FLDOE Title I Update FASFEPA Technical Assistance Forum September 16, 2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
School Improvement Grants Webinar – Tier I and II Schools April 21, 2010.
Advertisements

April 15, Through the SIG program, the United States Education Department (USED) requires state educational agencies (SEAs) to use three tiers to.
Presented by : Delaware Department of Education March 15, 2011.
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION APRIL 27, 2010 VANDERBILT MARRIOTT NASHVILLE, TENNESSEE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT APPLICATION ROLLOUT 1.
MSDE Alternative Governance Plan Development School: James Madison Middle School January 2012.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY WAIVER Overview of Federal Requirements August 2, 2012 Alaska Department of Education & Early Development.
North Carolina ESEA Flexibility Request Frequently Asked Questions April 30, 2012 April 27,
Dr. Kathleen M. Smith Director, Office of School Improvement (804) (804) (Cell) Dr. Dorothea Shannon.
1 Marie Izquierdo & Pablo G. Ortiz. Prioritizing Tiered Support to Schools schools defined as “persistently low- achieving” by the requirements.
FY 2012 SIG 1003G LEAD PARTNER REQUEST FOR SEALED PROPOSAL (RFSP) BIDDERS’ CONFERENCE February 7, 2011.
1 Visions of Community 2011 March 12, 2011 The Massachusetts Tiered System of Support Madeline Levine - Shawn Connelly.
1 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT COHORT 2 LODI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION APRIL 5, 2011.
Support for the Change, Challenge, and Commitment All Maryland Students College and Career Ready.
INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP FOR DIVERSE LEARNERS Susan Brody Hasazi Katharine S. Furney National Institute of Leadership, Disability, and Students Placed.
School Improvement Grants. Over 13,000 schools are currently under some form of improvement status schools = 5% of schools in some form of restructuring.
Moving to Schoolwide from a Targeted Assistance Program Karen Seay, Title I-A Coordinator Shasta Oswald, School Improvement Coordinator August 28, 2014.
1 Tier 1 Education: Review Participant Training January AmeriCorps External Reviewer Training.
MONITORING INDISTAR® STATE-DETERMINED IMPROVEMENT PLANNING TOOL.
Subtitle 1003(g) School Improvement Grants April 2, 2012.
M AXIMIZING F LEXIBILITY IN THE A DMINISTRATION OF F EDERAL G RANTS July 17, 2013.
Iowa’s Teacher Quality Program. Intent of the General Assembly To create a student achievement and teacher quality program that acknowledges that outstanding.
Federal Program Monitoring and Support Division Charlotte Hughes, Director Donna Brown, Section Chief.
School Improvement Grants (SIG) Overview Adapted from LACOE Intervention for for Persistently Lowest- Achieving Schools 1.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANTS (SIG): A New Opportunity for Turning Around Low-Performing High Schools January 29, 2010.
School Improvement Grants March, Overview American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Goals and purpose of SIG grants Definition of “persistently lowest-
“An Act Relative to the Achievement Gap” Report of the Superintendent Melinda J. Boone, Ed.D. March 4, 2010.
Indistar Summit – Coaching with Indistar February 2012 Presenters: Yvonne Holloman, Ph.D. Associate Director, Office of School Improvement Michael Hill.
Mississippi Department of Education Office of School Recovery November 18, :30-4:30 Committee of Practitioners Meeting School Improvement Grant 1003(g)
IMPLEMENTING THE SIG REQUIREMENTS 1.  Students who attend a State’s persistently lowest- achieving schools deserve better options and can’t afford to.
Maryland’s Journey— Focus Schools Where We’ve Been, Where We Are, and Where We’re Going Presented by: Maria E. Lamb, Director Nola Cromer, Specialist Program.
Race to the Top (RTTT) Overview of Grant Competition Goals and Requirements 1.
Federal Programs Fall Conference Title I and the ACIP Logan Searcy and Beth Joseph.
Race to the Top Scope of Work Broward County Public Schools.
School Improvement Grant Update Fall Grant Purpose School Improvement Grants (SIG), authorized under section 1003(g) of Title I of the Elementary.
© 2009 American Institutes for Research ® State-wide Systems of Support: Integrating High School Redesign Efforts Joseph Harris, Project Director Jenny.
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction March 17, 2011 Presented by: California Department of Education.
HEE Hui For Excellence in Education June 6, 2012
Mississippi Department of Education Office of Innovative Support February 17, 2010 Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting.
QUESTIONS MAY BE ED DURING THIS SESSION, OR AFTERWARD TO: Welcome to the SIG Cohort III Webinar Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Carlas McCauley Educational Program Specialist U.S. Department of Education Office of Elementary and Secondary Education
Considerations for Technical Assistance School Improvement Grant 1.
Virginia Department of Education Office of School Improvement Office of Program Administration and Accountability April 19, 2011.
Title I 2010 Spring Admin. Meeting Spring Title I Administrative Meeting Maryland State Department of Education April 13-14, 2010 Presented by: Maria E.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
Title I and Families. Purpose of Meeting According to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, schools are required to host an Annual Meeting to explain.
ESEA FLEXIBILITY: AN OVERVIEW September 26, 2011.
Choosing a Reform Model District Wide Stakeholder Meeting 1.
School Improvement Overview September 17-18, 2015 Tyson Carter School Improvement Coordinator Idaho State Department of Education
Schoolwide Programs – New Guidance Karen Seay, Director Federal Policy and ESEA Research Division New Directors’ Training September 17-18, 2015
Title I, IDEA Part B and IDEA Part C September 2, 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act Use of Funds Guidance 1.
Title I Updates Donna Brown, Director North Carolina Department of Public Instruction Federal Program Monitoring and Support September 29,
Presented By WVDE Title I Staff June 10, Fiscal Issues Maintain an updated inventory list, including the following information: description of.
AB Miller High School Community Meeting April 13, 2010.
Confidential 1 Regional Achievement Center 3 Essex and Hudson Counties School Improvement Plan April 2013.
Title I 1003(g) School Improvement Grants Presented by: WVDE Title I Staff March 9, 2010.
Center on School Turnaround at WestEd. 2 3 Race to the Top School Improvement Grants Alignment of Existing Federal Resources ESEA Flexibility Lowest-
Office of School Turnaround Center for Accountability and Improvement, Ohio Department of Education 25 South Front Street, Columbus, Ohio
S CHOOL I MPROVEMENT G RANTS An Overview of Fiscal Year (FY) DRAFT.
Administering Federal Programs-A Charter School Perspective Dr. Vanessa Nelson-Reed Federal Program Administrator NCDPI.
Virginia Department of Education March 5,  The Virginia Department of Education (VDOE) was informed that on March 3, 2010, USED posted the states’
TTIPS Model Overview.
ESEA Flexibility: An overview
Federal Programs Committee of Practitioners Meeting
January 2010 Marilyn Peterson Data and Federal Programs
The Role a Charter School Plays in its Charter Authorizer’s Submission of the Consolidated Federal Programs Application Joey Willett, Unit of Federal Programs.
SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT
Filling Your Buckets: Aligning it ALL!
School Improvement Grants
ESEA Flexibility: An overview
Developing and Revising Schoolwide Plans
Presentation transcript:

FLDOE Title I Update FASFEPA Technical Assistance Forum September 16, 2009

Bureau of Student Assistance Bureau reorganized to provide more focused support to all LEAs Regions match DA regions

Title I, Part A Application Review –Thorough review –Tied to data –Leads to improved student performance –Budget matches narrative –Consultation with the REDs

School Improvement – 1003(a) Applications released July 28, nitiativehttps://app1.fldoe.org/bsa/SchoolImproveI nitiative Applications Due: August 31, 2009 Strategies must be comprehensive and lead to improved student achievement Developed in Consultation with REDs Contact: Program Specialist or

1003(g) - Purpose Proposed requirements released August 25, 2009 Utilize school improvement funds (section 1003(g)) to turn around or close down persistently low-achieving schools: –Identify and serve the lowest-achieving schools in the state; –Support only the most rigorous interventions that hold promise of rapid improvements in student achievement and culture; –Provide sufficient resources over several years to implement interventions; and –Measure progress in achievement results.

1003(g) - Identifying and Serving the Lowest- achieving Schools States must identify schools within three categories: –Tier I: The lowest achieving 5% or 5 Title I schools in need of improvement, corrective action, restructuring, whichever number of schools is greater –Tier II: Equally achieving secondary non-Title I schools that are Title I eligible –Tier III: The remaining Title I schools in need of improvement, corrective action, or restructuring States should give priority to awarding grants to LEAs that will serve both Tier I and Tier II schools

1003(g) - Supporting the Most Rigorous Interventions Tier I and II schools must implement one of the following: –Turnaround model –Restart model –School closure –Transformation model If the LEA has more than nine Tier I and Tier II schools the same intervention can not be implemented in more than 50% of the schools

1003(g) – Turnaround Model  Replace the school principal and at least 50% of staff;  Adopt a new governance structure, which may include a “turnaround office”;  Implement a new or revised instructional program;  Implement strategies to recruit, place, and retain effective staff;  Provide ongoing, high-quality, job-embedded professional development;  Promote the continuous use of student data to inform and differentiate instruction;  Establish schedules and strategies that increase instructional time for students and time for collaboration and professional development; and  Provide appropriate social-emotional and community- oriented services and supports for students.

1003(g) – Restart Model  Close a school and reopen it under a:  Charter school operator;  Charter management organization (CMO); or  Education management organization (EMO).  Must be selected through a rigorous review process.  Must admit, within the grades it serves, all former students who wish to attend the school.

1003(g) – School Closure An LEA closes a school and enrolls the students who attended that school in other, high-achieving schools in the LEA, which may include charter schools.

1003(g) – Transformation Model 1. Developing teacher and school leader effectiveness: The LEA must-- –Use evaluations that are based primarily on student growth to improve teachers’ and school leaders’ performance; –Identify and reward school staff who improve student achievement outcomes and identify and remove those who do not; –Replace the principal who led the school prior to commencement of the transformation model; –Provide staff ongoing, high-quality, job-embedded professional development aligned with the school’s instructional program and designed to ensure effective teaching and learning and successful implementation of school reform strategies; and –Implement strategies designed to recruit, place, and retain effective staff.

1003(g) – Transformation Model 1. Developing teacher and school leader effectiveness: The LEA may-- –Provide additional compensation to attract and retain high-quality educators; –Institute a system for measuring changes in instructional practices resulting from professional development ; and/or –Ensure that the school is not required to accept a teacher without the mutual consent of the teacher and principal, regardless of the teacher’s seniority.

1003(g) – Transformation Model 2. Comprehensive instructional reform strategies. The LEA must-- –Use data to identify and implement comprehensive, research-based, instructional programs that are vertically aligned and aligned with state standards; and –Promote the continuous use of individualized student data (such as from formative, interim, and summative assessments) to inform and differentiate instruction to meet the needs of individual students.

1003(g) – Transformation Model 2. Comprehensive instructional reform strategies. The LEA may-- –Conduct periodic reviews to ensure that the curriculum is being implemented with fidelity, is having the intended impact on student achievement, and is modified if ineffective; –Implement schoolwide response-to- intervention/instruction; –(3) In secondary schools--

1003(g) – Transformation Model 2. Comprehensive instructional reform strategies. The LEA may, in secondary schools— –Increase rigor by offering opportunities for students to enroll in advanced coursework, early-college high schools, dual enrollment programs, or thematic learning academies and provide support to students; –Improve student transition from middle to high school through summer transition programs or freshman academies; and/or –Increase graduation rates through, for example, credit- recovery programs, smaller learning communities, and acceleration of basic reading and mathematics skills.

1003(g) – Transformation Model 3. Extending learning time and creating community oriented schools. The LEA must-- –Provide more time for students to learn core academic content by expanding the school day, the school week, or the school year or increasing instructional time during the school day.

1003(g) – Transformation Model 3. Extending learning time and creating community oriented schools. The LEA must-- –Provide more time for teachers to collaborate, including time for horizontal and vertical planning; –Provide more time or opportunities for enrichment activities for students by partnering, as appropriate, with other organizations, such as universities, businesses, and museums; and –Provide ongoing mechanisms for family and community engagement.

1003(g) – Transformation Model 3. Extending learning time and creating community oriented schools. The LEA may- –Partner with parents, faith- and community-based organizations, health clinics, the police department, and others to create safe school environments that meet students’ social, emotional and health needs; –Extend or restructure the school day to add time for such strategies as advisory periods to build relationships between students, faculty, and other school staff; or –Implement approaches to improve school climate and discipline, such as implementing a system of positive behavioral supports or taking steps to eliminate bullying and student harassment.

1003(g) – Transformation Model 4. Providing operating flexibility and sustained support. The LEA must-- –Give the school sufficient operating flexibility (including staffing, calendars/time, and budgeting) to implement a comprehensive approach to substantially improve student achievement; and –Ensure that the school receives ongoing, intensive technical assistance and related support from the LEA, the SEA, or a designated external lead partner organization (such as a school turnaround organization or an EMO).

1003(g) – Transformation Model 4. Providing operating flexibility and sustained support. The LEA may-- –Allow the school to be run under a new governance arrangement, such as a turnaround division within the LEA or SEA; and/or –Implement a weighted per-pupil school- based budget formula.

1003(g) – Strongest Commitment Defined as the LEA’s efforts to: –Analyze the needs of its schools and match the interventions to those needs; –Design interventions consistent with this notice; –Recruit, screen, and select external providers to ensure quality; –Embed the interventions in a longer-term plan to sustain gains in achievement; –Align other resources with the interventions; –Modify its practices, if necessary, to enable it to implement the interventions fully and effectively; and –Sustain the reforms after the funding period ends.

1003(g) – Strongest Commitment The SEA must also consider: –An LEA’s capacity to implement the proposed interventions; and –May approve to serve only those schools for that the LEA can implement fully and effectively one of the proposed interventions.

1003(g) – General Application Requirements LEAs must serve each Tier I school using one of the four interventions, unless it does not have the capacity to serve all. If the LEA has more than nine Tier I and Tier II schools the same intervention can not be implemented in more than 50% of the schools The LEA must include in its application a budget indicating how it will allocate school improvement funds among the Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III schools it commits to serve.

1003(g) – Providing Sufficient Resources States are required to allocate sufficient school improvement funds to LEAs to match, as closely as possible, an LEA’s budget for implementing one of the four interventions. The notice recommends $500,000 for each Tier I school. Period of availability may be extended beyond September 30, 2011

Waiver Requests USDE issued guidance (July 7, 2009) Input from all stakeholders –COP (July 8, 2009) –LEA (August 5, 2009) –Public (August 6, 2009) Request submitted to USDE Anticipate a one-month turn around for USDE approval

Waiver Requests Cap on Financial Incentives and Rewards Title I Schoolwide Program Eligibility Inclusion of ARRA in the Set-aside for CWT/SES and the PPA for SES Restriction on SINI and/or DINI from Becoming an Approved SES Provider Requirements for Highly Qualified Paraprofessionals in Newly Identify Title I Schools Limitation Prohibiting a Waiver of the Carry-over Limitation to Only Once in Three Years Inclusion of ARRA in the Hold-harmless Reduction in Funds Inclusion of ARRA in the Cap on School-Level Reduction in Funds Use of Title I, Part A for Additional Paraprofessionals in Newly Identified Title I Schools

Parental Involvement LEA Parental Involvement Plans Due October 2, 2009 –Reviewed by Department Staff to ensure compliance –Review Rubrics Guidance Document Frequently Asked Questions –

Parental Involvement Future Plans Evaluate and revise the state PIP to mirror the requirements of the LEA Parent Advisory Council Connecting Required Plans –Online system based on the template –Linked to SIP, DIP, and LEA Plan Parental Involvement Toolkit Training modules for parent involvement

Thank you! Lisa Bacen