Our recommendation is that schools use school-wide screening in combination with at least five weeks of weekly progress monitoring in response to general education to identify students who require preventative intervention. Our rationale is that one-time universal screening at the beginning of the year can over-identify students who require preventative intervention. For example, in our research (Compton, Fuchs, Fuchs & Bryant, 2006), conducted in reading at first grade, 50 percent of students identified on the basis of one-time screening spontaneously “recovered,” i.e., made good progress over the course of first grade without preventative intervention. Identifying students for preventative intervention based on one-time screening means that schools are pressed to deliver costly preventative intervention to large numbers of students who do not need those services, thereby watering down the nature of preventative intervention. By contrast, our research (Compton et al., 2006) shows that five weeks of weekly progress monitoring can reduce or even eliminate the provision of preventative intervention to these “false positives”; hence, our recommendation to incorporate short-term progress monitoring in response to general education for determining students who require preventative intervention.