èÖľyuzuki

Skip to main content
Accountability

Continuous Improvement

Related Links

Evidence-Based Interventions

This page is a working document and will be updated periodically with additional resources concerning evidence-based interventions.

Requirements

All schools in the CSI, ATSI, and TSI support models must implement at least one evidence-based intervention as part of its annual School Comprehensive Education Plan (SCEP).

Tiers of Evidence

The Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) defined four tiers of evidence-based support and stipulated that districts receiving Title I, 1003 School Improvement Grants must ensure that all schools identified for additional support must include at least one evidence-based intervention that is in either Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3.

Tier 1 - Strong Evidence

Definition

Supported by strong evidence from at least one well designed, well implemented experimental study (randomized-control groups).

What does it mean?

Studies show that this strategy improves a relevant student outcome (e.g. reading scores, attendance rates).

In these studies, students have been randomly assigned to treatment groups or control groups, so that researchers can speak with confidence that those who participate in the intervention strategy outperform those who do not.

These studies meet the What Works Clearinghouse evidence standards without reservations.

The studies use large, multi-site samples.

Tier 2 - Moderate Evidence

Definition

Supported by at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (matched groups, interrupted time series, et al.)

What does it mean?

Students have found that the strategy improves a relevant student outcome (e.g. reading scores, attendance rates).

Students in these students have not been randomly assigned, but researchers have used statistical matching methods that allow them to speak with confidence that the strategy results in an improved outcome.Ìý

These studies meet the What Works Clearinghouse evidence standards with reservations.

The studies use large, multi-site samples.

No other studies show that this strategy negatively impacts an outcome.

Tier 3 - Promising Evidence

Definition

Supported by at least one well designed, well implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias

What does it mean?

There is evidence that this strategy improves a student outcome (reading scores, attendance rates), but that research may consist of correlational studies -- studies that can show a relationship between the strategy and outcome but cannot show that the improved outcome was the result of the strategy.

The studies supporting Tier 3 strategies do not have to be based on large, multi-site samples.

A strategy that would otherwise be considered Tier 1 or Tier 2, but it does not meet the sample size requirements, is considered Tier 3.

No other studies show that this strategy negatively impacts an outcome

Tier 4 - Demonstrates a Rationale

Definition

High-quality research findings or positive evaluation suggests that this will likely improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes; and there are ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention.

What does it mean?

Based on existing research, the intervention cannot yet be defined as a Tier 1, Tier 2 or Tier 3. However, there is good reason to believe — based on existing research and data — that the intervention could improve a relevant student outcome.

NOTE: A Tier 4 evidence-based intervention does not fulfil the requirement that all CSI and TSI schools must have at least one evidence-based intervention.

Identifying an Evidence-Based Intervention

As part of the development of the School Comprehensive Education Plan (SCEP), the SCEP Development Team consisting of school stakeholders will review multiple sources of information and feedback to identify areas of need and determine potential root causes. The SCEP Development Team should consider the areas of needs and root causes identified when deciding the evidence-based intervention(s) it will pursue.

State-supported Evidence-Based Strategies

The State will be providing a list of strategies that, if implemented according to the parameters outlined, will meet the evidence-based intervention requirement.Ìý

Find a list of the state-supported Evidence-Based Strategies here.

This list will be periodically updated.Ìý

Evidence-based Intervention Resources

There are a number of clearinghouse available that identify research supporting specific interventions.Ìý Districts and schools are encouraged to review the various clearinghouses, including those identified below, to find programs and strategies that align to the needs identified in the needs assessment process.

NYSED has provided a crosswalk for each of the clearinghouses listed below.Ìý Schools that identify a strategy from one of these clearinghouses will not need to identify the research that supports the strategy as an evidence-based intervention under ESSA; instead, schools can identify the rating the strategy received when reviewed by the clearinghouse.Ìý

What Works Clearinghouse

The (WWC) is organized by the Institute for Education Sciences within the U.S. Department of Education.

Rating System

WWC classifies programs into three categories:

  • Meets WWC Standards Without Reservations
  • Meets WWC Standards With Reservations
  • Does Not Meet WWC Standards

The process for determining the rating for each program is outlined in this

Any program that meets WWC standards, including those with reservations, meets the criteria for a Tier 1, 2, or 3 intervention.Ìý A crosswalk between the WWC rating designations and the ESSA rating designations can be found below:

WWC Rating Criteria that prompted the WWC rating ESSA Evidence Tier
Meets Standards Without Reservations
  • Well designed, well implemented experimental study with low attrition.
  • Well designed, well implemented Regression Discontinuity Design.

If positive or potentially positive effectiveness rating with large multisite sample =ÌýTier 1 Strong Evidence

If positive or potentially positive effectiveness rating without large multisite sample =ÌýTier 3 Promising Evidence
Meets Standards With Reservations
  • Well designed, well implemented quasi-experimental design with baseline equivalence (or a Randomized Control Trial with high attrition that can be reviewed as a quasi-experimental design).

If positive/potentially positive effectiveness rating with large multisite sample = Tier 2 Moderate Evidence.

If positive/potentially positive effectiveness rating without large multisite sample = Tier 3 Promising Evidence.
Social Programs That Work

is a nonprofit philanthropic foundation that review programs in all areas of social policy, including K-12 education.

Rating System

Social Programs That Work provides three different ratings to the programs it reviews:

  • Top Tier
  • Near Top Tier
  • Suggestive Tier

Any program that is rated as Top Tier or Near Top Tier meets the criteria for an ESSA Tier 1 or 3 intervention.Ìý A crosswalk between the Social Programs That Work rating designations and the ESSA rating designations can be found below:

Social Programs That Work Rating Criteria that prompted the Social Programs That Work rating ESSA Evidence Tier
Top Tier
  • Well-designed, well-implemented Randomized Control Trials in replicable setting
  • Large, sustained effects
  • Must be multisite

If sample size is large =ÌýTier 1 Strong Evidence

If sample size is not large =ÌýTier 3 Promising Evidence
Near Top Tier
  • Meet all but one of the Top Tier standards

Tier 3 Promising Evidence
Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development

identifies evidence-based prevention and intervention programs that are effective in reducing antisocial behavior and promoting aÌýhealthyÌýcourse ofÌýyouth development.

Rating System

Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development classifies programs into three categories:

  • Model Plus Programs
  • Model Programs
  • Promising Programs

Any program that meets Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development standards and connects to student outcomes meets the criteria for a Tier 1, 2, or 3 intervention.Ìý A crosswalk between the Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development rating designations and the ESSA rating designations can be found below:

Blueprint for Healthy Youth Development Rating Criteria that prompted the rating ESSA Evidence Tier
Model Plus Programs
  • At least two high-quality Randomized Control Trials (RCT) or one RCT and one Quasi-Experimental Design (QED).
  • Significant sustained positive impact on intended outcomes.
  • No evidence of negative effects.
  • Intervention specificity, outcomes, risk/protective factors, and logic model all specifically described.
  • Results have been independently replicated.Ìý

If large/multisite sample = Tier 1 Strong Evidence.

If no sample size information is available or sample is not large/multisite = Tier 3 Promising Evidence.

Model Programs
  • At least two high-quality RCTs or one RCT and one QED.
  • Significant sustained positive impact on intended outcomes.
  • No evidence of negative effects. Intervention specificity, outcomes, risk/protective factors, and logic model all specifically described.

If large/multisite sample = Tier 1 Strong Evidence.

If no sample size information is available or sample is not large/multisite = Tier 3 Promising Evidence.

Promising Programs
  • One high-quality RCT or two high-quality QEDs.
  • Significant positive impact on intended outcomes.
  • No evidence of negative effects.
  • Intervention specificity, outcomes, risk/protective factors, and logic model all specifically described.

If large/multisite sample and RCT = Tier 1 Strong Evidence.

If large/multisite sample and 2 QEDs = Tier 2 Moderate Evidence.

If no sample size information is available or sample is not large/multisite = Tier 3 Promising Evidence.

Evidence-Reviews

The sites below have conducted evidence-reviews of specific strategies. Schools can use this information to identify research supporting a variety of strategies and programs.Ìý Schools interested in pursuing a strategy identified through this means will need to submit a link to evidence that supports the strategy as a Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3 evidence-based intervention.

Additional Resources

Below you will find some general research sites that can help schools identify research supporting a variety of strategies and programs.Ìý Schools interested in pursuing a strategy identified through this means will need to submit a link to evidence that supports the strategy as a Tier 1, Tier 2, or Tier 3 evidence-based intervention.


  • ERIC is an online library of education research and information, sponsored by the Institute of Education Sciences of the U.S. Department of Education.
    Ìý

  • JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary sources.Ìý This database requires registration.
    Ìý

  • Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text or metadata of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines.Ìý The index includes most peer-reviewed online academic journals and books, conference papers, theses and dissertations, preprints, abstracts, technical reports, and other scholarly literature.
    Ìý

  • Results First Clearinghouse DatabaseÌýbrings together information on the effectiveness of social policy programs from nine national clearinghouses.
    Ìý

  • The American Institute for Research isÌýa nonprofit, nonpartisan behavioral and social science research, evaluation, assessment and technical assistance organization.
    Ìý

  • The National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing is research partnership focused on improving the quality of education.
    Ìý

  • Ìý

  • Ìý

Additional Resources By Topic

Attendance
  • Attendance Works promotes strategies to better student attendance:
  • Action planner for reengaging students to support everyday attendance. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, Student Engagement and Attendance Center. Available at
  • Solving Chronic Absence: Information and resources for educators and community coalitions. Every Student Present by the èÖľyuzuki State Council on Children and Families.
Culturally Responsive-Sustaining Education Practices
Family and Community Engagement
  • èÖľyuzuki State Education Department Office of Special Education Educational Partnership Family and Community Engagement (FACE) Centers. Available at .
  • Mapp, K. L. & Bergman, E. Dual capacity-building framework for family-school partnerships (Version 2). Available at
  • National Parent Teacher Association (PYA)National Standards for Family-School Partnerships. Available at
Mental Health Interventions and Supports
  • Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC): Promoting Mental Health and Well-Being in Schools: An Action Guide for School and District Leaders. Division of Adolescent and School Health (DASH); National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion (NCCDPHP). Available at
  • Mental Health Technology Transfer Center Network (MHTTC): National School Mental Health Best Practices: Implementation Guidance Modules for States, Districts, and Schools. Available at and Classroom WISE: Well-Being Information and Strategies for Educators. Available at
  • Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA): Ready, Set, Go, Review: Screening for Behavioral Health Risk in Schools. Available at
Social-Emotional Learning
  • èÖľyuzuki State Education Department: Social Emotional Learning Benchmarks, and Social Emotional Learning: A Guide to Systemic Whole School Implementation. Both available at /student-support-services/sel
  • Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL): CASEL’s District Resource Center. Available at and The CASEL Guide to Schoolwide Social and Emotional Learning. Available at
Trauma-Informed Practice
  • National Center on Safe Supportive Learning Environments: Trauma-Sensitive Schools Training Package. Available at

Implementation

Once a school identifies an evidence-based intervention(s), it must be strategic with how it implements the intervention(s).Ìý Evidence-based interventions may not lead to success if they are not implemented with fidelity.Ìý Schools must also consider how the intervention is communicated and how it is monitored after it begins.