Since the 1999-2000 school year, TAP: The System for Teacher and Student Advancement (TAP) has been implemented in hundreds of schools across the nation and demonstrated an ability to raise student achievement, improve the quality of instruction and increase the ability of high-need schools to recruit, retain and support effective teachers. The TAP system has been implemented in schools across nearly 20 states in urban, suburban, rural, and tribal districts, as well as at the elementary, middle, junior, and high school levels. Throughout TAP's fifteen year history, much information has been learned with regard to the most effective and efficient method to ensure high fidelity implementation. As the National Institute for Excellence in Teaching (NIET) continues to expand their partnerships with schools, this document specifically examines their lessons learned for implementation procedures at the high school level. In the fall 2013, NIET held a High School Summit meeting, including principals and teachers from across the nation among our partnering schools, who have experience implementing the TAP system in high school environments. At this Summit, a series of conversations and breakout sessions were used to identify common issues and the effective solutions for implementing TAP in a high school. Among the topics discussed, the participants organized their conversations around three implementation themes and offered eleven solutions. Each of these topics is detailed throughout this document. The first theme that emerged from the discussion centered on cluster groups, where the Summit attendees identified four common challenges and offered a wealth of key solutions to address those issues. Additionally, the Summit attendees discussed the role of field testing at the high school level, noting the challenges of identifying whether the same strategy should be used across content areas or if different strategies should be used; determining which benchmarks are selected; differentiating across grade levels and various content levels within content areas (i.e. algebra/ geometry); and using student work to monitor student achievement gains. The attendees also identified and discussed multiple solutions to each of these challenges. Finally, the group discussed the role of Follow-Up at the high school level to address the challenges regarding scheduling; pedagogy and content; and perceptions. The group also identified and discussed multiple solutions to each of these challenges. This report details the findings from this High School Summit, including the most common issues and the multiple solutions for each issue. Following the themes discussed by the participants, the report is separated into key sections and explores why these issues are different at the high school level and captures the experiences of the experts involved in the Summit. [Contributors to this report included: Gary E. Stark, Jason Culbertson, Keith Wilson, Jennifer Oliver, Monique Wild, and Jessica Alexander.]