Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Rob Horner, and George Sugai University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill...

Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase,Rob Horner, and George Sugai

University of North Carolina – Chapel HillUniversity of Oregon

University of Connecticut

SISEP

Project Directors 2009

SISEP Center

State Implementation and Scaling up of Evidence-based Practices (SISEP)

www.scalingup.org

DoE and OSEP Leaders

Project Officer: Jennifer Doolittle

© Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Robert Horner, George Sugai, 2009

System Change

“Education has a thousand pilots and no central heating system”

Tom Luce, National Math and Science Initiative

Scaling Up

EBPs currently are used where they are most wanted (boutique uses)

Social impact will come from going where they are most needed

Accessible to ALL students and families who could benefit

Common usage = work with the willing and the reluctant

Scaling Up

Scaling up is achieved when at least 60% of the students/ schools that could benefit from an innovation have full and effective access to that innovation

School Wide PBS

SWPBS Schools

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

Aug 04 Aug 05 Aug 06 Aug 07

Year

Tota

l Num

ber

Sch

ools

School Wide PBS

SWPBS Schools

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

Aug 04 Aug 05 Aug 06 Aug 07

Year

Tota

l N

um

ber

Sch

ools

6% of all schools

© Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Robert Horner, George Sugai, 2009

Capacity Development

To scale up interventions we must first scale up implementation capacity

Building implementation capacity is essential to maximizing the use of EBPs and other innovations

Large scale, real time changeGlennan, Bodilly, Galegher, & Kerr (2004)

Selection Criteria

The State has documented implementation of an evidence-based curriculum/instruction initiative or a behavior support program.

The State has demonstrated committed leadership at the State level.

The State is willing to dedicate roughly $2 million a year to scaling up evidence-based practices.

© Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Robert Horner, George Sugai, 2009

© Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Robert Horner, George Sugai, 2009

Selection Criteria

The State is willing to participate in and contribute to a community of practice.

The State has a statewide data collection system in place.

Scaling Up Start with the end in mind

What will it take to:

Make statewide use of education innovations…

That produce increasingly effective outcomes…

For the next 50 years?

State Management

Team

State Transformation

Team

Regional Implementation

Team

N = 50 – 200 Schools

Regional Implementation

Team

N = 50 – 200 Schools

Regional Implementation

Team

N = 50 – 200 Schools

Regional Implementation

Team

N = 50 – 200 Schools

IMPLEMENTATION CAPACITY FOR

SCALING UP EBPs

SIS

EP

Su

pp

ort

State Management

Team

State Transformation

Team

Regional Implementation

Team

N = 50 – 200 Schools

First Regional Implementation

Team

N = 9 StaffN = 50 Schools

Regional Implementation

Team

N = 50 – 200 Schools

Regional Implementation

Team

N = 50 – 200 Schools

IMPLEMENTATION CAPACITY FOR

SCALING UP EBPs

[Phase 1]

SIS

EP

Su

pp

ort

& 2

FT

E

Too many overqualified people = Capacity Dev.

State Management

Team

Implementation Team

InnovationTeachersStudents

Po

licy En

abled

P

ractice (PE

P)

Pra

ctic

e In

form

ed

Po

licy

(P

IP)

Sys

tem

C

han

ge

SIS

EP

Sys

tem

Ch

ang

e S

up

po

rt

Implementation Team

Implementation Team

Prepare Communities

Prepare schools and staff

Work with Researchers

Assure Implementation

Prepare Districts Assure Student Benefits

Create Readiness

Parents and Stakeholders

© Fixsen & Blase, 2009

© Fixsen & Blase, 2007

Student Benefits

Technical

Integrated & Compensatory

Performance Assessment (Fidelity)

Coaching

Training

Selection

Systems Intervention

Facilitative Administration

Decision Support Data System

Competence Organization

Leadership

Adaptive

System ChangeEXISTING SYSTEM

EFFECTIVE INNOVATIONS

ARE CHANGED TO

FIT THE SYSTEM

EXISTING SYSTEM IS

CHANGED TO SUPPORT

THE EFFECTIVENESS OF

THE INNOVATION

EFFECTIVE INNOVATION

System Change

Innovative practices do not fare well in existing organizational structures and systems

Organizational and system changes are essential to successful use of innovations

Expect it, Plan for it

Cannot change a whole system at once

Transformation Zone

Use Innovations

Develop Implementation Infrastructure

Change System

Transformation Zone A “vertical slice” of the education system

(from the classroom to the Capitol)

The “slice” is large enough (critical mass) to include all aspects of the system

» Develop capacity to change systems

The “slice” is small enough to be manageable

» Manage the change process (small bites)

» Manage the risks (most innovations don’t work at first)

» Limit the damage (quick recovery, rapid resolution)

SYSTEM ALIGNMENT

State Department

Districts/ Regions

Schools

Teachers/ Staff

Effective Practices

AL

IGN

ME

NT

Tra

nsf

orm

atio

n

Zo

ne

Federal Departments

Imp

lem

enta

tio

n T

eam

s

FORM SUPPORTS FUNCTION

For More InformationFor More InformationDean L. Fixsen, Ph.D.

919-966-3892

fixsen@mail.fpg.unc.edu

Karen A. Blase, Ph.D.

919-966-9050

blase@mail.fpg.unc.edu

State Implementation and Scaling up of Evidence-based Practices

National Implementation Research Network

www.scalingup.org

http://nirn.fpg.unc.edu

For More Information

The OSEP-funded National Technical Assistance Center on Positive Behavior and Intervention Supports was established to address the behavioral and discipline systems needed for successful learning and social development of students. The Center provides capacity-building information and technical support about behavioral systems to assist states and districts in the design of effective schools.

Thank YouWe thank the following for their support

Annie E. Casey Foundation (EBPs and cultural competence)

William T. Grant Foundation (implementation literature review)

Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (implementation strategies grants; NREPP reviews; SOC analyses of implementation; national implementation awards)

Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (implementation research contract)

National Institute of Mental Health (research and training grants)

Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (program development and evaluation grants

Office of Special Education Programs (Capacity Development Center contract)

Agency for Children and Families (Child Welfare Leadership Development contract)