After sufficient data have been collected and graphed (e.g., six to nine data points on reading GOMs), progress is evaluated against the student’s instructional or social-emotional/behavioral goal to determine whether the student is making sufficient progress. For social-emotional-behavioral goals, the focus should be on replacement skills and/or behaviors, with progress monitoring measuring growth in that area, which should then correlate with a decrease in problem/maladaptive behavior. If the trendline (performance) is below the goal or aimline, then the response is not (yet) adequate. We move to the next step in the intensification process. In most cases, students with severe and persistent learning needs, including students with disabilities, will require several rounds of adaptation before progress is sufficient. If at any time the team or a family member suspects a disability, a special education evaluation referral should be initiated. The data collected through the intervention and intensification/DBI process can be used in the referral and evaluation processes and to inform existing IEPs and 504 plans.

When progress in response to an intervention implemented with fidelity is inadequate, the student-level team needs to dig deeper. In this step of DBI, a team engages in a diagnostic process to develop a hypothesis about the potential cause(s) of the student’s academic and/or behavioral difficulties. This hypothesis drives the team’s decisions about how best to support the student and adapt the intervention. In Rhode Island’s model, since academic and behavioral needs don’t exist separately from one another, we conceptualize a diagnostic process that hypothesizes if the need is an “isn’t doing” (i.e., relationship, engagement, and motivation), a “trouble doing” (i.e., difficulty performing the skill automatically and generalizing it to new situations), or a “can’t do” (i.e., skill deficit/instructional mismatch possibly indicating the need for a different intervention). In the social-emotional/behavioral realm, this process may include a simple Functional Behavior Assessment (FBA) (i.e., FACTS), extensive FBA, or Collaborative Problem-Solving Assessment of Problems to be Solved and Lagging Skills.

After completing a diagnostic process and hypothesizing the nature of a student's struggle, the team moves on to plan adaptations to better meet these individual needs. The plan often identifies a clear focus (i.e., addressing barriers to intervention fidelity such as absences, addressing an 'isn’t doing,' a 'trouble doing,' or a 'can’t do' hypothesis). The intensification plan also defines who is responsible for which part of the plan and by when. For some more complex SEB needs, family-school-organization wrap-around may be needed. A staff member or a Family Care Community Partnership’s partner will function as a coordinator aligned with memoranda of agreement established between the school and community providers. Finally, the team sets the date when they will come together after having implemented the intensification plan to see if it worked. Recall that students with the most complex needs, including students with disabilities, may require several rounds of adaptation before progress is sufficient. The process repeats until we figure it out - together. Go team!

The quality and fidelity of Tier 1 and Tier 2 set the foundation for the successful implementation of intensive intervention. Schools/teams focusing on Tier 3 often find it necessary to improve their Tier 1 and 2 systems as part of continual school improvement to better meet the needs of their most complex learners (National Center on Intensive Intervention, 2022).