School recovery planning can feel like a giant puzzle: academic gaps, student mental health needs, staffing constraints, family expectations, and compliance requirements—all moving at once. Washington’s Academic and Student Well-being Recovery Plan: Planning Guide (2021) was designed to make that puzzle easier to solve by giving districts, tribal compact schools, and charter schools a clear structure for planning, acting, reviewing results, and improving over time.
At TinyEYE, we partner with schools through online therapy services, so we pay close attention to plans that connect academics and student well-being. This guide does exactly that: it treats learning and well-being as inseparable, and it asks schools to plan with equity at the center.
Why this plan matters (and why it’s required)
The Planning Guide exists in response to both federal and state requirements tied to funding and accountability.
Federal requirement: Under the American Rescue Plan Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ARP ESSER) Fund, districts must create a “Safe Return to In-Person Instruction and Continuity of Services Plan,” post it publicly, and provide an opportunity for public comment.
Washington State requirement: House Bill 1368 (2021) requires an Academic and Student Well-being Recovery Plan addressing needs resulting from COVID-19 closures and extended remote learning.
Importantly, OSPI links plan approval to access to ESSER III funds. In other words: a thoughtful, complete plan isn’t just a best practice—it’s a key step in unlocking resources to support students.
The North Star: OSPI’s vision, mission, and equity focus
OSPI’s vision is straightforward: all students prepared for postsecondary pathways, careers, and civic engagement. The mission and values reinforce how to get there—by closing opportunity gaps, maintaining high expectations, and focusing on the whole child.
The guide is explicit about what equity means in practice: it goes beyond “treating everyone the same.” It calls on leaders to examine how current policies and systems create uneven outcomes—especially for students of color, students experiencing poverty, students receiving special education and/or English Learner services, students who identify as LGBTQ+, and highly mobile students.
What schools must include in the Recovery Plan
The plan template is structured so schools can show what they’re doing, who they’re doing it for, and how they’ll know it’s working. Key required elements include:
Diagnostic assessments by grade level (academic and well-being), plus how often they’re used.
Identification of learning and well-being gaps and which students are most impacted.
Student groups included in data reporting, including (but not limited to) race/ethnicity groups, English Learners, students with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, and students in foster care.
Strategies for learning recovery and acceleration that address disproportional impacts from COVID-19 disruptions.
Additional instruction, well-being supports, and extracurricular opportunities based on assessed needs.
Equity analysis used to develop the plan (required), plus school board approval and public posting in accessible formats.
This structure matters because it pushes planning away from vague intentions and toward specific, measurable actions.
Equity analysis: the “check before you build” step
OSPI requires LEAs to begin with an equity analysis tool. Think of this as a decision-making checkpoint: before launching new interventions, schools ask, “Who benefits, who might be left out, and what barriers are we unintentionally reinforcing?”
The guide lists examples of equity tools and policies (for informational purposes, not endorsements), including tools from Shoreline, Highline, Camas, Quincy, Puget Sound ESD 121, and the Reimagining Consortium.
For school leaders, the practical takeaway is this: equity analysis is not an “extra document.” It’s the lens that shapes staffing, scheduling, service models, communication plans, and which students receive additional support first.
Continuous improvement that’s actually usable: Plan, Do, Study, Act
One of the most helpful parts of the Planning Guide is its emphasis on continuous improvement cycles. Rather than creating a plan once and hoping it works, LEAs are encouraged to use a Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) approach:
Plan: Set an objective, make predictions, decide who will do what and when, and plan for data collection.
Do: Implement and document what happens.
Study: Analyze results and compare them to predictions.
Act: Decide what to adjust, adopt, or abandon—and start the next cycle.
This is especially useful for student well-being supports, where needs can change quickly and where the “right” approach often depends on local context.
The three phases: plan now, learn fast, improve over time
OSPI breaks implementation into three phases so districts can act quickly while still building toward long-term improvement:
Phase 1 (June 2021): Initial strategies for summer and early fall.
Phase 2 (November 2021): Review data from Phase 1, adjust strategies, and plan longer-term supports for winter and the school year.
Phase 3 (April 2022): Continue the improvement cycle and move toward sustained strategies for future years (2022–23+).
Even if you’re well past these dates, the model remains valuable: implement targeted supports, measure impact, and iterate.
Six key themes schools can use as a planning checklist
The guide highlights six themes that show up throughout strong recovery plans. Here’s what they mean in practical terms.
1) Student well-being
OSPI defines student well-being broadly to include social-emotional learning (SEL) and mental health. The guide is clear: learning cannot take place unless we attend to students’ overall well-being.
Evidence-based practices include culturally responsive and anti-racist approaches, relationship-building structures (like advisories and small mentored groups), and strengthening family partnerships.
Schools are encouraged to cultivate safe, inclusive environments and ensure students with disabilities have opportunities for interaction and support alongside peers.
This is an area where related services matter. Speech-language therapy, occupational therapy, and counseling supports can directly reduce barriers to learning—especially when delivered consistently and integrated into school routines.
2) Student and family voice
Families gained new insights during remote learning, and students became more aware of what helps (and hurts) their motivation. OSPI encourages LEAs to move along a continuum from limited involvement to true partnership, where families are deeply engaged in decision-making.
Offer two-way communication in families’ native languages (including ASL).
Use surveys, interviews, and other feedback loops.
In middle and high school, consider advisory systems so every student has an advocate and every family has a consistent contact.
3) Professional learning
Recovery plans often succeed or fail based on adult capacity. The guide emphasizes sustained, job-embedded professional learning aligned to student needs. It also notes Washington’s professional learning day requirements, including SEL/trauma-informed topics and racial literacy/cultural responsiveness.
In practice, this means planning not only what supports students will receive, but also how staff will be trained to deliver them with fidelity.
4) Recovery and acceleration (not remediation)
A major shift in the guide is the move from “catching kids up” through remediation to accelerating learning by building on what students already know and quickly addressing missing prerequisite skills.
Acceleration can happen before/after school, weekends, summer, or through expanded learning time.
Schools are encouraged to avoid rigid tracking and instead use flexible grouping around clusters of standards.
5) Diagnostic assessments (academic and well-being)
The plan requires LEAs to identify which diagnostic tools they use, which grades use them, and how frequently. The guide distinguishes diagnostics from summative tests: diagnostics are meant to guide next instructional steps and supports.
It also stresses that tools should be asset-based and used to support students—not punish or label them. Examples of commonly used tools are listed across ELA, math, and well-being (such as WaKIDS, iReady, Star, WIDA MODEL, and school climate surveys).
6) Community partnerships
Community-based organizations can expand what schools can offer—especially for enrichment, wraparound supports, and culturally responsive programming. The guide recommends asset mapping to identify existing community strengths and match them to student and family needs.
Where TinyEYE fits: turning plans into real services
Many recovery plans identify student well-being needs and service gaps, but implementation can be difficult when schools face staffing shortages or high caseloads. Online therapy services can help districts:
Increase access to consistent services (especially in hard-to-staff areas).
Support MTSS frameworks by aligning therapy goals with school-wide interventions.
Improve continuity across phases of the plan by maintaining service delivery even when schedules shift.
Strengthen equity by expanding access for students who might otherwise wait months for support.
The big idea behind OSPI’s guide is hopeful: we don’t have to “return to normal.” We can learn from what happened, build better systems, and keep improving—using data, community voice, and equity checks to guide decisions.
For more information, please follow this link.
