Readiness Profile is almost ready
Rate all 30 core ingredients to unlock your results.
Your MTSS Profile
Look at each score on its own rather than averaging them. Mark one component as your priority.
| Component | Score | Priority | Next Action |
|---|---|---|---|
| A: Leadership & Infrastructure | ā/10 | ||
| B: Core Instruction (HQIM/HQIP) | ā/10 | ||
| C: Tiered Instruction & Intervention | ā/10 | ||
| D: Assessment & Progress Monitoring | ā/10 | ||
| E: Teaming & Problem-Solving | ā/10 | ||
| F: Family & Community Engagement | ā/10 |
Next Step
Schedule an MTSS consultation. Bring this profile to a planning conversation with our MTSS team. We’ll review your current resources, find the gaps with the biggest effect on students and educators, and decide together on the right mix of support.
Schedule an MTSS Consultation