District recommends EduCLIMBER for MTSS case management after vendor review; board told rollout will take several years
Loading...
Summary
A district review of MTSS platforms ranked EduCLIMBER first (lower cost and stronger MTSS features), with Branching Minds second and Panorama third; staff recommended phased training, a train‑the‑trainer model, and keeping Panorama surveys separate.
Novi administrators recommended adopting the EduCLIMBER platform to support a districtwide multi-tiered system of supports (MTSS), telling the board April 24 that EduCLIMBER best matched district needs in a vendor demonstration, user sandbox testing and cost comparison.
District MTSS leaders said they piloted Panorama’s survey capabilities earlier in the year but found Panorama’s MTSS features less customizable for interventionists. A multidisciplinary review team conducted demonstrations and sandbox testing of three vendors—Panorama, Branching Minds, and EduCLIMBER—and scored platforms against a rubric. The district reported EduCLIMBER ranked highest by the educator panel and quoted lower implementation costs than the other vendors.
Director of Mental Health and Wellness Rosalie Johnson and ELD director Spencer Riley explained why a single platform matters: it consolidates academic data, attendance, SEL measures and other records into a student “data story,” reduces time spent pulling information from multiple places, and standardizes documentation of MTSS meetings and action plans. EduCLIMBER staff and district pilot users emphasized features such as automated imports from PowerSchool and assessment systems, progress-monitoring visuals, and an early-warning system to identify students at risk.
Leaders noted two practical constraints: no platform is perfect, and implementation will require extensive training. The district proposed a three-year phased rollout that begins with training interventionists and a district onboarding team (train‑the‑trainer) so building-level staff can be supported locally. Johnson said EduCLIMBER’s references indicated strong implementation support from the vendor.
Board members asked about Panorama’s shortcomings (limited customization for MTSS workflows) and the degree of automatic data import. District staff said most data can be auto-imported from PowerSchool and other systems but that some manual inputs—such as certain benchmark assessments—will remain. The board also asked whether the MTSS tool would be family-facing; staff said the platform is primarily internal but that family communication and parent-facing materials remain a board priority.
District staff requested board direction to move forward with EduCLIMBER and outlined next steps: board approval, identification of a district onboarding team, a train‑the‑trainer schedule, vendor-led implementation support, and staged building rollouts with ongoing professional development.
