1 of 87

Framework Integration: Define and Strengthen your MTSS to Support Academic, SEB, and Mental Health

June 2026

2 of 87

Objectives

Participants will:

- be able to define the core features of MTSS

- be able to describe academic and SEB frameworks

- identify strategies and recommendations for alignment

- learn tools and resources to support alignment efforts

3 of 87

Think and Comment…

�1) What do you know about MTSS frameworks?

2) How is this conversation is connected to your �strategic plan and priorities?

4 of 87

Example Questions You Might Have About Your Organization

Do we have the right organizational goals?

Are we achieving our goals?

Do we have clearly defined expectations for community members aligned to our goals?

How are decisions made that affect all staff?

Do our staff feel supported?

Are our staff competent and confident?

What PD & Coaching is needed?

What strategies/ interventions do staff use to help community members achieve our expectations?

How do we layer supports for members who are struggling?

Are our systems, practices, interventions working?

Are we implementing consistently and accurately?

How do we screen to know who in our community needs which supports?

OUTCOMES

SYSTEMS

PRACTICES

DATA

EQUITY

Do our processes represent equity of voice from historically marginalized community members?

Do all community members experience our supports equitably?

Midwest PBIS Network 4-10-22

What is keeping you up about your organization and/or priorities?

5 of 87

How did we get here?

Context and an Abbreviated History of �MTSS Frameworks

6 of 87

Schools Then

Pre-1950s

Kids… learning

7 of 87

1960s

1960s -

8 of 87

1960s

1975

1960s -

Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) passed:

Free
Appropriate and Tailored to the Student
Least Restrictive Environment
Parent Voice

9 of 87

1950s continued

1950s

ALL

Some

Few

Public Health Framework

🧠

10 of 87

Origin of PBIS

1990s

Schools

PBIS emerged from research at the University of Oregon in the 1980s. The term "Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports" was formally introduced with the 1997 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

1997

11 of 87

Multi-Tiered means…

Tier I Prevention:

The core school-wide and classroom instruction and practices all staff use with all students…

Tier II Prevention:

Intensifying the Core Tier 1 instruction and practices (increased frequency, structure, and feedback) when more support is needed for specific skills among small groups…

Tier III Prevention:

Individualizing the core Tier 1 and Tier 2 instruction and practices…

Midwest PBIS Network 2-17-26

Adapted from: USDOE OSEP PBIS TA Center

… in order to achieve our [insert expectations here] and our measurable outcomes for all

(e.g. the social-emotional-behavioral and academic success of our community.)

Multi-tiered means…

Primary prevention is provided to all students and focuses on giving students the necessary pro-social skills that prevents the establishment and occurrence of problem behavior. If done systemically and comprehensively with fidelity, we now that will be sufficient for about 80% of our students.

For a small group of students (typically around 10-15%) we will need to add another layer of support- secondary/tier 2/targeted supports. The goal of secondary prevention is to reduce/prevent the likelihood of problem behavior occurrences, and to enable these students to be supported by the school-wide MTSS effort.

Still, a small number/few students (about 1-5% )will need yet another layer of very individualized/intensive support. The goal of tertiary/tier 3 supports is to reduce the intensity, complexity, and impact of the problem behaviors displayed by these students by providing supports that are (a) function-based, (b) contextually appropriate and person-centered, (or core tier 1 curriculum and practices.

12 of 87

Don’t label me… support me

Adult rel.

Peer rel.

Anxiety

Problem sol.

Anger man.

Distracting others

Working ind.

Chemistry

Geometry

Lang Arts.

PE

Orchestra

Attend.

Ask assist.

Activity: �

What does YOUR social, emotional, academic, physical, and/or professional profile look like?

Tier 1 Supports

Tier 2 Supports

Tier 3 Supports

Student Profile

------------------- Teacher Profile?

And in those early days, while we got the language wrong early and often (anyone recall labeling kids as “high flyers” or “red-level kids”?), we have been clear for some time now that it’s the INTERVENTIONS that are in Tiers, not the students. We do not label students. They are not Tier 1, or Green. Students are not “on” a tier. We know that saying “that is a Tier 2 kid,” and “He is on Tier 2” is a mis-understanding of both the framework and human development.

Rather, Tiers help us structure the many supports that students may need to be successful for aspects of their life. So a better statement example is “this student is receiving Tier 2 support for attendance,”

Compare this to academics. Students have an academic profile too. They may respond to Tier 1 supports for math, but need individual tutoring (Tier 3?) for reading comprehension.

[12/9/21] “Tiered systems represent a logic (not practice) for building a continuum of evidenced practices related to specific student behaviors. As such, each individual has a range of needs across the continuum [i.e., most of my behaviors only require general supports, a few of my skills need a additional supports (e.g., CI/CO), a couple skills require much more specialized assistance]; therefore, a given skill is moved up/down the continuum based on responsiveness to a good implementation of a contextually and data matched practice. Students do not move across the 3 tiers. Their strengths and needs are supported by different practices from across the continuum; for example, “Based on his last two weeks of data, George only needs 3 instead of 5 check-in’s with the counselor each day for his punctuality in the morning; however, he still needs daily buddy reminders to be on time in each of his afternoon classes.” As intensity and individualization increase (or decrease) for a specific skill so should the intensity and specificity of the data measures increase (or decrease).

�– George Sugai

Professor Emeritus (retired 1 May 2019)

Neag School of Education

University of Connecticut

13 of 87

1990s PBIS focused on externalized behavior

ALL

Some

Few

Schools

1990s -

14 of 87

2000s

ALL

Some

Few

Schools

2000s -

15 of 87

What is Mental Health?

What is Wellness?

Romer, N., von der Embse, N., Eklund, K., Kilgus, S., Perales, K., Splett, J. W., Sudlo, S., Wheeler, D., (2020). Best Practices in Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Screening: An Implementation Guide. Version 2.0. Retrieved from www.smhcollaborative.org/universalscreening

Complete Mental Health is Social-Emotional-Behavioral
Mental Health is more than simply the absence of psychological problems. The absence of phycological problems does not infer wellness or happiness.
Therefore one’s mental health, or wellness, is strong when they are experiencing both low levels of SEB psychological problems, and high levels of SEB competencies.

Rev 9/15/21 a Midwest PBIS Network

16 of 87

2000s

2000s -

Academics & Behavior

(NOTE: This is not I-MTSS)

17 of 87

Alignment

Restorative Practices

Social Skills Programming

Trauma Informed Strategies

Social Emotional Learning

School Mental Health

Dropout Prevention

Bullying Prevention

Classroom Management

Cultural Responsiveness

Wellness & Self-Regulation

Literacy Instruction

Cognitive Behavior Counseling

School Climate

Function-based Support

Wraparound

Community Partnership Integrations

Equity

I-MTSS & PBIS are Frameworks for Aligning Your School Initiatives and Interventions

Midwest PBIS Network 4-11-22

Schools Now

18 of 87

What are MTSS/PBIS/IMTSS/ISF?

19 of 87

MTSS Frameworks

I-MTSS

PBIS

(SEB MTSS)

Academic MTSS

Community MH Partnerships

ISF

PBIS

(SEB MTSS)

MWPBIS

6-1-25

PBIS

(SEB MTSS)

Academic MTSS

RtI

MTSS

20 of 87

Frameworks: Definitions

Read
Take note:

Compare/Contrast
What stands out to you?
Compare to your understanding and efforts

Share and Discuss

RESOURCE: Frameworks Defined https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Uea4vQYQwML_2N_V18J2cgfJYj81j9qWRQ_eYpPKCPI/edit?usp=sharing

MWPBIS

12-1-25

21 of 87

Integrating Frameworks: Considerations

I-MTSS

PBIS

(MTSS-SEB/MH)

Thoroughly defined. We know what this is.

We know what works (25 Years of empirical research)

We know how through strong fidelity metrics

Conceptualized framework

Promising Logic

Little evidence thus far

MTSS (A)

Strong outcome measures and individual practices

Various teaming and decision-making structures

Rev 8/29/24 MWPBIS Network

Efficient and Effective Aligned Community Partnerships

Prioritizes MH

Defined Process

ISF

22 of 87

What is Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports?

PBIS is a multi-tiered framework that organizes our school and integrates our initiatives, to achieve desired outcomes through understanding our data, implementing a continuum of practices, supporting staff through systems, and prioritizing equity.

Midwest PBIS Network 4/5/22 a

Adapted from: USDOE OSEP TA Center on PBIS (October 2015). PBIS Implementation Blueprint: Part 1 – Foundations and Supporting Information. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, 5. https://www.pbis.org/blueprint/implementation-blueprint

5 Essential Elements of PBIS

23 of 87

PBIS is an �Operating System

for our School Initiatives

SYSTEMS

What is the teaming structure for implementation?

What PD & Coaching is being provided

PRACTICES

What continuum of evidence-based practices will be used?

DATA

Are the practices and the framework implemented with fidelity?

What results are we getting?

EQUITY

Is the initiative culturally responsive and equitable?

MWPBIS

8-10-26

OUTCOMES

What organizational goal is supported by the initiative?

What meaningful outcomes are we targeting?

Slide Starter: “This visual is the organizing logic of a Multi-Tiered Behavioral Framework…

Sources:

1. What is a systems Approach in school-wide PBIS? OSEP Technical Assistance on Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports.

2. McIntosh, K.& Goodman, S. (2016). Integrated Multi-Tiered Systems of Support: Blending RTI and PBIS. New York: Guilford Press.

Outcomes: academic and behavior targets that are endorsed and emphasized by students, families, and educators. (What is important to each particular learning community?)

Practices: interventions and strategies that are evidence based. (How will you reach the goals?)

Data: information that is used to identify status, need for change, and effects of interventions. (What data will you use to support your success or barriers?)

Systems: supports that are needed to enable the accurate and durable implementation of the practices of MTSS. (What durable systems can be implemented that will sustain this over the long haul?)

The framework language is familiar and used often when discussing MTSS. By framework, we mean MTSS is a singular method of organizing the decision making, implementation, and progress monitoring of school operations. The circles represent the key components of that framework, and are used to organize the school’s way of work. Start with identifying outcomes, which for whole school is often Social Competence and Academic achievement…

Then we look to the data to uncover our “current reality” or what is showing up around this outcome-where are we/where do we stand. We would use the data to identify a precision statement that clearly defines the current reality (problem to address). Then we would look to our resources (e.g., resource map) to identify what practices we might have that would support students with the issues showing up in our data (e.g., school-wide expectations defined, taught, and reinforced for respectful behavior). Then we look at what supports would be necessary to support the adults to implement the practices identified to support students. Then we return to data to monitor progress and make decisions as to whether or not what we implemented worked. If not, was it because we lacked fidelity? Or was it because it wasn’t the right match of practices to need? Do we need different systems (supports) for the adults.

Cultural Relevancy:

Culturally relevant behavior support: Teach behaviors that are socially relevant to Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CLD) students

Culturally validating behavior support: Acknowledge students’ cultural identity as a strength

Establish cultural validity of data: Carefully review operational definitions of behavioral violations�

Disaggregate ODR data by student race. For example, ethnicity report of the School Wide Information System (www.swis.org)�

Revise measures: Provide schools with tools to assess extent to which culturally responsive systems and practices are in place

Generate school-wide commitment to culturally equitable behavioral outcomes: Define school-wide behavioral goals in collaboration with parents of CLD students�

Increase accountability for equitable outcomes. Review extent to which defined goals are met.

24 of 87

TA Brief

Center on PBIS. (March, 2021). Why prioritize behavior support? Eugene, OR: Center on PBIS, University of Oregon. Retrieved from: https://www.pbis.org/resource/why-prioritize-behavior-support

Supporting student behavior is critical to promoting full access to instruction for each and every student.

Behavior continues to be the most likely reason students are excluded from their learning environment, including those from marginalized groups and students with disabilities who are at highest risk of experiencing exclusionary discipline…

Don’t forget about behavior! Continue to focus on the Social, Emotional, and Behavioral (SEB) needs of students in your MTSS

Rev 9/15/21 Midwest PBIS Network

25 of 87

What is the research on PBIS?

1) https://www.pbis.org/pbis/studies

2) https://www.pbis.org/resource/references-for-the-evidence-base-of-pbis

26 of 87

When Implementing Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS) with Fidelity

27 of 87

MTSS

2010 - Today

MTSS was referenced in the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in 2015.

2015

MTSS varies from state to state.

TODAY

28 of 87

Team based leadership and coordination
Evaluation of implementation fidelity
Three-Tiered Continuum of evidence-based practices
Continuous data-based progress monitoring and decision-making
Comprehensive universal screening (for systemic and early access)
On-going professional development including coaching with local content expertise

McIntosh, K.& Goodman, S. (2016). Integrated Multi-Tiered Systems of Support: Blending RTI and PBIS. New York: Guilford Press.

Specific academic assessments and interventions
Use of published curricula selected by school or district
Use of direct assessment of skills
Periodic assessment through benchmarking periods
Focus on grade-level teaming
Described in IDEA as special education eligibility determination approach

Focus on teaming
Scientifically based �interventions
Instruction as prevention
Tiered continuum of supports with increasing intensity based on need
Regular screening for early intervention
Use of a problem-solving model and data-based decision rules
Emphasis on improving quality of implementation
Embedded into school improvement plan

Specific social behavior assessments and interventions
Use of free materials that are adapted to fit the school’s context
Use of indirect assessment of behavior
Continuous assessment of social behavior with existing data sources
Focus on schoolwide teaming
Described in IDEA as schoolwide prevention and individual intervention approach

Academic RTI

Schoolwide PBIS

Core Features of MTSS

Updated 8-22-19a Midwest PBIS Network

Common MTSS Features of RtI and PBIS

29 of 87

What if… ?

This means moving away from co-located model…

PBIS

School-Based Mental Health

to a fully integrated system

Interconnected Systems Framework

Rev 11/1/21

School Employed and Community Employed Staff work together as integrated teams, use community and school data to assess the needs of young people community-wide, and together select and monitor evidence-based practices that match specific needs.

ISF

30 of 87

What is the big idea?

The Interconnected Systems Framework (ISF) is systems-change work for districts and community partners, designed specifically to overcome the inefficiencies and limited effectiveness of siloed systems (schools doing one thing, community mental health another, county agencies yet another).

PBIS

31 of 87

Key Messages

The Interconnected Systems Framework (ISF) aims to shift traditional approaches of schools, community mental health, and county/state service agencies by aligning them into a coordinated system of delivery. All academic, behavioral, and mental health prevention and supports (no matter who delivers) are integrated—rather than siloed—into a single continuum of supports for all students, families, and staff, with a strong emphasis on improving both efficiency of delivery, and effectiveness of outcomes.

To achieve this, the ISF team leads systems-change efforts through partner engagement to reassess policies, workforce capacity, and funding structures to ensure systems are sustainable and responsive to community needs.

Aligning community/school mental health providers with other behavioral supports (e.g. PBIS) can efficiently blend all resources into one system that aligns trauma-informed approaches within one behavioral health system in schools. This allows prevention (tier 1) approaches to include trauma-informed skills/instruction to be linked to the basic behavioral curriculum (e.g. “respect, responsibility, safety expectations) for seamless delivery by teachers in classrooms. Tier 2 trauma-informed approaches can be part of the continuum of Tier 2 instructional groups and specific screeners can be used to ensure accurate matching of student needs and interventions. Tier 2/3 trauma-informed interventions can be linked down to Tier 1 for transference and generalization and transition off higher tiers down to lower Tiers. Data systems to monitor progress of interventions can also be layered from Tier 1 through tiers 2/3, allowing for efficient progress monitoring.

32 of 87

Integrated Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (iMTSS) Defined

IMFR: Integrated MTSS Fidelity Rubric 3/2024�

Table 1: IMFR Domains and Items

IMTSS is a comprehensive and equitable prevention framework for improving the outcomes of all students, through the intentional integration of MTSS-A (academics) and MTSS- B (behavior). �

MTSS-A is the tiered infrastructure using data to match academic assessment and resources to student need.

MTSS-B is best demonstrated through the research and efficacy of the PBIS Framework for achieving social-emotional-behavioral (SEB) and mental health outcomes. �

IMTSS intends to leverage the unique strengths of each traditionally separate system. (Midwest PBIS Network 2024, MTSS.org 2023)

Rev 8/29/24 MWPBIS Network.

I-MTSS Research Network. (2023). What is an Integrated Multi-Tiered System of Support? Integrated Multi-Tiered Systems of Support Research Network, University of Connecticut, www.mtss.org.

Integrated continuum of research-informed practices

Comprehensive Data-driven decision making

Integrated teaming and coaching structures

Integrated professional development

Additional systems to support sustained and scaled implementation

Key iMTSS Components

33 of 87

Integrated Multi-Tiered Systems of Support (iMTSS) Defined

IMFR: Integrated MTSS Fidelity Rubric 3/2024�

Table 1: IMFR Domains and Items

iMTSS is a comprehensive and equitable prevention framework for improving the outcomes of all students, including students with or at-risk for disabilities, through �integrated academic and behavioral support

(MTSS.org, 2023)

I-MTSS Research Network. (2023). What is an Integrated Multi-Tiered System of Support? Integrated Multi-Tiered Systems of Support Research Network, University of Connecticut, www.mtss.org.

Integrated continuum of research-informed practices

Comprehensive Data-driven decision making

Integrated teaming and coaching structures

Integrated professional development

Additional systems to support sustained and scaled implementation

Key iMTSS Components

Rev 8/29/24 �MWPBIS Network

34 of 87

What we think we know about I-MTSS

USDOE is engaged in initial and narrow funding to research the impact of integrating Academic and Behavior MTSS, with most studies focused on reading outcomes

MTSS is a popular and widely adopted term in schools
MTSS is inconsistently defined across the research and in practice
The research complements each other:

MTSS-A is stronger for outcome measures on individual practices
MTSS-B (PBIS) is stronger in systems, installation, implementation science, fidelity measures, and aligning initiatives

Common teaming structures between Academic and Behavior supports differ. Integrated teaming needs more research
Measuring fidelity of the Integration of MTSS does not replace attending to the fidelity of proven social-emotional-behavioral structures

“Many students have co-occurring difficulties in both Academic and SEB domains that cannot adequately be addressed unless we pay attention to the connection and interaction between these traditionally separate systems”

– Steve Goodman

Co-PI IMTSS Research Network

Midwest PBIS Network 5/15/24

35 of 87

What is the research on Integrating MTSS?

36 of 87

Why integrate?

Academic & behavioral needs are inter-related

A

B

Create an effective context for learning
Select appropriate content
Use data-driven instructional methods
Support educators with implementation

https://www.pbis.org/resource/effective-instruction-as-a-protective-factor

Effective SEB Support

Improved

SEB Skills

Effective Instructional Practices

Improved Academic Skills

Slide Courtesy of Brandi Simonsen, UConn

37 of 87

I-MTSS just might work!�Multi-Tiered Framework Summary of Outcomes

Implement PBIS

with fidelity

Meaningful SEB outcomes

Implement RTI

with fidelity

Unknown SEB outcomes

Mixed academic outcomes

Implement I-MTSS

with fidelity

Meaningful academic and SEB outcomes

Meaningful academic outcomes (literacy)

SEB Outcomes

Academic Outcomes

Slide Courtesy of Steve Goodman, UConn

PBIS is effective in producing meaningful social emotional behavioral outcomes (Goodman & Peshak George, 2020)

PBIS has mixed results in changing academic achievement (Kim et al, 2018)

RTI for academic produces favorable results (Gersten et l, 2008; Grapin, Waldrom, Joyce-Beaulieu, 2018)

Integrated academic and behavior MTSS produces meaningful academic and behavior outcomes (McIntosh et al, 2006; Stewart et al, 2007)

Stewart, R. M., Benner, G. J., Martella, R. C., & Marchand-Martella, N. E. (2007). Three-tier models of reading and behavior: A research review. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions, 9, 239–253.

Goodman, S., & Peshak George, H. (2020). School-wide positive behavioral interventions and supports. In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education. Oxford University Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.013.1203

McIntosh, K., Horner, R. H., Chard, D., Boland, J., & Good, R. (2006). The use of reading and behavior screening measures to predict non-response to school-wide positive behavior support: A longitudinal analysis. School Psychology Review, 35, 275-291.

Kim, J., McIntosh, K., Mercer, S. H., & Nese, R. N. T. (2018). Longitudinal Associations Between SWPBIS Fidelity of Implementation and Behavior and Academic Outcomes. Behavioral Disorders, 43(3), 357–369. https://doi.org/10.1177/0198742917747589

READING

Gersten, R., Compton, D., Connor, C.M., Dimino, J., Santoro, L., Linan-Thompson, S., and Tilly, W.D. (2008). Assisting students struggling with reading: Response to Intervention and multi-tier intervention for reading in the primary grades. A practice guide. (NCEE 2009-4045). Washington, DC: National Center for Edu- cation Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/ publications/practiceguides/.

Fien, H., Nelson, N. J., Smolkowski, K., Kosty, D., Pilger, M., Baker, S. K., & Smith, J. L. M. (2021). A Conceptual Replication Study of the Enhanced Core Reading Instruction MTSS-Reading Model. Exceptional Children, 87(3), 265–288. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402920953763

Coyne, M. D., Oldham, A., Dougherty, S. M., Leonard, K., Koriakin, T., Gage, N. A., Burns, D., & Gillis, M. (2018). Evaluating the Effects of Supplemental Reading Intervention Within an MTSS or RTI Reading Reform Initiative Using a Regression Discontinuity Design. Exceptional Children, 84(4), 350–367. https://doi.org/10.1177/0014402918772791

Grapin, S. L., Waldron, N., & Joyce-Beaulieu. (2018). Longitudinal effects of RtI implementation on reading achievement outcomes. Psychology in the Schools,56, 242-254.

38 of 87

Summary

Midwest PBIS Network 10/6/24

Adapted from: USDOE OSEP TA Center on PBIS (October 2015). PBIS Implementation Blueprint: Part 1 – Foundations and Supporting Information. Eugene, OR: University of Oregon, 5. https://www.pbis.org/blueprint/implementation-blueprint

Increase Effectiveness and Efficiency
Supports Consistent Adult Behavior
Data-driven decision making
Process for Continuous Improvement
Framework for Aligning Initiatives to MTSS Features

Leverage PBIS’s proven MTSS framework to organize your school, integrate initiatives such as MTSS-A and/or Community MH Partnerships, and achieve targeted outcomes meaningful to your community.