MTSS work happens at multiple levels, but those levels are not always equally supported. While schools often have clear structures for student-level problem-solving, far fewer have routines for leaders to step back, examine patterns, and address system-wide needs. The difference between the two can determine whether MTSS work stays reactive or becomes truly effective.
The insight above was recently shared by a district administrator in Florida who was looking to improve their MTSS practice. Similar observations have been shared many times before. The most common component of MTSS that schools and districts implement is the student-level problem-solving meeting. In almost every school that employs an MTSS model, you will find a team of teachers who come together to understand why a student is struggling, what has been done to support the student, and what should be done moving forward. This collaborative problem-solving work at the student-level is critical for student success and effective MTSS, but it is all too often stymied by an absence of systems-level problem-solving that establishes the infrastructure upon which any student-level support can be provided. After all, as the name of the acronym suggests, it is the system that the model is based on and the foundation for student-level problem-solving.
With the increased number of students requiring intervention and support, it is even more critical for school and district leaders to adopt a systems-level approach to supporting students and educators.
There are simply too many students and too few resources to take a one-by-one approach and we have to find efficiency and hopefully synergy by building a system that finds common problems and solves the problem with the most efficient effort/expenditure - for all those affected.
Many districts and schools are missing a way to assess and improve on their MTSS system-level health. The Branching Minds team works with districts to help institute what we call a “School Leadership Meeting.” This meeting is conducted three times a year following the administration of universal screening assessments. This meeting typically includes the principal, data specialists (e.g., AP or counselor), student service/instructional service representatives, special education representatives/teachers, and grade-level representatives in larger schools or general education teacher representatives in smaller schools.
The goal of this meeting is to understand the health of school-level RTI/MTSS practice (check out our School Leaders Data Collection Worksheet + Planning Worksheet) by looking at the percent of students who are adequately served by the core curriculum, the objectivity of instruction across demographics, grades, and classrooms, and improvement in student outcome measures since the last meeting. These metrics are used to evaluate the quality of practice across Tier 1, 2 and 3 levels of support and guide school-level improvement plans.
The School Leadership Meeting is designed to help MTSS leadership teams ask, reflect on, and leverage data to problem-solve the answers to these six system-level questions:
Is the core curriculum supporting 80% of students (i.e., are 80% of students on grade level)? If not, take a deeper dive into the schools, grade levels, content areas, and classrooms to evaluate the quality of the intended curriculum, the resources, and delivery of instruction.
Is the core curriculum supporting students objectivity, across demographics, schools, grades, and classrooms? If the answer is no, take a deeper dive into the schools and grade levels to evaluate the cultural responsiveness of the core.
Are students progressing, and do we see healthy tier movement? With healthy support at each tier, more students should be moving down in tiered support intensity than up. If not (i.e., there is greater movement up than down), take a closer look into the schools, grades, and tier levels to evaluate the quality of the interventions provided.
Are students progressing objectivity? If not, evaluate the demographic breakdown of students being supported at the tier 2 and 3 level as well as the quality of interventions to identify any disproportionality or biases in how students are being supported.
Are evidence-based interventions being delivered with fidelity? If not, drill down to schools, grades, and topic levels to see if there are particular areas of concern, potentially with particular interventions. Determine whether educators need additional support implementing certain programs or practices.
Are efficiencies being found through creating small groups for intervention work? If not, how can we use current assessment data to form specific "skill-based" small groups to lessen the number of plans to be written, student support meetings to hold, and more kids served with the same amount of time?
Research and best practice in MTSS points to the importance of problem-solving across multiple levels. Systems-level problem-solving is an essential foundation to any MTSS/RTI model and provides the support for teams of educators to come together to meet the needs of individual students.
At Branching Minds, our MTSS professional learning focuses on strengthening the systems that support consistent implementation across a district. Strong MTSS outcomes depend on clear structures, shared expectations, and well-defined processes — not just individual programs or initiatives.
Through our professional learning, we work with district leadership teams to examine current MTSS practices, identify strengths and gaps, and clarify roles, routines, and decision-making processes. This work helps districts build the infrastructure needed to support high-fidelity MTSS practice over time, often including the development of a shared MTSS handbook to ensure clarity and consistency across schools.