One concern, three years, and every hand it passes through.
A first-grade teacher flags a child in October. The work becomes everyone’s job in turn — it moves between a teacher, an interventionist, a coordinator and a case manager, and each one picks it up where the last set it down. Here is that journey from where they each sit: what they do, and what the software does back.
Refer — the classroom teacher, one form
The teacher fills in one referral about a child watched since September. That one form routes to MTSS, special education, multilingual services, Section 504 or health, opens a case in that teacher’s name, and starts the child-find clock at the same moment — whether or not anybody in the building remembers that clock exists.
There are also things it cannot do. A parent-tier account cannot open a referral, and no account can open one against a student whose record has been archived. That is the first thing this page shows the software doing, and the order is deliberate: a good deal of what protects a district here is what the product does not do.
The form the teacher fills in
Step one of five. The twelve areas of concern are the product’s own, and the program follows from which ones are selected. The later steps are named on the rail rather than drawn — they were not reachable to observe, and this site does not draw what it has not seen.
REFER & MTSS ACTIONS
What areas are you concerned about?
reconstruction Rebuilt from the real screen for this page. The labels, thresholds and rules are the product’s own; the student and the concerns selected are illustrative.
Assess — the same teacher, at the kiosk
The same teacher gives the baseline probe. A general-education teacher is a first-class examiner here, so the first read on a struggling reader does not wait on a specialist’s calendar three weeks out.
The kiosk requires a reason for the probe before it starts, and it checks the accommodations the student is owed against the measure about to be administered. Where those two conflict it stops before the first item, rather than collecting a score whose meaning is already in question.
Baseline — the interventionist writes it, the coordinator locks it
The interventionist sets the target and the aim line the student will be measured against from here on. Locking it is a permission the interventionist does not hold. The finalize step belongs to the coordinator, so the number every later decision refers back to has been signed off by the person accountable for the tier.
And it will not lock an empty one. Where there is nothing meaningful to aim at, the finalize step declines and the plan stays open.
Plan — the form opens already knowing
The interventionist opens the Tier 2 plan. The probes that match the domain the interventionist is planning for are already floated to the top of the picker under Recommended, because the baseline said what domain this is. The fields the record can answer arrive answered, and what is left is the part only the interventionist can do.
The date a decision could be made, and what is holding it
The plan carries the earliest date a tier decision could be made, and recomputes it every time the form opens. Two things hold that date: how many progress-monitoring points have been collected, and how long the intervention has run. The plan names which of the two is binding, so a team waiting on one of them is not guessing which.
WAC sets no minimum Tier 2 duration, so both numbers are policy rather than law. CetusEd defaults to 6 points and 12 weeks. Your district sets both under Referral Gates, from 3 to 20 points and 4 to 52 weeks, and the platform counts against your numbers rather than ours.
Monitor — the clocks count school days
Deadlines the law measures in school days are counted in school days, against the calendar your district loads. Weekends and the non-school days on that calendar are skipped, so a February break moves the date rather than quietly consuming it.
School-day counting needs your district’s calendar loaded.
What the team sees while the clock is running
The student timeline, as the software draws it. Consent goes in; the report deadline is 35 school days after that and the eligibility meeting 40, counted against the calendar the district loads, so a February break on it moves both. The dates in this reconstruction are illustrative — what is real is that nobody types them and nobody keeps them on a whiteboard.
STUDENT RECORD · CHAPTER 1
reconstruction Rebuilt from the real screen for this page. The labels, thresholds and rules are the product’s own; the dates are illustrative.
Four points below the line, surfaced the day it happens
The interventionist logs the week’s probe from the same kiosk the teacher used in October. Four consecutive points below the aim line is a decision rule your team already uses. CetusEd watches for it and puts it in front of you. Turning that into a determination is not something it does: the decision is the team’s, and the record names who made it.
A score can be excluded from that rule, but only by a person and only with a written reason. The score stays on the student’s record. Nothing is deleted, the reason travels with it, and a challenged score can be corrected without destroying the evidence trail. If a correction later removes the pattern, CetusEd retracts whatever was armed on it.
Who finds out, and how
The action goes to the interventionist, the person running the plan who can change it this week. The coordinator finds it the next morning on their own dashboard, in the list of what needs attention, alongside every other student who has reached the same point.
Decide — the hinge, and it belongs to the team
The coordinator, the interventionist and the teacher sit down together with the review open. The software assembles what the decision needs — the trend, the fidelity record, the comparison against peers — and then stops. The software computes the data. Turning that into a determination is not something it does: that is the team’s, and the record names who concluded it.
Eligibility, and the record is ready before the case manager is assigned
Evaluate — the tier decision is not the eligibility decision
What the team decides here is whether to refer for an evaluation. Eligibility is a separate determination and it is not made from progress data. The referral opens, and the evaluation waits on written parental consent — consent is what starts the clock: 35 school days to the evaluation report, counted in school days against the district’s own calendar. The eligibility group meets after that, not before.
The team determines eligibility. From the day after that meeting the thirty-day clock to the initial IEP runs automatically, counted against the calendar your district loaded, and CetusEd raises it while there is still time to act rather than after it has passed.