Dyslexia screening that reaches every flagged reader's family, in its own language, inside the state deadline
Every flagged reader's family told in its own language, inside the state deadline.
See one case, screen by screen ↓Literacy & Dyslexia Screening is software for the follow-through on dyslexia screening in schools: it tracks literacy screenings, parent notices and reading plans under dyslexia laws. Seven agents import each window's screener scores, apply the state risk rule and the district's cut points with the passage cited, draft reading plans from the subtests and write parent notices in the family's home language. Teachers prepare plans, reading specialists approve them, liaisons review translations and principals approve every notice.
AI in education: a buyer's guide to agentic AI for colleges, universities and school districts →
Updated
Dyslexia screening is now the law in about forty states: every young child is screened for reading difficulties, and the clock starts when the window closes. A written notice must reach the family in a language it understands, and an at-risk reader needs an individual reading plan. The screener ends at a score report. Everything after the score is still done by hand.
A district literacy office exports results and matches them to the roster to find who was missed, sorts flags against the cut points while applying the state rule from memory, types plans into another system, copies letters from a template and waits on translations. Nobody owns a clock per school, so a notice deadline is found when the state report is built, and a student whose IEP already covers reading can end up with a second, conflicting plan. Literacy & Dyslexia Screening puts agents on that follow-through, so specialists, liaisons and principals spend their time deciding.
Estimated split of the working days between the window closing and the last notice being drafted, by hand and with the agents. The 9-day total is the sample district's baseline and the 1-day total is the design target; the split between rows is our estimate.
Seven agents cite the rule behind every flag, draft plans and home-language notices, and watch each school's clock; specialists, liaisons and principals decide.
Rowan Gate Elementary screened 43 first graders in two classrooms this fall, and seven fell below benchmark. On Tuesday, October 13, four days before parent notices are due, none of the seven has gone out. Here is what happens, screen by screen, in the working solution.
Every K–3 classroom is one row and every child a dot on the screener's four bands, with a mark for the reading plan and one for the parent notice. 14,402 of 14,538 students are screened and 3,208 are at risk. The Clock agent puts Rowan Gate first: 7 Grade 1 notices unsent, 4 days left, and the Somali liaison covers 9 schools.
Fall window closed Oct 3; parent notices due Oct 17 (state rule, 14 days)
Amina Yusuf's fall composite is 368, in the below-benchmark band (362–389) of the district's cut points v3, and her rapid naming took 66 seconds, where well below starts above 62. Either meets the state risk rule §4(b), and both are cited to the screener report. The Screening agent's confidence is 0.91.
This is a screening result, not a diagnosis.
The Plan agent drafted one goal per weak skill: rapid naming in 48 seconds or less by the winter window, letter naming at 40 a minute, phonemic awareness at 33 sounds a minute, each citing the subtest. Teacher Hannah Lindqvist moved the small group from 9:30 to 10:15 and prepared the plan. Owen approves it; he could not approve a plan he prepared.
Noah Whitfield has an IEP for a speech-language impairment with no reading goal, and his decoding and phonemic segmentation scores are well below. The agent proposes no separate reading plan: the IEP team adds a reading goal at an amendment meeting on Oct 20, and the parent notice still goes by Oct 17. Case manager Derek Osei accepts.
0 duplicate plans this fall
The Notice agent wrote every notice from the state template in the home language recorded in the student information system: three in Spanish, one in Somali and three in English. Six are ready for the principal. Amina's Somali notice waits for the liaison, because one phrase came in at 0.58 confidence.
Read back into English, "cudurka akhriska" said "in danger of the reading illness". Faduma picks the agent's alternative, "dhib xagga akhriska ah" (difficulty with reading), records the reason "Meaning: implied illness" and approves the translation.
Save to the district glossary · updates 11 pending Somali drafts
With the translation reviewed, the principal approves and sends all seven notices through the family messaging platform. Each notice keeps its own steps: drafted Oct 6, translation reviewed, prepared by Owen Pradhan on Oct 12, approved and sent by Marisol Treviño.
All 7 notices sent at 10:05 a.m. through the family messaging platform, 4 days before the deadline.
Back on the board, the Grade 1 notice marks are filled and unsent notices fall from 36 in 3 schools to 29 in 2. The Clock agent moves on: Quarry Hill's 18 notices need an approver while its principal is away.
All notices sent · 4 days to spare
The family opens the notice with the reading plan attached and four plain answers: I have read this, ask for a meeting, ask for an evaluation, call the liaison. A meeting request goes to Owen Pradhan and Faduma Warsame-Hill; an evaluation request goes to child find, 60 days from consent under IDEA. A printed copy goes home on Oct 14.
The approval, the liaison's correction and its reason, the glossary update to 11 drafts and the Clock agent's entry all sit on the audit trail. For a state review, the director builds a sealed pack with the scope, the contents and a redaction profile chosen.
The same seven first graders, seen by the five people who carry them: what their day looked like, and what it looks like now.
Seven agents cite the rule behind every flag, draft plans and home-language notices, and watch each school's clock; specialists, liaisons and principals decide.
Imports each window's screener scores, matches them to the student roster, applies the state dyslexia risk rule and the district cut points, and cites the clause, cut point and report passage for every flag.
Finds every K–3 student not screened in a window, with the reason, and proposes make-up sessions.
Drafts each reading plan from the diagnostic subtests: one goal per weak skill, interventions from the district's approved list, minutes, progress checks every two weeks and home activities.
Writes each parent notice from the state template in the home language recorded in the student information system, with the English beside it, a read-back and a confidence for every phrase.
Tracks the 14-day notice and 30-day plan clocks for all 41 schools, alerts principals two days ahead, escalates to the director a day ahead and proposes fixes, such as a delegate approver or a second reviewer.
Finds IEPs, 504 plans and English learner status, routes plans to case managers so no student gets two plans, and routes evaluation requests to child find with the 60-day clock.
Builds and checks the state screening file and the sealed state review pack.
Approve plans, review translations, approve notices. The agents propose; a named person decides.
Ask in plain words, or say what to prepare next. Every answer points to the score, the rule or the record behind it.
Which schools will miss the notice deadline?
Three schools still have notices unsent; all are due Oct 17 under state rule §5(a). Rowan Gate has 7 Grade 1 notices, 6 prepared, with Amina Yusuf's Somali notice waiting for Faduma Warsame-Hill. Quarry Hill has 18 prepared and reviewed, but its principal is away until Oct 19, so I propose Assistant Principal Keisha Montrose as delegate. Lantern Point has 4 Haitian Creole notices waiting for review and 7 waiting for the principal.
Why was Amina Yusuf flagged?
Amina's Grade 1 fall composite is 368, in the below-benchmark band (362–389) of the district cut points v3. Her rapid naming took 66 seconds; well below starts above 62 seconds. Either meets the state risk rule §4(b). This is a screening result, not a diagnosis.
How many English learners were flagged in English only?
57 English learners scored at risk in English but have no home-language screen yet. Under state rule §4(c) I hold their flags: 41 have a Spanish screen booked Oct 14–16 and 16 wait for Mei-Lin Zhou's review. Their families get no notice until the flag is confirmed or released.
Draft the delegation for Quarry Hill
Drafted: Assistant Principal Keisha Montrose approves Quarry Hill parent notices Oct 13–19 while Dr. Jonah Whitcombe is away. 18 notices are prepared and reviewed. A delegation needs your approval and is logged; it ends on its own on Oct 19.
13 screens from the working solution, on its sample data. Pick one to see it large.
Every rule a flag, plan or notice is checked against is a setting, versioned and on the audit trail.
| Setting | Default | Choose from |
|---|---|---|
| Parent notice clock | 14 days after the window closes | From the state rule; changes are versioned and need the director |
| Reading plan clock | 30 days after the window closes | From the state rule; an IEP addressing reading meets it |
| Alerts and escalation | Principal 2 days before, director 1 day before | Overdue goes to the assistant superintendent, with a late-notice code in the state file |
| District cut points | v3, approved Aug 18, 2026 | Director proposes, assistant superintendent approves; never mid-window |
| Phrase confidence for liaison review | Below 0.80 | Every non-English notice is reviewed by a person regardless |
| Plan confidence for bulk approval | 0.85 or more | Also unchanged since the draft, no IEP or English learner hold, not prepared by the approver |
| Languages without a liaison | District interpreter service | Reviews within 2 school days |
| Retention | 5 years after the student leaves the district | Redaction profiles: state review, accreditation, public records |
Every figure is labelled: a target the solution is built to, an estimate, a typical published result, or a proven one.
Sources: Understood, "More states mandate screenings for reading challenges in young kids" (about 41 states require annual screening for reading difficulties; 15–20% of the population has some form of dyslexia) · Chalkbeat, April 1, 2025 (one district's dyslexia screener and state reading assessments, 41% overlap among flagged kindergartners) · IDEA, 34 CFR 300.301 (60-day evaluation) · ESSA §1112(e)(4) (communicating with parents in a language they understand) · FERPA, 34 CFR Part 99. The rule clauses §3–§7 are the working solution's sample state rule, not any one state's law. "demo" = seen in the working solution, on its sample data · "target" = design goal, measured in the live solution · "typical" = published figures · "estimated" = our split of the days. Marlow Bay Unified School District, its schools and the people named on this page are fictional: characters and sample data in the working solution.
Literacy & Dyslexia Screening is software for the follow-through on dyslexia screening in schools: it tracks literacy screenings, parent notices and reading plans under dyslexia laws. Seven agents import each window's screener scores, apply the state risk rule and the district's cut points with the passage cited, draft reading plans from the subtests and write parent notices in the family's home language. Teachers prepare plans, reading specialists approve them, liaisons review translations and principals approve every notice.
No. Screening identifies risk; it is not an evaluation. The agents never describe a child as having dyslexia, and every notice states that the results are not a diagnosis. A family can ask for an evaluation from the notice itself, and the Coordination agent routes it to child find with the IDEA 60-day clock from consent.
In the working solution's sample state rule, the family must receive a written notice within 14 days of the window closing and the child needs a reading plan within 30. The Plan agent drafts the plan from the subtests, the Notice agent drafts the notice, and the Clock agent tracks both clocks for every school, alerting the principal two days ahead and the director a day ahead.
The Notice agent writes each notice from the state template in the home language recorded in the student information system, beside the English, with a read-back and a confidence for every phrase. A bilingual family liaison reviews every non-English notice and must decide any phrase below 0.80. A liaison's correction goes into the district glossary and updates every pending draft in that language.
The IEP meets the reading plan requirement, so no second plan is written. The Coordination agent checks for an IEP, a 504 plan or English learner status before any plan is drafted, and routes a student whose IEP has no reading goal to the case manager as a proposal for the IEP team.
It can: a child six months into English may score well below for reasons that are not dyslexia. The Screening agent holds flags for English learners without a home-language screen, 57 in the sample district this fall, until the home-language screen or the English learner coordinator confirms or releases each one with a reason. Their families get no notice until then.
The Agentic Solution Engine builds and deploys it from your requirements and documents: your state rule, cut points, screening windows, notice templates and reviewer assignments. It goes live once every quality gate has passed, connected to your assessment platform, student information system, case management system and family messaging platform.
Yes. Agents draft, cite, alert and propose; people decide. A teacher prepares and a specialist approves every plan, a liaison reviews and a principal approves every notice, cut point changes need the assistant superintendent, and the state file is prepared and certified by different people. Anyone with the role can override an agent's output with a reason code, and the original is kept.
Plans drafted in minutes, and no student judged on sessions that never happened.
1-min demoAI Lesson PlanningEvery lesson drafted from the adopted curriculum, every activity cited to a standard.
1-min demoAI Essay FeedbackStudents get feedback in days, not weeks, with every comment signed by their teacher.
1-min demoWe'll run Literacy & Dyslexia Screening on a sample of your own screener results, notice templates and state rule.