1. Dial-in: 1-888-447-7153 Passcode: 899594 SPDG Directors’ Webinar: Exploration Stage Presenters: Ron Dughman, Mountain Plains Regional Resource Center, Marick Tedesco, PhD, State Transformation Specialist, State of Oregon

2. 2 Webinar Ground Rules Roll Call  Enter Name, State, and role in chat pod Mute your phones:  To Mute or Un-Mute Press *6  Please do not put your phones on ‘Hold’ Q & A Process (audio/chat):  Ask questions in two ways – 1) via phone or 2) type in chat pod Archive Recording, PPT, & Materials: http://signetwork.org/event_calendar/events

3. 3 General Updates 2013 SPDG Continuation Reporting  REPORT Due: May 3, 2013  Link to Recorded presentation by Jennifer Coffey http://www.signetwork.org/content_pages/10 http://www.signetwork.org/content_pages/10  Q&A Session: February 19, 3:00-4:00pm Eastern to address questions grantees may have after viewing the recording SPDG National Meeting - Deadlines  Registration and reserve lodging – February 11  Submit Market Place and Poster Session Proposals: February 11

4. 4 General Updates OSEP Project Directors Meeting  SAVE THE DATE: July 15-17, 2013  Hosted by AIR  SPDG Program Area Meeting - 4:00-6:00 pm Day 1  No meals or snacks provided -  You must register for the conference before reserving lodging. Please click here to register now.Please click here to register now  A block of rooms has been reserved at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel,

5. Feb-Mar Mar-Apr Apr-June June-Aug 6 1-2 months Follow-up Peer to Peer Check-ins Discussion Imp Stage-based Tool Implementation & Scale Up Conversations PLC Feb 14 Mar 6 (f2f mtg) Apr 11 Jun 13 One week prep Directors’ Webinars Feb 7 Mar 6 (f2f mtg) Apr 4 Jun 6 5 4 Units #1 Exploration: February #2 Installation: March #3 Initial Implementation: April #4 Full Implementation: June Presentation Impl-Stage & related tools Parsed by RRC Regions

6. Agenda for today 6  Overview of the Exploration Stage  Guiding Implementation Questions Overview  Hexagon Tool Overview and Use  Hexagon Tool and Correlation to Guiding Implementation Questions  Overview of the ImpleMAP  One State’s Experience with ImpleMap

7. Introductions 7

8. Karen A. Blase Barbara Sims Michelle A. Duda Dean L. Fixsen Jonathan Green Ron Dughman, RRCP Jeanna Mullins, RRCP Chapel Hill NC October 2012 Building Implementation Capacity RRCP Implementation Core Team Institute

9. Purposeful matching of critical implementation activities to the appropriate stage of the process Stages of Implementation Stages

10. Help to develop, improve, and sustain educators’ competence and confidence to implement effective educational practices and supports. Help ensure sustainability and improvement at the organization and systems level Help guide leaders to use the right leadership strategies for the situation Implementation Drivers Drivers

11. New Approaches Need New Ways of Work Transparent, protocol-driven feedback loops and processes Aligned policies, funding, guidance to support new ways of work There are no administrative decisions, they are all education quality decisions. Improvement Cycles Cycles

12. Implementation Teams ARE NOT Committees Advisory Groups Implementation Teams DO Know the innovation – the WHAT Know and use implementation science and best practices – the HOW Use Plan, Do, Study, Act Cycles to “get started” and “get better” Stay on “mission” Engage in the right work at the right level at the right time. Implementation Teams Teams

13. IMPLEMENTATION STAGES Purposeful matching of critical implementation activities to the stage of the process

14. Active Implementation Frameworks Successful implementation on a useful scale requires... Purposeful matching of critical implementation activities to the stage of the process – “STAGES OF IMPLEMENTATION” Active use of implementation core components “best practices” – “IMPLEMENTATION DRIVERS” A focus on continuous, purposeful improvement – “IMPROVEMENT CYCLES” Organized, expert assistance – “IMPLEMENTATION TEAMS”

15. Our Current Context Improved Outcomes for ALL Students GOAL EBPs/EIIs

16. Stages AND Drivers Implementation Takes Time: 2 – 4 Years EXPLORATION INSTALLATION INITIAL IMPLEMENTATION FULL IMPLEMENTATION Drivers “DRIVERS”

17. Stages of Implementation EXPLORATION Competency Drivers Organization Drivers Leadership Drivers Integrated & Compensatory —Fixsen, Naoom, Blase, Friedman, & Wallace, 2005 “Pay now or Pay later”

18. Exploration Goals Create readiness for change Changing hearts and minds Examine degree to which the proposed strategies and practices meet the needs of our State and our students Determine whether the strategies, practices, and implementation are desirable and feasible Implementation Stages

19. Exploration Stage What happens during Exploration Stage? Determine Need and Identify Options Assess “Fit” and Feasibility Structural and functional changes identified Promote “Buy in” for the innovation and for implementation supports Make recommendations (go/no go) Implementation “Team” identified Implementation Stages

20. GUIDING IMPLEMENTATION QUESTIONS EXPLORATION STAGE Formalize Structures 1. Who will be accountable on a day-to-day basis for ensuring this work is done? • 2. How will State leadership be a part of this process to ensure that successes are operationalized and barriers are removed?

21. GUIDING IMPLEMENTATION QUESTIONS EXPLORATION STAGE Determine Need and Options 1. What do your current data suggest is the most critical or pivotal need? 2. What is the supporting research or evidence of the strategies you are considering?

22. GUIDING IMPLEMENTATION QUESTIONS EXPLORATION STAGE Assess Fit and Feasibility 1. What are the priorities of your State? 2. What is your theory of change (i.e., logic model, blueprint, outcome map etc.)? 3. How will you measure progress toward that goal at t the LEA? 4. Who will do what differently at the SEA to impact that outcome? At the LEA?

23. GUIDING IMPLEMENTATION QUESTIONS EXPLORATION STAGE Promote “Buy-in” and “Ownership” 1. How will readiness be created at the SEA? At the LEA?

24. GUIDING IMPLEMENTATION QUESTIONS EXPLORATION STAGE Reassess and Decide 1. What has emerged during Exploration that impacts your decision?

25. The Hexagon An EBP Exploration Tool NEED FIT RESOURCES EVIDENCE CAPACITY READINESS Fit with current Initiatives School, district, state priorities Organizational structures Community values Need in school, district, state Academic & socially significant Issues Parent & community perceptions of need Data indicating need Resources and supports for: Curricula & Classroom Technology supports (IT dept.) Staffing Training Data Systems Coaching & Supervision Administration & system Evidence Outcomes – Is it worth it? Fidelity data Cost – effectiveness data Number of studies Population similarities Diverse cultural groups Efficacy or Effectiveness Capacity to Implement Staff meet minimum qualifications Able to sustain Imp Drivers Financially Structurally Buy-in process operationalized Practitioners Families Readiness for Replication Qualified purveyor Expert or TA available Mature sites to observe Several replications How well is it operationalized? Are Imp Drivers operationalized? The “Hexagon” can be used as a planning tool to evaluate evidence- based programs and practices during the Exploration Stage of Implementation. Download available at: www.scalingup.org/tools-and-resources EBP: 5 Point Rating Scale: High = 5; Medium = 3; Low = 1. Midpoints can be used and scored as a 2 or 4. HighMedLow Need Fit Resource Availability Evidence Readiness for Replication Capacity to Implement Total Score © National Implementation Research Network 2009-2012 Adapted from work by Laurel J. Kiser, Michelle Zabel, Albert A. Zachik, and Joan Smith at the University of Maryland

26. Exploration: ImpleMap Purpose:  To assess and understand “the implementation landscape”  A data collection tool to assess Implementation drivers and implementation best practices Pre-Requisites  Interviewer needs to have expertise in Implementation Science  Site has a history of successful (or not) use of evidence-based or evidence informed practices

27. ImpleMap Administration INTERVENTION WHATHOWWHO Enter the name of each intervention provided by the respondent. You may know the intervention by another name, but record the name used in this provider organization. Ask questions to get information about the vetting process. Ask about the “core intervention components” as they are described by the respondent. Core intervention components are the critical functions that define an intervention. Ask about the Implementation Drivers. Implementation Drivers are components related to: ►developing staff competency (selection, training, coaching, performance assessments); ►organization supports (decision support data systems, facilitative administration, systems interventions); and ►leadership supports (technical and adaptive). Ask about the person accountable for providing each Implementation Driver. Record the name, position, and physical location of each person.

28. Reflection Creating Readiness What role can you play in developing readiness for the EBP/EII you have in mind? What are 2 things your team could to tomorrow to asses your current infrastructure? The Hexagon Tool (Analysis of Evidence- based Programs or Practices) Modification of the Hexagon Tool for a new initiative Implementation Mapping (ImpleMap) Supporting New Ways of Work

29. What’s Next 29  Thursday 2/14, Implementation and Scale Up Conversations PLC: Break-out discussions focused on Exploration Tools  Friday 2/8: Agenda with guiding questions disseminated via the PLC Outlook reminder message  Friday 2/8: Peer Partners to be notified

30. Peer Partners 30  Friday 2/8: Peer Partners to be notified ??, Louisiana, 2011 Adria David, Idaho, Director, 2012 Allison Layland, Maryland, Coordinator, 2012 Annette Young, Montana, Coordinator, 2010 Brenda Oas, North Dakota, Director, 2012 Debrajean Scheibel, Maine, 2011 Denise Andreski, Florida, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Evaluator, 2012 Jane Splean, Nevada, Coordinator and Lori Schwank, Nevada, Coordinator, 2007 Jennifer Huisken LaPointe, Arkansas, Evaluator 2009 Kerry Haag, Kansas, Director, 2012 Kimberly Harper, Wyoming, Director, 2011 Kristan Sievers-Coffer, Indiana, Director 2009 Lorraine Jensen/Larson, Minnesota, Director 2010 Lowell K. Oswald, Utah, Director 2012 Mary Steady, New Hampshire, Director 2012 Pat Mueller, Alabama, Delaware, New Hampshire, Mississippi, Vermont, Evaluator & Co- Director 2012 (4), 2010 (1) Paula Crawford, North Carolina, Director 2010 Sarah Drinkwater, Oregon, Director 2011 Shatarupa Podder, Pennsylvania, Director 2012 Susan Williamson, Alabama, Director 2012