Though historically associated with secondary outcomes like graduation, early warning systems (EWSs) have been increasingly used across a K–12 system as both a tool and a data-driven process to flag students who may be at-risk of not meeting key academic outcomes, including literacy. While EWSs can help schools identify students who may need additional support, identifying students is only one step in the process.
A new REL Pacific study, Understanding the Use of an Early Warning System to Support Tier 2 Literacy Interventions in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Public School System, examined how the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Public School System (CNMI PSS) used an EWS to guide Tier 2 reading interventions and what was learned through implementation.
Building an early warning system for early literacy
How the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Public School System built an early warning system to support Tier 2 Literacy Interventions
The CNMI PSS serves about 7,000 K–12 students in 20 schools across Saipan, Tinian, and Rota. Nine are elementary schools in which 19 percent of students are English learner students.
Improving early reading outcomes is an important CNMI PSS priority. In 2021, fewer than half of CNMI PSS grade 3 students (43 percent) met Star Reading proficiency benchmarks. As part of its efforts to strengthen data-driven decisions on reading instruction and intervention, CNMI PSS developed its EWS and the system’s infrastructure with REL Pacific’s support and funding from an Institute of Education Sciences (IES) Statewide Longitudinal Data Systems grant.
Literacy coaches, principals, and central office leaders helped shape how the system would function before the pilot. The resulting EWS brought together academic, attendance, behavior, and information about students moving between schools to help teams identify students needing additional support. To better understand EWS implementation across schools, this study used data from a 2024 implementation survey completed by each school's EWS team, along with interviews with leaders from the nine elementary schools.
What the study found
Implementation was strong overall, with opportunities to improve consistency
All nine elementary schools reported generally following the seven-step EWS process:
- Organize EWS teams and resources.
- Use the EWS tool.
- Review early warning data.
- Identify at-risk students.
- Assign targeted interventions.
- Monitor interventions and progress.
- Evaluate and refine the EWS.
However, implementation varied across schools. Some teams used the EWS platform less consistently than others to document interventions or plans. This included three teams that reported matching fewer than 75 percent of identified students with interventions.
What this finding could mean for practice: The study suggests that clearer implementation expectations and targeted support may help schools use EWS processes and tools more consistently. Opportunities for schools to share implementation lessons may also be useful.
Navigating multiple sources of student data
Helping teams make sense of EWS data alongside other information
What the study found: Most EWS teams used additional data sources alongside EWS data, with seven teams using at least three additional data sources to identify and support students. Sources included formative assessments, grades and other progress-monitoring data, and contextual information from classroom observations and conversations with families and other educators.
What this finding could mean for practice: Non-EWS sources can provide a fuller picture of student needs but also complicate the next steps. Teams may need clearer guidance to make the additional information manageable and actionable. Teams can use existing structures—such as professional learning communities, grade-level meetings, instructional planning meetings, or EWS team meetings—to reflect on their data-use practices and identify available supports.
The questions and resources below can help teams consider how they use multiple data sources in practice; the resources may support more than one of the questions.
Strengthening alignment across systems and supports
Making it easier for educators to connect data, instruction, and intervention decisions
What the study found: The study revealed an opportunity to better align the new curriculum and standardized reading assessment. School leaders noted that educators were still building a shared understanding of how assessment results connected to what students were learning. At the time of the study, schools were also implementing a new curriculum, a new EWS platform, and additional MTSS training. These efforts created a strong foundation for supporting early literacy. The study findings also highlighted the need for time and collaboration to help educators interpret data and connect it to practice.
What this finding could mean for practice: Effective EWS implementation requires alignment across curriculum, assessment, interventions, professional learning, meeting structures, EWS indicators, documentation, and district guidance. The questions and resources below can help teams examine how well these components are aligned and identify opportunities to strengthen connections across their EWS.
Improving data use is an ongoing, collaborative process
Building on existing strengths as systems, needs, and supports change over time
An EWS is more than a dashboard: It is a process for using data to inform decisions. Its usefulness depends on how well people, processes, data, instructional practices, and interventions work together. This study highlights opportunities to strengthen these components through clearer guidance, stronger alignment, professional learning, and collaboration across schools. The questions and resources above can help education teams identify opportunities to strengthen their own EWS implementation.
