Score the Diagnostic by Cluster Before Choosing a Seam
The Child Experience Fragmentation Diagnostic
Companion to The Child Should Never Experience the Organizational Chart · Updated 2026-09-30
Use this to find where the child is paying for adult coordination failure, before you choose one seam to improve. It is a first-version field tool, not a validated research instrument. Use it as structured inquiry, not as a psychometric score. Worked in “The Child Experience Fragmentation Diagnostic,” in “Test the Model on One Seam Before Reorganizing Anything.”
Name the student population or the repeated coordination problem you are rating, and the date. Then rate each item from 0 to 3.
- 0: Rarely or never true.
- 1: Occasionally true.
- 2: Often true.
- 3: Routinely true.
In the last column, write one example from your own school for every item you rate 1 or higher. An item you cannot illustrate may be too abstract for your setting, and that is worth recording.
Information Fragmentation
| Item | Rating (0 to 3) | Example from our school |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Families must repeat important information to multiple school staff. | ||
| 2. Teachers learn important information about a student late. | ||
| 3. Specialists maintain plans that classroom teachers rarely use. | ||
| 4. Staff rely on informal personal messages to move important information. | ||
| 5. Different teams use different versions of the student’s current plan. |
Instructional Fragmentation
| Item | Rating (0 to 3) | Example from our school |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Students miss important core instruction to receive other support. | ||
| 2. Intervention strategies are not connected to classroom instruction. | ||
| 3. Specialists rarely observe the settings in which students are expected to apply skills. | ||
| 4. Students receive conflicting strategies, vocabulary, or expectations from different adults. | ||
| 5. A support can continue for months without a clear decision about continuation, modification, or exit. |
Responsibility Fragmentation
| Item | Rating (0 to 3) | Example from our school |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Staff are unsure who owns the next step after a concern is raised. | ||
| 2. Referral is commonly treated as transfer of responsibility. | ||
| 3. Meetings end with recommendations but no named action owners. | ||
| 4. Families are unsure who is coordinating the overall plan. | ||
| 5. Problems can remain open because each department is waiting for another department. |
Interpretive Fragmentation
| Item | Rating (0 to 3) | Example from our school |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Different professionals use the same data but do not discuss differing interpretations. | ||
| 2. Teams record conclusions without recording uncertainty or alternative hypotheses. | ||
| 3. Language development, disability, instruction, attendance, and behavior are considered in separate conversations even when they may interact. | ||
| 4. Student strengths and family knowledge are peripheral to problem analysis. | ||
| 5. Data collection is more developed than routines for data interpretation and use. |
Transition Fragmentation
| Item | Rating (0 to 3) | Example from our school |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Useful knowledge is lost when students change grades or schools. | ||
| 2. Receiving teachers get records without a meaningful handoff. | ||
| 3. Entry to and exit from interventions are poorly coordinated with classroom instruction. | ||
| 4. Reclassification, eligibility changes, or program changes are treated as administrative events rather than learning transitions. | ||
| 5. Nobody checks whether a handoff actually worked. |
Family Navigation Burden
| Item | Rating (0 to 3) | Example from our school |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Families receive multiple uncoordinated communications about the same issue. | ||
| 2. Families must understand internal departments to know whom to contact. | ||
| 3. Meetings are scheduled without serious attention to family access constraints. | ||
| 4. Translation is provided, but the overall plan remains difficult to understand. | ||
| 5. Families become the primary people connecting one professional’s recommendations to another. |
Read the Clusters, Not a Grand Score
Do not begin by calculating a grand score. Look for clusters. A school with low information fragmentation but high transition fragmentation has a different design problem from a school with strong meetings but an impossible schedule.
| Cluster | Items rated 2 or 3 (of 5) | What the child is paying for here |
|---|---|---|
| Information Fragmentation | ||
| Instructional Fragmentation | ||
| Responsibility Fragmentation | ||
| Interpretive Fragmentation | ||
| Transition Fragmentation | ||
| Family Navigation Burden |
Choose one seam to improve first. Ninety days is enough time to redesign one seam and find out what the design got wrong.
Download