GA SPDG’s Lessons Learned Laura Brown Lynn Holland + SPDG GPRA Results Jennifer Coffey Facilitators: Jennifer Coffey, OSEP Project Officer John Lind, SIGnetwork, University of Oregon
Zoom Telephone *6
GA SPDG’s Lessons Learned Laura Brown Lynn Holland
Jennifer Coffey, PhD SPDG Program Lead SPDG GPRA Results Jennifer Coffey, PhD SPDG Program Lead
GPRA Measure – Evidence-based Professional Development Measure 1.1 of 1: Percentage of SPDG-funded initiatives that meet benchmarks for use of evidence-based professional development practices to support the attainment of identified competencies.
Actual (or date expected) Year Target Actual (or date expected) Status 2007 Set Baseline 30.5 Baseline 2008 40.0 (September, 2009) Pending 2009 60.0 2010 Not available. Not Collected 2011 2012 50 Historical Actual 2013 45 2014 3 2015 72.4 2016 70.0 75 Target Exceeded 2017 92 2018 77.0 86 2019 82.0 2020 85.0
Percentage That Met Target Program Measure 1 Number of Initiatives Percentage That Met Target Year Met Target Did Not Meet Target Total Initiatives 1 2 5 7 71% 3 60% 4 100% 11 6 67% Tot 24 29 83%
Performance assessment Program Measure 1 Initiative Year Selection Training Coaching Performance assessment Support A1 A2 B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 C1 C2 D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 E1 E2 Count of 1: 1 3 2 4 Count of 2: 6 9 7 5 10 Count of 3: 18 16 19 15 11 12 Count of 4: 21 8 13 14
Components to Improve B(5) Training: Trainers (the people who trained PD participants) are trained, coached, and observed. C(2) Coaching: SPDG coaches use multiple sources of information in order to provide assistive feedback to those being coached and also provide appropriate instruction or modeling. D(3) Performance Assessment: Implementation fidelity and student outcome data are shared regularly with stakeholders at multiple levels (SEA, regional, local, individual, community, other agencies).
D(4): Goals are created with benchmarks for implementation and student outcome data, and successes are shared and celebrated. D(5): Participants are instructed in how to provide data to the SPDG Project. E(2): Leadership at various education levels (SEA, regional, LEA, school, as appropriate) analyzes feedback regarding barriers and successes and makes the necessary decisions and changes, including revising policies and procedures to alleviate barriers and facilitate implementation
GPRA Measure – Improving Implementation Measure 2.1 of 2: The percentage of Special Education State Personnel Grant funded Initiatives that meet benchmarks for improvement in implementation of SPDG-supported practices over time.
Actual (or date expected) Year Target Actual (or date expected) Status 2006 Not available. 37.5 Target Not In Place 2007 87.5 2008 Set Baseline Not Collected 2009 61.0 2010 75.0 2011 2012 18 2013 50 Historical Actual 2014 37 2015 58 2016 60.0 74 Target Exceeded 2017 72 2018 65.0 55 Target Not Met 2019 2020 70.0
Percentage That Met Target Program Measure 2 Number of Initiatives Percentage That Met Target Year Met Target Did Not Meet Target Total Initiatives 1 2 3 5 60% 4 50% 6 11 55% 33% 7 100% Tot 12 10 22
Setting Targets Challenging but achievable Analyzing your history and the outcomes other initiatives are experiencing. Set the target for your out-years Work with your Project Officer Targets can be changed
GPRA Measure – Sustaining Implementation Measure 2.2 of 2: The percentage of Special Education State Personnel Grant-funded initiatives that meet targets for the use of funds to sustain SPDG-supported practices.
Actual (or date expected) Year Target Actual (or date expected) Status 2012 Not available. 32 Target Not In Place 2013 88 Historical Actual 2014 63 2015 90 2016 85.0 78 Target Not Met 2017 83 2018 Target Exceeded 2019 2020
Percentage That Met Target Program Measure 3 Number of Initiatives Percentage That Met Target Year Met Target Did Not Meet Target Total Initiatives 1 2 5 7 71% 3 100% 4 10 11 91% 6 Tot 26 29 90%
Setting Targets Part II
What challenges do you foresee… If we set targets for you?
Planning our Professional Learning
What are your needs? Around MTSS?