web viewthe application should be sent as a microsoft word document, not. ... roberta ashlock ......

School Improvement Grants

Application for FY 2014 New Awards CompetitionSection 1003(g) of the

Elementary and Secondary Education ActFiscal Year 2014

District Name: Sheridan School District 48J

Oregon Department of EducationSalem, OR 97310

SUBMISSION INFORMATIONElectronic Submission:The Oregon Department of Education strongly prefers to receive a district’s FY 2014 SIG application electronically. The application should be sent as a Microsoft Word document, not as a PDF.

The district should submit its FY 2014 application to [email protected]

The cover page must be signed by the superintendent and school board chairperson. It can be electronically signed and submitted with the application, or the district may submit a paper copy of the cover page signed by the district superintendent and school board chairperson to the address listed below under “Paper Submission.”Paper Submission:If a district is not able to submit its application electronically, it may submit the original and two copies of its SIG application to the following address:

Erica AndersonOregon Department of Education255 Capitol St NESalem, OR 97310

Due to potential delays in government processing of mail sent through the U.S. Postal Service, districts are encouraged to use alternate carriers for paper submissions.Application DeadlineApplications are due on or before May 20, 2015.

For Further InformationIf you have any questions, please contact Erica Anderson at (503) 947-5880 or by e-mail at [email protected].

APPLICATION COVER SHEET

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANTS

Legal Name of Applicant:Sheridan School District 48J

Applicant’s Mailing Address:Sheridan School District 48J

435 S. Bridge St.Sheridan, Oregon 97378

District Contact for the School Improvement Grant

Name: Steven Sugg

Position and Office: Superintendent

Contact’s Mailing Address: 435 S. Bridge St., Sheridan, OR 97378

Telephone: 971-261-6959

Fax: 503-843-3505

Email address: [email protected]

District Superintendent (Printed Name):Steven Sugg

Telephone:971-261-6959

Signature of the District Superintendent: Date:May 19, 2015

The district agrees to comply with all requirements applicable to the School Improvement Grants program, including the assurances contained herein and the conditions that apply to any waivers that the State and/or District receives through

this application.

District School Board Chairperson (Printed Name):Judy Breeden

Telephone:971-261-6959

Signature of the District School Board Chairperson: Date:May 19, 2015

DISTRICT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS

A. SCHOOLS TO BE SERVED: A district must include the following information with respect to the schools it will serve with a School Improvement Grant.A district must identify each school that it is applying to serve and that it commits to serve, and the district must identify the model that it will use in each school as applicable. Enter school information in the table below.

Intervention model districts may include are: (1) turnaround; (2) restart; (3) closure; (4) transformation; (5) evidence-based whole school reform model; and (6) early learning model.

SCHOOLNAME

NCES ID # STATESCHOOL ID #

Priority or Focus (Include ODE school improvement

tier assigned fall 2014)

INTERVENTION:

Faulconer-Chapman

School411122001285 1235 Focus, Tier 3 Transformation

B. DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION: A district must include the following information in its application for a School Improvement Grant.

(1) For each priority and focus school that the LEA commits to serve, the LEA must demonstrate that the LEA has analyzed the needs of each school, such as instructional programs, school leadership and school infrastructure, based on a needs analysis that, among other things, analyzes the needs identified by families and the community, and selected interventions for each school aligned to the needs each school has identified. [Respond to parts 1A – 1C]

(1A Describe how family and community stakeholders have been engaged in identifying the needs of the school and selecting an intervention.)

SIG Planning Team Members include:Steven Sugg SuperintendentMarti Hofenbredl PrincipalKari Sanders Vice PrincipalDeAnn O’Neil Business ManagerAdam Delatte Elementary TeacherMindy Arthur Elementary TeacherKaren Sullivan Title 1 Reading SpecialistRobin VanBuren Middle School TeacherLee Duval Elementary TeacherChristina Broncheau Child Development Specialist

Michelle DeBoard Educational ConsultantRoberta Ashlock ParentLaycee Grauer Parent

Many of the members of the planning team have been a part of the focus school leadership team over the past three years and have been instrumental in the development of the CAP. The leadership team has completed the assessment of all 34 indicators in the Indistar system and has been working to improve student educational outcomes. The district discussed the School Improvement Grant Process and models at two school district board meetings; the March board meeting and the April board meeting. The Board felt strongly that the transformation model was the best fit for FCS due to the fact that there is a strong teacher cadre and classified staff. Many of the classified staff also represent the parent community as their children attend district schools. The different SIG models were introduced and discussed at a community and parent meeting on April 2nd where the following characteristics of a new principal were identified by stakeholders: change agent; strong behavior management; strong instructional leader; able to relate to a broad range of students; expectation of high standards of success for all students; accountability of staff; strong communicator; engaging community. Stakeholders believe with a new leader in place and a focus on developing our staff towards better instruction and accountability we will see improved student educational outcomes. The choice of the transformation model was unanimous. All of the results of these conversations were then reviewed by the SIG Planning Team. This team is fully committed to the use of the Transformation Model.

3strong / thorough response

2average / partial response

1weak / minimal response

0not addressed

The LEA, in conjunction with school leadership from each school it commits to serve, has engaged family and community stakeholders in multiple ways and at multiple times to allow for assessment and review of the needs of the school and proposed intervention model.

The LEA or the school it is committing to serve, have engaged family and community stakeholders to allow for assessment and review of the needs of the school and proposed intervention model.

The LEA or the school it is committing to serve, has informed family and community stakeholders of the proposed intervention model.

No action was taken to engage family and community stakeholders.

(1B Describe how the needs analysis takes into account the current state of improvement efforts at the school.)

An analysis of the needs assessment reveals that current improvement efforts are ineffective. Currently the staff lacks a unified vision, clear focus and does not follow through on the effective implementation of the selected initiatives Positive Behavior Interventions and Supports (PBIS), Response to Intervention (RTI) and Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID). While all of the initiatives are currently evident in some form at Faulconer-Chapman each requires more work to be effective.

Current efforts are having an uneven impact on our minority students as well as our students in poverty. The student population of Faulconer-Chapman is 71% White, 16% Hispanic, 8% Multi Racial, 4% Native American with a few students of other racial groups. White students tend to be the top academic performers in the school. In the area of reading White student growth was a level 4 and all other subgroups were at a level 2 or below. In mathematics student growth is much more even with all but one subgroup at a level 3, the exception being students with disabilities was a level 2.

The needs analysis began with the 34 indicators from Indistar and the current progress and status of the three identified initiatives. The team then determined that the three initiatives align with the objectives identified by the school leadership team as the priorities of the Comprehensive Achievement Plan.

The seven objectives identified by the leadership team to be included in the Comprehensive Achievement Plan are;

● DSC1.1 The School’s principal and staff will work together to create a safe, respectful, culturally-inclusive environment with consistent school rules and expectations;

● DSC1.4 School staff will identify students who need additional learning time to meet standards and provides timely and effective programs of assistance;

● EE2.2 All teachers will used instructional strategies and initiatives that are grounded in evidence-based practices, strengthen the core academic program, increase the quality and quantity of learning time, and address the learning needs of all students;

● EE2.4 Instructional team will use a variety of data to assess strengths and weaknesses of the curriculum and instructional strategies and make necessary changes;

● EE2.5 All instructional staff in the school will use sound classroom management practices that encourage student engagement and affect student learning;

● LDR5.9 School leadership will facilitate an annual evaluation of the implementation and results achieved the school’s improvement plan;

● TL4.2 A system will be in place for assessing and monitoring student achievement relative to state standards.

PBIS: Currently in year three, this is by far the most effective of the strategic programs. Staff leadership is strong and monthly professional development has strengthened staff awareness and implementation. Some staff are reluctant to embrace the concepts and need to be held accountable to participate. (DSC1.1)RTI: Although Sheridan was in the first cohort of Oregon RTI with strong implementation, efforts have waned and implementation is weak, at best.(DSC1.4, EE2.4, EE2.2, TL4.2)AVID: Due to the fact that AVID leadership has changed three times over the past four years, implementation is weak. Awareness is strong and selected staff incorporate AVID strategies in the classroom. Stable leadership will allow the program to expand and strengthen. (EE2.5, EE2.2)

Currently, of the seven indicators chosen for the CAP, one is fully implemented and the team continues to work to complete the remaining six.

Completed: (TL4.2)In progress: (DSC1.1, DSC1.4, EE2.2, EE2.4, EE2.5, LDR5.9)All feedback has been incorporated into the CAP and no further actions are required at this time.




0not addressed

The needs analysis, conducted by the LEA, in conjunction with school leadership, takes into account the current improvement strategies / priorities being implemented AND incorporates a review of the ODE CAP Review Feedback.

The needs analysis takes into account the current improvement strategies / priorities being implemented and might incorporate a review of the ODE CAP Review Feedback.

The needs analysis acknowledges the current improvement strategies / priorities being implemented.

The needs analysis disregards current improvement strategies / priorities.

(1C Describe how the needs assessment takes into account the current state of the school.)

Faulconer Chapman received a level 2 rating on the 2013-14 state report card earning 45.8% of the points available, this is a slight increase from the previous year. The school rating has been stagnant for the past 3 years and student achievement is not increasing. Faulconer-Chapman is also below average compared to similar schools. The poverty rate for Faulconer-Chapman is over 74% and many of our students live with extended family or guardians and lack means to be able to access to community resources. In 2013-14 46.3 percent of students met the reading benchmark and 35.5 percent met the math benchmark. All subgroups were rated either a level 1 or 2 in both areas. Student growth data in math was strong with most subgroups achieving a level 3 status, however Students with Disabilities was the lowest rated subgroup. White students achieved a level 4 in reading growth while all other subgroups were either level 1 or 2.

● The leadership team examined the current state of all of the programs in the school including the strengths of the staff charged with implementation. All school data available including state report cards, school wide progress monitoring data, behavior data, school CAP and ODE CAP feedback were examined. The team ascertained the following:

○ RTI, PBIS, and AVID were not being implemented with fidelity.○ Professional development does not focus on the three priorities of the school and is not always

high quality.○ Staff evaluation has improved but is still inconsistent and lacks inter rater reliability.○ The review found that the K-5 reading program lacked a common curriculum with little vertical

alignment. The school recently adopted Engage NY for math grades 4-8 and ELA grades 6-8. Grades K-3 are using math connects. All staff has aligned the curriculum with the Common Core State Standards.

○ Learning time is not always protected and schedules are not followed with fidelity. All school announcement happen throughout the day and teachers sometimes do not adhere to the schedule.

○ Parents are involved in PTSO activities (popcorn Friday and school store) and are not as involved academically (reading with students, tutoring in math).

○ The building principal has complete autonomy of the building and budget.

○ Staff strengths and weaknesses were identified.○ The team examined staff self-reflection data from TalentEd.○ The school currently uses DIBELS for math and reading assessments to identify students who

need academic support.○ DIBELS data in conjunction with teacher created common formative assessments are used for

progress monitoring.○ Data teams meet in six week cycles to review student progress.○ Teachers meet in professional learning communities weekly during early release time.○ Recently there has been a high staff turnover rate with many retirements and in the fall of 2015

47% of the staff will have less than 2 years of experience in the building.○ Staff are eager to improve student outcomes and currently lack support, knowledge and focused

leadership.




0not addressed

The needs analysis, conducted by the LEA, in conjunction with the school, articulates the strength of curricular and instructional needs, the status of the comprehensive assessment system and use of data teams for decision-making, and the capacity of the teaching staff to implement the intervention selected.

The needs analysis conducted articulates the strength of curricular and instructional needs, the status of the comprehensive assessment system and use of data teams for decision-making, and the capacity of the teaching staff to implement the intervention selected.

The needs analysis alludes to or references curricular and instructional needs, assessment systems and data teams, and the capacity of the teaching staff to implement the intervention selected.

The needs of the school were not addressed.

(2) For each priority and focus school that the LEA commits to serve, the LEA must demonstrate that it has taken into consideration family and community input in selecting the intervention. [Respond to parts 2A – 2B]

(2A Describe the process for garnering input from family and community stakeholders)

Sheridan School District actively engages its family and community constituents. The district regularly communicates with its residents and elicits their input on key initiatives.

● School report cards are shared with parents at conferences in the fall and are posted on the district website. They are reviewed and explained in detail at site council, staff and board meetings.

● In January of each year a “state of the schools” newsletter is provided to parents and the community and

posted on the district website.● A meeting was held with parents to discuss the SIG application process. Feedback received from this

group supports the SIG. Moreover, the group is confident in and supportive of the staff currently in place. They are concerned with the lack of focused leadership and collaborative cohesive culture at Faulconer Chapman School. They believe that with a new, stronger leader in place the school can thrive.

● Parent feedback was solicited regarding the qualities and characteristics necessary for a new leader at the school. During the hiring process for a new principal at Faulconer-Chapman both parents and students were a part of the team.

● Bi-weekly articles in the local paper, written by the superintendent, have featured the three major focus areas for next school year at Faulconer Chapman. Future articles will highlight the SIG grant process and proposed intervention options. After significant discussions about the SIG grant process and the intervention possibilities at two board meetings the board unanimously supports the Transformation Model.




0not addressed

Family and community stakeholders were educated on the current report card ratings, current improvement efforts (CAP, Priorities, etc.) AND provided opportunities for dialogue and feedback with both the LEA and school leadership pertaining to the current state of the school and improvement efforts.

Family and community stakeholders were provided opportunities for dialogue and feedback with school leadership or LEA leadership pertaining to the current state of the school and improvement efforts.

Family and community stakeholders were made aware of the LEA’s intent to engage in the SIG process on behalf of the school.

No action was taken to engage family and community stakeholders.

(2B Describe the process for considering the input from family and community stakeholders)

The District Leadership Team and the Teaching and Learning Team that include all district administrators and teacher leaders have examined the data from the district along with stakeholder feedback and are in complete agreement regarding the chosen intervention. These groups recommended the Transformation Model to the Superintendent who then took that recommendation to the School Board for discussion at two public meetings. The School Board unanimously supports the choice of the Transformation Model.




0not addressed

LEA in collaboration with school leadership, analyzed and considered family and community stakeholder input in selecting the

LEA in collaboration with school leadership, analyzed and considered family and community stakeholder input in selecting the

LEA and / or school leadership analyzed and considered family and community stakeholder input in selecting the

No action was taken to consider family and community stakeholder input.

intervention and provided opportunities for final approval.

intervention. intervention.

(3) The LEA must describe actions it has taken, or will take, to design and implement a plan consistent with the final requirements of the turnaround model, restart model, school closure, transformation model, evidence-based whole school reform model, or early learning model.

(3 Describe actions taken, or will take, to design and implement a plan for the selected model)

● The district recently completed an exhaustive search for a new principal at Faulconer-Chapman. The new leader will begin duties as of July 1, 2015. Interview and screening committees were instructed to identify candidates that possess the qualities identified by staff and community. A group of school staff made up of classified, certified and parent representatives screened the principal applications. The interview process included an interview team made up of certified, classified administrative and parent representatives. Each candidate met with a group of students and was escorted on a building tour.

The selected candidate is an experienced administrator with a strong background in staff development and will be presenting about his observation and evaluation techniques at the summer COSA conference. The district knows it is imperative to send the administrative team attend national conferences and other training opportunities to gain valuable knowledge and skills. (EE2.2, EE2.4, EE2.5)

● Staff assignments were examined with regard to staff strengths and weaknesses and will be rearranged in order to strengthen these programs and implement each with fidelity. General fund and SIG resources will be used to provide focused professional development for all staff in each of these areas (RTI, PBIS and AVID) to increase their expertise and understanding of these programs. (EE2.2, EE2.4, EE2.5, TL4.2, DSC1.1, DSC1.4)

● The planning team also examined teacher self-reflection data from TalentEd. The data indicated that staff rated themselves weak in the area of student engagement. To this end, over the next five years all staff will be trained in AVID teaching methods at the AVID Summer Institute in order to increase teaching quality and develop a common vocabulary and set of instructional strategies. General fund and SIG resources will be used to purchase seats at the institute. Additionally, during goal setting conferences in the fall of 2015, each teacher will set a goal to increase and vary the use of instructional methods and engagement strategies in their daily teaching. (EE2.2, EE2.4, EE2.5).

● In an analysis of curriculum and report card data it was evident that there is no consistent core reading program in use in K-5 classrooms. During the 2014-15 school year a team of K-5 teachers, along with the Title 1 Reading Specialist thoroughly reviewed literacy programs approved by ODE. Beginning with the 2015-16 school year Reach for Reading curriculum will be implemented K-5 along with Benchmark Literacy Writer’s Workshop as components of a more in-depth literacy program. The adopted literacy program was intentionally chosen because it incorporates works from diverse authors and illustrations of diverse populations. Students will feel represented by the text and illustrations in the program. Professional development activities will focus on deep implementation of these programs and are included in the district professional development calendar for 2015-16. (EE2.2, EE2.4, EE2.5)

● The district is currently finishing the second year of Legends, an evaluation system that complies with Oregon law. Principals are evaluated on a yearly basis and contract teachers are evaluated every second year (probationary are evaluated every year for the first three years) but work collaboratively with their supervisor on a yearly basis to design Student Learning and Growth Goals (SLGG). The peer review panel offered positive feedback and illuminated the need to provide additional training for staff in order to fully implement the system. While the SLGG process is working, we will continue to train staff in the development and use of these type of goals. The district uses TalentEd for the evaluation system that includes some analytics that were used for the first time this year.. During a review of the analytics, our staff self-assessed as low in the area of student engagement. The district was able to respond with professional development focused on effective student engagement techniques. Since the focused professional development, student engagement strategies have been more consistently incorporated throughout the district. Analytics provided from TalentEd data will continue to be used to inform the district and to address the needs of staff. (LDR5.9, EE2.2, EE2.4, EE2.5)

● In order to attract and retain special education teachers the district negotiated with the licensed staff union to provide stipends to this group of highly trained educators.(DSC1.4)

● Staff are also encouraged and supported to augment their skills by earning specialty endorsements. (DSC1.4).

● District work over the past year has ensured that our programs are aligned with state standards and are research based. Progress monitoring of TalentEd final evaluations, staff self-evaluations and student achievement results data are used to evaluate the effectiveness of district and school programs and inform professional development activities. The district will provide high quality job embedded professional development opportunities for all staff. Instructional assistants will participate in all professional development offerings in order to increase their capacity to work strategically and effectively with our students(EE2.2, EE2.4, EE2.5)

● The district recently passed a bond and as a result now has wireless access throughout the building to allow for the use of technology in the classroom for student learning. The district will augment its current technology budget with SIG funds to purchase portable devices such as IPADs for classroom use. (EE2.2, EE2.4, EE2.5)

● The district is currently in the process of adopting a new reading curriculum. The adoption committee examined student demographics, school strengths and weaknesses, and teacher effectiveness to identify the characteristics necessary in a reading curriculum to support all students. The committee then examined the state approved reading curriculums using the rubric from the ODE website to identify the two best programs. After piloting two programs and executing a side by side comparison the committee will present the final recommendation to the School Board in May.(EE2.2)

● The early release Monday schedule will continue for the predictable future. Staff use this time to meet in grade level/subject area professional learning communities. Staff examine common formative assessment data, discuss instructional strategies and reflect on the effectiveness of those strategies. We will use a train the trainer model to train staff leaders to build system capacity in this area. (DSC1.4, EE2.4, EE2.5)

● The implementation of the new reading program and the current math curriculum will be closely

monitored in order to respond quickly to professional development needs in these areas. Additionally, a decision will be made as to the timing of a math curriculum adoption. (LDR5.9)

● The current Response To Intervention (RTI) program is ineffective. The existing teacher leader for RTI will be replaced with a stronger, more effective, program leader. Additional professional development will be offered to increase overall staff capacity to incorporate RTI strategies with more fidelity. An outside consultant will be contracted with to provide professional development, support and build system capacity. (EE2.2, EE2.4, EE2.5)

● The number of students impacted by Autism has increased. Currently, staff is ill-equipped to work effectively with this group of students. There is a definite need for robust professional development of all staff in this area to ensure these students are successful. Staff will be trained in Collaborative Problem Solving in order to more effectively educate all students. (DSC1.1)

● The current class schedule needs to be modified in order to meet the new state requirements. The schedule next year will provide increased instructional time at all grade levels across the district. The five period trimester schedule will be replaced by a seven period semester schedule beginning in the fall of 2015. (EE2.2)

● Presently the summer school program is two weeks in length. Resources from this grant will allow the program to expand to a full six weeks. The focus will continue to be core reading and math to strengthen students’ skills. (EE2.2)

● The district has a significant homeless population in addition to families of poverty. In partnership with county and city agencies, enhanced by funding from the SIG, it is the district plan to open a community resources center to provide much needed support and services to our families in crisis. (DSC1.1, EE2.2)

● Many district families live below the poverty line but do not qualify for Head Start. One of the district goals is to establish an in-district, free, pre-school program. Data shows that incoming kindergarten students are behind academically. The addition of a pre-K program would allow these young students to learn the skills necessary to be good readers by the end of the third grade year. (EE2.2)

● District leaders will work diligently with ODE in order to continue to obtain resources and support.

● Since FCS is the only elementary school in the district, there is adequate flexibility with budgeting and staffing to continue to research and implement the best strategies available for the district and the school. Innovative practices will be piloted by select grade levels prior to full-school implementation.

● School leadership is seeking two additional teaching FTE targeted at the K-3 grade levels to reduce class size from 24 to 20. The district is committed to supporting these FTE after the grant ends.(EE2.2, EE2.4, EE2.5)

● School leadership is also requesting two additional classified FTE to support the learning in the classrooms. The district will continue these FTE after the grant ends. (EE2.2, EE2.4, EE2.5)




0not addressed

The LEA in collaboration with school leadership, has designed a plan that specifically references AND addresses the final requirements of the selected model.

OR

The LEA in collaboration with school leadership, has developed specific structures and timelines to finalize a plan to address the final requirements of the selected model.

The LEA has designed a plan that specifically references AND addresses the final requirements of the selected model.

OR

The LEA has developed structures and timelines to finalize a plan to address the final requirements of the selected model.

The LEA has designed a plan that potentially addresses the final requirements of the selected model.

OR

The LEA has developed a timeline to finalize a plan to address the final requirements of the selected model.

The communicated plan does not address the final requirements of the selected model.

(4) The LEA must describe actions it has taken, or will take, to determine its capacity to provide adequate resources and related support to each priority and focus school, identified in the LEA’s application in order to implement, fully and effectively, the required activities of the school intervention model it has selected on the first day of the first school year of full implementation. [respond to 4A and 4B]

(4A Describe actions taken to determine the capacity of the school to fully and effectively implement the selected intervention.)

The planning team examined school processes, staff strengths and leadership capacity with respect to each of the required activities. Their findings/recommendations are included below.

● Replace The Principal: This process has recently been completed and a new principal has been hired. The search process included a wide range of school personnel as well as parent representation. We had already chosen to apply for the SIG grant and use the transformation model. The interview team researched qualities of a turnaround leader and specifically a transformational leader. The interview questions were tailored to elicit characteristics of a transformational leader. The administrator identified and hired has demonstrated instructional leadership and the ability to help staff improve their instruction.

● Implement Rigorous, Transparent, and Equitable Evaluation and Support Systems: We use the Legends evaluation system developed by Salem-Keizer for our teacher evaluation system. We have been using that system for the past two years. This year we went through a peer review process and received great reviews on our system with minor areas of improvement needed. The largest area is in the continued need for staff development for an understanding of the system and how it ties into the Oregon matrix.

We have ongoing training planned in this area and for our student learning and growth goals. The new principal is known for his ability to work with teachers to improve practice through the evaluation system.

● We use the TalentEd system for maintaining our evaluation records and timelines. This tool allows us to monitor the progress of the evaluation system for each teacher. We can then use the analytic capabilities of the software to determine overall strengths and weaknesses. The summative evaluation data is then used to identify areas for professional growth for each educator as well as areas of strength that we may tap into for expertise in professional development.

● The administrator evaluation system is tied to the Educational Leader Standards (ISLLC) for educational leader evaluations. We will also continue to train administrators on the use of this evaluation system. All of our district leaders attended Inter Rater Reliability (IRR) training this past school year. The new principal of Faulconer-Chapman will receive extensive training on both systems prior to the start of the 2015-16 school year.

● Implement an Instructional Program: We have used a comprehensive evaluation and selection process to adopt a new K-5 literacy program for the district and we will use this process in the future for more adoptions. District teachers and leaders are continuing to work on vertical alignment of the curriculum. One early release day per month is spent on vertical alignment endeavors. Professional development activities will focus on how to make data informed curriculum and instruction decisions. The district is continuing to align curriculum with the common core state standards (CCSS). Only research based and approved programs that have been successfully implemented in districts with similar demographics are considered for use in our district.

● Use of Student data: We currently use RTI for screening and progress monitoring of our students by using DIBELS data. The RTI process will be enhanced by a school leader well versed in RTI strategies and able to provide effective professional development for staff. Additionally, the district is contracting with a RTI consultant from Education Northwest to help guide implementation efforts and provide expertise. PBIS data is used to monitor behavior in the district and adjust building procedures as necessary. We will continue to work with our EBISS coach to implement the model further. While school focus has been on Tier I interventions, next year we will be focus on Tier II intercessions.

● Professional Development: Faulconer-Chapman School has improved the professional development opportunities to staff in the past year by tailoring these opportunities through the use of data gathered from staff feedback and TalentEd. Teacher leader positions have been created and individuals who have been recognized for their expertise have assumed these critical positions and led staff development activities. The district will continue to tap the expertise currently in the building as well as strategically use outside experts to accentuate our professional development in the district. Staff feedback has been very positive in regards to using our own staff expertise.

● Increased Learning Time : This past winter, the learning time at all grade levels was examined in relation to the new requirements adopted by the State Board of Education. The building and district have adjusted learning time to comply with the new requirements and maximize learning time throughout the day. Other building practices have also been examined such as: the number of non-academic assemblies, the use of the intercom during instructional time and the number and amount of time spent for recess. The school currently offers two weeks of summer school and would like to expand that to four or six weeks. The district has been offering full-day kindergarten free of charge to all our kindergarten students

for the past five years and with the mandating of full day kindergarten the district will be examining the possibility of offering half-day Pre-k to our families.

● Family and Community Engagement : Faulconer-Chapman currently has several evening events for parents and the community. The school hosts the usual annual concerts, awards presentations, promotions and Title 1 family nights. Also, the school hosts cooking classes and a school-wide carnival. Both the parent-teacher-student organization and the site-council provide feedback and support to the school. Staff and parents work collaboratively on the Sheridan Education Foundation fundraiser to make it a success.

● Operational Flexibility : Faulconer-Chapman is the only elementary school in the district which allows the school to be more responsive to the needs of the students. The district is fully committed to supporting the new leader to make any changes necessary to improve educational outcomes for students.

● Support : The district will continue to assist the school and work closely with the coaches and school support team provided by ODE. The district is fully committed to obtaining assistance outside of the school for all areas in need of extra support. The district is small and central office administration consists of a Superintendent and Special Programs Director. Grant funds will be expended to provide expertise and time to build the capacity of our FCS staff to sustain all interventions implemented.




0not addressed

The LEA in collaboration with school leadership, has taken steps to determine the capacity of the school to fully and effectively implement the selected intervention beginning on the first school day of the implementation year.

The LEA has taken steps to determine the capacity of the school to fully and effectively implement the selected intervention beginning on the first school day of the implementation year.

The LEA has taken steps to determine the capacity of the school to implement the selected intervention.

Steps to determine the capacity of the school were not communicated.

[(4B) Enter response here. Describe actions taken to determine the capacity of the district to support the full and effective implementation of the selected intervention. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

The planning team studied the district structure, including central office personnel and the capacity to support the intervention activities. Currently there is no FTE dedicated specifically to curriculum and instruction. Grant funds will be allocated to a partial FTE to supplement current leadership endeavors.

● This a small district with one K-8 school and one 9-12 high school. There are two central office administrators, a Superintendent and Director of Special Programs. The district has in the past contracted with educational consultants and experts and will continue to do so in order to supplement the expertise of the central office staff. Central office staff are expected to participate in the professional development activities in order to increase capacity to support and sustain the interventions.




0not addressed

The LEA in collaboration with school leadership, has taken steps to determine the capacity of the district to support the full and effective implementation of the selected intervention beginning on the first school day of the implementation year.

The LEA has taken steps to determine the capacity of the district to support the full and effective implementation of the selected intervention beginning on the first school day of the implementation year.

The LEA has taken steps to determine the capacity of the district to support the implementation of the selected intervention.

Steps to determine the capacity of the district to support the intervention were not described.

(5) The LEA must describe actions it has taken, or will take, to align other resources (for example, Title I funding) with the selected intervention.

[(5) Enter response here. Describe how additional resources will be aligned to support the implementation of the selected intervention. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance

District leadership, working with building leadership, has already begun to reorganize staff to better support the chosen initiatives;

● AVID, PBIS, and RTI. Teacher leaders have been identified and a shared leadership model is being implemented. Current budget dollars have been reallocated to support these initiatives such as allocating money for PBIS program incentives and money for teacher stipends to lead the initiatives.

● Title I money will be used to hire additional assistant time to support classroom interventions and for a new reading specialist with a strong background in RTI.

● Title II funding will be used to support the initiatives by providing funds for training in effective teaching strategies (AVID) and to hire on-staff mentors to help support teachers new to the district in the last two years.




0not addressed

The LEA, in The LEA has articulated The LEA has articulated Alignment of additional

collaboration with school leadership, has clearly articulated additional resources available to the school AND has described, specifically, how those resources will be aligned to meet the needs of the school and selected intervention.

additional resources available to the school AND has described how those resources will be aligned to meet the needs of the school and selected intervention.

additional resources available to the school OR has described how additional resources might be aligned to meet the needs of the school and selected intervention.

resources to support the implantation of the selected intervention was not described.

(6) The LEA must describe actions it has taken, or will take, to modify its practices or policies, if necessary, to enable it to implement the selected intervention fully and effectively.

[(6) Enter response here. Describe the necessary changes to practices and policies to support the full and effective implementation of the selected intervention. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

The district is committed to supporting a strong implementation effort in this intervention.

● Funds from the SIG grant will be used to hire a .5 FTE person to oversee the implementation of the intervention. This person will be given authority and support for ensuring full implementation of the programs and initiatives of this intervention.

● The district has had a practice in the past of focusing on an initiative for a year and then moving on. The new Superintendent and the new building leader are committed to building a highly functioning and successful school. A sustained focus on three initiatives will allow for deep implementation and a culture shift leading to improved educational outcomes for all students.

● No district or board policies will need to be changed or modified.




0not addressed

The LEA, in collaboration with school leadership, has identified practices and policies that would potentially inhibit the full and effective implementation of the selected intervention AND has taken steps to adjust said practices / policies.

The LEA has identified practices and policies that would potentially inhibit the full and effective implementation of the selected intervention AND has taken steps to adjust said practices / policies or proposed plans to begin adjusting practices / policies.

The LEA has identified practices and policies that would potentially inhibit the full and effective implementation of the selected intervention.

The need to modify practices or policies was not addressed.

- or -

The LEA, in collaboration with school leadership, has agreed that no policies / practices exist that would prevent the full and effective implementation of the selected intervention.

(7) The LEA must describe how it will provide effective oversight and support for implementation of the selected intervention for each school it proposes to serve (for example, by creating an LEA turnaround office).

(7 Describe how the ELA will provide oversight and support for implementing the selected intervention.)

● While the superintendent is ultimately responsible for the implementation of the transformation model, the principal, with the support of the grant manager, will oversee the execution of the model at the building level. The grant manager will share regular, monthly reports at Site Council, board, staff and, when applicable, association meetings. Timelines and newsletters will be publicized in the local newspaper, on the district website, on other social media and updates will be shared at local agency meetings.

● The planning team will meet quarterly to review progress and make adjustments as necessary.3

strong / thorough response2

average / partial response1

weak / minimal response0

not addressedThe LEA, in collaboration with school leadership, has described mechanisms to oversee and support the implementation of the selected intervention that includes specific articulation of an office or individual responsible for the described activities as well as clear timelines for focused dialogue and adjustment (where necessary).

The LEA has described mechanisms to oversee and support the implementation of the selected intervention that includes reference of an office or individual responsible for the described activities as well as clear timelines for focused dialogue.

The LEA has described mechanisms to oversee the implementation of the selected intervention that includes reference of an office or individual responsible for the described activities and may include loosely defined timelines for check-ins.

Description does not articulate how the LEA will provide oversight and support to the school.

(8) The LEA must describe how it will meaningfully engage families and the community in the implementation of the selected intervention on an ongoing basis.

(8 Describe the ongoing engagement of families and the community regarding the implementation of the selected intervention.)

Current efforts to meaningfully engage families and the community will continue, however, while these activities bring constituents into the school it is important for us to create a two way dialogue with them. We want to encourage deep community involvement in educating our youth. By using the strategies suggested by the Reform Support Network in the March 2014 article “Strategies for Community Engagement in School Turnaround” the district will look to greatly increase parent and community involvement. Initially the district will hire a classified, .5 FTE with SIG funds to help create the infrastructure needed to support family and community engagement. Communication and feedback will be key in this process. The school will need to listen to feedback and adjust as necessary and where possible. Additionally, an objective of this community engagement position will be to create significant opportunities for participation in our schools. This concept and infrastructure will need to be self-sustaining, well designed and easy for families and community to access. The ultimate goal of the position will be to turn our community supporters into leaders and advocates for our school. The community will be informed of progress in the transformation model through presentations at open house events, school newsletters, website, and quarterly newspaper articles.




0not addressed

The LEA, in conjunction with school leadership from each school it commits to serve, has described how they will engage family and community stakeholders in multiple ways and at multiple times throughout the implementation of the proposed intervention model.

The LEA or the school it is committing to serve, have described how they will engage family and community stakeholders throughout the implementation of the proposed intervention model.

The LEA or the school it is committing to serve has described a plan to inform family and community stakeholders throughout the implementation of the proposed intervention model.

No action was taken to engage family and community stakeholders throughout the implementation of the proposed intervention model.

(9) The LEA must describe how it will sustain the reforms after the funding period ends.

[(9) Describe the strategies and plans for sustainability)

In all of the activities we undertake with the funds from the SIG grant we will concentrate on building capacity within our staff and identifying teacher leaders to do a train the trainer model. By approaching these activities in this way we will have a much improved chance to sustain deep implementation into the future. The district will allocate dollars from the general fund in order to sustain a pre-K program, instructional coach, community resource center, two teachers and two instructional assistants. This will be accomplished by focusing general fund dollars to support these programs during the first three years of the grant cycle and then adding these programs to the general fund over the final two years of the grant. As a result the district will need to redirect $450,000 of the general fund to support these programs. With the tapered approach it is $150,000 per year allocation from the general fund.




0not addressed

The LEA will articulate sustainability efforts throughout the implementation, support and oversight of the selected intervention, including a tapered budget as well as necessary PD / training to ensure the improvement efforts last beyond the funding period.

The LEA will articulate sustainability efforts throughout the implementation of the intervention, including a tapered budget as well as necessary PD / training to ensure the improvement efforts last beyond the funding period.

The LEA will articulate sustainability efforts throughout the implementation of the intervention, including a tapered budget.

The LEA did not describe any plans or strategies for sustainability.

(10) The LEA must describe how it will implement, to the extent practicable, in accordance with its selected SIG intervention model(s), one or more evidence-based strategies.

[(10A) Enter response here. Describe the process for evaluating and selecting evidence-based strategies. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

All three of our initiatives (RTI, AVID, PBIS) are evidence based. Each of these initiatives was selected because it aligns with an identified need of the school.

● RTI was selected because it has been in place for a period of time although implementation with fidelity has recently drifted.. When deeply executed, in conjunction with a new literacy program, the process will result in increased student achievement. (DSC1.4, EE2.4, EE2.2, TL4.2)

● Use of PBIS strategies is in its second year in the school and is showing signs of taking root. Deep implementation of this program will result in reduced referrals that will mean more instructional time for students, again, leading to higher student achievement and an increasingly positive school culture. (DSC1.1)

● AVID has been in place for 5 years and has resulted in improved teaching for staff who have been trained. Implementation of AVID school-wide will enhance the teaching and learning throughout the building, again resulting in higher student achievement. (EE2.5, EE2.2)

● This year the district has reviewed available reading programs for adoption K-5 and has adopted Reach for Reading and Benchmark Literacy Writer’s Workshop. Both of these programs are State approved, research based and vertically aligned. The district will contract with the publishers to provide professional development, and will continue with professional development led by teacher leaders throughout the school year. (EE2.2, EE2.3)




0not addressed

The LEA, in conjunction The LEA has described The LEA has described The LEA has not

with school leadership, has described the process used to determine how the strategies to be implemented are evidence-based and align to the needs of the school.

the process used to determine how the strategies to be impleme

nted are evidence-based and align to the needs of the school.

the process used to determine how the strategies to be implemented are evidence-based but has not described alignment to the needs of the school.

describe a process to determine how the selected strategies are evidence-based.

[(10B) Enter response here. Describe the implementation of evidence-based strategies. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

The Planning Team reviewed the current status of the initiatives and found that implementation is weak in all three. In order to create deep implementation, the team will use a combination of current district leadership positions, newly created positions, and outside expertise for these efforts.

The district has an AVID leader and a building level leader these positions are supported through the general fund. We will be sending staff to AVID Summer Institutes and will use a combination of Title IIA and SIG funds to purchase these trainings. We will use grant funds to hire a full time instructional coach to ensure that the instructional strategies learned at AVID Summer Institute are deeply embedded into our teaching pedagogy and build staff capacity for sound instruction. Data will be gathered through classroom observations and will be examined to determine if the use of effective student engagement strategies is increasing.

Both PBIS and RTI leaders have full time teaching responsibilities, as well. Grant funds would be used to hire a full time PBIS/RTI coordinator. The goal of the PBIS/RTI coordinator will be to support deep implementation of both programs into the culture of the school and build staff capacity to sustain these valuable programs after the grant ends. Referral data from the SWIS system will be monitored to measure the reduction of behavioral incidents. Screening and progress monitoring data will be used to measure the effectiveness of reading interventions. The PBIS and RTI teams will meet monthly to review the implementation of these programs and make necessary adjustments.

The instructional coach will also support staff in the implementation of the new literacy program through bi-weekly professional development, observations and collaboration with teaching staff. Data from common formative assessments as well as screening assessments will be used to monitor the success of the program.

Quarterly progress reports for each of the initiatives will be compiled and shared with district leadership, board and community. The quarterly reports will include data to demonstrate measureable student outcomes.




0not addressed

The LEA, in conjunction with school leadership, has described a plan to implement the selected strategies, supported

The LEA has described a plan to implement the selected strategies, supported by evidence of effectiveness.

The LEA has not described a plan to implement the selected strategies or the implementation plan

The LEA does not describe a strategy to implement.

by evidence of effectiveness.

does not describe how the strategies are supported by evidence of effectiveness.

(11) The LEA must describe how it will monitor each priority and focus school, that receives school improvement funds including by-

a) Establishing annual goals for student achievement on the State’s assessments in both reading/language arts and mathematics; and,

b) Measuring progress on the leading indicators as defined in the final requirements.

[(11A) Enter response here. Describe the annual goals for improved student achievement. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

At Faulconer-Chapman nearly 80% of students fall into the combined Disadvantaged subgroup. The 2013-2014 Report Card Rating Details show that the school was rated a Level 1 in both math and reading achievement and an overall Level 3 in Academic Growth. Subgroup growth was a Level 2 and was lowest in reading for combined subgroups. Since Oregon is switching to the Smarter Balanced Assessment during the 2014-15 school year there is no baseline data for the percentage of students meeting the new benchmarks. The building goal will be to increase the number of students meeting benchmark by 5 to 10 percent per year. All students will grow academically at least as well as the average of their academic peers.

Faulconer-Chapman has an overall goal to meet the Focus School exit criteria as outlined below by the end of the 2015-16 school year and become a model school by the end of the 2019-20 school year.

Oregon Proposed Exit Criteria for Focus Schools

Improvement School earns at least 47% of the total available points as detailed on the OregonSchool Report Card; and

Subgroup Growth Has earned more than 30% of the overall available points for subgroup growthas detailed by the Oregon School Report Card; and

Sustained Improvement Plan

Submits a written, detailed account of sustained improvement with data outliningthe improved achievement and growth for all subgroups to be reviewed and ap-proved by a panel of educational experts

Academic Growth Goals (per the Report Card Rating Detail Sheet)

Year 1 (2015-16)

Year 2 (2016-17)

Year 3 (2017-18)

Year 4 (2018-19)

Year 5 (2019-20)

Reading Meet or Exceed Combined

Meet or Exceed Combined




Median Growth Target and Achieve Level 3 in Subgroup Growth





Math Meet or Exceed Combined Median Growth Target and Achieve Level 3 in Subgroup Growth

Meet or Exceed Combined Median Growth Target and Achieve Level 4 in Subgroup Growth




Academic Achievement Goals (per the Report Card Rating Detail Sheet)

Year 1 (2015-16)

Year 2 (2016-17)

Year 3 (2017-18)

Year 4 (2018-19)

Year 5 (2019-20)

Reading Achieve Level 2 for All Students and Combined Subgroup

Achieve Level 3 for All Students and Combined Subgroup




Math Achieve Level 2 for All Students and Combined Subgroup





Sheridan School District is committed to measuring progress based on the following leading indicators:

● Total number of minutes within the school year.● Student participation rates on State assessments in ELA and in mathematics, by student subgroup● Student attendance rate● Student turnover rates● Discipline Incidents● Truancy data● Distribution of teachers on the evaluation system based on the performance level● Attendance rate of teachers

The above data is easily accessible and is compiled at the district level.




0not addressed

The LEA, in collaboration with school leadership, has described annual goals based on reading and mathematics student data, as well as periodic check-in measures, to ensure improved achievement for students.

The LEA has described annual goals based on reading mathematics student data, as well as quarterly check-in measures, to ensure improved achievement for students.

The LEA has described annual goals to ensure improved achievement for students.

The LEA did not describe annual goals.

[(11B) Enter response here. Describe the strategies for monitoring progress. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

Replace the Principal: Completed May of 2015.

Evaluation and Support Systems: Examine TalentEd data on teacher and administrator evaluations semi-annually to determine effectiveness and identify potential candidates for leadership positions, as well as staff who may need additional supports.

Implement Instructional Program: Provide staff professional development and time during early release Mondays to vertically align curriculum and align with Oregon Common Core Standards. Gather data from staff feedback and administrator observation to measure progress annually.

Use of Student Data: Assess all students three times per year to measure academic progress in the core curriculum and identify students for intervention and support. Students receiving the interventions will be progress monitored weekly to assess the effectiveness of the intervention. Teachers will also use common formative assessments in their classrooms to supplement this data and show student progress.

Professional Development: Faulconer-Chapman will keep detailed records of the training that each staff member receives. Administrators and the instructional coach will provide feedback to staff and support the implementation of research based classroom strategies. Staff will be surveyed annually to determine the effectiveness of professional development and future needs.

Increased Learning Time: Staff will follow the schedule currently developed to meet the increased instructional time requirements. Administration will monitor the schedule and instructional time interruptions such as non-academic assemblies and the use of school intercom and implement strategies to minimize these interruptions. Administrators and the instructional coach will monitor the effective use of instructional time through daily observations.

Family and Community Engagement: The family and community engagement coordinator will research best

practice in this area and will create a detailed plan by the end of year one. At least three community engagement activities will occur in year one and increase from this number yearly.

Operational Flexibility: The new principal will have full control of the building budget staff assignments, and schedule from day one. The principal will also have complete control of the content of professional development activities for the building staff.

Support: The school will continue to receive full district support as well as any support provided by ODE such as a coach and school support team.




0not addressed

The LEA, in collaboration with school leadership, has described detailed periodic progress monitoring structures, strategies, and benchmarks to ensure successful implementation of the final requirements of the selected intervention.

The LEA has described periodic progress monitoring structures, strategies, and benchmarks to ensure successful implementation of the final requirements of the selected intervention.

The LEA has somewhat described monitoring structures and benchmarks to ensure successful implementation of the final requirements of the selected intervention.

The LEA did not described plans for monitoring progress.

(12) The LEA must include a timeline delineating the steps it will take to implement the selected intervention in each school identified in the LEA’s application.

[(12) Enter response here. Describe the timeline for implementing the selected intervention. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]Timeline:

Year 1

May 2015 Hire New Principal

June 2015 Receive SIG and Notify Stakeholders

June 2015 Screen and Select Staff

June 2015 Purchase of Chromebooks or IPADS for classrooms to support reading adoption

June 2015 Identify Teacher Leaders (Instructional Coach, PBIS/RTI Coordinator)

June 2015 Identify and Hire Grant Coordinator

June 2015 Meet with RTI expert to Plan Implementation Process to Begin in Fall

August 3-5 AVID Summer institute

August 3-7 ODE School Improvement Summer Academy

August 2015 Meet and greet for new principal

August 2015 Hire community center and community engagement coordinator

August 2015 Literacy Program professional development

August 2015 RTI/PBIS training (classified and certified staff)

September 2015 Hire Pre-K teacher and instructional assistant and begin purchasing furniture and materials

Sept 2015 - May 2016

Professional Development of Instructional Strategies, PBIS, RTI and Evaluation System

October 2015 Community center opening

January 2016 Begin Pre-K program

Year 2

July/August 2016 Host four to six week summer school session

August 2016 Planning Team Retreat to assess year 1 and plan year 2

August 2016 AVID Summer Institute

September 2016 Pre-K Program Full year

October 2016 Community Celebration for Exiting Focus School Status

School Year Continued Professional Development Opportunities

November 2016 Begin Mathematics Curriculum adoption process

May 2017 Adopt Math Curriculum

Year 3

August 2017 Planning Team Retreat to Assess Year 2 and Plan Year 3


August 2017 New Math Curriculum Professional Development

School Year Continued Professional Development Activities

School Year Monitor Progress

Year 4

August 2018 Planning Team Retreat to Assess Year 3 and Plan Year 4 and Sustainability





Year 5

August 2019 Planning Team Retreat to Assess Year 3 and Plan Year 4 and Sustainability








0not addressed

The LEA, in collaboration with school leadership, has described a timeline that includes specific monitoring and review opportunities conducted by the LEA, opportunities for family and community stakeholder updates and review, and specific measures aligned to the final

The LEA has described a timeline that includes monitoring opportunities conducted by the LEA and measures aligned to the final requirements of the selected intervention and the planned activities.

The LEA has described a timeline that includes monitoring opportunities and measures aligned to the planned activities.

The LEA has not described a timeline that supports the implementation of the selected intervention.

requirements of the selected intervention and the planned activities.

(13) The LEA must describe actions it has taken, or will take, to recruit, screen, and select external providers, if applicable, to ensure their quality, and regularly review and hold accountable such providers for their performance.

[(13A) Enter response here. Describe the actions taken to screen and select external providers. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

Not Applicable




0not addressed

The LEA, in collaboration with school leadership and family and community members, has developed a rigorous process to select an external provider that includes an examination of provider's reform plans and strategies that are research based and match the LEA's and school's capacity to implement.

The LEA has developed a rigorous process to select an external provider that includes an examination of provider's reform plans and strategies that are research based and match the LEA's and school's capacity to implement.

The LEA has developed a process to select external providers.

The LEA does not describe a process to select external providers.

Score will not be given if not applicable and will not count against the school’s overall score.

[13B) Enter response here. Describe the processes and timelines for review and accountability of external providers. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

Not Applicable




0not addressed

The LEA, in collaboration with school leadership, has developed and communicated a plan

The LEA has developed and communicated a plan to review regularly the external provider’s contract that holds

The LEA has somewhat developed timelines or protocols for reviewing the external provider’s ongoing work with the

The LEA has not described timelines and protocols for monitoring the progress of the external

to review regularly the external provider’s contract that holds accountable services and performance of the external provider.

accountable services and performance of the external provider.

school. provider.


(14) An LEA must hold the charter school operator, CMO, EMO, or other external provider accountable for meeting these requirements, if applicable.

[(14) Enter response here. Describe accountability plans for external providers here. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

Not Applicable




0not addressed

The LEA, in collaboration with school leadership and family and community members, has developed a plan to review regularly the external provider’s contract that holds accountable services and performance, as well as protocols responding to if the external provider is not fulfilling their responsibility within the contract.

The LEA has developed a plan to review regularly the external provider’s contract that holds accountable services and performance, as well as protocols responding to if the external provider is not fulfilling their responsibility within the contract.

The LEA has developed a plan to review the external provider’s contract that holds accountable services and performance.

The LEA did not describe plans for monitoring external providers.


(15) For an LEA that intends to use the first year of its School Improvement Grants award for planning and other pre-implementation activities for an eligible school, the LEA must include a description of the activities, the timeline for implementing those activities, and a description of how those activities will lead to successful implementation of the selected intervention. If the district selects the turnaround or transformation model for any of its 2014-15 SIG eligible schools, the district also must submit a letter from the union or association in support of the SIG requirements associated with the selected model (see

Appendix B for a sample letter). [respond to 15A, 15B and 15C]

[(15A) Enter response here. Describe the activities, timeline, and description of implementation in the planning year (where applicable). See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

Not Applicable




0not addressed

The LEA, in collaboration with school leadership, has described a plan (including activities and timelines) to preserve current improvement efforts while supporting the pre-implementation and planning for the selected intervention.

The LEA has described an intent to preserve current improvement efforts while supporting the pre-implementation and planning for the selected intervention.

The LEA has described a plan to support the pre-implementation and planning for the selected intervention.

The LEA has selected a pre-implementation year, but does not include a plan or timeline.


[(15B) Enter response here. Describe how the newly hired principal will be introduced and transitioned to the SIG plan. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

Since the new principal was hired before the application was submitted the new principal reviewed the application and assisted in its development. As the plan and implementation move forward the principal will lead the monitoring process and the development of any changes to the plan.




0not addressed

The LEA has described structures, timelines and expectations for the newly hired principal to review the SIG plan and the expectations communicated therein and has described a process for revising the SIG plan based on the newly hired principal’s

The LEA has described timelines for the newly hired principal to review the SIG plan described a process for revising the SIG plan based on the newly hired principal’s input, honoring the input from stakeholders as described in 2A & 2B.

The LEA has described timelines for the newly hired principal to review the SIG plan described.

The LEA plans to rehire a turnaround principal, but does not address the transition to SIG implementation.

Score will not be given if not applicable and will not count against the school’s overall

input, honoring the input from stakeholders as described in 2A & 2B.

score.

[(15C) Acknowledge inclusion of the letter of support from the local teachers’ association.]

We have the support of the local association and the letter is included.




0not addressed

n / a The LEA has included a letter of support from the local teachers’ association in support of the SIG requirements associated with the selected intervention.

n / a No letter is included in the application.


(16) For an LEA eligible for services under subpart 1 or 2 of part B of title VI of the ESEA (Rural Education Assistance Program) that chooses to modify one element of the turnaround or transformation model, the LEA must describe how it will meet the intent and purpose of that element.

[(16) Enter response here. Describe the intent of the element being modified and a plan for meeting the intent. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

Not Applicable




0not addressed

The LEA has thoughtfully articulated the intent of the element it is choosing to modify and has described a plan to meet the intent of the element, including specific goals / measures aligned to the element and

The LEA has referenced the intent of the element it is choosing to modify and has described a plan to meet the intent of the element, including specific goals / measures aligned to the modified element.

The LEA described a plan to meet the intent of the element, including specific goals / measures aligned to the modified element.

The LEA has not described a plan to meet the intent of the modified element.

Score will not be given if not applicable and will not count against the school’s overall

timelines and protocols for adjusting implementation activities if / when those goals aren’t met.

score.

(17) For an LEA that applies to implement an evidence-based, whole-school reform model in one or more eligible schools, the LEA must describe how it will

a. Implement a model with evidence of effectiveness that includes a sample population or setting similar to the population or setting of the school to be served; and

b. Partner with a strategy developer, as defined in the final SIG requirements.

[(17A) Enter response here. Describe implementation of an evidence-based, whole-school reform model with evidence of effectiveness that includes a sample population or setting similar to the population or setting of the school to be served. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

Not Applicable




0not addressed

The LEA, in collaboration with school leadership, has selected a reform strategy aligned to the needs of the school (as determined by the needs assessment) as well as aligned to the population / setting of the selected school.

The LEA has selected a reform strategy aligned to the needs of the school as well as aligned to the population / setting of the selected school.

The LEA has selected a reform strategy aligned to the population / setting of the selected school.

The LEA has not selected a reform strategy aligned to the population / setting of the school.


[(17B) Enter response here. Describe the LEA partnership with a strategy developer. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

Not Applicable




0not addressed

The LEA, in collaboration with

The LEA has developed a rigorous process to

The LEA has developed a process to select a

The LEA has not selected a reform

school leadership and family and community members, has developed a rigorous process to evaluate and select a strategy-developer, ensuring the developer has the capacity and experience to implement the reform strategy and to meet the articulated achievement goals and final requirements.

evaluate and select a strategy-developer, ensuring the developer has the capacity and experience to implement the selected intervention and to meet the articulated achievement goals and final requirements.

strategy-developer, but has deferred evaluation of capacity and experience to implement the selected intervention and to meet the articulated achievement goals and final requirements to said developer.

strategy aligned to the population / setting of the school.


(18) For an LEA that applies to implement the restart model in one or more eligible schools, the LEA must describe the rigorous review process (as described in the final requirements) it has conducted or will conduct of the charter school operator, CMO, or EMO that it has selected or will select to operate or manage the school or schools.

[(18) Enter response here. Describe the review process of the charter school operator, CMO, or EMO. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]

Not Applicable




0not addressed

The LEA, in collaboration with school leadership and family and community members, has developed a rigorous review process to select and monitor the operator selected that takes into account research-based strategies, performance, and continued evaluation and monitoring of

The LEA has developed a rigorous review process to select and monitor the operator selected that takes into account research-based strategies, performance, and continued evaluation and monitoring of implementation.

The LEA has developed a process to select or monitor operators of the school.

The LEA did not address a rigorous review process.


implementation.

The district must provide a budget that indicates the amount of school improvement funds the district will use in each school it proposes to serve and the funds it will use to –

● Conduct LEA-level activities designed to support implementation of the selected school intervention models in the LEA’s priority and focus schools.

Fill in the Table below and submit a copy of the Budget Template for each school for which the district is applying (see LEA Appendix A for the budget template). The budget template aligns the SIG requirements with the 34 CAP Indicators. Each SIG requirement must be present in the budget as it will be the starting point for the school’s improvement plan (CAP) for the 2015-16 school year. If funds other than SIG funds will be used for a SIG requirement, indicate the source of funds in the budget template. If the district expects a school will meet one or more SIG requirements without any associated costs (from SIG funds or other funds), or will not expend any funds on a particular requirement during Year 1, indicate as much on the budget template on an expenditure line with a cost of zero. All SIG requirements, as listed on the indicator sheet of the budget template, must appear on the expenditure sheet of the budget template.

Note: : An LEA’s budget should cover three years of full implementation and be of sufficient size and scope to implement the selected school intervention model in each priority or focus school the LEA commits to serve. Any funding for activities during the pre-implementation period must be included in the first year of the LEA’s budget plan. Additionally, an LEA’s budget may include up to one full academic year for planning activities and up to two years to support sustainability activities. An LEA may not receive more than five years of SIG funding to serve a single school.

An LEA’s budget for each year may not exceed the number of the number of priority and focus schools it commits to serve multiplied by $2,000,000.

Example: LEA Proposing a Planning Year for One or More SchoolsLEA XX BUDGET

Year 1 Budget

(Planning)

Year 2 Budget (Full

implementation)

Year 3 Budget(Full

implementation)

Year 4 Budget (Full

implementation)

Year 5 Budget (Sustainability

Activities)

Five- Year Total

Priority ES #1 $30,000 $240,200 $231,000 $220,000 $150,000 $871,200Focus MS #1 $82,000 $355,000 $310,000 $294,000 $110,000 $1,151,000District-level Activities and/or indirect $30,000 $30,000 $20,000 $80,000Total Budget $112,000 $595,200 $571,000 $544,000 $280,000 $2,102,200

Example: LEA Proposing to Implement a Model in One or More Schools on the First Day of the Upcoming School Year

LEA XX BUDGETYear 1 Budget

Year 2 Budget(Full

implementation)

Year 3 Budget(Full

implemen-tation)

Year 4 Budget

(Sustain- ability

Activities)

Year 5 Budget

(Sustain-ability

Activities)Five-Year Total

Pre-implementa

tion

Year 1(Full

Implementation)

Priority ES #1 $51,000 $265,000 $231,000 $190,000 $130,000 $90,000 $957,000Focus MS #1 $106,000 $392,000 $355,000 $294,000 $160,000 $110,000 $1,471,000District-level Activities and/or indirect $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $30,000 $20,000 $200,000Total Budget $ 864,000 $ 636,000 $ 534,000 $320,000 $220,000 $2,628,000

Note: A District may fill out both charts if it is applying for a planning year for some, but not all, of the schools it proposes to serve.

Planning Year Budget for One or More Schools[DISTRICT NAME] BUDGET

Year 1 Budget

(Planning)

Year 2 Budget (Full

implementation)

Year 3 Budget(Full

implementation)

Year 4 Budget (Full

implementation)

Year 5 Budget (Sustainability

Activities)

Five- Year Total

[School Name][School Name]District-level Activities and/or indirectTotal Budget

Budget for One or More Schools Implementing a Model on the First Day of the Upcoming School Year:SHERIDAN SCHOOL DISTRICT 48J BUDGET

Year 1 Budget

Year 2 Budget(Full

implement-tation)

Year 3 Budget(Full

implemen-tation)

Year 4 Budget

(Sustain- ability

Activities)

Year 5 Budget

(Sustain-ability

Activities)Five-Year Total

Pre-implementa

tion

Year 1(Full

Implementation)

Faulconer-Chapman School $791,200 $728,700 $728,700 $608,700 $488,700 $3,346,000[School Name]District-level Activities and/or indirect $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $20,000 $100,000Total Budget $811,200 $748,700 $748,700 $628,700 $508,700 $3,446,000

D. ASSURANCES: A district must include the following assurances in its application for a School Improvement Grant.By submitting this application, the district assures that it will do the following (check each box):

X Use its School Improvement Grant to implement fully and effectively an intervention in each Priority and Focus school, that the LEA commits to serve consistent with the final requirements;

X Establish annual goals for student achievement on the State’s assessments in both reading/language arts and mathematics and measure progress on the leading indicators in section III of the final requirements in order to monitor each Priority and Focus school that it serves with school improvement funds, and established goals (approved by the SEA) to hold accountable its Tier III schools that receive school improvement funds;

X Report to the SEA the school-level data required under section III of the final requirements, including baseline data for the year prior to SIG implementation;

X Ensure that each Priority and Focus school, that it commits to serve receives all of the State and local funds it would receive in the absence of the school improvement funds and that those resources are aligned with the interventions.

A complete application includes:

▢ Completely fill out cover sheet with superintendent’s signature and school board chairperson’s signature.

▢ Part A of application: Fill in the Schools to be Served table.

Part B of application:

▢ Use the 34 Comprehensive Achievement Indicators within Indistar to provide the district and school a basis for the needs assessment.

▢ For the Transformation and Turnaround Models only, submit a letter of support from the Superintendent regarding hiring a turnaround principal (see Appendix C for an example).

▢ Respond to Part B, numbers one through twelve.

▢ Respond to Part B, numbers thirteen through eighteen where applicable.

▢ Number 15C includes a letter of support from the Association regarding support for the SIG requirements.

Part C of application:

▢ Fill in the District Budget table.

▢ Submit a budget for each school by completing a separate SIG Budget Template for each school.

▢ Part D: Check the assurance boxes.

web viewthe application should be sent as a microsoft word document, not. ... roberta ashlock ......

Documents