MPS strategic plan

Board Vote Presentation September 9, 2014

Formally recommit to our vision of Every Child College and Career Ready

Set big, bold new targets for accelerating student achievement over the next 6 years

Establish a framework for achieving success with a new Theory of Action, long term Goals, and a revised District Scorecard

Why we’re here tonight

2

* Development of supporting

District Management

Plan / FY15 District Action

Plan

*Implementation

* Progress monitoring and

reporting

FALL 2014 and beyond

* Adjustments made to plan

based on stakeholder

feedback

* Acceleration 2020 presented

to Board for approval

SUMMER 2014:

* Draft ‘strategic plan’ presented

to Board and community for

feedback

SPRING 2014:

* Draft ‘strategic plan’ developed

by planning team

WINTER 2014:

*Learning from past practice

*Review of MPS progress and

results

* Community ‘listening

campaign’

SUMMER / FALL 2013:

3

How we got here

TONIGHT’S VOTE

By the numbers: • 17 Listening Sessions

with 500+ stakeholders • All staff survey (400+

responses) and parent/family survey (1,500+ responses)

By the numbers: • 15 listening sessions

with 400+ stakeholders

• 350+ survey responses providing reactions to the draft plan

5-Year District Management Plan (strategies, projects, timelines)

Annual District Action Plan Budget

Today’s Vote

In process – preview provided

Plan components

Mission

Vision

Values

Theory of Action

Goals w/ Performance Measures & Annual Targets

4

How this plan is different

Schools as the unit of

change

Focus

Alignment incl. clear roles, cross-cutting strategies

Faster pace

Structures for strong implementation

5

6

Mission

Vision

Values

Theory of Action

Goals w/ Performance Measures & Annual Targets

Preview: key management plan details

PREVIEW TODAY: 1) Academic Initiatives 2) Autonomy 3) Student Based

Allocation 4) Integration

District Management Plan (strategies to accomplish each goal)

MANAGEMENT PLAN PREVIEW: Academic Initiatives

Academic Strategy Framework

7

MANAGEMENT PLAN PREVIEW: Academic Initiatives (cont.)

8


9


10


11

MANAGEMENT PLAN PREVIEW: Human Capital Initiatives in support of Academic Initiatives

12

MANAGEMENT PLAN PREVIEW: School Autonomy

School Autonomy:

Rooted in the 2020 Theory of Action (‘Schools as the Unit of Change’), we believe student outcomes will improve if schools…

have a greater sense of ownership of their choices have the flexibility to meet the needs of their specific

population there is space to innovate

Balanced with clear accountability structures Autonomies in four areas: curriculum, budget, time,

staffing

13

MANAGEMENT PLAN PREVIEW: School Autonomy (cont.)

2014-15:

RFP Process to select pilot Community Partnership Schools (1-5 sites)

2015-16:

Inaugural Community Partnership Schools use autonomies to improve student achievement

2016-17:

• Use lessons learned from first round of Community Partnership Schools to develop autonomy opportunities for all schools

• Develop process for additional schools to be granted specific autonomies

With strong accountability

14

MANAGEMENT PLAN PREVIEW: Student Based Allocation

Implementation of SBA supports the

2020 Theory of Action

15

Increased equity

Enhanced transparency

Increased differentiation based on need

Greater predictability

Improved alignment with district strategy

MANAGEMENT PLAN PREVIEW: Student Based Allocation (cont.)

Model Under

Development

Soft Landing Measures

+ Principal/AP

and Secretary

School’s Projected

Enrollment

Base Funding Factor X +

School’s Projected

Enrollment

Respective Weights + X

School Budget 16


17

FY 15

Mock Budget Year

• Continue designing model

• Mock budget (Fall) to five volunteer schools

• Facilitator training through PR firm -central office and school level (Aug & Sept)

• Create Site Council Management Policy

FY 16

Pilot Year

• Revise model, if needed

• Per pupil budget allocated to pilot schools (Spring 2015)

FY 17

Implementation Year

• Per pupil budget allocated to all schools (Spring 2016)

• Community engagement (beginning Sept 2014) • Realignment of Central Office (beginning Sept 2014)

• Principal engagement and training (beginning Oct 2014)


Community Engagement Schedule – First Three Months

18

September

• Area A – 10th

• Area B- 11th

• Area C- 17th

• Latino Advisory- 15th

• Hmong Parents- 17th

• Afr Amer- 25th

• Phillips Indian Educators (PIE)- 25th

October

• SEAC- 2nd

• Somali Advisory-10th

• Laotian leaders- 14th

• Afr Amer Parents Advisory- 14th

• DPAC- 20th

• Afr Amer leaders- 23rd

• Latino Parent Council

• Native Parent Council-25th

• Site Council & PTA meetings in Areas A, B & C

• Latino Collaborative

November

• SEAC- 6th

• Area A-12th

• Area B- 13th

• Asian Partnership- 14th

• Area C- 19th

• HS Student Govt

• Mid School Student Govt

• Site Council & PTA meetings in Areas A, B & C

Significant focus of community engagement will be at the school level with Site Councils, PTA/PTO’s, and school communities October and beyond.

MANAGEMENT PLAN PREVIEW: Integration

Integration to Support Student Achievement

District Placement System Values

Diversity (integrated learning sites)

Keeping siblings together

Class size goals

Close to Home

Community school guarantee

Stability of pathways K-12

Parent choice to obtain different learning approaches

19

MANAGEMENT PLAN PREVIEW: Integration (cont.)

Short-term (14-15) Strategies for Integration • Examine placement procedures (late arrivals, etc.) • Pursue transportation opportunities • Increase accountability through careful monitoring and reporting

Long-term Strategies for Integration

• Dedicated Board / community dialogue on managing competing values (esp. community schools and integration)

• Review placement procedures • Strengthen ‘Expanded School Options’ • Add capacity at integrated community and magnet schools

20

Our Mission

We exist to ensure that all students learn. We

support their growth into knowledgeable, skilled and

confident citizens capable of succeeding in their

work, personal, family, and community lives into the

21st century.

Our Vision

Every child college and career ready

Our Values

Children first

Right to quality education

Importance of family

Equity

Diversity

Respect for employees

Partnership for youth

Transparency and accountability

Our Theory of Action

Schools as the Unit of Change

5-percent annual increase in students meeting or exceeding state standards in reading and math

8-percent annual increase meeting or exceeding standards in reading and math for our lowest

performing students

10-percent annual increase in the 4-year graduation rate

22

of Student Achievement

5-8-10

Constructive

Sensible

APPENDIX Acceleration 2020 Detail

23

24

Our Mission

We exist to ensure that all

students learn. We support

their growth into

knowledgeable, skilled and

confident citizens capable of

succeeding in their work,

personal, family, and

community lives into the 21st

century.

Our Values

Children first



Equity

Diversity



Transparency and

accountability

Our Vision

Every child college and career ready

Our Theory of Action

Schools as the Unit of Change

2020 FRAMEWORK

25


All children deserve strong, effective public schools that

prepare them for postsecondary education,

lifelong learning, work, and citizenship.


Parents and families want the best for their children. We welcome families into

our schools, encourage their partnership, and expect their

participation in the education of their children.

Equity

Every student deserves equitable access to quality

academic programs and the support to be successful,

regardless of race, economic status, or circumstance.

Diversity

Every student in Minneapolis has outstanding potential, and it is our duty to help him or her

realize that potential. The combination of a diverse

student body and staff is our District’s strength.


We respect and value all MPS employees. Effective teachers and principals are essential for academic achievement and we

commit to having and supporting the highest-quality

staff.


Public and private partnerships are essential

for strong schools and communities. Everyone has

a role in helping future generations succeed.

Transparency and accountability

We commit to being effective and responsible stewards of public and private resources. We pledge transparency and accountability in our finances

and operations.

DISTRICT VALUES - detail

SCHOOLS AS THE UNIT OF CHANGE IF WE… AND… AND… THEN… SO THAT… LEADING TO…

Recognize that improved academic achievement happens in and through our schools…

Principals and their school-based teams are the leaders of that improvement…

Central office exists to: • Establish

parameters to monitor school performance;

• Provide support and service to school leaders and staff in support of student learning;

• Ensure equity of outcomes for all of our students; and

• Increase efficiency across the system…

Principals will be supported and expected to make decisions that improve instruction and create supports to meet the specific needs of their student population within defined parameters…

All students have access to high quality schools, demonstrate persistence, and meet or exceed grade level standards…

EVERY MPS CHILD COLLEGE AND CAREER READY

REQUIRING: A system to hold all schools accountable for performance standards based on a common definition of school quality. An integrated approach to ensuring there are effective employees at every level of the district focused on improving student outcomes. A clear set of academic priorities that academic departments and schools will engage in. A mechanism to allocate resources to schools in an equitable and transparent way based on student needs. Collaborative leadership at school sites under the leadership of high performing principals.

26

THEORY OF ACTION - detail

27

Measures 1 Reading proficiency

2 Math proficiency*

3 Four-year graduation rate*

4 % of incoming MPS students that are Kindergarten-ready

5 % of MPS students that meet or exceed standards for 3rd grade reading proficiency*

6 Science proficiency

7 % of students attending school 95% of the time

8 % of Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) exams taken by MPS students for which a potential college-credit eligible score was earned

9 % of students scoring a 21 or higher on the ACT*

10 Student ‘persistence’ rating TBD

11 Global competency metric TBD

12 % of priority and focus designated schools meeting or exceeding all applicable district targets in reading and math proficiency and graduation rate

* = required by World’s Best Workforce legislation

2020 GOALS - detail

28

Improved Student Outcomes (1 of 2) District Measures Target Rationale Current Performance

SY13-14 (unless otherwise noted)

Performance Target Supporting information provided annually SY14-15 SY15-16 SY16-17 SY17-18 SY18-

19 SY19-20

1 Reading proficiency 5% annual increase overall 8% annual increase for Students of Color (SOC) Eliminate achievement gap

42% 47% 52% 57% 62% 67% 72% Performance data by race/ethnicity and program (ELL, Sped, FRL)

Reading proficiency- Students of Color

24% 32% 40% 48% 56% 64% 72%

2 Math proficiency* 5% annual increase overall 8% annual increase for Students of Color (SOC) Eliminate achievement gap


Math proficiency- Students of Color

28% 36% 44% 52% 60% 68% 76%

3 Four-year graduation rate* 10% annual increase overall, up to a plateau at 85% to reflect high performance district benchmarks

53.9% (Class of 2013, AYP

2014)

64% 74% 84% 85% 85% 85% • Performance data by race/ethnicity, program (ELL, Sped, FRL), and school type

• Drop out rate • College enrollment

data • 5 and 6 year grad rates

4 % of incoming MPS students that are Kindergarten-ready (BKA literacy) NOTE: assessment will be realigned in 14-15, leading to new baseline and target

3% annual increases based on trend data

70% 73% 76% 79% 82% 85% 88% Performance data by race/ethnicity

5 Reading proficiency, 3rd grade* 5% annual increase overall 8% annual increase for Students of Color (SOC) Eliminate achievement gap


Reading proficiency, 3rd grade- students of color

24% 32% 40% 48% 56% 64% 72%

29

Improved Student Outcomes (2 of 2)

District Measures Target Rationale Current Performance SY13-14 (unless

otherwise noted)

Performance Target Supporting information provided annually

SY14-15 SY15-16 SY16-17 SY17-18 SY18-19 SY19-20

6 Science proficiency 5% annual growth to follow associated growth in reading and math

33% 38% 43% 48% 53% 58% 63% Performance data by race/ethnicity

Science proficiency – Students of Color

8% annual growth, eliminate achievement gap

15% 23% 31% 39% 47% 55% 63%

7 % of students attending school 95% of the time

15% point increase overall Elimination of disparities

60% 63% 65% 68% 70% 73% 75%

Native American 29% 37% 45% 52% 60% 68% 75% African American 49% 53% 58% 63% 68% 73% 75% Asian 74% 74% 74% 74% 74% 75% 75% Hispanic 65% 66% 68% 70% 71% 73% 75% White 72% 72% 73% 73% 74% 74% 75% ELL 68% 69% 70% 71% 72% 73% 75% Special Education 44% 50% 55% 60% 65% 70% 75%

8 % of Advanced Placement (AP) and International Baccalaureate (IB) exams taken by MPS students for which a potential college-credit eligible score was earned

3% annual increases based on trend data

44% 47% 50% 53% 56% 59% 64% NOTE: exploring addition of CTE into this metric

9 % of students scoring a 21 or higher on the ACT*

3% annual growth target 33% 36% 39% 42% 45% 48% 51% Performance data by race/ethnicity and program (ELL, Sped, FRL)

10 Student ‘persistence’ rating TBD

********** Measure under development 14-15 / Baseline 15-16 ******* Performance data by student group and grade

11 Global competency metric TBD

********* Measure under development 14-15 / Baseline 15-16 ******** (to include multilingualism, cultural competency, and service learning)

Performance data by student group and grade

12 % of priority and focus designated schools meeting or exceeding district targets in reading and math proficiency and graduation rate (if applicable)

100% by 2020 meeting 5/8/10 targets

n/a TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD 100%

30

Measures 13 Students of color achievement gap in reading

14 Students of color achievement gap in math

15 Disparity rate for students of color suspended once or more (risk ratio)

16 % of students meeting or exceeding expected growth targets in reading

17 % of students of color meeting or exceeding expected growth targets in math

18 % of students who enroll in at least one advanced course and receive a 'C' or above (AP, IB, CIS, Advanced CTE, PSEO)

19 % of English learners meeting language growth targets

20 % of English learners meeting language proficiency targets

21 Disparity rate for the identification of students of color for special education services (risk ratio)

2020 GOALS - detail

31

Equity (1 of 3) District Measures Target Rationale Current Performance


Performance Target Supporting information provided annually SY14-15 SY15-16 SY16-17 SY17-18 SY18-19 SY19-20

13 Students of color achievement gap in reading

Based on meeting 5/8/10

52 pts 43 35 26 17 9 0 pts • Performance data by program (EL vs. non-EL, Sped vs. non-Sped)

• Somali students Native American 55 pts 46 37 28 18 9 0 pts

African American 54 pts 45 36 27 18 9 0 pts

Asian 37 pts 31 25 19 12 6 0 pts

Hispanic 53 pts 44 35 27 18 9 0 pts

14 Students of color achievement gap in math

Based on meeting 5/8/10

49 pts 41 33 25 16 8 0 pts

Native American 53 pts 44 35 27 18 9 0 pts

African American 53 pts 44 35 27 18 9 0 pts

Asian 29 pts 24 19 15 10 5 0 pts

Hispanic 45 pts 38 30 23 15 8 0 pts

15 Disparity rate for students of color suspended once or more (risk ratio)

Eliminate disparities by 2020 (= 1.0 ratio)

4.5 3.9 3.3 2.8 2.2 1.6 1.0

Native American 1.8 1.7 1.6 1.4 1.3 1.1 1.0 African American 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 Asian 0.1 0.3 0.4 0.6 0.7 0.9 1.0 Hispanic 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 ELL 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.0 Special Education 2.7 2.4 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.3 1.0

16 % of students meeting or exceeding expected growth targets in reading

Reflects the growth needed to achieve 5/8/10 on proficiency

45.2% (SY12-13) 70% 70% 70% 70% 70% 70%

Native American 37% 59% 59% 59% 59% 59% 59% African American 36% 59% 59% 59% 59% 59% 59% Asian 49% 73% 73% 73% 73% 73% 73% Hispanic 40% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% White 58% 78% 78% 78% 78% 78% 78% ELL 37% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% Special Education 35% 56% 56% 56% 56% 56% 56%

32



Performance Target

SY14-15 SY15-16 SY16-17 SY17-18 SY18-19 SY19-20

17 % of students meeting or exceeding expected growth targets in math

Reflects the growth needed to achieve 5/8/10 on proficiency

48.2% (SY12-13)

70% 70% 70% 70% 70% 70%

Native American 35% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62%

African American 40% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62%

Asian 54% 75% 75% 75% 75% 75% 75%

Hispanic 46% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67%

White 58% 77% 77% 77% 77% 77% 77%

ELL 45% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65% 65%

Special Education 37% 58% 58% 58% 58% 58% 58%

18 % of students who enroll in at least one advanced course and receive a 'C' or above (AP, IB, CIS, Advanced CTE, PSEO)

Achieve proportional enrollment among student groups

53% 57% 60% 63% 67% 70% 75%

Native American 28% 36% 44% 52% 59% 67% 75%

African American 39% 45% 51% 57% 63% 69% 75%

Asian 60% 63% 65% 68% 70% 73% 75%

Hispanic 42% 48% 53% 59% 65% 71% 75%

White 73% 74% 74% 74% 75% 75% 75%

ELL 30% 37% 45% 52% 60% 67% 75%

Special Education 26% 34% 43% 51% 59% 67% 75%

19 % of English learners meeting language growth targets

8% annual increase to reach a maximum of 90% (as aspirational as research supports)

47% (SY12-13) / 52% (SY13-14 projected)

58% 65% 71% 77% 84% 90%

20 % of English learners meeting language proficiency targets

Match State targets (represents only 4 years in program to get to proficiency instead of standard of 5-7)

14% (SY12-13) / 15% (13-14 projected)

17% 18% 20% 22% 23% 25%

33



Performance Target

SY14-15 SY15-16 SY16-17 SY17-18 SY18-19 SY19-20

21 Disparity rate for the identification of students of color for special education services (risk ratio)

Eliminate disparities by 2020

1.49 1.41 1.33 1.25 1.16 1.08 1.00

Native American 1.39 1.33 1.26 1.20 1.13 1.07 1.00 African American 1.44 1.37 1.29 1.22 1.15 1.07 1.00 Asian 0.62 0.67 0.72 0.77 0.82 0.87 1.00 Hispanic 1.03 1.03 1.02 1.02 1.01 1.01 1.00

34

Measures 22 % of parents reporting, "I feel welcome at my child's school."

23 % of parents reporting, “I understand the different ways I can be involved in my child's school.”

24 % of community partnerships meeting identified goals (evaluation results)

25 % of parents reporting their child's school meets or exceeds their expectations.

26 % of non-MPS-governed schools (contract alternatives and district authorized charters) meeting performance criteria

27 % of publicly educated Minneapolis-resident students choosing MPS (market share) – by zone

2020 GOALS - detail

35

Family & Community Partnership District Measures Target Rationale Current Performance


Performance Target

SY15-16 through SY18-19

SY19-20 Supporting information provided annually

22 % of parents reporting, "I feel welcome at my child's school."

**************** Baseline setting 14-15***************** (New parent phone survey / initial data available Fall, 2014)

Child's race/ethnicity and program (Sped, ELL, FRL)

23 % of parents reporting, “I understand the different ways I can be involved in my child's school.”


24 % of community partnerships meeting identified goals (evaluation results)

********Measure under development 14-15 / Baseline 15-16 ******* (Evaluation system currently under development)

25 % of parents reporting their child's school meets or exceeds their expectations.


Child's race/ethnicity and program (Sped, ELL, FRL)

26 % of non-MPS-governed schools (contract alternatives and district authorized charters) meeting performance criteria

********** Baseline setting 14-15********* (As contracts are renewed, following the contract renewal cycle)

100%

27 % of publicly educated Minneapolis-resident students choosing MPS (market share)

Follow 5-Year enrollment plan assumptions passed by the Board, Fall 2013

District: 67% **Targets pending further analysis** Zone 1: TBD

Zone 2: TBD Zone 3: TBD

36

Measures 28 % of principals rated ‘effective’ overall

29 % of teachers rated ‘effective’ overall

30 Rate of teachers hired early (early hire contract)

31 Rate of teacher vacancies at start of school

32 Employee retention - highly rated staff retained • Teachers • School administrators • Other staff

33 Diversity of school staff (teachers, educational assistants, school administrators)

34 Employee engagement measure TBD

2020 GOALS - detail

37

Effective Teachers, School Leaders, and Staff

District Measures Target Rationale Current Performance

Target Performance

28 % of principals rated ‘effective’ overall ********* Baseline setting 14-15********** (Data available September, 2014)

29 % of teachers rated ‘effective’ overall ********* Baseline setting 14-15********** (Data available December, 2014)

30 % of teachers hired early (early hire contract) ******** Baseline setting 14-15************ (Data available September, 2014)

31 % of teacher positions vacant at the start of school ************ Baseline setting 14-15*********** (Data available September, 2014)

32 Employee retention - highly rated staff retained *********** Baseline setting 14-15*********** (Data available December, 2014)

Teachers - highly rated staff retained

Principals - highly rated staff retained

Other staff - highly rated staff retained

33 Diversity of school staff (teachers, educational assistants, school administrators)

Increase (will not set numerical targets)

25% *************** increase annually***************

Teachers 16%

Educational assistants 42%

School administrators 41%

34 Employee engagement measure TBD **** Measure under development 14-15 / Baseline 15-16 **** (Measurement tool to be developed)

38

Measure 35 Baldrige Criteria score (effectiveness of management systems)

36 Unrestricted Fund balance

37 Budget-to-actual revenue (% variance)

38 Budget-to-actual expenses (% variance)

39 Bond rating

40 Audit opinion

41 Spending with diverse vendors

2020 GOALS - detail

39

Stewardship District Measures Target Rationale Current

Performance SY13-14 (unless

otherwise noted)

Performance Target

SY14-15 SY15-16 SY16-17 SY17-18 SY18-19 SY19-20

35 Baldrige Criteria score (effectiveness of management systems)

**************** Baseline setting 14-15*****************

36 Unrestricted Fund balance Board established range

13% 8%-13% 8%-13% 8%-13% 8%-13% 8%-13% 8%-13%

37 Budget-to-actual revenue (% variance)

Historical trend/ COO recommendation

-2% within 2% within 2% within 2% within 2% within 2% within 2%

38 Budget-to-actual expenses (% variance)

6% within 2% within 2% within 2% within 2% within 2% within 2%

39 Bond rating AA2 AA2 AA2 AA2 AA2 AA2 AA2

40 Audit opinion Unqualified Unqualified Unqualified Unqualified Unqualified Unqualified Unqualified

41 Spending with diverse vendors* COO recommendation; contingent on disparity study

6% 10% 10% 12% 12% 12% 12%

40

Measure

42 Transportation on-time arrivals at school

43 Breakfast participation rate

44 Lunch participation rate

45 Placement metric TBD

46 % of funds allocated directly to schools, compared to % allocated to central office

2020 GOALS - detail

41

Resources for Student and Schools District Measures Target Rationale Current

Performance SY13-14 (unless

otherwise noted)

Performance Target Supporting information provided annually

SY14-15 SY15-16 SY16-17 SY17-18 SY18-19 SY19-20

42 Transportation on-time arrivals at school

Historical trend/ COO recommendation

77% (thru March)

79% 81% 83% 85% 87% 89%

43 Breakfast participation rate 34% (thru March)

36% 38% 40% 42% 42% 42% FR eligible and paid

44 Lunch participation rate 62% (thru March)

64% 66% 68% 70% 70% 70%

45 Placement measure TBD ********Measure under development 14-15 *********

46 % of funds allocated directly to schools, compared to % allocated to central office

COO Recommendation; dependent on WSF implementation details

77.7%/ 21.3% (FY15 Budget)

81%/19% 83%/17% 85%/15% 85%/15% 85%/15% 85%/15%

MPS strategic plan

Documents

Transcript of MPS strategic plan