South Dakota School Improvement Fund Application (MS …



South Dakota

School Improvement Fund

State Application

Section 1003(g)

Fiscal Year 2007

School Improvement Fund

Section 1003(g)

CFDA # 84.377A

November 2007

The South Dakota Department of Education (SDDOE) solicited input from department staff, school support team members (SST), and the Committee of Practitioners (COP) in the development of this application. In addition, the COP will further review the application during its regularly scheduled fall meeting on November 27, 2007. Recommendations will be incorporated in the school application as appropriate. The application is signed and submitted by the South Dakota state Title I Director, Diane R. Lowery.

Department of Education Representative Signature Date

Part A – Funds Retained by the SEA

Each SEA must:

1. Identify the amount of funds the SEA will retain from section 1003(g) and 1003(a) for State-level activities.

SDDOE will retain 5% of each of the funding sources for state level activities. $18,091 will be reserved from section 1003(g) and $74, 548 from section 1003(a).

2. Describe the SEA’s current statewide system of support required under section 1117 and how the SEA will use funds available to the SEA under section 1003(g) and 1003(a) to build capacity at the LEA and school levels to improve student achievement.

Statewide System of Support

The state provides technical assistance to districts with schools in improvement through the School Support Team (SST) and seven regional Educational Service Agencies (ESAs). SDDOE is also supported in its work by its comprehensive center and McREL. The groups that comprise the SD statewide system of support and some of their functions are:

South Dakota Department of Education (SDDOE)

1. SITAT (School Improvement Technical Assistance Team) represents the SD Department of Education and provides leadership and service in coordinating district/school improvement efforts. This group is currently working with the NCCC, McRel, and the Center on Innovation and Improvement to determine ways to build capacity at the school district level for school improvement.

2. Prioritize assistance to districts and schools.

3. Develop a statewide system of support that, at a minimum, includes the following

approaches:

a. Establishing school support teams for assignment to, and working in, districts and schools in school improvement.

b. Devising additional approaches to providing the assistance, such as providing assistance through institutions of higher education and educational service agencies or other local consortia, and private providers of scientifically based technical assistance.

School Support Team (SST)

District Improvement:

1. SST members review the district improvement plan to ensure that all sections of the plan are addressed.

2. Recommend approval of the improvement plan to DOE.

3. Monitor and support implementation of the improvement plan.

4. Monitor progress of the improvement plan.

5. Make recommendations for further assistance.

6. Participate in and/or facilitate a district on-site audit.

School Improvement:

1. SST person assigned to each district with a school(s) in school improvement:

a. SST will contact the assigned school to check on development and implementation of the school improvement plan.

b. Assist with school data retreat.

c. Participate in and/or facilitate a school-level audit.

d. Collaborate with ESA personnel.

2. Recommend approval of the school improvement plan to DOE.

3. Monitor and support implementation of the improvement plan.

Schoolwide:

1. SST person assigned to schools planning a schoolwide program:

a. Assist with the annual schoolwide conference.

b. Provide technical assistance with writing of schoolwide plan.

c. Recommend schoolwide plan approval to DOE.

d. Monitor the implementation of the schoolwide plan.

Education Service Agencies (ESA)

1. Provide technical assistance to schools as requested by the district.

2. Provide professional development in curriculum areas.

3. Coordinate school and district activities with SST.

4. Participate in school and district audits.

5. Assist with development of formative assessments using the Achievement Series.

Use of 1003(a) funds

Funds retained for state level activities under section 1003(a) are being used to support SEA activities related to school improvement, provide the SST to districts and schools, and to conduct necessary assistance and monitoring for the Supplemental Educational Services (SES) provisions required under section 1116.

Use of 1003(g) funds

The funds available to the SEA under section 1003(g) will be used to continue to support the SEA and the SST functions to assist the districts and schools in improvement. Efforts are focused on building capacity at the district level to assist their own schools in raising student achievement.

3. From the list on page 3, describe the school improvement strategy or strategies the SEA will implement with section 1003(g) and 1003(a) funds, including a brief explanation of why each strategy was selected.

South Dakota will use its share of the 1003(a) and 1003(g) funds for the following strategies, noting the reason for selection:

❖ Provide customized technical assistance and/or professional development that is designed to build the capacity of LEA and school staff to improve schools and is informed by student achievement and other outcome-related measures. All schools and districts are required to analyze student achievement data to determine the areas of need. SST are not only required by section 1117 of Title I, but are needed by schools and districts to help guide and support their plans for intervention.

❖ Provide professional development to enhance the capacity of school support team members and other technical assistance providers who are part of the statewide system of support and that is informed by student achievement and other outcome-related measures. 1003(g) funds will be used to provide continued support to the state’s SST as its mission is crafted to meet the evolving needs of schools and districts. ESA personnel assist schools in conducting a comprehensive needs assessment process to identify areas of challenge and identify the data needed to evaluate the current plan. Funds will be used to bring together SST, ESA, and SEA staff to upgrade and revitalize the data analysis process, formalize the state’s plan for its statewide system of support, and promote collaboration and coordination of the various entities involved in school improvement work across the state.

❖ Implement other strategies determined by the SEA or LEA, as appropriate, for which data indicate the strategy is likely to result in improved teaching and learning in schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring. Funds reserved from 1003(a) funds are used to assist the SEA with its responsibilities for Supplemental Educational Services (SES). Consultants are contracted to conduct the annual review of SES provider applications, evaluate the effectiveness of SES providers, monitor both LEAs and SES providers for compliance with federal requirements under Section 1116, and provide technical assistance to both providers and LEAs in implementing SES. Funds will be used to enhance recruitment of new providers to ensure as many quality providers as possible. Outcomes of these efforts include better services for more eligible students and compliant programs.

Part B – Funds Awarded to LEAs

Each SEA must describe:

1. How the SEA will allocate at least 95 percent of its section 1003(g) and 1003(a) funds, either separately or combined, to LEAs. In its description, the SEA must address the following statutory provisions:

❖ The criteria the SEA will use to give priority to LEAs with the lowest-achieving schools that demonstrate— 1) The greatest need for these funds, and 2) The strongest commitment to ensuring that the funds are used to provide adequate resources for the lowest-achieving schools to meet the goals for improvement under section 1116.

❖ How the SEA will define “greatest need” and “strongest commitment.”

❖ With respect to section 1003(g) funds (if allocated separately from 1003(a) funds), the criteria the SEA will use to determine grant award amounts to LEAs to ensure that each grant— 1) Is of sufficient size and scope to support the activities required under sections 1116 and 1117, and 2) Is not less than $50,000 or more than $500,000 for each participating school.

❖ How funds will be integrated with other funds awarded by the SEA under the ESEA.

❖ Whether, assuming section 1003(g) funds are appropriated in subsequent years, the SEA will renew an LEA’s grant for up to two additional one-year periods if schools in the LEA are meeting the goals for improvement under section 1116.

Allocations

SDDOE will distribute 95% of the 1003(a) and 1003(g) funds to LEAs with Title I schools in improvement based on demonstration of greatest need and strongest commitment. Conditions of eligibility will also be applied as a first screen for those schools wishing to apply for the 1003(g) funds. The funds available under 1003(a) have been and will continue to be allocated on a formula basis to all LEAs with Title I schools in improvement with grant awards ranging form $5000 to $50,000. Additional funds will be available to LEAs with Title I schools through a competitive application process for the 1003(g) funds. LEAs may request $50,000 to $80,000 for each eligible Title I school. Grant awards will be determined based upon the school’s description of how the funds will be used to support the strategies outlined in its school improvement plan and demonstrated need for the amount requested. SDDOE reserves the right to determine the final grant award to ensure sufficient funds are available to carry out the proposed activities. Four to six grant awards are expected to be awarded, dependent upon the amount of funds requested and determined for each recipient school.

95% School Improvement Funds

The school improvement set-aside for the 2007-2008 school year for section 1003(a) is      $1,490,956.00. Distributions to LEAs for Title I schools in improvement equal 95% or $1,416,408.00. South Dakota’s allocation under section 1003(g) for the 2007-2008 school year is $361,828. 95% of this amount, $343,737, will be allocated out to LEAs with Title I schools in improvement through a competitive grant process.

Greatest Need 1003(a)

LEAs with Title I schools identified for school improvement under Section 1116 - Title I, Part A are eligible to receive Title I School Improvement funds under section 1003(a). The allocation formula takes three factors into consideration to determine need: poverty, enrollment, and level of need. Grant awards have been set at a minimum of $5000 and capped at $50,000. LEAs will receive an allocation of at least $5000 for each Title I school in school improvement. Some of the Title I schools in improvement are quite small with only one or two teachers. The small grant award has been proven over the past several years to be sufficient to meet the needs of these small schools.

POVERTY

One half of the School Improvement funds are allocated to eligible schools based on the number of children eligible for the free and reduced price lunch program at each school. Each school is allocated funds based on its proportionate share of the total free and reduced price lunch count at eligible schools.

ENROLLMENT

One half of the School Improvement funds are allocated to eligible schools based on weighted school enrollment counts. Enrollment counts are weighted depending on each eligible school’s “Level of Need”. The “Level of Need” determination process is described below. The enrollments are weighted according to the factors in the following table:

|LEVEL OF  | Weighting |

|NEED | Factors |

|Level 1 | 1.00 |

|Level 2 | 1.25 |

|Level 3 | 1.50 |

|Level 4 | 1.75 |

|Level 5 | 2.00 |

The funds are allocated to eligible schools based on each school’s proportionate share of the total weighted enrollment count for eligible schools.

LEVEL OF NEED

The level of need is computed using a formula that was developed by a study group within the Comprehensive Assessment System for ESEA Title I (CAS) SCASS project through CCSSO. This formula takes into account several factors including how far each student group's performance on the state test is from the AMO as well as the distance from each student group’s target for making safe harbor provisions. The scores of these calculations are added together to compute the priority point score. Schools are then rank-ordered according to the priority point score. Schools that have generated the largest points, indicating that the student groups the school is accountable for (groups that meet the minimum N size of 10) are performing the furthest from the goals. The program used to run these calculations was developed in partnership with Edvantia (formerly AEL) and can be downloaded from the Edvantia website at: . The publication, District Audit Tool: A Method for Determining Level of Need for Support to Improvement, describes the priority point system in Stage 1 and is available on the CCSSO website at: .

Once the priority point values are determined, the schools are then divided into quintiles with the highest point schools in quintile one. The school improvement status for each school is also noted. The number of schools in each quintile, separated by the level of school improvement, is then placed on the matrix. A performance-standard setting process is then conducted, determining the level of need for each of the cells in the matrix. Schools in the fifth level of need are considered those with the highest need. Each school is then assigned a level of need that can be incorporated into the allocation formula for school improvement funds. Determining the level of need is further explained in the publication, District Audit Tool, in Stage 1.

|Title I School Matrix 2007 | | | |

|Level of SI |5th Quintile |4th Quintile |3rd Quintile |2nd Quintile |1st Quintile |

|Total # |9 |9 |9 |9 |9 |

|1 |1 |6 |4 |2 |2 |

|2 |2 |1 |0 |2 |0 |

|3 |3 |2 |2 |3 |0 |

|4 |2 |0 |3 |0 |1 |

|5 |1 |0 |0 |2 |6 |

| | | | | | |

|Level of Need |5 |4 |3 |2 | |

| | | | | |1 |

Greatest Need 1003(g)

In addition to the objective measures used to determine need for the 1003(a) funds (poverty, enrollment, and level of need), each LEA with eligible schools applying for funds under section 1003(g) must demonstrate the need for the additional school improvement funds available under 1003(g). The LEA must note other funds available to the school and explain why additional funds are needed to carry out the activities proposed. These activities must be based on scientific research and proven to be effective in raising student achievement for the students and subgroups not making AYP. It is the responsibility of the school to justify the need for the funds. SDDOE will consider each request on an individual basis.

Strongest Commitment

Schools will demonstrate their commitment to providing adequate resources to achieve academic success through their school improvement plans. The application for both 1003(a) and (g) funds will require schools to demonstrate how the proposed use of funds supports the school improvement plan. Based on its comprehensive needs assessment that considers a broad spectrum of data, schools identify areas of need and articulate measurable goals and objectives. Funds must be used for strategies to reach those goals and objectives, as outlined in the school improvement plan. Strong alignment between identified needs, goals, objectives, strategies, and funding sources must be demonstrated. All schools will be required to outline how school improvement funds will be integrated with funds received under the realm of the consolidated application (Title I Parts A, C, and D; Title II Parts A and D, Title III, Title IVA, Title V, and Title VI) to build on the goals and objectives stated in the school improvement plan. In addition, integration with other programs funded by SDDOE under ESEA, if applicable, such as: Reading First and Early Reading First, Century 21st after school programs, and South Dakota Incentives + must be demonstrated.

Beyond the commitment demonstrated for receipt of 1003(a) funds, schools applying for the additional funds under 1003(g) must further indicate its commitment to raising student achievement and fulfilling the requirements of sections 1116 and 1117. The application for 1003(g) funds will require schools to outline its intervention programs for struggling students, including extended day and year programs. The LEA must also address its commitment to school choice and SES as required under section 1116. The application will require LEAs to explain how the additional school improvement funds will be used to supplement state and federal funds to meet its goals and objectives as outlined in its school improvement plan.

Conditions of Eligibility

SDDOE will consider LEAs with Title I schools in improvement as eligible to apply for the additional 1003(g) funds if the following conditions have been met.

• The requirement for the 10% set aside of the school’s Title I allocation for professional development, including teacher mentoring, has been met as required.

• SES responsibilities have been met (notification of school improvement status and SES letters to parents are accurate, complete, and sent in a timely manner, appropriate SES student recruitment, coordination with SES providers, and accurate SES reports submitted by established due dates).

• Compliance with school improvement requirements (plans contain all required components, corrective actions chosen and implemented in a timely manner, school audits conducted as required in the fall of the restructuring planning year, and the submission of corrective action and restructuring plans to SDDOE in a timely manner).

2. The local application provisions the SEA will require its LEAs to address to ensure that LEAs will use funds under section 1003(g) and 1003(a) to implement one or more of the school improvement strategies previously listed and that decisions about the strategy or strategies a) selected are based on data; and b)The school improvement strategies supported with these funds contribute to achieving the annual measurable objectives in school improvement plans [§1116(b)(3)(v)], or to achieving the goals necessary for schools to exit corrective action and restructuring status, as appropriate.

The applications for both 1003(a) and (g) funds will require LEAs to choose one or more of the listed strategies for use of school improvement funds. The narrative section after each chosen funding strategy will require schools to identify the results of their comprehensive needs assessment that shows the need for this intervention and how the funding strategy aligns with the goals, objectives, and strategies outlined in the school improvement plan.

Strategies

❖ Provide customized technical assistance and/or professional development that is designed to build the capacity of LEA and school staff to improve schools and is informed by student achievement and other outcome-related measures.

❖ Utilize research-based strategies or practices to change instructional practice to address the academic achievement problems that caused the school to be identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.

❖ Create partnerships among the SEA, LEAs and other entities for the purpose of delivering technical assistance, professional development, and management advice.

❖ Provide professional development to enhance the capacity of school support team members and other technical assistance providers who are part of the statewide system of support and that is informed by student achievement and other outcome-related measures.

❖ Implement other strategies determined by the SEA or LEA, as appropriate, for which data indicate the strategy is likely to result in improved teaching and learning in schools identified for improvement, corrective action, or restructuring.

3. How the SEA will assess the effectiveness of school improvement activities and disseminate information on what works to other LEAs in the State.

Effectiveness

SDDOE will use three data sources to determine effectiveness of school improvement funds. Information from each of the data sources will be complied for each school and analyzed to determine successful strategies implemented by the schools receiving the school improvement funds. A panel consisting of members of the department’s SITAT, Committee of Practitioners, and School Support Team members will be convened to conduct the analysis.

1. Consistent with the measurable outcomes of the school improvement fund, SDDOE will determine the effectiveness of school improvement funds by the following measures:

❖ The number and percentage of students who score proficient in reading and mathematics increased in LEAs and schools receiving School Improvement Funds as measured by the Dakota STEP. Analysis of the data for SD Title I schools in improvement, revealed that many of the schools had high levels of student proficient and advanced percentages for the school as a whole. SDDOE plans to also report and analyze data that includes the achievement percentages for each subgroup that put the school into improvement initially and those that did not make AYP the prior year.

❖ LEAs and schools receiving School Improvement Funds made AYP.

❖ LEAs and schools receiving School Improvement Funds removed from improvement status.

2. SDDOE will analyze evaluation forms of school improvement plans. Each school in improvement is required to evaluate its school improvement plan annually and submit the evaluation form to SDDOE. Schools list their school improvement goals and objectives along with the strategies they plan to use to reach those targets. The school must first determine if strategies were implemented as planned. The second prong of the evaluation requires the school to use the data predetermined to be the indicator of effectiveness to evaluate each strategy and indicate if the goal and objective were met. Finally, the school must draw a conclusion from the implementation and achievement data about the effectiveness of each strategy.

3. SDDOE will compute progress ratios. The program and process for calculating priority points used to determine level of need can also be used to determine progress. The publication, District Audit Tool: A Method for Determining Level of Need for Support to Improvement, describes the progress metric and its uses in Stage 5. The current year’s AYP and percent proficient and advanced for each student group is compared to the school’s data from the previous year to determine if progress has been made.

Dissemination

Results from the analysis of the effectiveness of the strategies used by schools receiving school improvement funds will be shared with all schools in improvement and LEAs in the state through publication of the report. The report will be posted on the department’s website and emailed to superintendents, principals, Title I and school improvement contacts, and through the Title I listserv. The report will be highlighted at the state’s conference on school improvement.

Part C – Monitoring

Each SEA must describe how it will monitor the effectiveness of the strategies selected and implemented with funds from section 1003(g) and 1003(a) and the steps the SEA will take if the school improvement strategies supported with these funds are not contributing to increased student achievement.

The process described for determining effectiveness will be conducted for schools receiving 1003(a) and 1003(g) funds in the fall of each year. The analysis will be completed prior to the next round of school improvement funds allocations for 1003(a) funds and competition for the 1003(g) funds. The steps taken by the SEA will be different for the 1003(a) funds than for the 1003(g) funds.

1003(a)

These funds are allocated on a formula basis to all LEAs with Title I schools in improvement. If a school wishes to use the grant funds to support a strategy that has not been proven to be effective, the SDDOE will council with the school, in consultation with the assigned SST member, to determine alternative strategies and uses of funds. The application for funds will not be approved by SDDOE for strategies not determined effective.

1003(g)

LEAs with Title I schools apply for these funds through a competitive grant process. The criteria for application review includes evidence of effectiveness. Low scores will be generated for strategies not showing effectiveness. If the rank ordering of the grant application relative to the available funds allows for an application to be considered for funding with some strategies not showing the desired level of effectiveness, the SDDOE will negotiate with the school to determine the best course of action. SST will be involved in the discussion.

Each LEA applying for a continuing grant award on behalf of one or more of its schools will include the school’s plan evaluation. A continuing application will be provided to those schools indicating interest in continuing the activity or intervention approved in the original grant award. The continuing application would require the school to show evidence of effectiveness of the activity and explain why funds are needed to continue the activity for another year. The grant award will be for the same amount of the original award, unless evidence is provided that demonstrates that an increase is needed. A school will qualify for a continuing grant award for one successive year after receiving the original grant, given the school is still in school improvement. After the second year of the grant award, the school would be required to again apply through the competitive grant process.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download