1. Data Driven: Using District Comparisons Capital Region ESD October 22, 2014 Tim Stensager, Director of Data Governance Division of Assessment and Student Information Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction

4. Intervent ion Code Total Distinct Students Enrolled At Any Time During the Year Total Incidents Resulting in SS/LS/EX % of Incidents (not distinct students) Total Distinct Students with Incidents Resulting in SS/LS/EX % of Interventions (distinct students) % Students with Incidents Resulting in SS/LS/EX NOT RETURNED: Total Distinct Students with Incidents Resulting in SS/LS/EX and with NO Student Enrollment on May 31st % of Students with SS/LS/EX and with NO Student Enrollment on May 31st Total Distinct Students WITHOUT SS/LS/EX NOT RETURNED: Total Distinct Students WITHOUT SS/LS/EX and with NO Student Enrollment on May 31st % of Students WITHOUT SS/LS/EX and with NO Student Enrollment on May 31st Total Dropou t Rate EX1,124,5352,5293.3%2,3214.7%0.2%27311.8%1,079,81618,673 LS1,124,5354,3755.7%4,0278.1%0.4%3087.6%1,079,81618,673 SS1,124,53569,76391.0%43,48387.3%3.9%1,0322.4%1,079,81618,673 Total1,124,53576,667100%49,831100%4.4%1,6133.24%1,079,81618,6731.7%1.8%

5. This represents.2% of total students

6. School Year of 2012-13 State Total Distinct Student Enrollment State % of All Enrolled Total Distinct Students1195293100% Hispanic / Latino of any race(s)21414317.9% American Indian / Alaskan Native163501.4% Asian751336.3% Black / African American482654.0% Native Hawaiian / Other Pacific Islander96580.8% White62076651.9% Two or More Races667705.6% Not Provided570.0%

8. Total Distinct Students1195293100%47351 Hispanic / Latino of any race(s)21414317.9%11853 American Indian / Alaskan Native163501.4%1316 Asian751336.3%1247 Black / African American482654.0%5586 Native Hawaiian / Other Pacific Islander96580.8%655 White62076651.9%23091 Two or More Races667705.6%3428 Not Provided570.0%2

9. No Disproportionality

11. Small Disproportionality at + or – 5%

16. XXXXSchool District

19. If you are at -10.0, your FRL students graduated at 10 percentage points lower than the rest of the students. If you are a school on the 0.0 axis, your FRL students graduated at the same rate as the rest of the students

20. If your school is on the 0.0 Axis, you graduated 76% If you are on the -20.0 axis, you graduated 56% (76% - 20% = 56%)

21. This school has higher than state Avg. Grad rates of 86% (76% state avg + 10% = 86%) Their students on FRL graduated At the same rate as the other Students – since they are at 0.0 On the horizontal scale. This school has higher than state Avg Grad rates of 91% (76% = 15%) But their FRL students graduated At a rate 20% lower than all students This school had a lower grad rate From state avg of 46% (76% - 30%) They had no FRL disproportionality Since they are on the 0.0 axis for FRL disproportionality.

22. Strategic Tactical Annual Monthly Weekly Daily Bi-Annual Teacher Grade Lev/ Dept District State/Leg/Gov/Policy OSPI/ESD School Brd School Federal Gov Time Student Information System (SIS) K-12 Warehouse/CEDARS