1. Presented by : Delaware Department of Education March 15, 2011

2. Students who attend a States persistently lowestachieving schools deserve better options and cant afford to wait Quality, not quantity, of LEA applications and implementation Need to build capacity and supports at all levels Not a oneyear activity – up to 3 years

3. Two out of six applications were awarded last summer: Brandywine School District, Mount Pleasant High School Seaford School District, Seaford High School See http://www.doe.k12.de.us/infosuites/staff/fedstprog/TitleIPa rtA/1003g.shtml http://www.doe.k12.de.us/infosuites/staff/fedstprog/TitleIPa rtA/1003g.shtml

4. Implement one of 4 interventions (same as Race to the Top) in persistently low-achieving Title I schools and Title I- eligible secondary schools Funds may be used across 3 years, but the majority of funds must be expended to fully implement interventions in Year 1 of the award An LEA must apply for at least $50,000, but no more than $2,000,000 per year for each eligible school it commits to serve

5. Tier I = 5 lowest performing Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring Tier II = 5 lowest performing Title I eligible secondary schools (but not participating in Title I) regardless of improvement status Tier III = all other Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring

6. Dover High School Glasgow High School Howard High School Positive Outcomes Charter Stubbs Elementary School

7. Brandywine High School Delmar High School Lake Forest High School Stanton Middle School Dickinson High School

8. State FY 11 $1,626,978 regular SIG – 5% for state administration =$1,545,629 + $6,870,000 carryover from FY 10 $8,415,629 for LEAs to turn around schools

9. 1. State Partnership Zone schools that are in SIG Tiers I and II 2. Other SIG Tier I and II schools as follows: 1. Rank of both Tier I and Tier II schools lowest to highest 2. Determine LEA demonstrated capacity within the allocation 3. Fund LEA applications in rank order, lowest to highest, of performance in LEA applications that demonstrated capacity

10. 3. Tier III schools - only where Tier I and/or Tier II schools are already being funded and where Tier III schools choose to implement one of the four SIG models 4. Tier III schools - only where Tier I and/or Tier II schools are already being funded or in LEAs where there are not Tier I or II schools that choose not to implement one of the four SIG model

11. There are no major changes to the states application to US Ed. There are a few changes to the federal non-regulatory guidance New guidance allows for pre-implementation activities Modifications and new questions are noted in the non-regulatory guidance. http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/sigguidance11012010.pdf There are changes to the LEA application Updated budget section (like Consolidated Application) New questions about pre-implementation activities Rubric developed for LEA self-assessment prior to submission

12. Examples of how LEAs may use funds before the 2011-2012 school year include, but are not limited to: holding parent and community meetings to review school performance, discuss the new model to be implemented, and develop school improvement plans in line with the model selected; recruiting and hiring the incoming principal, leadership team, and instructional staff; conducting a rigorous review process to select, and then contracting with, a charter management organization, an education management organization, or an external provider; providing professional development that will enable staff to effectively implement new or revised instructional programs that are aligned with the schools comprehensive instructional plan and intervention model.

13. To extend the period of availability of school improvement funds for the SEA and all of its LEAs to September 30, 2014. To permit LEAs to allow their Tier I and Tier II Title I participating schools that will implement a turnaround or restart model to start over in the school improvement timeline. Waive the 40 percent poverty eligibility threshold to permit LEAs to implement a schoolwide program in a Tier I or Tier II Title I participating school that does not meet the poverty threshold. To extend the period of availability of FY 2009 carry over school improvement funds to September 30, 2014.

14. LEA application opened 3/14/11 LEA application closes 4/15/11 SEA initial reviews complete 4/22/11 Approved applications forwarded to Associate Secretary and Secretary for review LEAs with substantially approvable applications notified of revisions needed LEAs with unfunded applications notified

15. LEA resubmissions due 5/6/11 SEA second round reviews complete 5/11/11 Approved applications forwarded to Associate Secretary and Secretary for review LEAs with additional revisions needed notified LEA subsequent re-submissions due 5/18/11 SEA final re-reviews completed 5/25/11 Goal is to have all approved by 6/1/11

16. School Closure EMO/CMO Restart Transformation Turnaround

17. LEA closes a school and enrolls the students who attended that school in other schools in the LEA that are higher achieving from guidance LEA has discretion to determine which schools are located within a reasonable proximity to a closed school

18. The LEA must engage in open dialogue with families and the school community early in the closure process Funds may not be used in receiving school

19. Only 1 year may be funded parent and community outreach services to help parents and students transition to a new school Other costs that cannot be paid Anything that is a regular responsibility of the LEA Unless the costs are directly attributable to the school closure and exceed the costs the LEA would have incurred in the absence of the closure

20. LEA converts a school or closes and reopens a school under a charter school operator, a charter management organization (CMO), or an education management organization (EMO) Must enroll any former student who wishes to attend the school

21. LEA must select provider through a rigorous review process. LEA Application must identify Rigorous process of selection Potential model providers Model providers ability & interest

22. Provider may require student/parent agreements covering student behavior, attendance, or other commitments related to student achievement Provider may not require students to meet certain academic standards prior to enrolling in the school

23. If the school is restarting as a charter school, then all requirements under state law and regulation for charter schools must be followed.

24. Overview of required and permissible elements Review of self-assessment rubric

25. 1003(g) SIG Success Plan Expectations 1003(g) SIG Grant Overview

26. ESPES Website: http://www.doe.k12.de.us/dess/espes.shtml#1003G http://www.doe.k12.de.us/dess/espes.shtml#1003G USDOE Website: http://www2.ed.gov/programs/sif/index.html Center for Innovation and Improvement Website: http://www.centerii.org/http://www.centerii.org/