Deliverable 03 · Activity 3.5
Technical Assistance Plan
Training, Technical Assistance, Coaching And Implementation Support For Six LEAs And Eighteen Schools.
The Technical Assistance Plan describes how the Santa Clara County Office of Education and project partners will provide ongoing training, technical assistance, coaching, and implementation support to the six participating local educational agencies (LEAs) and eighteen participating schools across the contract period.
- Due
- September 30, 2026
- Term
- July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2028
- Elements
- 9
- Lead
- SCCOE · Impacter Pathway · DBG
Exhibit A Section VI, Deliverable 3 · Nine required elements · Implementation Workplan Activity 3.5
Activity 3.5 · Section 09
Tracking TTA Delivery, Implementation Progress, Barriers, Fidelity, And Site-Specific Needs
What is tracked, how the effectiveness of technical assistance is evaluated, and how progress is reported to the Commission.
Scope This Section Answers
Identify and describe how Contractor will track TA delivery, implementation progress, barriers, fidelity, and site-specific support needs.
What Is Tracked
Tracking covers what was delivered and what changed as a result. Counts of sessions and participants record the first. Evidence of adult practice change records the second, and it is the stronger indication that capacity has been built.
| What | Recorded |
|---|---|
| TA Delivery | Which support channel, sessions delivered, sites and LEAs reached, participant roles, setting used, and which curriculum content was covered |
| Implementation Progress | Screening strategy agreed, administration model selected, administration completed, participation and reach, data review occurring, actions identified and followed up |
| Barriers | What is preventing implementation at a site, who raised it, what was done, and whether it needed to go to the LEA or beyond |
| Fidelity | Whether the core expectations below are being met |
| Site-Specific Needs | Support a site has asked for or that strategic planning has identified, and how it was answered |
Evaluating Whether Technical Assistance Is Working
Participant satisfaction is not sufficient evidence that professional learning has produced capacity. The project uses Thomas Guskey's five levels of professional development evaluation to organize the evidence, applied to the capacities the Activity 3.3 curriculum addresses.
| Level | Question | Example, For Champions Learning To Facilitate A Data Review |
|---|---|---|
| 1 · Reactions | Was the learning relevant and useful for this participant's role and context? | Did champions find the session applicable to their school? |
| 2 · Learning | Did participants develop the intended knowledge and skills? | Can they explain the review process and demonstrate it? |
| 3 · Organization Support | Do the conditions exist for them to use it? | Is there an instructional leadership team, MTSS meeting, staff meeting, or professional development day where it fits? Do they have the time, the information, the authority, and leadership backing? |
| 4 · Use In Practice | Is the learning being used? | Do they facilitate the review locally? Has behavioral health data review become part of the school's routine? |
| 5 · Student Outcomes | What changes are observed over time? | Subsequent behavioral health information, alongside attendance, office discipline referrals, academic information, and locally selected school improvement measures |
Level 3 deserves particular attention. A participant may learn a practice well and still be unable to use it, because no meeting exists where it belongs, or the information does not reach them in time, or the decision is not theirs to make. Where that is what the evidence shows, the response is to work on the organizational condition rather than to repeat the training.
Applied Survey Research is the project evaluator and will refine the specific measures, instruments, administration points, aggregation methods, and interpretation, with attention to keeping the burden on participating staff low. Activity 3.3 identifies educator knowledge gains, confidence in data use, and observable practice change as the measures relevant to the curriculum. No numerical proficiency thresholds are set.
Changes In Adult Practice
The clearest evidence that technical assistance has built capacity is a change in what adults and organizations do. Indicators the project watches for include:
- a behavioral health champion leading a data walkthrough with no project facilitation;
- a counselor using behavioral health information alongside other student information as a matter of course;
- a school incorporating behavioral health review into its MTSS process;
- an instructional leadership team using the information in a meeting it already holds;
- teachers adopting practices connected to a competency the school has identified;
- a site running its own screening administration with reduced onsite support;
- an LEA running a recurring cross-site review; and
- district leaders using findings to direct professional learning or site support.
Each of these tells more about capacity than attendance figures do.
The Recurring Review Cycle
As each screening window approaches, a school or LEA team revisits the goals and next steps it set after the previous one. The team asks what it intended to do, whether the support or practice was actually put in place, what changed in the behavioral health information, what other relevant information shows, what should be kept, what should be adjusted, and what needs further investigation.
That is the continuous improvement cycle in practice, and it runs at more than one level. A counselor may screen a defined group of students, provide a period of small-group support focused on a particular competency, and later look at subsequent results for that group. A grade-level team, an instructional leadership team, or an LEA team applies the same sequence to aggregate information.
Subsequent change is read alongside implementation and context. A practice that was put in place and a change that followed it are two facts, and treating the first as the cause of the second requires evidence the project does not assume it has.
Fidelity And Local Adaptation
Fidelity here means that the core expectations hold. It does not mean every site runs an identical workflow.
Appropriate use of behavioral health screening. Privacy and role-appropriate access. Asset-based interpretation. Correct use of student-level and aggregate information. A connection between evidence and action. Progress monitoring. Review of implementation. Responsible interpretation of results.
Screening population and timing. Administration model and setting. Which meeting structure carries the review. Who takes part. Who serves as behavioral health champion and what that role covers. Professional development setting and format. Facilitation approach and the pace of transfer to local staff.
Reporting To The Commission
SCCOE participates in monthly check-in meetings with the Commission, as Exhibit A requires, and reports on implementation status, spending, scheduling, and issues arising. Quarterly Collaborative Learning Group summaries report convening activity for each quarter under Deliverable 5, and quarterly student services and outcome reporting is delivered under Deliverable 6. The Final Report covers the full term.
What this plan's tracking produces also feeds Deliverable 7, the Student Behavioral Health Performance Management Training Guide, which is built from what implementation across these eighteen schools shows and is written for schools beyond the cohort.
Activity 3.3 is the training and capacity-building curriculum this plan draws on. It is cited here rather than reproduced. · Exhibit A Section VI, Deliverable 3 · Nine required elements · Implementation Workplan Activity 3.5