District Capacity Index Each LEA must complete a self analysis of the capacity it has to assist the low performing schools in the implementation of the selected intervention. This will be determined utilizing a scale of 1-3 ranking from poor (1), satisfactory (2) and commendable (3) for the following criteria: Poor Satisfactory Commendable Points Criteria 1 point 2 points 3 points Earned Limited SEA LEA governance State takeover district No SEA intervention 3 intervention Findings in areas Findings in areas No findings in the Title I audit reports requiring a repayment of noted-repayment of 3 fiscal area funds funds not required LEA overall Bottom Middle Top 3 achievement ranking (5% = 3 districts) (70% = 38 districts) (25% = 14 districts) Approval of the district strategic plan by the Approved by the Approved by the SEA Not approved by the SEA 3 SEA SEA with revisions without revisions (entire plan, not just the Title I section) Percentage of Title I 0-50% of the Title I 51-75% of the Title I 76-100% of the Title schools that met AYP 3 schools met AYP. schools met AYP. I schools met AYP. in the last testing cycle A critical mass of The practice of PLCs staff has begun to The school has not yet is deeply embedded engage in PLC begun to address the in the culture of the practice. Members Development of schools practice of a PLC or an school. It is a driving are being asked to as professional effort has been made to force in the daily modify their thinking 3 learning communities address the practice of work of the staff. It as well as their PLCs, but has not yet is deeply internalized traditional practice. begun to impact a critical and staff would resist Structural changes mass of staff members. attempts to abandon are being met to the practice. support the transition. Identification of district No district leadership Lacks specific A specific district leadership team and team nor identified identification of leadership team is assignment of person assigned for personnel for the identified and one or responsibilities monitoring district leadership more persons are 3 implementation team and for assigned for monitoring monitoring implementation. implementation. Poor Satisfactory Commendable Points Criteria 1 point 2 points 3 points Earned School Leadership School leadership team School leadership School leadership 3 Team members are identified team members are team members are
District Capacity Index Each LEA must complete a self analysis of the capacity it has to assist the low performing schools in the implementation of the selected intervention. This will be determined utilizing a scale of 1-3 ranking from poor (1), satisfactory (2) and commendable (3) for the following criteria: Criteria Poor 1 point Satisfactory 2 points Commendable 3 points Points Earned LEA governance State takeover district Limited SEA intervention No SEA intervention 3 Title I audit reports Findings in areas requiring a repayment of funds Findings in areas noted-repayment of funds not required No findings in the fiscal area 3 LEA overall achievement ranking Bottom (5% = 3 districts) Middle (70% = 38 districts) Top (25% = 14 districts) 3 Approval of the district strategic plan by the SEA (entire plan, not just the Title I section) Not approved by the SEA Approved by the SEA with revisions Approved by the SEA without revisions 3 Percentage of Title I schools that met AYP in the last testing cycle 0-50% of the Title I schools met AYP. 51-75% of the Title I schools met AYP. 76-100% of the Title I schools met AYP. 3 Development of schools as professional learning communities The school has not yet begun to address the practice of a PLC or an effort has been made to address the practice of PLCs, but has not yet begun to impact a critical mass of staff members. A critical mass of staff has begun to engage in PLC practice. Members are being asked to modify their thinking as well as their traditional practice. Structural changes are being met to support the transition. The practice of PLCs is deeply embedded in the culture of the school. It is a driving force in the daily work of the staff. It is deeply internalized and staff would resist attempts to abandon the practice. 3 Identification of district leadership team and assignment of responsibilities No district leadership team nor identified person assigned for monitoring implementation Lacks specific identification of personnel for the district leadership team and for monitoring implementation. A specific district leadership team is identified and one or more persons are assigned for monitoring implementation. 3 Criteria Poor 1 point Satisfactory 2 points Commendable 3 points Points Earned School Leadership Team School leadership team members are identified School leadership team members are School leadership team members are 3