SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION SCORING RUBRIC

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION SCORING RUBRIC"

Transcription

1 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION SCORING RUBRIC 1003 (g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act FY 2011 Mail to: Alabama Department of Education Federal Programs 5348 Gordon Persons Building P.O. Box Montgomery, Alabama For technical assistance, contact Marcus Vandiver at: Telephone: (334) Fax: (334) S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 1

2 Purpose: The SIG Scoring Rubric will be used to score submitted SIG applications from LEAs and schools. It will also be used to assists LEAs and schools in the SIG application writing process. Definition of Categories: The inadequate category indicates that the necessary information is absent or not clear. The adequate category indicates that the necessary information is present and clear, but not very detailed. The comprehensive category indicates that the information is present, clear and very detailed. There may even be additional relevant items in the description. Each section will be scored based on the category matched to each indicator. A section score of 1, 3, or 5 will be given for each section. The section score will then be multiplied by the score multiplier for the final section score. Multipliers: The purpose of the section multiplier is to give more or less weight/importance on certain sections of the SIG application. S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 2

3 School Improvement Grant Application Scoring Rubric Tier I and Tier II School Application Criteria LEA Number: School Number: Information Maximum Points Points Awarded LEA LEA Information 0 A Schools to be Served 5 B LEA Commitment and Capacity 20 C-1 Designing and Implementing Interventions 5 C-2 Selection of Providers 5 C-3 Alignment of Resources 5 C-4 Modification of Practices and Procedures 5 C-5 Sustainability of Reforms 5 D Identification of Stakeholders 5 E Waivers 0 F Budget for Local Education Agency Expenditures 5 School School Information 0 A Identification of Needs 10 B Selected Model and Requirements 10 C Pre/Full Implementation Activities 10 D Alignment of Other Resources 5 E Sustainability Matrix for Schools 5 F Timeline 5 G Annual Goals 5 H Budget for School Expenditures 10 TOTAL 120 S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 3

4 LEA S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 4

5 LEA INFORMATION Complete the School Improvement Grants (SIG) 1003(g) LEA Application Cover Page The SDE will evaluate the SCHOOL CONTACT INFORMATION by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The LEA No Yes has entered the appropriate information in each field. has provided a signature for the School Improvement Grant contact. has checked the appropriate assurances has provided a signature and date for the LEA Chief Financial Officer name. has provided a signature and date for the LEA Superintendent name. NO SCORE FOR THIS SECTION A: SCHOOLS TO BE SERVED An LEA must include the following information with respect to the schools it will serve with a School Improvement Grant. Please identify each Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III school and the intervention model that will be used in each school with a School Improvement Grant. The SDE will evaluate LEA s SCHOOLS TO BE SERVED LIST by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The LEA No Yes has clearly identified schools that will be served by the School Improvement Grant funds has entered the appropriate tier of each school. has entered an appropriate intervention model for each Tier I and/or Tier II schooi. Score S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 5

6 B: LEA COMMITMENT AND CAPACITY Please indicate the capacity to use School Improvement funds to provide adequate resources and related support to each Tier I and Tier II school identified in this application to implement fully and effectively the required activities of the school intervention model it has selected. The SDE will evaluate the capacity to implement a school model, intervention, and/or School Improvement activities in each Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III school by requiring the LEA to provide strong evidence in the following areas: The LEA has clearly demonstrated the extent to which the LEA can recruit qualified new staff to effectively implement grant and model requirements and School Turnaround interventions (i.e., ability to recruit and retain personnel; district-level policies regarding movement of personnel). has clearly demonstrated a commitment of the LEA, school board, school staff, and stakeholders to support the implementation of educational reform in the district. has clearly aligned the School Turnaround process to identified school needs to ensure effective short-term and long-term implementation of the selected intervention model or School Turnaround activities (i.e., equitable teacher practices; instructional practices; ability to provide equitable education to all students; perceptions of school staff, LEA personnel, students, parents, and the community; ability to coordinate improvement efforts; program coherence; district-level policies). has clearly aligned federal, state, and/or local resources to identified school needs to ensure short-term and long-term support of the selected intervention model or School Turnaround activities (i.e., flexibility and efficiency of technical and professional resources; district-level policies). has provided a clear description of how capacity (time, personnel, resources, etc.) will be implemented to ensure the initial fundamentals of the intervention are effective and efficient (i.e., ability to coordinate turnaround efforts; ability to implement critical change in adequate time; program coherence). has provided a clear description of how the availability of all other necessary resources unique to each intervention model or School Improvement activity will be implemented to ensure timely transition of protocol (i.e., the requirements of the grant and each of the four models; the availability of external providers, EMOs, Turnaround Specialists, and personnel to service the schools; program coherence; district-level policies). has clearly aligned the School Improvement process to identified school needs to ensure timely implementation by the selected external provider. has provided a clear description of how grant and model activities will be aligned and implemented with the commitment and capacity of all involved stakeholders, including parents and the community (see SIG Final Requirements). If the LEA is NOT applying to serve each Tier I school, the LEA must explain why it lacks capacity to serve each Tier I school. The SDE will evaluate whether an LEA lacks capacity to implement a school intervention model in each Tier I and Tier II school by requiring the LEA to provide strong evidence in the following areas: The LEA has clearly demonstrated the extent to which the LEA cannot recruit qualified new staff to effectively implement grant and model requirements and School Improvement interventions in all of the identified Tier I schools in the district (i.e., ability to recruit and retain personnel, district-level policies regarding S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 6

7 movement of personnel, etc.). has clearly demonstrated a lack of commitment by the LEA, school board, school staff, and stakeholders to support the implementation of grant and model requirements and School Improvement interventions in all of the identified Tier I schools in the district. has clearly demonstrated the inability to align the School Improvement process with the identified school needs to ensure effective short-term and long-term implementation of the selected intervention model or School Improvement activities in all of the identified Tier I schools in the district (i.e., equitable teacher practices; instructional practices; ability to provide equitable education to all students; perceptions of school staff, LEA personnel, students, parents, and the community; ability to coordinate improvement efforts; program coherence; district-level policies). has clearly demonstrated the lack of federal, state, and/or local resources to ensure short-term and longterm support of the selected intervention model or School Improvement activities in all of the identified Tier I schools in the district (i.e., flexibility and efficiency of technical and professional resources; district-level policies). has clearly demonstrated the lack of capacity (time, personnel, resources, etc.) to ensure the initial fundamentals of the intervention are implemented effectively and efficiently in all of the identified Tier I schools in the district (i.e., ability to coordinate improvement efforts; ability to implement critical change in adequate time; program coherence). has clearly demonstrated the unavailability of other necessary resources unique to each intervention model or School Improvement activity to ensure timely transition of implementation protocol in all of the identified Tier I schools in the district (i.e., the requirements of each of the four models; and the availability of external providers, EMOs, Turnaround Specialists, and personnel to service the schools; program coherence; district-level policies). X 4 Score cannot exceed 20 C-1: DESIGNING AND IMPLEMENTING INTERVENTIONS Design and implement interventions consistent with the final requirements. The SDE will assess the LEA s commitment to design and implement an appropriate intervention model and School Turnaround activities by requiring the LEA to provide strong evidence in the following areas: The LEA has clearly identified and prioritized needs through a completed and comprehensive SIG School Needs Assessment. has clearly aligned the capacity (staff, resources, time, etc.) with the implementation of specific interventions and School Turnaround activities. has clearly aligned School Turnaround processes with the designed interventions. has clearly aligned other resources to support the design and implementation efforts of selected S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 7

8 interventions. has clearly engaged stakeholders (staff, parents, community, etc.) to provide input into the design and implementation process of School Turnaround activities. has provided a clear description of how regular (at least biweekly) data meetings will be scheduled to identify school/teacher/student weaknesses and to adjust plans for supports to address assessed weaknesses. has clearly communicated with potential external provider(s) to plan and develop professional development and support based on assessed needs (at least biweekly). has provided a clear description of how accurate documentation of meetings and communications will be maintained and used in the School Turnaround process. has provided a clear description of how schedules, goals, and timelines will be revised as needed. has provided a clear description of how data/forms will be submitted to the SDE and/or USDE in accordance to established timelines. has provided a clear description of how grant and model requirements will be aligned and implemented with the design and implementation of School Turnaround interventions (see SIG Final Requirements). Score C-2: SELECTION OF PROVIDERS Recruit, screen, and select external providers, if applicable, to ensure their quality. The SDE will assess the LEA s commitment to recruit, screen, and select external providers by requiring the LEA to provide strong evidence in the following areas: The LEA has provided a clear description of how external providers will be identified based on each school s SIG needs. has provided a clear description of how external providers will be interviewed and analyzed to determine evidence-based effectiveness, experience, expertise, and documentation to assure quality and efficiency of each external provider based on each school s identified SIG needs. has provided a clear description of how external providers will be selected based upon the provider s commitment of timely and effective implementation and the ability to meet school needs. has clearly aligned existing efficiency and capacity of the external provider with LEA and school resources, specifically time and personnel. has provided a clear description of how communication with the selected external provider(s) will ensure that supports are taking place and are adjusted according to the school s identified needs and short-term results. has provided a clear description of how the selected external provider will utilize multiple sources of data to evaluate the effectiveness of the supports provided (at least biweekly) and reporting the results to the SDE. S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 8

9 has provided a clear description of how the selected external provider will report the results to the school, LEA and SDE. has provided a clear description of how records for quality and frequency of supports provided by the selected external provider(s) will be monitored. has provided a clear description of how an in-school presence of the external provider will be implemented to monitor the interactions of the school administration, faculty, and staff to ensure the full implementation of School Turnaround activities. has provided a clear description of how progress of the school will be recorded and disseminated for efficient use. has provided a clear description of how Tier III school interventions and or School Improvement activities will be aligned by priority, based on needs (Tier III schools not using a model). has provided a clear description of how each of the grant and model requirements will be aligned and implemented with School Turnaround resources and actions steps of the selected external provider (see SIG Final Requirements). Score Align other resources with interventions. C-3: ALIGNMENT OF RESOURCES The SDE will assess the LEA s commitment to align other resources with the School Turnaround interventions by requiring the LEA to provide strong evidence in the following areas: The LEA has clearly identified resources currently being utilized in an academic support capacity to assist with the efforts of the School Improvement Grant. has clearly identified additional and/or potential resources that may be utilized in an academic support capacity to assist with the efforts of the School Improvement Grant. has clearly aligned federal, state, and local resources based on evidence-based effectiveness and impact with the design of interventions. has clearly aligned federal, state, and local resources with the goals and timeline of the grant (e.g., fiscal, personnel, time allotments/scheduling, curriculum, instruction, technology resources/equipment). has provided a clear description of how regularly scheduled reviews of the resource alignment will be conducted to ensure all areas are operating fully and effectively to meet the intended outcomes or making adjustments as necessary. has provided a clear description of how resources that are not being used to support the School Turnaround process will be redirected. S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 9

10 has provided a clear description of how the implementation of the interventions by school administration, faculty, and staff, as well as interactions with the potential external provider(s), will be monitored and evaluated to ensure the full implementation of supports. has provided a clear description of how each of the grant and model requirements will be aligned and implemented with available resources (see SIG Final Requirements). Score C-4: MODIFICATION OF PRACTICES AND PROCEDURES Modify its practices or policies, if necessary, to enable its schools to implement the interventions fully and effectively. (e.g. schedules, calendars, number of PD days provided) The SDE will assess the LEA s commitment to modify its practices or policies, if necessary, to enable it to implement the interventions fully and effectively by requiring the LEA to provide strong evidence in the following areas: The LEA has clearly identified LEA and school barriers that may slow or halt the School Improvement Grant implementation process. has clearly developed strategies to overcome identified barriers to fully implement the School Improvement Grant implementation process. has designed and implemented a policy modification protocol for the applying SIG school(s) that may include input from local education agency administrators, board members, and SIG school personnel. has clearly developed an ongoing process to assess policy and process modification for SIG school administrator, faculty and support staff hiring and transfer procedures. has clearly developed an ongoing process to assess policy and process modification for SIG school teacherperformance rewards and incentives. has clearly developed an ongoing process to assess policy and process modification for altering the traditional school day and/or school calendar year to include additional instructional and planning time for the applying SIG school(s). has provided a clear description of how grant and model requirements will be aligned and implemented with the modified practices and policies (see SIG Final Requirements). Score S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 10

11 Sustain the reforms after the funding period ends. C-5: SUSTAINABILITY OF REFORMS The SDE will assess the LEA s commitment to sustain the reforms after the funding period ends by requiring the LEA to provide strong evidence in the following areas: The LEA has clearly developed a plan that supports sustainability of the School Turnaround processes and interventions. has clearly developed a plan to effectively train school administrators, faculty, and support staff about the implementation of interventions into operating flexibility of the school. has clearly developed a plan to effectively train school administrators, faculty, and support staff about implementation of interventions into the classroom curriculum and activities. has clearly identified alternative funding sources to sustain operational protocol that may require financial support. has clearly identified meaningful professional development for school administrators, faculty, and support staff that supports short-term and long-term sustainability of School Turnaround processes. has clearly developed a plan that demonstrates a commitment to the continuous development of teacher knowledge and skills to incorporate changes into their instruction as evidenced by an extensive action plan after the granting period has ended. has clearly developed an evaluation system to measure short-term, long-term, and multi-level implementation of interventions. has clearly developed an evaluation system to measure the effectiveness of supporting initiatives and policy. has clearly developed a process to embed School Turnaround interventions and activities in an extensive strategic long-term plan to sustain gains in student achievement. has clearly developed an evaluation system to monitor strategic checkpoints and end-of-the-year results and outcomes to inform and assist practitioners with problem-solving and decision-making that supports shortterm and long-term educational fidelity. has clearly developed a plan to sustain the alignment of resources with the applying SIG school s mission, goals, and needs. has clearly developed a growth model for both the fiscal and human capital within the LEA for implementation and sustainability of School Turnaround interventions and activities. has clearly established an accountability process that provides effective oversight of the School Turnaround interventions and activities, financial management, and operations of the school. has provided a clear description of how each of the grant and model requirements will be aligned and implemented with sustainability efforts (see SIG Final Requirements). Score S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 11

12 D: IDENTIFICATION OF STAKEHOLDERS As appropriate, the LEA must consult with relevant stakeholders regarding the LEA s application and implementation of school improvement models in its TIER I, TIER II, and Tier III schools. The SDE will evaluate LEA s list of IDENTIFIED STAKEHOLDERS by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The LEA...has clearly identified stakeholders has clearly identified stakeholder roles in the implementation of School Improvement activities. Score E: WAIVERS The LEA must check each waiver that the LEA will implement. If the LEA does not intend to implement the waiver with respect to each applicable school, the LEA must indicate for which schools it will implement the waiver. The SDE will evaluate LEA s list of IWAIVERS by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The LEA No Yes...has checked the appropriate waivers regarding the selection of the School Improvement model has provided a signature and date for the LEA Chief Financial Officer name. has provided a signature and date for the LEA Superintendent name. NO SCORE FOR THIS SECTION F: BUDGET FOR LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCY EXPENDITURES The LEA must provide a budget and a summary of expenditures for each year that indicates the amount of School Improvement Grant funds the LEA will use each year, including the pre-implementation period to: Implement the selected model intervention, and/or School Improvement activities in each Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III school it commits to serve Conduct LEA-level activities designed to support implementation of the selected school intervention model(s) in the LEA s Tier I, Tier II, Tier III schools The Federal Programs Director is responsible for final approval of all federal budgets. All budget revisions will be done in egap. Documents posted in egap are available for public viewing. The SDE also has the ability to view and track expenditures to match them to the approved budget. All pre-implementation activities are a part of the year one budget. The total cost for pre-implementation activities and full implementation for year one S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 12

13 should not exceed $2,000,000. The SDE will review all LEA budgets to assure that they have sufficient funds to implement the selected intervention fully and effectively by: The LEA has submitted a budget of $50,000 - $2,000,000 per year for each school, not to exceed $6,000,000 over three years, including expenditures for the LEA. has submitted a budget that is appropriately aligned with the sizes of the schools and the necessary needs of the schools to support full implementation of the selected intervention models and interventions/activities. has provided a description in the summary areas of the application of each of the expenditures listed in the budget including all necessary information. has clearly matched activities and interventions, including needed personnel, services, travel, and materials/supplies, with budget expenditures in the budget summary areas. has clearly demonstrated a plan regarding high-level transparency of accounting procedures and processes (i.e., timesheets, appropriate labeling of hardware). has clearly aligned federal, state, and local resources to ensure short-term and long-term support of the selected interventions or School Improvement activities. (Sustainability) has clearly demonstrated a commitment to providing a high level of transparency from the LEA regarding accounting procedures and processes through the use of Alabama s Electronic Grant Application Process (egap) which includes both budget planning and funding information. Score S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 13

14 School S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 14

15 SCHOOL INFORMATION Complete the School Improvement Grants (SIG) 1003(g) school contact information The SDE will evaluate the SCHOOL CONTACT INFORMATION by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The school has entered the appropriate information in each field. NO SCORE FOR THIS SECTION A: IDENTIFICATION OF NEEDS For each Tier I and Tier II school, please identify the needs and the selected intervention for each school. Needs should be identified using the Continuous Improvement Grant (SIG) Needs Assessment Form. (See Appendix A) The SDE will evaluate the IDENTIFICATION OF NEEDS by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The school has completed the School Data section of the Needs Assessment and included all relevant data has completed the School Assessment Data section of the Needs Assessment and included all relevant data. has completed the School Culture-Related Data section of the Needs Assessment and included all relevant data has completed the Goals to Address Academic Needs section of the Needs Assessment and is aligned with relevant data sections. has completed the Goals to AMOs and English Proficiency Needs section of the Needs Assessment and is aligned with relevant data sections has clearly provided evidence for the Strategies to Address School Safety, Classroom Management, Discipline, a section of the Needs Assessment. has clearly identified root causes and commitment to assist the schools to fully implement the proposal to address the causes. has clearly prioritized needs of the school from the SIG Needs Assessment document. X 2 Score cannot exceed 10 S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 15

16 B: SELECTED MODEL AND REQUIREMENTS Please indicate the capacity to use school improvement funds to provide adequate resources and related support to each Tier I and Tier II school identified in this application to implement fully and effectively the required activities of the school intervention model it has selected. The SDE will evaluate SELECTED MODEL AND REQUIREMENTS by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The school has provided reasonable evidence of why the selected intervention model was chosen. has clearly aligned selected intervention model with the identified and prioritized needs from A of the School Application section. has provided a clear description of how required activities as well as any permissible activities will be addressed. X 2 Score cannot exceed 10 C: PRE-/FULL IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES For each Tier I and Tier II school, please identify interventions and/or school improvement activities. Align all interventions and activities with identified needs and provide a description of how each intervention/activity will help remedy the identified need and increase student achievement. Be sure to include all interventions/activities being funded through SIG. Other interventions/activities may be added as well, but must be specified if they are not being paid with SIG funds. The SDE will evaluate PRE-/FULL IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The school has clearly identified each intervention and/or activity has clearly aligned each intervention and/or activity with each identified need from A of the School Application section. has clearly described each intervention/activity. has clearly described how each intervention/activity will help remedy the identified need. has clearly described how each intervention/activity will help to increase student achievement. has clearly listed reasonable and allowable activities in the pre-implementation, section C-1. has clearly listed reasonable and allowable activities in the full implementation, section C-2. X 2 Score cannot exceed 10 S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 16

17 D: ALIGNMENT OF OTHER RESOURCES Please provide a summary of how each fund source, local, state, and federal, supports the selected model, interventions, and/or school improvement activities. Do not include expenditures that would be paid from the SIG fund source. The SDE will evaluate the ALIGNMENT OF OTHER RESOURCES by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The school has clearly identified each of the programs, services, activities, personnel, and/or materials and supplies being supported by other resources. has clearly identified the federal, state, local, or in-kind fund source for each of the programs, services, activities, personnel, and/or materials and supplies. has provided an expenditure description how each of the programs, services, activities, personnel, and/or materials and supplies being supported by other resources will assist in the implementation of the intervention model. has provided an estimated amount of funding for each of the programs, services, activities, personnel, and/or materials and supplies. Score E: SUSTAINABILITY MATRIX FOR SCHOOLS Please provide a plan of sustainability for each intervention/activity. In the left column, list the activity or intervention that will be sustained. In the right column, list the plan of sustainability for the appropriate intervention or activity. All appropriate interventions should be included. The SDE will evaluate the SUSTAINABILITY MATRIX FOR SCHOOLS by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The school has clearly identified each intervention/activity from sections C-1 and C-2. has clearly described a reasonable plan of sustainability for each intervention/activity that parallels action plans in the LEA Sustainability. Score S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 17

18 F: TIMELINE The school, with assistance from the LEA, must include a timeline delineating the steps it will take to plan and implement the selected model, interventions, and/or School Improvement activities in each Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III school identified in Part A of the application. The SDE will evaluate the TIMELINE by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The school has clearly provided evidence of monthly action steps regarding implementation of the grant and model activities that are consistent with the final requirements. has clearly provided evidence of monthly action steps regarding implementation of the selected model requirements and interventions/activities which include, but not limited to professional development, training sessions, implementation of all of interventions/activities, benchmark assessments, yearly assessments, progress monitoring, sharing information with stakeholders, assessing data, and planning how results will be used for the next year. has clearly provided evidence of a timeline that presents a cohesive approach to school improvement that leverages time to provide the greatest service to students. has completed timelines for each of the three funding periods, including the pre-implementation period (optional) with detailed monthly action steps. Score G: ANNUAL GOALS As appropriate, the school, with assistance from the LEA, must describe the annual goals for student achievement on the state s assessments in both reading/language arts and mathematics that it has established in order to monitor its Tier I and Tier II schools that receive School Improvement funds. Tier III annual goals are subject to approval by the SEA. The SDE will evaluate the ANNUAL GOALS by analyzing the completion of the following criteria: The school has provided reasonable measurable annual goals for reading/language arts. has provided reasonable measurable annual goals for mathematics. has provided reasonable measurable annual goals for graduation for schools with a grade of 12.. has clearly provided baseline data for each of the annual goals. has completed annuals goals for each of the three funding periods. Score S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 18

19 H: BUDGET FOR SCHOOL EXPENDITURES The school, with assistance from the LEA, must provide a budget and a summary of expenditures for each year that indicates the amount of School Improvement Grant funds the LEA will use each year, including the pre-implementation period to: Implement the selected model intervention, and/or School Improvement activities in each Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III school it commits to serve Conduct LEA and school-level activities designed to support implementation of the selected school intervention model(s) in the LEA s Tier I, Tier II, Tier III schools The Federal Programs Director is responsible for final approval of all federal budgets. All budget revisions will be done in egap. Documents posted in egap are available for public viewing. The SDE also has the ability to view and track expenditures to match them to the approved budget. All pre-implementation activities are a part of the year one budget. The total cost for pre-implementation activities and full implementation for year one should not exceed $2,000,000. The SDE will further review all LEA/school budgets to assure that they have sufficient funds to implement the selected intervention fully and effectively by: The school has submitted a budget of $50,000 - $2,000,000 per year for each school, not to exceed $6,000,000 over three years. has submitted a budget that is appropriately aligned with the sizes of the schools and the necessary needs of the schools to support full implementation of the selected intervention models and interventions/activities. has provided a description in the summary areas of the application of each of the expenditures listed in the budget including all necessary information. has clearly matched activities and interventions, including needed personnel, services, travel, and materials/supplies, with budget expenditures in the budget summary areas. has clearly demonstrated a plan regarding high-level transparency of accounting procedures and processes (i.e., timesheets, appropriate labeling of hardware). has clearly aligned federal, state, and local resources to ensure short-term and long-term support of the selected interventions or School Improvement activities. (Sustainability) has clearly demonstrated a commitment to providing a high level of transparency from the LEA regarding accounting procedures and processes through the use of Alabama s Electronic Grant Application Process (egap) which includes both budget planning and funding information. X 2 Score cannot exceed 10 S I G S c o r i n g R u b r i c 19

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION Section 1003 (g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act FY 2011 Mail to: Alabama Department of Education Federal Programs 5348 Gordon

More information

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION FOR LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES LEA APPLICATION

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION FOR LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES LEA APPLICATION SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION FOR LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES LEA APPLICATION Section 1003 (g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act FY 2010 Mai Alabama Department of Education Federal Programs

More information

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION Section 1003 (g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act FY 2012 Mail to: Alabama Department of Education Federal Programs 5348 Gordon

More information

Student Achievement and School Accountability Programs (SASA) Monitoring Plan for School Improvement Grants October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011

Student Achievement and School Accountability Programs (SASA) Monitoring Plan for School Improvement Grants October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011 Student Achievement and School Accountability Programs (SASA) Monitoring Plan for School Improvement Grants October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2011 January 12, 2011 Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION...

More information

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT CONTINUATION FUNDING REQUEST REPORT FOR LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT CONTINUATION FUNDING REQUEST REPORT FOR LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT CONTINUATION FUNDING REQUEST REPORT FOR LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES Section 1003 (g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act July 2015 Alabama Department of Education Office

More information

Partnership to Realize Enduring Systemic Success (PRESS)

Partnership to Realize Enduring Systemic Success (PRESS) Partnership to Realize Enduring Systemic Success (PRESS) School Improvement Grants, Cohort 4R Technical Assistance Session September 22, 2016 PRESS, NJ s School Improvement Grant Program Please note that

More information

Illinois Center for School Improvement Framework: Core Functions, Indicators, and Key Questions

Illinois Center for School Improvement Framework: Core Functions, Indicators, and Key Questions Framework: Core Functions, Indicators, and Key Questions The Core Functions and Indicators, which form the structure for the delivery and execution of (Illinois CSI) services, describe the big ideas or

More information

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT: TIER I AND TIER II SCHOOL APPLICATION Section 1003 (g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act FY 2011 Mail to: Alabama Department of Education Federal Programs 5348 Gordon

More information

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION FOR LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES LEA APPLICATION. Section 1003 (g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION FOR LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES LEA APPLICATION. Section 1003 (g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION FOR LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES LEA APPLICATION Section 1003 (g) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act FY 2010 Mai Alabama Department of Education Federal Programs

More information

School Improvement Grants Online Tool

School Improvement Grants Online Tool School Improvement Grants Online Tool Monitoring and Evaluating Transformations by FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS Center on Innovation & Improvement Mid-Atlantic Comprehensive Center Appalachia Regional Comprehensive

More information

Frequently Asked Questions Contact us: RAC@doe.state.nj.us

Frequently Asked Questions Contact us: RAC@doe.state.nj.us Frequently Asked Questions Contact us: RAC@doe.state.nj.us 1 P a g e Contents Identification of a Priority, Focus, or Reward School... 4 Is a list of all Priority, Focus, and Reward Schools available to

More information

Arizona Department of Education Standards for Effective LEAs and Continuous Improvement Plans for LEAs and Schools

Arizona Department of Education Standards for Effective LEAs and Continuous Improvement Plans for LEAs and Schools Arizona Department of Education Standards for Effective LEAs and Continuous Improvement Plans for LEAs and Schools ALEAT Arizona Department of Education - August 2014 1 Contents Overview Page 3 Standards

More information

SAMPLE. Equity Data Profile and LEA Equity Action Plan

SAMPLE. Equity Data Profile and LEA Equity Action Plan SAMPLE Equity Data Profile and LEA Equity Action Plan The following LEA Equity Data Profile and corresponding LEA Equity Action Plan have been provided as SAMPLES in order to help LEAs in developing their

More information

Teacher and Leader Evaluation Requirements An Overview

Teacher and Leader Evaluation Requirements An Overview Teacher and Leader Evaluation Requirements An Overview Teacher and Leader Evaluation Requirements: An Overview The Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) believes that all District of Columbia

More information

UTAH. ESEA Flexibility Request

UTAH. ESEA Flexibility Request UTAH ESEA Flexibility Request 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS CONTENTS PAGE Cover Sheet for ESEA Flexibility Request 4 Waivers 5 Assurances 6 Consultation 8 Evaluation 13 Overview of SEA s ESEA Flexibility Request

More information

The Historic Opportunity to Get College Readiness Right: The Race to the Top Fund and Postsecondary Education

The Historic Opportunity to Get College Readiness Right: The Race to the Top Fund and Postsecondary Education The Historic Opportunity to Get College Readiness Right: The Race to the Top Fund and Postsecondary Education Passage of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) and the creation of the Race to

More information

District Student Success Process Planning Template

District Student Success Process Planning Template District Student Success Process Planning Template District: Superintendent: Special Education Director: Contact Person: Phone: Email: Date: (If other than the Sped Director) District Stakeholder Engagement

More information

Self-Assessment Duval County School System. Level 3. Level 3. Level 3. Level 4

Self-Assessment Duval County School System. Level 3. Level 3. Level 3. Level 4 Standard 1: Purpose and Direction 1.1 The system engages in a systematic, inclusive, and comprehensive process to review, revise, and communicate a system-wide propose for the student success. The system

More information

THE FOUR NON NEGOTIABLES

THE FOUR NON NEGOTIABLES THE FOUR NON NEGOTIABLES ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS SAFE AND SUPPORTIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT PURPOSEFUL, TIMELY TWO WAY COMMUNICATION ECISD STRATEGIC PLAN 2015 2016 1 Beliefs Definition:

More information

Domain 1: Strategic/Cultural Leadership

Domain 1: Strategic/Cultural Leadership Framework for Leadership Types of Evidence Supervisor: Curriculum and Instruction Please note: The evidence identified here is provided to stimulate conversations that occur between a supervising authority

More information

Leadership and Leadership Team Rubric Introduction

Leadership and Leadership Team Rubric Introduction Purpose: Leadership and Leadership Team Rubric Introduction To provide core structures and critical features that reflects best practice. To guide the leadership team in the development of this team grounded

More information

0.00 185,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,000.00 177,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.

0.00 185,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8,000.00 177,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. Budget Ohio Virtual Academy (142950) Lucas County 2012 Rev 2 Application Number (17) U.S.A.S. Fund #: 537 Plus/Minus Sheet (opens new window) Purpose Code Object Code Salaries 100 Retirement Fringe Benefits

More information

MTSS Implementation Components Ensuring common language and understanding

MTSS Implementation Components Ensuring common language and understanding MTSS Implementation Components Ensuring common language and understanding Table of Contents about MTSS Page # Multi-tiered systems of supports defined What are the basic components of the problem-solving

More information

Georgia District Performance Standards

Georgia District Performance Standards Vision and Mission: Purpose and direction for continuous improvement with a commitment to high expectations for learning and teaching VM 1: Creates and communicates a collaboratively-developed district

More information

New Hampshire Farmington High School 40 Thayer Drive Farmington NH 03836 603-755-2811. Interventions Annual Form by Federal Requirement

New Hampshire Farmington High School 40 Thayer Drive Farmington NH 03836 603-755-2811. Interventions Annual Form by Federal Requirement New Hampshire Farmington High School 40 Thayer Drive Farmington NH 03836 603-755-2811 Interventions Annual Form by Federal Requirement Instructions: When SIG Implementation begins, complete the descriptions

More information

By 2012 improve performance to 45% proficient. By 2013 improve performance to 60% proficient. By 2014 improve performance to 75% proficient.

By 2012 improve performance to 45% proficient. By 2013 improve performance to 60% proficient. By 2014 improve performance to 75% proficient. Plan Overview V L T Academy (000909) Hamilton County 2012 V L T Academy (000909) Plan Overview Plan Item 1) By 2014, improve performance in Reading at the K 12 level from 30% proficient to 75% proficient

More information

The Massachusetts Tiered System of Support

The Massachusetts Tiered System of Support The Massachusetts Tiered System of Support Chapter 1: Massachusetts Tiered System of Support (MTSS) Overview Massachusetts has developed a blueprint outlining a single system of supports that is responsive

More information

MARZANO SCHOOL LEADERSHIP EVALUATION MODEL

MARZANO SCHOOL LEADERSHIP EVALUATION MODEL TEACHER & LEADERSHIP EVALUATION MARZANO SCHOOL LEADERSHIP EVALUATION MODEL Prepared by Learning Sciences Marzano Center Center for Teacher and Leadership Evaluation April 2012 1 TEACHER & LEADERSHIP EVALUATION

More information

Technical Review Coversheet

Technical Review Coversheet Status: Submitted Last Updated: 8/6/1 4:17 PM Technical Review Coversheet Applicant: Seattle Public Schools -- Strategic Planning and Alliances, (S385A1135) Reader #1: ********** Questions Evaluation Criteria

More information

Principal Selection Process. Office of Human Resources. October 2015

Principal Selection Process. Office of Human Resources. October 2015 Principal Selection Process Office of Human Resources October 2015 1 Strategic Goals 2 Principal Selection Process Overview Tier 4 Entry Plan Case Study Superintendent, Deputy Superintendent, Chief Schools

More information

STRATEGIC TECHNOLOGY PLAN

STRATEGIC TECHNOLOGY PLAN STRATEGIC TECHNOLOGY PLAN 2015-2018 Approved: February 1, 2016 Table of Contents Introduction Vision and Mission Statement The DESE Local Technology Plan Guidelines Strategic Planning and Budgeting Goals

More information

Migrant Education Program Evaluation Toolkit A Tool for State Migrant Directors. Summer 2012

Migrant Education Program Evaluation Toolkit A Tool for State Migrant Directors. Summer 2012 Migrant Education Program Evaluation Toolkit A Tool for State Migrant Directors Summer 2012 Developed by the U.S. Department of Education Office of Migrant Education through a contract with The SERVE Center

More information

TUSD STRATEGIC PLAN

TUSD STRATEGIC PLAN Tucson Unified School District TUSD STRATEGIC PLAN 2014-2019 Table of Contents Curriculum Strategic Priority #1: Curriculum TUSD will design an aligned, articulated and well administered curriculum that

More information

Ch. 4: Four-Step Problem Solving Model

Ch. 4: Four-Step Problem Solving Model Ch. 4: Four-Step Problem Solving Model MDCPS Office of Academics, Accountability & School Improvement 2013-2014 The Problem-Solving Team Each school is expected to create and support an RtI/MTSS leadership

More information

School Improvement Funds ARRA

School Improvement Funds ARRA ARRA: The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), commonly known as the Economic Stimulus Package, will make funds available to states and school districts to save teaching jobs, help states

More information

Using student growth measurements that are meaningful and provide information that will guide instruction.

Using student growth measurements that are meaningful and provide information that will guide instruction. 049817_Russia Local_ Scope of Work Russia Local School Microsoft Word Version Race to the Top Vision By the year 2014, the students of Russia Local School will obtain one or more year's growth in one year's

More information

Louisiana Department of Education 2013 Common District Charter Request for Applications

Louisiana Department of Education 2013 Common District Charter Request for Applications Louisiana Department of Education 2013 Common District Charter Request for Applications Table of Contents I. Introduction... 3 II. New and Experienced Operator Application Tracks... 4 III. Charter Application

More information

CONTINUATION PLAN School Improvement Grant (SIG) 1003(g) 2015-16

CONTINUATION PLAN School Improvement Grant (SIG) 1003(g) 2015-16 CONTINUATION PLAN School Improvement Grant (SIG) 1003(g) 2015-16 School: School 2 District: Troy City School District BEDS Code: 491700010002 District Contact: Juli Currey Enrollment: 372 SIG Model: Transformation

More information

District Accountability Handbook Version 3.0 September 2012

District Accountability Handbook Version 3.0 September 2012 District Accountability Handbook Version 3.0 September 2012 Colorado Department of Education Page 1 The purpose of this handbook is to provide an outline of the requirements and responsibilities for state,

More information

Highly Qualified Teacher Component JUNE 2016

Highly Qualified Teacher Component JUNE 2016 Highly Qualified Teacher Component JUNE 2016 Highly Qualified Teacher Component Summary Each school district shall develop an equitable access plan to ensure that poor and minority students have equitable

More information

Gordon County Schools Parental Involvement Policy 2015-2016

Gordon County Schools Parental Involvement Policy 2015-2016 Gordon County Schools Parental Involvement Policy 2015-2016 What is Parental Involvement? Parental involvement means the participation of parents in regular, two-way, and meaningful communication involving

More information

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT (SIG) PRACTICE:

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT (SIG) PRACTICE: SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT (SIG) PRACTICE: BUILDING DISTRICT CAPACITY THROUGH TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Recognizing that the causes of low student achievement in a state s lowest

More information

DISTRICT: Date Submitted to DOE: Contact Person s Name Title. Phone # E mail:

DISTRICT: Date Submitted to DOE: Contact Person s Name Title. Phone # E mail: Review and Approval Checklist for RTTT Principal Evaluation Systems 6 1 2011 *represents beginning of change and # represents end of change. * Modified to Reflect Statutory Changes 4/12/11 # DISTRICT:

More information

March 2014 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT FRAMEWORK 2.0

March 2014 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT FRAMEWORK 2.0 March 2014 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT FRAMEWORK 2.0 Table of Contents STRAND I: TEACHING FOR LEARNING... 3 Standard 1: Curriculum... 3 A. Alignment... 3 B. Coherence... 3 Standard 2: Instruction... 3 C. Instructional

More information

ON THE SAME PAGE EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF COLLEGE- AND CAREER-READY STANDARDS THROUGH LABOR-MANAGEMENT COLLABORATION

ON THE SAME PAGE EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF COLLEGE- AND CAREER-READY STANDARDS THROUGH LABOR-MANAGEMENT COLLABORATION TM ON THE SAME PAGE EFFECTIVE IMPLEMENTATION OF COLLEGE- AND CAREER-READY STANDARDS THROUGH LABOR-MANAGEMENT COLLABORATION This publication has been adapted from Assessing Implementation of the Common

More information

Evaluating the School Strategic Plan Components Title I Rubric for Schoolwide Projects

Evaluating the School Strategic Plan Components Title I Rubric for Schoolwide Projects Evaluating the School Strategic Plan Components Title I Rubric for Schoolwide Projects Category Planning Committee The stakeholders represent various school groups or committees that can assist in aligning

More information

NCEE EVALUATION BRIEF May 2015 STATE CAPACITY TO SUPPORT SCHOOL TURNAROUND

NCEE EVALUATION BRIEF May 2015 STATE CAPACITY TO SUPPORT SCHOOL TURNAROUND NCEE EVALUATION BRIEF May 2015 STATE CAPACITY TO SUPPORT SCHOOL TURNAROUND One objective of the U.S. Department of Education s (ED) School Improvement Grants (SIG) and Race to the Top (RTT) program is

More information

ESEA FLEXIBILITY: AN OVERVIEW. September 26, 2011

ESEA FLEXIBILITY: AN OVERVIEW. September 26, 2011 ESEA FLEXIBILITY: AN OVERVIEW September 26, 2011 INTRODUCTION STATES LEADING REFORM States and districts have initiated groundbreaking reforms and innovations to increase the quality of instruction and

More information

Organizational Report for Post-Baccalaureate Non-Degree Educator Preparation Programs. (Institution, Organization, or LEA name)

Organizational Report for Post-Baccalaureate Non-Degree Educator Preparation Programs. (Institution, Organization, or LEA name) Organizational Report for Post-Baccalaureate Non-Degree Educator Preparation Programs (Institution, Organization, or LEA name) Page 2 of 13 Instructions for Writing the Organizational Report The Organizational

More information

No Child Left Behind Program Series. NCLB Comprehensive Needs Assessment

No Child Left Behind Program Series. NCLB Comprehensive Needs Assessment NCLB Comprehensive Needs Assessment NCLB Comprehensive Needs Assessment 1 No Child Left Behind Comprehensive Needs Assessment People without information cannot act. People with information cannot help

More information

Recruiting, Selecting and Hiring TAP Leaders

Recruiting, Selecting and Hiring TAP Leaders Recruiting, Selecting and Hiring TAP Leaders Tap Recruitment Process Overview Sample Job Advertisement for Master/Mentor Teachers Sample Recruitment Flier for Master/Mentor Teachers Sample Meeting Agenda

More information

Dimensions and Functions for School Leaders

Dimensions and Functions for School Leaders Dispositions, Dimensions, and Functions for School Leaders Preparation and Support for the Next Generation of Kentucky s School and District Leaders Kentucky Cohesive Leadership System Continuum for Principal

More information

Illinois State Board of Education. Student Assessment Inventory for School Districts

Illinois State Board of Education. Student Assessment Inventory for School Districts Illinois State Board of Education Student Assessment Inventory for School Districts April 2015 Assessment and Accountability Illinois State Board of Education 110 North First Street Springfield, IL 62777

More information

Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina s School counselors

Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina s School counselors Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina s School counselors Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina s School Counselors Standard 1: school counselors demonstrate leadership, advocacy, and collaboration. Professional

More information

DRAFT For use in 2012-13 validation process only Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina s School counselors

DRAFT For use in 2012-13 validation process only Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina s School counselors Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina s School counselors Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina s School Counselors Standard 1: school counselors demonstrate leadership, advocacy, and collaboration. Professional

More information

NCEE EVALUATION BRIEF December 2013 OPERATIONAL AUTHORITY, SUPPORT, AND MONITORING OF SCHOOL TURNAROUND

NCEE EVALUATION BRIEF December 2013 OPERATIONAL AUTHORITY, SUPPORT, AND MONITORING OF SCHOOL TURNAROUND NCEE EVALUATION BRIEF December 2013 OPERATIONAL AUTHORITY, SUPPORT, AND MONITORING OF SCHOOL TURNAROUND The federal School Improvement Grants (SIG) program, to which $3 billion were allocated under the

More information

The Strive HI Performance System Hawaii s new school accountability and improvement system Summary

The Strive HI Performance System Hawaii s new school accountability and improvement system Summary The Strive HI Performance System Hawaii s new school accountability and improvement system Summary In 2012, the Hawaii State Department of Education (DOE) and State Board of Education released a joint

More information

Sample Career Ladder Program Evaluation Process

Sample Career Ladder Program Evaluation Process Sample Career Ladder Program Evaluation Process SAMPLE The Purpose of the Career Ladder Program Evaluation Process The goal of the program evaluation process is to determine the impact and effectiveness

More information

APPENDIX B. SCORING RUBRIC

APPENDIX B. SCORING RUBRIC APPENDIX B. SCORING RUBRIC Corrected based on the January 2010 correction notices published in the Federal Register. These notices are available at http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/legislation.html.

More information

REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS RFA # GD0 SSOS-BPG 15

REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS RFA # GD0 SSOS-BPG 15 REQUEST FOR APPLICATIONS RFA # GD0 SSOS-BPG 15 District of Columbia Office of the State Superintendent of Education FY 2015 State System of Support Best Practices Grant RFA Release Date December 2, 2014

More information

Strategic Plan 2014 2018

Strategic Plan 2014 2018 DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH Strategic Plan 2014 2018 We focus on improving internal systems and processes in the Vermont Department of Health s Strategic Plan. By successfully implementing the Plan s objectives,

More information

School Library 21 (SL 21)

School Library 21 (SL 21) School Library 21 (SL 21) Measurement Benchmarks for Michigan School Libraries for 21 st Century Schools Categories for School Library Program Evaluation Building the 21 st Century Learning Environment

More information

Forum on Educational Accountability

Forum on Educational Accountability Forum on Educational Accountability http://www.edaccountability.org A Research- and Experience-Based Turnaround Process June 17, 2010 The Forum on Educational Accountability (FEA) believes it appropriate

More information

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT (SIG) PRACTICE:

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT (SIG) PRACTICE: SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT (SIG) PRACTICE: TURNAROUND LEADERSHIP ASPIRING LEADERS PIPELINE MIAMI-DADE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS MIAMI, FLORIDA In response to a critical shortage of leaders to support school

More information

WAC 180-17-050 Release of a school district from designation as a. required action district. (1) The state board of education shall release

WAC 180-17-050 Release of a school district from designation as a. required action district. (1) The state board of education shall release Exhibit C WAC 180-17-050 Release of a school district from designation as a required action district. (1) The state board of education shall release a school district from designation as a required action

More information

Florida Department of Education Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services. Compliance Self-Assessment 2013-14

Florida Department of Education Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services. Compliance Self-Assessment 2013-14 Florida Department of Education Bureau of Exceptional Education and Student Services Compliance Self-Assessment 2013-14 Individual Educational Plan (IEP) GSW Student umber: Student s ame: School/Grade:

More information

Strategic Plan 2011-2016

Strategic Plan 2011-2016 Maricopa County Regional School District The District of Miracles Strategic Plan 2011-2016 Vision: Empowering students to take control of their future by providing an education that inspires and enables

More information

CII - Promising Practices

CII - Promising Practices March 2011 The Oklahoma Story CII - Promising Practices Situating School Improvement Grants within a Coherent System of Support Prepared by Julie Corbett of Corbett Education Consulting for the Center

More information

N.J.A.C. 6A:9C, PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS

N.J.A.C. 6A:9C, PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS N.J.A.C. 6A:9C, PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS SUBCHAPTER 1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE 6A:9C-1.1 Scope 6A:9C-1.2 Purpose SUBCHAPTER 2. DEFINITIONS 6A:9C-2.1 Definitions SUBCHAPTER 3. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

More information

GAO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANTS. Education Should Take Additional Steps to Enhance Accountability for Schools and Contractors

GAO SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANTS. Education Should Take Additional Steps to Enhance Accountability for Schools and Contractors GAO United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters April 2012 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANTS Education Should Take Additional Steps to Enhance Accountability for Schools and

More information

Title II, Part A Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund Equitable Services to Private School Teachers

Title II, Part A Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund Equitable Services to Private School Teachers Title II, Part A Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund Equitable Services to Private School Teachers Under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as reauthorized by the No Child

More information

HANOVER COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS DISTRICT TITLE I, PART A PARENT INVOLVEMENT POLICY

HANOVER COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS DISTRICT TITLE I, PART A PARENT INVOLVEMENT POLICY HANOVER COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS DISTRICT TITLE I, PART A PARENT INVOLVEMENT POLICY The Hanover County Public School Board recognizes the importance of the school and home working together as partners in

More information

Framework for Leadership

Framework for Leadership Framework for Leadership Date Leader Self-Assessment Evaluator Assessment Domain 1: Strategic/Cultural Leadership Principals/school leaders systemically and collaboratively develop a positive culture to

More information

Improvement Plan for Los Alamos Public Schools

Improvement Plan for Los Alamos Public Schools Improvement Plan for Los Alamos Public Schools Improvement Plan for New Mexico Date of Report: 10/25/2010 Progress 17 % (2 of 12) Action Steps Complete Goal: District Overall Student Mathematics Goal The

More information

Plan for Continuous Improvement (PCI) Virginia Beach City Public Schools Compass to 2020: Charting the Course

Plan for Continuous Improvement (PCI) Virginia Beach City Public Schools Compass to 2020: Charting the Course School: Diamond Springs Elementary School Year(s): 2015-2017 (2 year plan) Date of Plan: VBCPS Goals 1. High Academic Expectations (Literacy and Numeracy) Compass to 2020 2. Multiple Pathways (Approach

More information

SCHOOL S. Standards for Quality Schools

SCHOOL S. Standards for Quality Schools SCHOOL S AdvancED 2011 1 SCHOOLS standards for quality SCHOOLs Commitment to continuous improvement is a dynamic effort, consistently requiring attention and revision. We expect this commitment from the

More information

State University of New York Charter Renewal Benchmarks Version 5.0, May 2012

State University of New York Charter Renewal Benchmarks Version 5.0, May 2012 State University of New York Charter Renewal Benchmarks Version 5.0, May 2012 Introduction The State University of New York Charter Renewal Benchmarks 1 (the Benchmarks ) serve two primary functions at

More information

INNOVATION CONFIGURATION. Broward County Public Schools. Pathway for Fluent College & Career. Readiness. April, 2014 to June, 2017

INNOVATION CONFIGURATION. Broward County Public Schools. Pathway for Fluent College & Career. Readiness. April, 2014 to June, 2017 INNOVATION CONFIGURATION Broward County Public Schools Pathway for Fluent College & Career Readiness April, 2014 to June, 2017 SLT MEMBER: Dan Gohl OWNER OF INITIATIVE: Mildred Grimaldo CONTACT: Camille

More information

Superintendent Effectiveness Rubric*

Superintendent Effectiveness Rubric* Public Document 3 Purpose: Outlines the standards that are the foundation for the evaluation. Name of Superintendent: Date: Performance Rating Scale: Distinguished (4) Accomplished (3) standards for most

More information

Data Team Rubric Principals Leadership Academy FY Data Team Meeting

Data Team Rubric Principals Leadership Academy FY Data Team Meeting School Steps/ 1 Collect & Chart Data & Results 2 Analyze Strengths & Obstacles 3 Goals Data Team Rubric Principals Leadership Academy FY 2010-2011 (Note: All criteria must be met for proficiency) Data

More information

South Washington County Schools World s Best Workforce Summary Report

South Washington County Schools World s Best Workforce Summary Report South Washington County Schools World s Best Workforce Summary Report This comprehensive plan is intended to serve as a foundational document to align school district educational initiatives that serve

More information

North Carolina TEACHER. evaluation process. Public Schools of North Carolina State Board of Education Department of Public Instruction

North Carolina TEACHER. evaluation process. Public Schools of North Carolina State Board of Education Department of Public Instruction North Carolina TEACHER evaluation process Public Schools of North Carolina State Board of Education Department of Public Instruction Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina Teachers ( This form should be

More information

Nevada Department of Education WestEd University of Virginia Partnership for Leaders in Education

Nevada Department of Education WestEd University of Virginia Partnership for Leaders in Education Nevada Department of Education WestEd University of Virginia Partnership for Leaders in Education School Turnaround Program UVA School Turnaround Cohort 13 Application Nevada Department of Education (NDE)/WestEd/University

More information

Pine-Richland School District Gifted Education Plan. Gifted Guidelines from the Pennsylvania Department of Education, August 2010

Pine-Richland School District Gifted Education Plan. Gifted Guidelines from the Pennsylvania Department of Education, August 2010 Table of Contents Mission Statement... 1 Vision Statement... 1 Philosophy of Gifted Education... 1 Gifted Guidelines from the Pennsylvania Department of Education, August 2010... 1 Strategic Goals for

More information

Charter School Performance Framework

Charter School Performance Framework Charter School Performance Framework The Regents of the University of the State of New York Office of School Innovation 89 Washington Avenue Albany, New York 12234 www.p12.nysed.gov/psc/ Charter School

More information

Coaching with Indistar Presentations. Yvonne Holloman & Michael Hill/Virginia. Coaching: State Administration

Coaching with Indistar Presentations. Yvonne Holloman & Michael Hill/Virginia. Coaching: State Administration Coaching with Indistar Presentations Coaching: State Administration Yvonne Holloman & Michael Hill/Virginia Indistar Summit Coaching with Indistar February 2012 Presenters: Yvonne Holloman, Ph.D. Associate

More information

2013 Marzano School Leader Evaluation Model Rubric

2013 Marzano School Leader Evaluation Model Rubric 2013 Marzano School Leader Evaluation Model Rubric Exclusive partners with Dr. Robert J. Marzano for the Teacher Evaluation Model and School Leader Evaluation Model Learning Sciences International 175

More information

FRAMEWORK OF SUPPORT: SCHOOL-LEVEL PRACTICE PROFILE

FRAMEWORK OF SUPPORT: SCHOOL-LEVEL PRACTICE PROFILE FRAMEWORK OF SUPPORT: SCHOOL-LEVEL PRACTICE PROFILE S The Framework of Supports are a set of Practice Profiles that serve as an implementation overview of Support for Personalized Learning (SPL). Practice

More information

... and. Uses data to help schools identify needs for prevention and intervention programs.

... and. Uses data to help schools identify needs for prevention and intervention programs. Rubric for Evaluating North Carolina s School Psychologists Standard 1: School psychologists demonstrate leadership. School psychologists demonstrate leadership by promoting and enhancing the overall academic

More information

HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION TRADES TRAINING PROGRAM FOR WOMEN AND MINORITIES

HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION TRADES TRAINING PROGRAM FOR WOMEN AND MINORITIES STATE OF NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION TRADES TRAINING PROGRAM FOR WOMEN AND MINORITIES NOTICE OF GRANT OPPORTUNITY 2006-2007 David J. Socolow Commissioner

More information

Effective Early Literacy Support in Philadelphia Promoting Early Literacy Inside and Outside of the Classroom

Effective Early Literacy Support in Philadelphia Promoting Early Literacy Inside and Outside of the Classroom Effective Early Literacy Support in Philadelphia Promoting Early Literacy Inside and Outside of the Classroom Rodney Johnson Director of Early Literacy Jill Valunas Children s Literacy Initiative Anchor

More information

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAM SSIP PHASE I IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE - Part B

OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAM SSIP PHASE I IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE - Part B OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION PROGRAM SSIP PHASE I IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE - Part B Background: As stated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the primary focus of Federal and State monitoring

More information

TITLE III FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

TITLE III FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS TITLE III FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS Frequently asked questions (FAQs) are listed below covering: Funding: For English Language Learners (ELLs) and Immigrant Children and Youth Accountability measures(annual

More information

Classified Performance Management. Advisory Committee Meeting May 23, 2011

Classified Performance Management. Advisory Committee Meeting May 23, 2011 Classified Performance Management Advisory Committee Meeting May 23, 2011 Classified Performance Management Page 2 Overview of all the pieces For LAUSD Inspirational Vision Every LAUSD student will receive

More information

NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL EXECUTIVE EVALUATION RUBRIC Preservice Candidates. Standard 1: Strategic Leadership

NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL EXECUTIVE EVALUATION RUBRIC Preservice Candidates. Standard 1: Strategic Leadership NORTH CAROLINA SCHOOL EXECUTIVE EVALUATION RUBRIC Preservice Candidates Standard 1: Strategic Leadership School executives will create conditions that result in strategically re-imaging the school s vision,

More information

school) 0.00 FY12 Pre Implementation Budget Amount

school) 0.00 FY12 Pre Implementation Budget Amount Application Electronic Classroom Of Tomorrow (133413) Franklin County 2012 Rev 0 Application Number (40) Please note that if LEA does not apply for one of the Tier I or Tier II schools, describe the lack

More information

Mississippi Charter School Application Evaluation Ratings and Sample Scoring Criteria. Ratings and Criteria

Mississippi Charter School Application Evaluation Ratings and Sample Scoring Criteria. Ratings and Criteria Mississippi Charter School Application Evaluation Ratings and Sample Scoring Criteria Ratings and Criteria Evaluators will use the following criteria to rate applications. Within each section, specific

More information

K - 12 Principal & Superintendent

K - 12 Principal & Superintendent BOSA COMPETENCY MATRIX Minnesota Administrative Licensure K - 12 Principal & Superintendent WINONA STATE UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF EDUCATION DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP Name: Place of Employment Mailing

More information

Comprehensive Reading Plan K-12 A Supplement to the North Carolina Literacy Plan. North Carolina Department of Public Instruction 2013-2014

Comprehensive Reading Plan K-12 A Supplement to the North Carolina Literacy Plan. North Carolina Department of Public Instruction 2013-2014 Comprehensive Reading Plan K-12 A Supplement to the North Carolina Literacy Plan North Carolina Department of Public Instruction 2013-2014 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION PAGE 3 NCDPI PAGE 4 STANDARDS-BASED

More information

ILLINOIS STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SYSTEM OF SUPPORT AND DISTRICT INTERVENTION DIVISION SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT (SIG) 1003(G)

ILLINOIS STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SYSTEM OF SUPPORT AND DISTRICT INTERVENTION DIVISION SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT (SIG) 1003(G) ILLINOIS STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION SYSTEM OF SUPPORT AND DISTRICT INTERVENTION DIVISION SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT (SIG) 1003(G) FY 2014 STATE APPLICATION PUBLIC COMMENT FEEDBACK A request for Public Comments

More information