Grouped by weakest strand
Students are grouped on the specific strand where they are furthest behind, not on their overall score. That is the group a teacher can actually plan a 20-minute rotation for.
Platform · Pillar 2 of 3
Senior year is too late to start.
Most CCMR tools open in grade 11. By then the intervention window is nearly closed. CCMRI tracks readiness from elementary forward — so a student who is drifting shows up in grade 6, not in a graduation report.
Three capabilities on one dataset: the K-12 growth pipeline, continuous Closing the Gaps tracking, and a teacher-facing draft that turns the near-ready list into visible, shared work.
K-12
Grades tracked, not just the graduating cohort
K-10
Grade-level RIT benchmarks, instead of one flat cut score
7
MAP strands used to build small groups automatically
4
Sub-population families reported continuously for Domain 3
A. The K-12 readiness pipeline
When does CCMR readiness actually start?
Not in grade 11. A student who cannot pass TSI as a senior was usually below grade-level reading or math years earlier. CCMRI makes that visible while there is still time to teach into it.
MAP scores are linked to STAAR performance
CCMRI reads NWEA MAP RIT scores and links them to STAAR performance using the published July 2025 MAP–STAAR linking cut scores. That turns an interim test score into a statement about grade-level performance.
Every student is judged against their own grade
Each student is compared to a grade-level RIT benchmark for grades K-10, not a single flat cut score. A 4th grader is measured against the 4th-grade benchmark and a 9th grader against the 9th-grade benchmark. A flat threshold makes every young student look behind and hides real gaps in the upper grades.
Growth is projected toward grade 11
The system projects whether a student is on track to reach TSI-capable performance by grade 11 at their current rate of growth. A middle-school student who is drifting off that line becomes visible in grade 6 — while there are still five years of instruction left.
MAP strand small groups
The grouping a teacher would otherwise build by hand.
CCMRI finds each student's weakest strand and automatically assembles small groups of students who share that weakness — ranked by severity, so the most urgent group is first.
Ranked by severity
Groups are ordered so the deepest need surfaces first. A teacher with time for two small groups this week knows which two to run.
A playbook comes with each group
Every strand opens with what it measures, the gaps that commonly cause it, concrete teaching moves, and vetted course-level resources — so the group arrives with a starting point attached.
Only real weaknesses form a group. A student is placed in a strand group only when that strand is
genuinely low. A student performing well across every strand is routed to enrichment instead — the system does not
manufacture an intervention group out of students who do not need one.
B. Proactive Closing the Gaps tracking
How does this connect to Domain 3?
TEA's Closing the Gaps domain scores a district on how well it serves specific student groups — not on how well the average student does. Most districts find out how they did months after the year they are being scored on has ended.
Continuous, not retrospective
CCMRI reports readiness by sub-population all year — economically disadvantaged, special education, emergent bilingual, and race and ethnicity groups. A group that is falling behind on the readiness pipeline is visible while the year is still in progress, which is the only point at which a district can move support toward it.
The same pipeline, split by group
This is not a separate report built from separate data. It is the K-12 pipeline above, sliced by sub-population, so a director can see that the overall trend is fine while one group's growth line has flattened. Averages hide exactly the thing Domain 3 scores.
The group that gets overlooked
Special education is frequently under-counted — in both directions.
Under the 2031 rules, some SPED graduates land higher than districts expect
A special education student who graduates with an IEP indicating workforce readiness, or with an advanced diploma, is placed by TEA in the Demonstrated tier under the 2031 differential-weighting rules. Districts routinely leave this group out of their own projections. CCMRI surfaces it specifically. How 2031 weighting works →
And they carry a distinct Bonus Outcome
Under TEC §48.110 as amended by HB 2 (2025), a special education graduate proven ready carries a $4,000 Bonus Outcome, with no threshold to clear first. It is the one category with no percentage gate — and the one most often absent from a district's own count.
Funding figures like the one above appear on administrator and board surfaces only. They never appear on a teacher-facing or student-facing screen — see the design principle below.
C. Fantasy Draft teacher engagement
Why gamify this?
Because the people who can actually move a near-ready student are the teachers who see that student every day — and they usually have no idea which students those are. The list exists in a district report they never open.
The near-ready list becomes a caseload
Teachers draft students who are close to clearing a readiness threshold onto a named caseload. The abstract district list turns into a short, specific set of students a teacher has agreed to watch.
Progress is visible as it happens
As drafted students convert — a retest passed, a certification earned, an indicator completed — progress updates for everyone. Mock, Live and Real modes let a campus practice before it runs the real thing, with leaderboards and progress tracking.
Students are tiered by proximity
A "Layup" is a student within a small margin of passing TSI. Tiers run from closest to longest-shot, so a teacher spends limited time where it converts rather than working an alphabetical list.
Design principle — readiness language only. On every teacher-facing and student-facing surface,
CCMRI shows readiness language and nothing else. No dollar amounts. No "missed revenue." No funding figures. Not as
a setting a district has to remember to switch on — it is how those screens are built. The draft is about
recognition and clarity of focus, and about knowing which three students to check on this week. Financial reporting
lives on administrator and board surfaces, where it belongs.
Teacher view — readiness language only
Student view — readiness language only
Caseload scoped to the teacher
Mass views audit-logged
Mock · Live · Real modes
Tiered by proximity to threshold
What you see
Four screens, four different jobs.
Same underlying student records. Each role gets the one view that is actionable for them, and nothing that isn't.
Teacher — a caseload with a named next step
The near-ready students this teacher drafted, each with the specific step that would finish the indicator: a TSI retest, a certification exam, a strand not yet mastered. Readiness language throughout.
Campus — small groups by strand
Every strand group on the campus, ranked by severity, with the students in each and the teaching playbook attached. Useful for an interventionist or an instructional coach planning the week.
District — sub-population readiness trend
The readiness pipeline split by economically disadvantaged, special education, emergent bilingual, and race and ethnicity groups, tracked across the year rather than reported after it.
Student — their own readiness journey
What the student has already completed, what is closest, and what comes next — in their own view, in plain language, with no dollar amounts and no accountability framing.
Also part of the pipeline
Family-facing readiness roadmaps
Parents get their student's readiness journey in plain language — what has been met, what is next, and why it matters — in English or Spanish. 🔴 Readiness language only: no dollar figures ever appear on a family, student or teacher surface.
An assistant that knows the rules
A built-in CoPilot answers CCMR questions in context — what an indicator requires, why a student is short, where to go next. It runs on enterprise Vertex AI with identifiers stripped before inference, and never trains on student data.
Questions
What districts ask about the pipeline
What grades does CCMRI cover?
CCMRI covers kindergarten through grade 12. The elementary and middle-school years are tracked as a growth pipeline: MAP RIT scores compared against a grade-level benchmark and projected forward toward TSI-capable performance. The high-school years are tracked as indicator completion: which of the 11 CCMR indicators a student has finished and which one is closest. A district can adopt the high-school side first and add the K-10 pipeline later, or run both from the start.
Do we need NWEA MAP for this to work?
MAP is what makes the K-10 growth projection possible. The projection uses published July 2025 MAP-to-STAAR linking cut scores and a grade-level RIT benchmark, so without a MAP-style interim assessment that specific projection is not available. Districts without MAP still get the full high-school CCMR indicator tracking, pathway and certification tracking, and sub-population reporting. Other interim assessment sources can be uploaded through the same import path, and STAAR results are used directly.
How is this different from an early-warning system?
An early-warning system predicts risk, usually dropout or course failure, from attendance, behavior and grades. This predicts and drives readiness indicator completion. The output is not a risk score; it is a named next step for a named student, such as a TSI retest, a certification exam, or a strand the student has not mastered. The two are complementary. Many districts run an early-warning system and still have no view of who is one step from a CCMR indicator.
How are the MAP strand small groups built?
CCMRI reads each student's MAP sub-scores across the seven math and reading strands, finds the strand where that student is weakest, and groups students who share the same weakest strand. Groups are ranked by severity so the most urgent group appears first, and only students whose weakest strand is genuinely low are placed in a group. Students performing well across every strand are routed to enrichment instead. Each group opens with a teaching playbook for that strand.
How does this connect to Closing the Gaps?
Closing the Gaps is Domain 3 of the Texas accountability system, and it scores a district on how well it serves specific student groups rather than the average student. CCMRI reports readiness by sub-population continuously, covering economically disadvantaged, special education, emergent bilingual, and race and ethnicity groups, during the school year. The purpose is to make a lagging group visible while there is still time to target support, instead of learning about it in the accountability release.
Does the Fantasy Draft put student data in front of the wrong staff?
No. Access is role-scoped. A teacher sees the students on their own caseload, a campus administrator sees their campus, and a district administrator sees the district. Tenant isolation is enforced at the database rules layer rather than in application code, so a request for another campus or another district is refused by the database itself. Every export and every mass view is written to a tamper-resistant audit trail the district can read directly. Full posture →
Is any of this shown to students?
Yes. Students see their own readiness journey: which indicators they have completed, which one is closest, and what the next step is. That view uses readiness language only. No dollar amounts, no funding figures and no accountability framing appear on any student-facing or teacher-facing screen. Students below grade 9 are not contacted by direct email, and a student can only ever see their own record, never a classmate's.
Founding cohort — Texas districts
See the pipeline against your own grades.
Twenty minutes. We'll walk the K-12 pipeline, the strand grouping, and the sub-population view using your district's real published TEA data — no slideware.
Phil Steinert, founder · phil@txccmri.com