Scaling Up Innovations Scaling Up Effectiveness OR Superintendents

Scaling Up Innovations Scaling Up Effectiveness OR Superintendents’ Forum April 2010 Dean L. Fixsen, Ph. D. & Karen A. Blase, Ph. D. University of North Carolina - Chapel Hill Rob Horner, Ph. D. University of Oregon George Sugai, Ph. D. University of Connecticut

Challenges OR Public Schools “Bottom 20%” § § § § § Students: 565, 000 Schools: 1, 800 School Districts: 196 Counties: 36 Budget: $8. 5 Billion 113, 000 360 39 36

Follow Through Programs Figure 1: This figure shows the average effects of nine Follow Through models on measures of basic skills (word knowledge, spelling, language, and math computation), cognitive-conceptual skills (reading comprehension, math concepts, and math problem solving) and self-concept. This figure is adapted from Engelmann, S. and Carnine, D. (1982), Theory of Instruction: Principles and applications. New York: Irvington Press.

Achieving Student Benefits § Hattie (2009) recently reported a metaanalysis of 816 meta-analyses § § 52, 649 research studies in education involving over 83 million students, teachers, staff, parents, and others. "It is what teachers get the students to do in the class that emerged as the strongest component of the accomplished teachers' repertoire. " Hattie (2009)

Achieving Student Benefits § Increasing opportunities to respond and the amount/ accuracy of feedback is an important correlate of student achievement § The feedback to the teachers about what students can and cannot do is more powerful than feedback to the student § This requires a change in the conception of what it means to be a teacher – not a solo performer Hattie (2009)

Achieving Student Benefits § We now know a lot about WHAT to do to educate students § We can improve education for students – on purpose!

Science “to” Service SCIENCE SERVICE IMPLEMENTATION GAP

Challenges § Science to Service Gap § What is known is not what is adopted to help students § Implementation Gap § What is adopted is not used fully and effectively in practice

Achieving Student Benefits Longitudinal Studies of a Variety of Comprehensive School Reforms Good Intentions Actual Supports Years 1 -3 Outcomes Every Teacher Trained Fewer than 50% of the teachers received some training Fewer than 10% of the schools used the CSR as intended Every Teacher Continually Supported Fewer than 25% of the teachers received support Vast majority of students did not benefit Aladjem & Borman, 2006; Vernez, Karam, Mariano, & De. Martini, 2006

Challenges § § You are not alone! Superintendents across the nation are facing the same problems: § Lack of consistency across teachers, schools, and years § Lack of capacity to make meaningful changes and sustain them

SISEP Center In 2007 § State of Oregon participated in a process to select States to create an infrastructure for implementation of innovations statewide. § § § 1 of 36 interested States 1 of 16 applicant States 1 of 6 chosen States that met the selection criteria and site visit criteria (IL, MI, MN, MO, OR, VA)

SISEP Center State Implementation and Scaling up of Evidence-based Practices (SISEP) www. scalingup. org Dean Fixsen and Karen Blase National Implementation Research Network, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Rob Horner University of Oregon George Sugai University of Connecticut

Capacity Building The SISEP Center – Intensive and focused activity to build state capacity and align system structures, roles, and functions Use implementation science and best practices across programs and innovations Large scale, real time change

Challenges § Students cannot benefit from interventions they do not experience § Teachers and staff have to change if students are to benefit Dobson & Cook (1980)

Implementation Science § Know-WHAT § Knowledge of the intervention § Know-HOW § Knowledge of implementation Tucker, Edmondson, & Nembhard (2005)

Know WHAT Choose Interventions Wisely § § Meaningful Improvement § Eventually want to see educationally and socially significant changes in student outcomes across the State Must be “worth the effort” to scale up (e. g. EBISS)

Know HOW IMPLEMENTATION INTERVENTION Effective Student Benefits NOT Effective Poor Outcomes Highly variable, often ineffective, NOT Effective sometimes harmful to students, families, and adults (Institute of Medicine, 2000; 2001; New Freedom Commission on Mental Health, 2003; National Commission on Excellence in Education, 1983; Department of Health and Human Services, 1999)

Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature Fixsen, D. L. , Naoom, S. F. , Blase, K. A. , Friedman, R. M. & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231). Download all or part of the monograph at: http: //www. fpg. unc. edu/~nirn/resources/detail. cfm? resource. ID=31

Implementation Science Data Show These Methods, When Used Alone, Do Not Result In Uses of Innovations As Intended: § § § Diffusion/ Dissemination of information Training Passing laws/ mandates/ regulations Providing funding/ incentives Organization change/ reorganization

Implementation Science Data Show These Methods, When Used Alone, Do Not Result In Uses of Innovations As Intended § We know a lot about ineffective methods because they are the ones we use! § Implementation science will improve as implementation practices improve (create a better “laboratory”)

Student Benefits Implementation Takes Time • Exploration Performance (Sustainability) Assessment (Fidelity) • Installation (Sustainability) Coaching • Initial Implementation Adaptive Innovation 2 – 4 Years Systems Intervention Organization Facilitative Administration Training • Full Implementation Integrated & (Effectiveness &Compensatory Sustainability) Selection Technical Decision Support Data System Leadership Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005

Implementation Science § Implementation Drivers § Common features of successful supports to help make full and effective uses of a wide variety of innovations

Reliable Benefits for Students Consistent uses of Innovations Performance Assessment (Fidelity) Coaching Staff Competence Systems Intervention Organization Supports Training Integrated & Compensatory Facilitative Administration Decision Support Data System Selection Technical Leadership Adaptive © Fixsen & Blase, 2007

Staff Coaching OUTCOMES (% of Participants who Demonstrate Knowledge, Demonstrate new Skills in a Training Setting, and Use new Skills in the Classroom) TRAINING COMPONENTS Knowledge Skill Demonstration Use in the Classroom 5% 0% Theory and Discussion 10% . . +Demonstration in Training 30% …+ Practice & Feedback in Training 60% 5% …+ Coaching in Classroom 95% 95% 20% 0% Joyce and Showers, 2002

Support Implementation § Students cannot benefit from education practices they do not experience § Support implementation practices within schools and districts

Capacity Building § Scaling up = at least 60% of the students who could benefit from an innovation have access to that innovation § Achieve significant benefits to students and society

Capacity Building § Letting it happen § Recipients are accountable § Helping it happen § Recipients are accountable § Making it happen § Purposeful use of implementation practices and science § Implementation teams are accountable Based on Greenhalgh, Robert, Mac. Farlane, Bate, & Kyriakidou, 2004

Capacity Building § Letting it happen § § Helping it happen § § Recipients are accountable Making it happen § Implementation Teams are accountable: THEY DO THE WORK (Heart of Scaling) Based on Greenhalgh, Robert, Mac. Farlane, Bate, & Kyriakidou, 2004

Implementation Team Minimum of three people (four or five preferred) to promote effective, efficient, and sustainable implementation, organization change, and system transformation work Tolerate turnover; teams are sustainable even when the players come and go

Implementation Team A group that knows the innovations very well (formal and craft knowledge) A group that knows implementation very well (formal and craft knowledge) A group that knows improvement cycles to make intervention and implementation methods more effective and efficient over time

Implementation Team Simultaneous, Multi-Level Interventions Teacher & Staff Competence School & District Supports Management (leadership, policy) Administration (HR, structure) Supervision (nature, content) Regional Authority Supports State and Community Supports

Implementation Team Prepare Communities Prepare Regions Prepare schools and staff Implementation Team Assure Student Benefits Parents and Work with Researchers Stakeholders Create Readiness Assure Implementation © Fixsen & Blase, 2009

Implementation Science IMPLEMENTATION INTERVENTION Impl. Team Effective 80%, 3 Yrs NO Impl. Team 14%, 17 Yrs Effective use of Letting it Happen Implementation Helping it Happen Science & Practice Fixsen, Blase, Timbers, & Wolf, 2001 Balas & Boren, 2000

School Wide PBS

School Wide PBS 12% in 17 Years (1992 -2009)

Costs and Savings Short-Term Investment in Imple. Capacity Realize Long. Term Benefits

Costs and Savings § This year’s success pays for next years increase in capacity Barber & Fullan (2005)

Change Systems To scale up, we need to: § Turn policy into effective practice § Create an infrastructure for implementation of innovations § Turn effective practice into policy

Challenges OR Public Schools “Bottom 20%” §PROBLEM: Students: The 565, 000 “bottom is distributed § 20%” Schools: 1, 800 throughout the state and §shifts School 196 each. Districts: year § Counties: 36 § Budget: $8. 5 Billion § 113, 000 SOLUTION: § capacity 360 Plan to reach ALL § 39 schools § 36

State Department Leadership District Leaders and Staff School Teachers and Staff All Students & Families N = 565, 000 © Fixsen & Blase, 2008

State Department Leadership Implementation. Skilled Workforce N=6 Regional Implementation Teams (N=5) 1 for every group of 5 “Districts” (N = 14 Regional Teams) N = 70 “District” Implementation Teams (N=4) 1 for every group of 25 Schools (N = 72 “District” Teams) N = 288 School Implementation Team (N=4) School Teachers and Staff 1 for each School (N = 1, 800 School Teams) All Students & Families N = 7, 200 Re-Purpose 1 for every 10 RITs (N = 1 State Teams) N = 76 < 0. 1% $$ State Transformation Team (N=6) N = 565, 000 © Fixsen & Blase, 2008

Saturation Intensive Development

Oregon Districts and Student Enrollment ODE Report Card 2008 -2009

Scale Up § To scale up interventions we must first scale up implementation capacity § Building implementation capacity is essential to maximizing the statewide use of EBPs and other innovations

Scale Up Oregon needs § About 14 Regional Implementation Teams (and support staff) § § § One State Transformation Team Annual cost about $8 million About $40, 000 per year per district (or $14 per year per student)

System Change § Innovative practices do not fare well in existing organizational structures and systems § An infrastructure for implementation does not exist § Organizational and system changes are essential to successful use of innovations

Legacy Systems § A legacy system is a system or application that continues to be used despite its poor competitiveness and compatibility with modern equivalents § Difficult to integrate new systems into legacy systems because it is a difficult and time intensive process to understand current system functionalities § Legacy methods create a huge conversion challenge for implementation teams Ashok R. B. Samuel (2009)

System Change EXISTING SYSTEM IS CHANGED TO SUPPORT THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE INNOVATION EFFECTIVE INNOVATIONS ARE CHANGED TO FIT THE SYSTEM EFFECTIVE INNOVATION

Compliance and Crises, Urgent, Time Sensitive!! • Services not meeting Standards • Deal with urgent and high profile issues Best Practices Implemented Fully With Good Outcomes System Supports & Stability Mandates, System Supports, Foundational Polices & Regulations • Regulatory roles • Basic Data Systems • Financing and Fiscal Accountability • Accreditation/ Licensing Standards • HR rules and regulations • Safety Standards • Work with Legislature • Inclusion of Stakeholders Leadership Responsibilities and Leverage Points Thanks to Tom Bellamy

Management Team • RFP methods • IHE curricula Implementation Team Teachers Innovations Students Practice Informed Policy (PIP) • Salaries System Change Policy Enabled Practice (PEP) “External” System Change Support Adaptive Challenges • Funding • Credentialing • Licensing • Time/ scheduling • Union contracts • Duplication • Fragmentation • Hiring criteria • Federal/ State laws

SYSTEM ALIGNMENT State Department Districts Implementation Teams Federal Departments Schools Teachers/ Staff Effective Practices FORM SUPPORTS FUNCTION

The End in Mind § With the purposeful use of implementation science, we can: § Make statewide use of good instruction, evidence-based practices, and other innovations… § To produce increasingly effective outcomes for all students… § For the next 50 years.

Implementation Science § Global Implementation Conference 2011 § www. implementationconference. org § Integrate the science, practice, policy of implementation, organization change, and system transformation

Call for Applications Science and Service Award Program § Do you know of an organization/coalition currently implementing an evidence based practice in their local community? § Is the implementation of this program/innovation producing beneficial outcomes to the community? § Are they a role model for moving the evidence-based practice from science to service? If you answered “YES” to all of the above, check out: http: //www. samhsa. gov/scienceandservice Nominate your own organization or someone you know!!

For More Information Karen A. Blase, Ph. D. Dean L. Fixsen, Ph. D. § 919 -966 -9050 § 919 -966 -3892 § karen. blase@unc. edu § dean. fixsen@unc. edu Frank Porter Graham Child Development Institute University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, NC http: //nirn. fpg. unc. edu/

For More Information State Implementation and Scaling up of Evidencebased Practices (SISEP) Dean Fixsen, Karen Blase, Rob Horner, George Sugai www. scalingup. org “Resources” Tab § Concept paper § Annotated bibliography § Data on scaling up § Scaling up Briefs

Evidence-based Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature Fixsen, D. L. , Naoom, S. F. , Blase, K. A. , Friedman, R. M. & Wallace, F. (2005). Implementation Research: A Synthesis of the Literature. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida, Louis de la Parte Florida Mental Health Institute, The National Implementation Research Network (FMHI Publication #231). Download all or part of the monograph at: http: //www. fpg. unc. edu/~nirn/resources/detail. cfm? resource. ID=31

Thank You for your Support § Annie E. Casey Foundation (EBPs and cultural competence) § National Institute of Mental Health (research and training grants) § William T. Grant Foundation (implementation literature review) § § Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (implementation strategies grants; national implementation awards) Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention (program development and evaluation grants § Office of Special Education Programs (Scaling up Capacity Development Center) § Administration for Children and Families (Child Welfare Leadership Development) § Duke Endowment (Child Welfare Reform) § Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (implementation research)