Priority Improvement and Turnaround Districts in Colorado Division - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Priority Improvement and Turnaround Districts in Colorado

Division of Accountability, Performance and Support

District Accreditation

CDE accredits districts in one of five categories:

• Accredited with Distinction
• Accredited
• Accredited with Improvement Plan
• Accredited with Priority Improvement Plan
• Accredited with Turnaround Plan

District Accreditation 2010, 2011, 2012

Number of Districts 2010 2011 Preliminary 2012 Distinction 14 18 19 Accredited 97 94 86 Improvement 46 46 51 Priority Improvement 17 17 19 Turnaround 7 6 6

Priority Improvement and Turnaround Status

• Under SB09-163, districts and schools may not

remain on Priority Improvement or Turnaround Plans for more than five consecutive years. Those that do, face significant action from the State Board of Education.

• For districts on Turnaround Plans, these actions

may be directed prior to the end of the five years.

C.R.S. 22-11-209. Removal of Accreditation

(1) The Department may recommend to the Commissioner and the State Board that the State Board remove a school district’s or the institute’s accreditation if: (a) The school district or the institute is accredited with turnaround plan and the department determines that the school district or the institute has failed to make substantial progress under its turnaround plan; or (b) The school district or the institute has been in the accredited with priority improvement plan category or lower for five consecutive school years; or (c) (I) The school district or the institute has substantially failed to comply with the provisions of article 44 of this title, concerning budget and financial policies and procedures, or article 45 of this title, concerning accounting and financial reporting;

(2) (a) If the department recommends removing accreditation pursuant to this section, the commissioner shall assign the state review panel to critically evaluate the school district's or the institute's performance and to recommend one or more of the following actions:

C.R.S. 22-11-209. Removal of Accreditation

C.R.S. 22-11-209. Removal of Accreditation

(A) That the school district be reorganized pursuant to article 30 of this title, which reorganization may include consolidation; (B) That a private or public entity, with the agreement of the school district, take over management of the school district or management of one or more of the district public schools; (C) That one or more of the district public schools be converted to a charter school; (D) That one or more of the district public schools be granted status as an innovation school pursuant to section 22-32.5-104 or that the local school board recognize a group of district public schools as an innovation school zone pursuant to section 22-32.5-104; or (E) That one or more of the district public schools be closed

Role of CDE

• Assign accreditation ratings to school

districts

• Review UIPs
• Convene the State Review Panel
• Provide recommendations for actions to

the Commissioner and State Board, including removal of accreditation

• Provide technical assistance

Role of State Board of Education

• Enter into accreditation contracts with local

school boards

• Determine if accreditation should be

removed from a school district

• Direct a local board or the Institute to take

a variety of actions, including restructuring

• r closing a school, if applicable

Dig into the Data

• Priority Improvement or Turnaround:

– 24 in 2010-11 – 23 in 2011-12 – 25 in 2012-13 per preliminary data

• Accreditation ratings for 2012-13 will be

final and public in November

• Share preliminary data to see trends

Preliminary 2012 Priority Improvement or Turnaround Districts

Entering into Year 4* Entering into Year 3* Entering into Year 2* Entering into Year 1* TOTAL Priority Improvement 10 4 5 19 Turnaround 3 2 1 6 TOTAL 3 12 4 6 25 * As of July 1, 2013

Cross-Unit Work

Improvement Planning Accountability School and District Performance General Support Field Service Managers (3 people) Targeted Support for PI/T Districts Performance Managers (4 people) Federal Programs Exceptional Student Services

How will we support Priority Improvement and Turnaround Districts?

• District and School visits (progress monitor)
• Emphasis on key practices
• Differentiated support

In-field support

• School Improvement Grant (SIG) support for

some schools

• Possible new grants and partnerships
• Grant monitoring for key practices

Funding Cross-CDE Unit Alignment

• “Coordinated Support Teams”
• Review of data, history, context, progress…

Internal Support Teams

• Close work between units of: School and

District Performance, Improvement Planning, Accountability, Accountability

Grant Support

• 1003 (a & g): School Improvement Grant

and Targeted District Improvement Grant

• Title I, II, III
• IDEA

Clear expectations of funding use Measurable indicators of progress Leverage grants to make dramatic improvements Renewal decisions based on progress

Expectations

• District and School leaders will take low

accreditation ratings seriously and will make collaborative efforts to improve performance with urgency.

• CDE will set clear performance

expectations and provide as much support and direction as needed.

Turnaround Study

by UCD’s Buechner Institute for Governance

• Goals:

– To review current state capacity and existing laws (SB 163) – To review promising turnaround solutions from other states and leading research – To analyze and make recommendations about most-promising

• ptions for turnaround districts and schools in Colorado
• Final report will be issued in November

Potential Pathways for Priority Improvement and Turnaround Districts

Reorganize or Consolidate

Develop External Management Organizations

Establish Charter or Innovation status

Close Schools and Issue RFP for New Schools

Creation of Recovery District