Presidio Independent School District Presidio Independent School District Improvement Plan 2015-2016...

Presidio Independent School District

District Improvement Plan

2015-2016

CCI Committee –Revised: August 6, 2015

District-wide Education Improvement Council

Revised: May 29, 2015, November 12, 2015, December 7, 2015

Approved: January 07, 2016

School Board Approved: January 20, 2016

Presidio ISD does not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, color, national origin, sex, or disability in providing education services, activities, and programs, including

vocational programs, in accordance with Title VI of the Civil Rights act of 1964, as amended; Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972; and Section 504 of the

Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended. For more information call 432-229-3375.

2

Table of Contents

District Improvement Plan 2015-2016

Summary

Introduction

Mission

District

Profile


Focus Area: Student Learning

Focus Area: Quality Learning and Working Environment

Focus Area: Effective and Efficient Organization

Focus Area: Parent and Community Engagement

Special Population Improvement Plans

3

Presidio Independent School District Improvement Plan

2015-2016 Summary

District Focus Area: Student Learning School Goal: All students will meet or exceed state standards in all content areas as measured by passing rates each six weeks, three State Assessment, and

yearly state required assessments.

Targets: ELA: 100% Math: 100% Science: 100% Social Studies: 100%

Strategies • Establish a process for supporting all learners in academics through appropriate interventions at the campus, classroom and individual

student levels.

• Strengthen literacy in all classes.

• Reinforce teacher/student engagement in SCA, Course Curriculum Maps, Lesson Planning, PDSA, and PDAS.

• Develop and implement strategies to attract and retain high quality, highly qualified teachers and para-professionals.

District Focus Area: Quality Learning and Working Environment School Goal: Create quality learning and working environments for all students, faculty, and staff as measured by semi-annual surveys, weekly attendance,

and nine-weeks discipline data.

Targets: 97% Attendance Rate 0% Major Discipline Actions

Strategies • Address standard faculty and staff and parent satisfaction issues.

• Establish a process for consistent implementation of student code of conduct.

• Establish a process to ensure a safe quality learning & working environments.

• Establish a professional development system.

District Focus Area: Effective and Efficient Operations

School Goal: Improve effectiveness of processes and procedures as measured by student, staff and parent satisfaction and climate surveys twice a year. Targets: 0% Drop Out Rate 100% Completion Rate

Strategies • Increase instructional time including but not limited to tutorials and enrichment.

• Ensure all district stakeholders have access to effective and efficient support resources.

• Ensure all students and staff have access to current, secure, and sustainable technology.

• Use Classroom Continuous Improvement to improve the school classroom systems.

District Focus Area: Parent and Community Engagement School Goal: Improve community engagement as measured by surveys at mid and end-of-year and documented participation throughout the year.

Target: 100% Parental Involvement

Strategies • Utilize parents, community organizations, businesses, and programs to increase student learning.

• Enhance customer service, particularly through welcoming environments, effective communication with the public, ongoing staff training

and results monitoring, and more multi-language information.

• Develop a quality measurement system of community engagement.

• Develop processes for transitioning students into the community.

4

Introduction

The Presidio Independent School District (PISD) Improvement Plan (DIP) is prepared in accordance with requirements of Chapter 11,

Subchapter F, of the Texas Education Code, specifically §11.251 and §11.252. These requirements are also contained in PISD policies BQ

(Legal) and BQA (Legal).

Each school district shall have a district improvement plan that is developed, evaluated, and revised annually, in accordance with district policy,

by the Superintendent with the assistance of the district-level committee. The purpose of the district improvement plan is to guide district and

campus staff in the improvement of student performance for all student groups in order to attain state standards in respect to academic excellence

indicators.

The DIP is required by statute to include the following components:

• Comprehensive needs assessment

• Measurable district performance objectives

• Strategies for improvement of student performance

• Strategies for providing secondary students with information on higher education preparation and opportunities

• Description of resources needed to implement identified strategies

• Description of staff responsible accomplishing of each strategy

• Timelines for implementation of each strategy

• Formative evaluation criteria

In developing the 2015-2016 DIP, the entire faculty and administration of Presidio ISD spent two days in June 2015, to work on the needs

assessment, not only as a District but also at the campus level. Presidio ISD District-wide Education Improvement Council (DWEIC) met in

committee through the fall and spring semester of the 2014-2015 school years to review the Needs Assessment, proposed Performance

Objectives and Targets, and complete the Action Steps. Campuses review data and plans throughout the year; plans carry over from previous

years to continue the revisions and appropriate strategies to continue for the current year and make changes to continue to improve and address

the student needs. The full DWEIC reviewed throughout the year and May 29, 2015, November 12, 2015, December 7, 2015 Approved: January

07, 2016 CCI Committee Revised 08-06-15 The Board of Trustees provided final approval:

5

Mission

Public Education Mission Statement: The mission of the public education system of this state is to ensure that all Texas children have access to a quality education that enables them

to achieve their potential and fully participate now and in the future in the social, economic, and educational opportunities of our state and

nation.

This mission is grounded on the conviction that a general diffusion of knowledge is essential for the welfare of this state and for the preservation

of the liberties and rights of citizens. It is further grounded on the conviction that a successful public education system is directly related to a

strong, dedicated and supportive family and that parental involvement in the school is essential for the maximum educational achievement of a

child.

Texas Education Code (TEC) 4.001 Public Education Goals

The goals of public education are to serve as a foundation for a well-balanced and appropriate education. The students in the public education

system will demonstrate exemplary performance in:

Goal One: The reading and writing of the English language.

Goal Two: The understanding of mathematics. Goal Three: The understanding of science.

Goal Four: The understanding of social studies.

Texas Education Code (TEC) 4.002 Presidio Independent School District Mission Statement:

The mission of the Presidio Schools, in cooperation with parents and the community, is to provide quality education and related support to

school-aged children in an equitable and accountable manner so that each student may become a literate, productive, and responsible American

citizen in a changing world.

Board Approved 1/20/04

6

District Profile

Presidio Schools believe all students can learn, and good teachers are the ones who make things happen. Presidio Independent School

District is committed to involving the school board, administrators, staff, parents, students and the community as a whole in solving

problems in order to bring about quality education.

Presidio Independent School District is a rural school district located on the Texas Mexico border in the Big Bend of Texas serving the

students of the communities of Presidio, Ruidoso, Candelaria, Shafter and through an agreement with Marfa Independent School

District, the community of Redford. Presidio ISD has one (1) elementary school, one (1) middle school, and one (1) high school. For

information about the district achievements and the student demographics, please visit the district website at http://www.presidio-

isd.net or on the TEA website at http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/. Presidio I.S.D. serves approximately 1,375 Pre-

Kindergarten through 12th grade students. The district also provides Distance Learning college courses through Sul Ross State

University and Odessa College, UTPB, TSTC, Texas Tech and UT.

Presidio I.S.D. is the largest employer in the city with approximately professional 143 and 120 full-time support staff.

District-wide Education Improvement Council

2015-2016

Voting Members:

Classification Name

Parent Socorro Rohana

Parent Lupe Calderon

Parent Alma Leyva

Community Member Arian Velazquez

Community Member Lupe Carrera

Business Representative Karmina Proaño

Business Representative Manuel Fausset

Business Representative Marisol Ramirez

http://www.tea.state.tx.us/perfreport/aeis/

7

Teachers:

PHS Rolando Gloria

PHS Perla Natividad

PHS Eric Turner

PHS Ebrahim Zakizadeh

LRFMS Jorge Avena

LRFMS Arely Perez

LRFMS Violeta Ledezma

LRFMS Samuel Aguilar

LRFMS Jesus Zubia

PES Maribel Santillan

PES Norma Escontias

PES Benito Escontrias

Non - Teaching:

PHS Dimitri Garcia

PHS Santos Lujan

LRFMS Edgar Tibayan

LRFMS Brian Whitecotton

PES Brenda Witty

District - Level Judith Pardo

Board Representative Dennis McEntire

This Council will meet during each academic year to review, revise and update the District

Improvement Plan.

8


The following District Improvement Plan is a document outlining district initiatives to improve student performance

and organizational effectiveness. Presidio Independent School District staff, students, and parents provided

suggestions for writing the District Improvement Plan. Each Campus Improvement Plan is written by elected

Professional Educators, Community Representatives, and Other Professionals and is aligned to the District

Improvement Plan.

To assess where our students are in relation to our mission and goals, a comprehensive needs assessment was

completed to identify strengths and areas of concern. A summary of the comprehensive needs assessment as well as

supporting documentation may be found in the Appendix.

Needs Assessment Instruments

Used in Planning:

1. Texas Assessment System

2. Accountability reports

3. Benchmark Results

4. Attendance Records (PEIMS)

5. Student, Staff, and Parent Satisfaction and Climate Surveys

Summary of Findings

All of the data reflects a need for school support in different strategies and rigor in order to improve test scores, and

overall educational performance. Presidio ISD is a STEM district and it is in aligned to the goals of STEM

academy. Presidio ISD is implementing strategies to address the weaknesses and build on the strengths of our

students. To address the needs established in the needs assessment, PISD has begun a comprehensive reform

initiative using Continuous Classroom Improvement as its model. This model focuses on a systems approach to

reform using data to drive collaborative decision making. Presidio ISD will be focusing in Project Based

Learning (PBL) while supporting our writing to learn strategies (W2L).

9

The following abbreviations or codes are used throughout this plan.

Abbreviations

CNA Comprehensive Needs Assess PI Parental Involvement

IS/EM/RS Instructional Strategies /Effective

Methods/Reform Strategies

PBL

Project Based Learning

HQ Highly qualified staff TIA Teacher Involvement in Assessments PD Professional Development W2L Writing to Learn

E/R Employee Recruitment Coord. Coordination/Integration

Program Budget

Codes

Bil

Bilingual

Local

Local

OEYP Optional Extended

Year T-1 Title I

SCE

State

Compensatory

Education.

Sp. Ed.

Sp. Education.

TI- Part C Migrant T-II A Title II, Part A

T-IV Title IV—Safe &

Drug Free

T-V A Title V—

Innovative

Other

Abbreviations AR Accelerated Reading AM Accelerated Mathematics

CCI Continuous Classroom Improvement

DWEIC District Wide Education Improvement

Council

FAT

Focus Area Team IEP Individual Education Plan

PLC Professional Learning Community TAPR Texas Academic Performance Report

VAT Vertical Alignment Team

TEKS Texas Knowledge & Skills

Note: X.X.X is the School Wide Component Numbering System: (Focus Area).(Focus Area Strategy).(Action Step)

10

District Focus Area: Student Learning District Goal: All students will meet or exceed state standards in all content areas as measured by passing rates each six weeks, benchmark tests, and yearly state required assessments.

District Priority Student Learning Target: By the end of the 2015-2016 school year, we will improve student performance in all areas and narrow the achievement gap between all students as

measured by:

• an increase in the percentage of students who pass state and local assessments.

• a decreased gap in the performance of all special population students and all students.

• an increase in the percentage of students achieving commended performance in all areas. District Strategy: 1.1 Establish a process for supporting all learners in academics through appropriate interventions at the campus, classroom and individual student levels.

School wide

Action/Strategy

Student

Staff Timeline Resources

Human/

Budget Code/ Evaluation Measures

Components Population Responsible Implementation Evaluation Materials

Amount Formative Summative

1.1.1 Disaggregation of

State Testing

data by Subgroups

All Campus

Administrators,

Counselors, Teachers

August May Eduphoria

Local, State, Federal

State

Assessment test

results, Benchmark

results

Summaries of

State

Assessments results by

subgroups 1.1.2 Benchmarks

Tests will be

administered on

all campuses

All Campus

Administrators,

Counselor,

Teachers

September May released tests,

teacher-made

tests

Benchmarks

Title I, OEYP,

SCE, Local

Individual test

results

Overall passing

percentage for

all content areas

1.1.3 Provide meetings

with parents to discuss state

assessment

testing and

requirements

All Campus

Administrators, Counselors,

Teachers

August May Reports and

individual results

Title I, Migrant, Title III, Local

Parent memos Sign-In sheets

1.1.4 Students who require related

services

will receive the

kind and amount

necessary

to benefit from special education

services

Special Ed. 588 Co-op, Sp. Ed.

Coordinators,

Campus

Administrators,

Counselors, Teachers

August May Campus budgets; 588

Co-op

Sp. Ed. Annual IEPs, lesson plans

Annual IEPs, AEIS data

Percentage of

State

Assessment

exemptions

1.1.5 Evaluate all

special programs

in place and make

recommendations

for improvement

All Campus

Administrators,

Counselors,

Teachers

Aug June Comprehensive

needs

assessments

Title I, Migrant, Title

III, Local

CNA forms Meetings

Comprehensive

needs

assessments

results

1.1.6 PISD will provide

Sufficient

instructional resources to each

teacher.

All Administration School Year School Year Budget Federal, Local and State

Staff Satisfaction

Student Performance

11

District Focus Area: Student Learning District Focus Area: Student Learning

District Goal: All students will meet or exceed state standards in all content areas as measured by passing rates each six weeks, three Benchmark test, and yearly state required

assessments.

District Priority Student Learning Target: By the end of the 2015-2016 school year, we will improve student performance in all areas and narrow the achievement gap between all students as measured by:


• a decreased gap in the performance of special population students and all students.

• an increase in the percentage of students achieving commended performance in all areas.

District Strategy: 1.1 Establish a process for supporting all learners in academics through appropriate interventions at the campus, classroom and individual student levels.

School wide

Student

Staff Timeline Resources Budget Evaluation Measures

Components Action/Strategy Population Responsible Implementation

Formative Evaluation

Human/ Materials

Code/ Amount

Formative Summative

1.1.7 Implement

curriculum maps

in all subjects for

grades K-12.

Vertical teaming to

refine the

curriculum maps.

1.1.8

1.1.9 Implement technology

programs at

grade-appropriate

levels, career

development

technology,

Benchmarks Test.

All Campus

Administrators,

Teachers A lll Special Ed.

Administration

Teachers All Director of

Technology,

Campus

Administrators,

Professional

staff,

Campus based

technology

support

specialists

August May All core content

professional staff Aug May Curriculum maps

Professional Staff Aug May Technology

Coordinators,

program-specific

software/hardware,

professional staff,

lab facilitators,

consultants, ESC-

18, campus based

technology support

specialists

Title I,

Local Federal,

State

Local Title I, III,

Bil.,

Migrant,

grants,

SCE, Local

Lesson plans.

Benchmarks Test Curriculum

maps, lesson

plans Pre-LAS testing,

STAR results,

program-specific

testing

Benchmark Test

Lesson plans,

test results Curriculum

maps

lesson plans Data,

standardized

test results

1.1.10 All identified

students will be

provided with

educational

services, resources,

whole child needs, and community

services

Homeless District and

campus

liaisons,

Campus

Administrators,

Homeless Coordinator

August May THEO, ESC-18

ESC, Title X

Coordinator

Title I Numbers of

students

identified,

Referrals

Number of

students

registered and

referrals

follow-up

12

District Focus Area: Student Learning

District Goal: All students will meet or exceed state standards in all content areas as measured by passing rates each six weeks, three benchmark test, and yearly state required assessments.



• a decreased gap in the performance of ELL students and all students.


District Strategy: 1.2 Strengthen literacy in all classes. Provide consistent approach with Bilingual/ESL Program.

School wide Components

Action/Strategy

Student Population

Staff Responsible

Implement

Timeline

ation Formative

Resources

Human/

Budget Code/

Evaluation Measures

Formative Summative

Evaluation Materials Amount 1.2.1 Vertical and

Horizontal

Alignment of

Bilingual/ESL

Program

ELL District August Annual Time, Curriculum

Maps


Vertical and Horizontal

Alignment of

Bilingual/ESL

Program

State

Assessment

and

Benchmarks

Test Results

1.2.2 Provide

opportunities for

all teachers to be

Bilingual and/or

ESL endorsed

ELL District and Campus Admin

August Annual Release Time,

Budget,

Professional

Development


Training sign- in sheets

Number of teachers with

Bilingual

and/or ESL

endorsement

1.2.3 Implementation of a consistent

District program

ELL District Admin

August Annual Time, Curriculum

Maps


Walk-throughs, Lesson Plans

State

Assessment

and

Benchmarks

Test Results

1.2.4 Implement Writing to Learn strategies to improve

performance of

English Language

Learners (ELLs)

ELL CCI Team and Campus Administrators

August Annual SIOP Model,

Training, Consultant

Trainer, Coach,

Time



State

Assessment and

Benchmarks

Test Results

1.2.5 Implement learning

strategies to

improve performance of

English Language

Learners (ELLs)

ELL CCI Team and Campus

Administrators

August Annual SIOP Model,

Training,

Consultant Trainer, Coach,

Time



State

Assessment

and Benchmarks

Test Results

13


District Goal: All students will meet or exceed state standards in all content areas as measured by passing rates each six weeks, three Benchmark test, and yearly state required

assessments. District Priority Student Learning Target: By the end of the 2015-2016 school year, we will improve student performance in all areas and narrow the achievement gap between all students as measured by:



• an increase in the percentage of students achieving commended performance in all areas. District Strategy: 1.3 Reinforce teacher/student engagement in benchmark test, Course Curriculum Maps, Lesson Planning, PDSA, and PDAS, AP Courses, Dual Enrollment

Courses.


Action/Strategy

Student Population

Staff Responsible

Implementa

Timeline

tion Formative

Resources

Human/

Budget Code/

Evaluation Measures

Formative Summative Evaluation Materials Amount

1.3.1 Benchmarks Tests and/or state

Assessment will be administered

on all campuses

All Campus Admin,

Counselor, Teachers

September May Eduphoria software,

released tests, teacher-made

tests

Title I, OEYP,

SCE, Local

Individual test results

Overall passing

percentage

for all content

areas 1.3.2 Implement

curriculum maps in

all subjects for

grades K-12. Use vertical teaming

to refine the

curriculum maps.

All Campus

Admin,

Teachers,

VATs

August May All core

content

professional

staff, Time

Title I, Local

Lesson plans. Benchmarks

Test

Lesson plans, test results

1.3.3 Implement a district wide

lesson plan

format that

incorporates all

elements of Continuous

Classroom

Improvement

All Campus Admin,

Teachers

August Annual Technology, Intranet,

Lesson Plan

Form and

Rubric

Local Lesson Plan Form

Lesson Plan Rubric

1.3.4 Increase the use

of quality tools in

the classroom (i.e.

plus/delta, issue

bin,

consensogram,

etc.)

All Campus

Admin,

Teachers

August Annual Training,

Coaching,

Consultant

Trainer Coach

Local,

State,

Federal

Training

sign-in

sheets,

coaching

reports

Walk-

troughs,

PDAS

1.3.5 Train all teachers in appraisal system

yearly (T-TESS)

All Campus and District

Admin

August September Training Materials,

Time

Local Training sign-in sheets

T-TESS

1.3.6 Teachers

integrating

college and career

Standards in their

courses

All Campus and

District

Admin

August Annual Highly

Qualified

Teachers

Local

State

Federal

Lesson Plans Lesson Plans,

Walk- troughs

14

1.3.7 Provide

professional

development for teachers in

college and career

standards

All Campus and District

Admin

August Annual Highly Qualified

Teachers

Local State

Federal

Sign-in sheets

Lesson Plans,

Walk- troughs

1.3.8 Expand the use of

concurrent and dual enrollment

courses

All Campus and

District Admin,

Counselor

August Annual Partnership

Agreements with area

colleges

Local State

Federal

Class Rosters Course Completion

Rate

15


District Goal: All students will meet or exceed state standards in all content areas as measured by passing rates each six weeks, three Benchmark test, and yearly state required assessments.





District Strategy: 1.4 Develop and implement strategies to attract and retain high quality, highly qualified teachers and para-professionals.


Action/Strategy

Student Population

Staff Responsible

Implement

Timeline

ation Formative

Resources

Human/

Budget Code/

Evaluation Measures

Formative Summative

Evaluation Materials Amount 1.4.1 Identify and

attend all possible

job fairs and

Recruiting sites.

All Administration & Appointed

Staff

2015-2016 Annual Staff Budget

State, Federal and

Local

Job Fair List Travel Records

1.4.2 Recruit highly Qualified teachers

from multiple

sources.

All Administration & Staff

2015-2016 Annual Staff Budget

State, Federal and

Local

Percentage of highly qualified

staff hired

Personnel Files

Highly

Qualified

Report

1.4.3 PISD will offer

Stipends for critical need

areas.

All Administration 2015-2016 Annual Budget State,

Federal and

Local

Percentage of

teachers retained

SBEC

Records

1.4.4 PISD will Provide

opportunities

for staff to

participate in

certification

preparation.

All Administration School Year School Year Budget Federal, Local and

State

Training Sign- In Sheets,

Transportation

Log, Staff

Development

Certificate

SBEC Certificate

1.4.5 PISD will offer

Moving and housing

assistance to new

teachers.

All Administration 2015-2016 First Semester

of

Employment

Budget State,

Federal and

Local

Percentage of

highly qualified staff hired

Personnel

Files Highly

Qualified

Report

1.4.6 PISD will

maintain a competitive

Salary schedule.

All Administration 2015-2016 School Year Budget State, Federal and Local

Percentage of

teachers retained

Records

16


District Goal: All students will meet or exceed state standards in all content areas as measured by passing rates each six weeks, three Benchmark test, and yearly state required assessments.





District Strategy: 1.4 Develop and implement strategies to attract and retain high quality, highly qualified teachers and para-professionals.


Action/Strategy

Student

Populati

on

Staff Responsible

Timeline Resources Budget

Code/

Amount

Evaluation Measures

Implementation Formative

Evaluation Human/

Materials Formative Summative

1.4.7 PISD will offer a new teacher

orientation to

welcome new

teachers to the

district.

All FAT 2, CCI

Mentoring

Program

August September New Teacher Survival

Guide,

Handbooks

Federal, Local

and State

Sign-In Sheets,

Attendance,

Plus/Delta

Teacher Retention

CCI Teacher

Visits

Reports

1.4.8 PISD will offer a mentoring

program (CCI

Team) to team

new teachers with

guidance.

All FAT 2, CCI Team

August June Mentoring Grant,

Consultants,

Reference

Books, Staff

Development,

Mentor

Stipends

Federal, Local

and State

Sign-In Sheets,

Monthly

Seminars,

Coaching

Visit Reports

Teacher Retention

CCI

Program

Evaluation

1.4.9 PISD will reimburse

certification exam

fees upon

submission of

certificate(s).

critical areas only.

All Administration School Year School Year

Budget

Federal,

Local

and State

SBEC Records

SBEC Certificate

17

District Focus Area: Student Learning District Goal: All students will be educated in learning environment that are safe, drug free, and conducive to learning.


• an increase in the percentage of students who pass state and local assessments. • a decreased gap in the performance of special population students and all students. • an increase in the percentage of students achieving commended performance in all areas.

District Strategy: 1.5 Develop and implement strategies implement strategies to maintain a coordinated school health program.


Action/Strategy

Student Populati on

Staf

f Responsibl

e

Timeline

Resources Budget Code/

Amount

Evaluation Measures

Implementa

tion

Formative Evaluation

Human/ Materials Formative Summative

1.5.1 PISD will

provide

awareness

training and

education for

the school

community

All SHAC Administration Teachers, and staff

August May Time, Presidio ISD

Police, SHAC

Faculty

Time

SCE, Local

Materials, Agenda Sign-in

1.5.2 Develop on-going

curriculum that

includes

educational

presentations to

student on teen

dating violence,

sexual violence,

and acquaintance

rape prevention

All SHAC

Administration

Teachers, and

staff

August May Presidio ISD Police,

Crisis Center, SHAC

CATCH curriculum,

TDSHS

Title I, SCE,

Local

Timeline for

framework

development

Curriculu

m work in

progress

1.5.3 Implement

Educational

program as well

discipline program

to prevent bullying

and provide

resources for

students, parents

and community.

All SHAC Administration Teachers, and staff

August May CATCH Curriculum Crisis Center SHAC Faculty and staff, Presidio ISD Police dept.

Local Sign-ins parent

meeting, Forms-

parent permissions

Student

Attendance

18

1.5.4 Implement

Educational program

as well discipline

program to prevent

bullying and provide

resources for students,

parents and

community

All SHAC

Administration

Teachers, and

staff

August May Time Crisis Center,

SHAC Faculty and staff

Presidio ISD

Police Dept.

Local Parent meeting,

Forms- parent

permissions

Sigh-in

19

Area:2.Focus Quality Learning and Working Environment

District Focus Area: Quality Learning and Working Environment

District Goal: Create quality learning and working environments for all students, faculty, and staff as measured by semi-annual surveys, weekly attendance, and nine-

weeks discipline data.

District Strategy: 2.1 Address standard faculty and staff and parent satisfaction issues.

School wide

Components

Action/Strategy

Student

Population

Staff

Responsible

Implement

Timeline

ation Formative

Resources

Human/

Budget Code/

Evaluation Measures

Formative Summative

Evaluation Materials Amount 2.1.1 Conduct parent

surveys to

determine

satisfaction issues

and address areas

in need of improvement at the

appropriate level

All Administrators Teachers

Parent liaisons

December May Surveys HB5 –Survey

Local Surveys Formulated

HB5 Survey

results

Survey Results

HB5 Survey

results

2.1.2 Conduct student

surveys to determine

satisfaction issues


Parent liaisons

December May Surveys Local Surveys Formulated

Survey Results

2.1.3 Conduct staff surveys to

determine

satisfaction issues

All Administrators

Teachers

Parent liaisons

December May Surveys Local Surveys Formulated

Survey Results

2.1.4 Conduct evaluations of all

trainings and

meetings using

quality tools, i.e.

plus/delta


Parent liaisons

August Annual Evaluation Instruments

Local Evaluation Instruments

Formulated

Evaluation Results

2.1.5 Create a district-

wide and community

communication

and feedback

system to address

areas of celebration and

areas in need of

improvement (i.e.,

issue bin,

suggestion box,

etc.)


Parent liaisons

August Annual Communication System

Local Communication System Created

Feedback Results

20


District Goal: Create quality learning and working environments for all students, faculty, and staff as measured by semi-annual surveys, weekly attendance, and nine-

weeks discipline data.

District Strategy: 2.2 Address standard faculty and staff and parent satisfaction issues.

School wide

Components

Action/Strategy

Student

Population

Staff

Responsible

Implement

Timeline

ation Formative

Resources

Human/

Budget Code/

Evaluation Measures

Formative Summative

Evaluation Materials Amount 2.2.1 Provide district wide

professional

development

opportunities in

conflict resolution,

district discipline

policies student code

of conduct

New Staff ESC-18, 588

Co-op,

Campus

Administrators

August May Campus Administrators, 588-Co-op, ESC-18

Federal, State, Local SCE, SP. Ed

Sign-in Sheets Certificates

2.2.2 Provide district wide professional

development

updates in district

discipline policies

and student code of conduct

District-wide ESC-18, 588 Co-op,

Campus

Administrators




2.2.3 Distribute

classroom

management plans,

discipline policies, and student code of

Conduct to teacher,

parents and

students

All Campus

Administrators

Teacher




2.2.4 Continue

employment of

Truant officer to

monitor student

attendance

All Superintendent August May District Personnel SCE, Local Payroll ADA records

21


District Goal: Create quality learning and working environments for all students, faculty, and staff as measured by semi-annual surveys, weekly attendance, and nine-weeks discipline data.

District Strategy: 2.3 Establish a process to ensure a safe quality learning & working environments.

School wide

Components

Action/Strategy

Student

Population

Staff

Responsible

Implemen

Timeline

tation Formative

Resources

Human/

Budget Code/

Evaluation Measures

Formative Summative

Evaluation Materials Amount 2.3.1 Vertical Teams

will continue to refine and update

the District

Curriculum Maps

in all subjects and

all grades.

All Campus

Administrators, Teacher

Leaders,

teachers,

August May Campus

Administrators, Teachers,

TEKS strands,

Curriculum

Maps, Early

Release Days

Federal,

State Local

Sign-in sheets,

meeting minutes

Vertically

aligned curriculum

2.3.2 Establish programs

to address suicide prevention,

conflict resolution,

and violence

prevention

All Campus

Administrators, Teachers,

counselors,

student liaisons

August May Program and

intervention

Strategies ESC-18

Title I, IV, SCE, Local

Interventions Newspaper articles, memos

Safe learning

environment on all

campuses

2.3.3 Student and

community groups

will work together to assist and

present different

community

involvement

activities such as

Red Ribbon Week, Family Violence

Awareness, and

other public

service initiatives

All Counselors,

student liaisons,

Family Crisis Center, Student

Council, NHS

Presidio ISD

Police dept.

August May Family Crisis

Center, ESC-

18, Student Organizations

Presidio ISD

Police dept.

Title I, IV,

SCE, Local Curriculum,

Lesson Plans,

News Articles

Safe learning

environment

on all campuses

22


District Goal: Create quality learning and working environments for all students, faculty, and staff as measured by semi-annual surveys, weekly attendance, and nine-weeks discipline data.

District Strategy: 2.4 Establish a process to ensure a safe quality learning & working environments.

School wide

Components

Action/Strategy

Stude

nt

Population

Staff

Responsible

Implemen

Timeline

tation Formative

Resources

Human/

Budget Code/

Evaluation Measures

Formative Summative

Evaluation Materials Amount 2.4.1 Determine needs

of staff and

students

LEP ALL Bilingual/ ESL

Director,

Campus

Administrators

Surveys Distributed Survey results Survey Data

Beginning of Year Planning

Staff Survey State,

Federal,

Local

Writing

and Oral

Survey

Results

Survey

Report

2.4.2 Develop training

plan-follow state

and federal training

LEP ALL Bilingual/ESL

Director, CCI

Team

and Campus Bilingual/ESL

Staff

Completed Training Plan

Ongoing Student and

Staff Data

State

Federal

Local

Training Plan Training

Plan

2.4.3 Training of Staff LEP ALL Bilingual/ESL

Director, CCI

Team

and Campus

Bilingual/ESL

Staff

Application of Strategies

Ongoing Specific

trainings

Trainers

Budget

State Federal

Local Administrator

Walk Through

Data

State

Assessment

2.4.4 Application of strategies in classroom

LEP ALL Bilingual/ESL Director, CCI Team and Campus Bilingual/ESL Staff

Walk-throughs and formal observations Teacher Self- Report

Ongoing Classroom Materials

State Federal Local

Administrator

Walk Through

data

State Assessment results

23

Special Population Improvement Plans

5. Title I, Part A Schoolwide

6. Title I, Part C Migrant Education

7. Title III, Part A—English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement/Bilingual/English as a

Second Language Program

8. State Compensatory Education (SCE)/At Risk

9. Special Education

10. Dyslexia

11. Advanced Academics/Gifted and Talented Program

12. BE/ESL Improvement Plan- PBMAS

13. Early College High School

14. T-Stem Academy Program

24

5. Title I, Part A Schoolwide

This district and campus ensure that the goals of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) have been adopted

and implemented in the district and campus improvement plans.

Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) Goals and Indicators

Performance Goal 1: All students will reach high standards, at a minimum attaining proficiency or better in reading/language arts and mathematics

as measured by the State Assessments.

1.1 Performance indicator: The percentage of students, in the aggregate and for each subgroup, who are at or above the proficient level in

reading/language arts on the State’s assessment (Note: These subgroups are those for which the ESEA requires State reporting, as identified in section

1111(h)(1)(C)(i).)

1.2 Performance indicator: The percentage of students, in the aggregate and in each individual student group, who are at or above the proficient

level in mathematics on the State’s assessment. (Note: These subgroups are those for which the ESEA requires State reporting, as identified in section

1111(h)(1)(C)(i).)

1.3 Performance indicator: The percentage of Title I schools that make adequate yearly progress.

Performance Goal 2: All limited English proficient students will become proficient in English and reach high academic standards, at a minimum attaining

proficiency or better in reading/language arts and mathematics as measured by the State Assessments.

2.1 Performance indicator: The percentage of limited English proficient students, determined by cohort, who have attained English proficiency

by the end of the school year.

2.2 Performance indicator: The percentage of limited English proficient students who are at or above the proficient level in reading/language arts on the State’s assessment, as reported for performance indicator 1.1.

2.3 Performance indicator: The percentage of limited English proficient students who are at or above the proficient level in mathematics on the State’s assessment, as reported for performance indicator 1.2.

Performance Goal 3: All students will be taught by highly qualified teachers as measured by the State Assessments.

3.1 Performance indicator: The percentage of classes being taught by “highly qualified” teachers (as the term is defined in section 9101(23) of the ESEA), in the aggregate and in “high-poverty” schools (as the term is defined in section 1111(h)(1)(C)(viii) of the SEA).

3.2 Performance indicator: The percentage of teachers receiving high-quality professional development (as the term, “professional development,” is defined in section 9101(34).

3.3 Performance indicator: The percentage of paraprofessionals (excluding those with sole duties as translators and parental involvement assistants) who are qualified (see criteria in section 1119(c) and (d).

Performance Goal 4: All students will be educated in learning environments that are safe, drug free, and conducive to learning as measured by the public

safety report.

4.1 Performance indicator: The number of persistently dangerous schools, as defined by the State.

25

Performance Goal 5: All students will graduate from high school as measured by drop out report.

5.1 Performance indicator: The percentage of students in the aggregate and in each group who graduate from high school each year with a

regular diploma,-disaggregated by race, ethnicity, gender, disability status, migrant status, English proficiency, and status as economically

disadvantaged:-calculated in the same manner as utilized in Nation Center for Education Statistics reports on Common Core of Data.

5.2 Performance indicator: The percentage of students who drop out of school,-disaggregated by race, ethnicity, gender, disability status, migrant

status, English proficiency, and status as economically disadvantaged;-calculated in the same manner as utilized in Nation Center for

Education Statistics reports on Common Core of Data.

Title I, Part A—Improving Basic Programs Operated by LEAs

Intent and Purpose

Title I, Part A, provides supplemental resources to local education agencies (LEAs) to help schools with high concentrations of students from low-income

families provide high-quality education that will enable all children to meet the state student performance standards. Title I, Part A, supports campuses in

implementing either a schoolwide program or a targeted assistance program. All campuses in Presidio ISD are Title I Schoolwide campuses.

It is recommended that all Title I, Part A, campuses have a school support team consisting of two to three members as appropriate to monitor program

compliance and effectiveness. The campus site-based decision-making committee provides the school support team function.

The school support team verifies the effectiveness of the General Program Requirements and Schoolwide Requirements stated below.

Intended Program Beneficiaries

The intended program beneficiaries are students who experience difficulties mastering the state academic achievement standards. General Program Requirements

All Campuses

All Title I, Part A, campuses must do the following:

1. implement Parents Right-to-Know in accordance with P.L. 107–110, Section 1111(h)(6)

2. develop school-parent compacts jointly with parents

3. provide information to parents in the language parents understand

4. develop an LEA and campus Parent Involvement Policies

5. implement Section 1304.21 of the Head Start Standards if implementing pre-school programs

35

6. integrate and coordinate Title I, Part A, professional development and services with other educational services and programs

7. provide additional assistance to students identified as needing help in meeting the state’s challenging student academic achievement standards

8. ensure that all new teachers hired on the campus to teach core academic subjects are highly qualified when hired

9. include in the Campus Improvement Plan (CIP) strategies and activities to ensure that all core academic subject area teachers teaching within the

school are highly qualified not later than the end of 2012–2013 school year Schoolwide Campuses The CIP of a Schoolwide Campus must do the following:

10. incorporate the requirements of a Schoolwide Plan as cited in P.L. 107–110, Section 1114(b)

11. clearly incorporate the Ten Components of a Schoolwide Program

12. describe how the school will use Title I, Part A, resources and other sources to implement the ten components

13. include a list of state and federal programs whose funds will be combined to implement a schoolwide program

14. describe how the intent and purposes of the Federal programs whose funds are combined on a schoolwide campus are met

15. include sufficient activities to address the needs of the intended beneficiaries of the Federal programs whose funds are combined on a schoolwide

campus for upgrading the entire education program.

In consultation with the local auditor, business office, administrators, and other campus professional staff, the decision was made to use the following

accounting method:

The following narrative contains the Intent and Purpose of each Federal fund that is used on this campus to enhance and upgrade the activities. The

district and campus ensure that the intent and purpose of each program is met through sufficient resources and activities addressed in the District

Improvement Plan and Campus Improvement Plan.

Title II, Part A—Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting Fund (TPTR) The Presidio ISD REAPS 100% of the Title II, Part A funds into the Title I, Part A Schoolwide Program.

Intent and Purpose

The intent and purpose of this program is to provide financial assistance to LEAs to do the following:

36

16. increase student academic achievement through improving teacher and principal quality and increasing the number of highly qualified teachers in

classrooms and highly qualified principals and assistant principals in schools

17. hold LEAs and schools accountable for improving student academic achievement Intended Program Beneficiaries

Intended beneficiaries are teachers and principals, including assistant principals, and as appropriate, administrators, pupil services personnel, and

paraprofessionals.

General Program Requirements

TPTR program activities are required to do the following:

18. They must be based on a local assessment of needs for professional development and hiring.

19. These activities must meet the following:

be aligned with state academic content and student academic performance standards and State Assessments

be aligned with curricula and programs tied to state academic content and student academic performance standards

be based on a review of scientifically-based research

have a substantial, measurable, and positive impact on student academic achievement

be part of a broader strategy to eliminate the achievement gap between low-income and minority students and other students

20. Professional development activities must be coordinated with other professional development activities provided through other Federal, state, and

local programs, including Title II, Part D (technology), funds.

Allowable Use of Funds [Section 2123(a)]

You must use TPTR funds to implement one or more of the following allowable activities:

21. recruiting, hiring, and retention of highly qualified personnel

22. providing professional development

23. improving the quality of the teacher and paraprofessional work force under Section 1119

24. reducing class size (only when the class-size reduction teacher is a highly qualified teacher) Consistent with local planning requirements and your organization’s needs assessment, the Title II, Part A, program offers you the flexibility to design and

implement a wide variety of activities that promote a teaching staff that is highly qualified and able to help all students—regardless of individual learning

37

needs—achieve challenging State content and academic achievement standards. Funds also can be used to provide school principals with the knowledge and

skills necessary to lead their schools’ efforts to increase student academic achievement.

You should be able to respond appropriately to and maintain documentation for each of the following questions to determine whether an expenditure would

be allowable:

25. Is the program, activity, or strategy reasonable and necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of the program?

26. Does the program, activity, or strategy address a need previously identified in the campus comprehensive needs assessment?

27. How will the program, activity, or strategy be evaluated to measure a positive impact on student achievement?

28. Is the program, activity, or strategy supplemental to other non-federal programs?

The Title II, Part A, statute specifically authorizes the following types of activities:

1. developing and implementing mechanisms to assist schools to effectively recruit and retain highly qualified teachers, principals, and specialists in

core academic areas (and other pupil services personnel in special circumstances).

2. developing and implementing strategies and activities to recruit, hire, and retain highly qualified teachers and principals

These strategies may include the following:

3. providing monetary incentives such as scholarships, signing bonuses, or differential pay for teachers in academic subjects or schools in which the

LEA has shortages

4. reducing class size

5. recruiting teachers to teach special needs children

6. recruiting qualified paraprofessionals and teachers from populations underrepresented in the teaching profession and providing those

paraprofessionals with alternative routes to obtaining teacher certification

7. providing professional development activities that improve the knowledge of teachers and principals and in appropriate cases paraprofessionals in the

following:

8. content knowledge—providing training in one or more of the core academic subjects that the teachers teach

9. classroom practices—providing training to improve teaching practices and student academic achievement through (1) effective instructional

strategies, methods, and skills, and (2) the use of challenging state academic content standards and student academic achievement standards in

preparing students for the State Assessments

38

10. providing professional development activities that improve the knowledge of teachers and principals, and in appropriate cases, paraprofessionals

regarding effective instructional practices that do the following:

11. involve collaborative groups of teachers and administrators

12. address the needs of students with different learning styles, particularly students with disabilities, students with special needs (including students

who are gifted and talented), and students with LEP

13. provide training in improving student behavior in the classroom and identifying early and appropriate interventions to help students with special

needs

14. provide training to enable teachers and principals to involve parents in their children’s education, especially parents of LEP and immigrant

children

15. provide training on how to use data and assessments to improve classroom practice and student learning. 16. developing and implementing initiatives to promote retention of highly qualified teachers and principals, particularly in schools with a high

percentage of low-achieving students, including programs that provide teacher mentoring from exemplary teachers and administrators, induction and

support for new teachers and principals during their first three years, and financial incentives to retain teachers and principals with a record of helping

students to achieve academic success 17. carrying out programs and activities that are designed to improve the quality of the teaching force, such as innovative professional development

programs that focus on technology literacy, tenure reform, testing teachers in the academic subjects in which teachers teach, and merit pay programs 18. carrying out professional development programs that are designed to improve the quality of principals and superintendents, including the

development and support of academies to help them become outstanding managers and educational leaders 19. hiring highly qualified teachers, including teachers who become highly qualified through State and local alternative routes to certification, and

special education teachers in order to reduce class size, particularly in the early grades 20. carrying out teacher advancement initiatives that promote professional growth and emphasize multiple career paths (such as paths to becoming a

mentor teacher, career teacher, or exemplary teacher) and pay differentiation

39

Title III, Part A—English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic

Achievement

Intent and Purpose

Title III, Part A, provides supplemental resources to LEAs to help ensure that children who are limited English proficient attain English proficiency (LEP)

at high levels in core academic subjects and can meet state mandated achievement performance standards.

Intended Program Beneficiaries

Intended beneficiaries are LEP students, including immigrant children and youth General Program Requirements

The requirements are to help ensure that LEP children, including immigrant children and youth, attain English proficiency, develop high levels of

academic attainment, and meet the same challenging State academic content and student academic achievement standards as all children are expected to

meet by doing the following:

29. assisting all LEP and immigrant students to achieve at high levels in the core academic subjects and achieve standards required in Title I, Section

1111(b)(1)

30. developing high-quality language instruction educational programs designed to assist state educational agencies, LEAs, and schools in teaching

LEP

and immigrant students

31. assisting state and local educational agencies to develop and enhance their capacity to provide high-quality instructional programs designed

to prepare LEP and immigrant students enter all-English instruction settings

32. assisting State and local educational agencies and schools to build their capacity to establish, implement, and sustain language

instruction educational programs and programs of English language development for LEP students

33. promoting parental and community participation in language instruction educational programs for LEP students

34. streamlining language instruction educational programs to help LEP and immigrant students develop proficiency in English while

meeting challenging state academic content and student academic achievement standards

35. holding State and local educational agencies and schools accountable for increases in English proficiency and core academic content knowledge of

LEP students

36. providing State and local educational agencies the flexibility to implement language instructional programs that are the most effective based

on scientifically-based research on teaching LEP students P.L. 107–110, Section 3102

40

Title III, Part A, funds shall be used to supplement and not supplant any other Federal, State, or local funds. For example, if an LEA is using state

bilingual funds to provide LEP services to students, and now replaces those state funds with Title III, Part A, funds, then the LEA has supplanted state

funds with

federal funds. To avoid supplanting funds, the LEA would have to demonstrate that any LEP services provided with Title III, Part A, funds are above

and beyond any LEP services provided with state funds. Allowable Use of Funds

An LEA receiving Title III, Part A, funds must use the funds to do the following:

increase the English proficiency of LEP children by providing high-quality language-instruction educational programs that are based on

scientifically-based research demonstrating the effectiveness of the programs in increasing English proficiency and student academic achievement

in the core academic subjects

provide high-quality professional development to classroom teachers (including teachers in classroom settings that are not the settings of

language- instruction educational programs), principals, administrators, and other school or community-based organizational personnel, that

meets the following:

is designed to improve the instruction and assessment of LEP children

is designed to enhance the ability of such teachers to understand and to use curricula, assessment measures, and instructional strategies for LEP

children

is based on documented research demonstrating the effectiveness of the professional development in increasing children’s English proficiency

or substantially increasing the subject matter knowledge, teaching knowledge, and teaching skills of such teachers

is of sufficient intensity and duration to have a positive and lasting impact on the teachers’ performance in the classroom.

This last point does not include activities such as one-day or short-term workshops and conferences unless these activities are components of a

long-term, comprehensive professional-development plan established by a teacher and the teacher’s supervisor and are based on an assessment

of the needs of the teacher, the supervisor, the students of the teacher, and any LEA employing the teacher.

The district and campus is able to respond appropriately to and maintains documentation for each of the following questions to determine whether

an expenditure would be allowable:

37. Is the program, activity, or strategy reasonable and necessary to carry out the intent and purpose of the program?

38. Does the program, activity, or strategy address a need previously identified in the campus comprehensive needs assessment?

39. How will the program, activity, or strategy e be evaluated to measure a positive impact on the English language acquisition and

academic achievement of LEP students?

40. Is the program, activity, or strategy supplemental to other Federal and non-Federal programs?

41

The district and/or campus may also use Title III, Part A, funds to achieve one of the program purposes by undertaking one or more of the

following activities:

upgrading program objectives and effective instructional strategies

improving the instructional program for LEP children by identifying, acquiring, and upgrading curricula, instructional materials, educational

software, and assessment procedures

providing the following

tutorials and academic or vocational education for LEP children

intensified instruction

developing and implementing elementary school or secondary school language-instruction educational programs that are coordinated with other

relevant programs and services

improving the English proficiency and academic achievement of LEP children

providing community participation programs, family literacy services, and parent outreach and training activities to LEP children and their families

to do the following:

to improve the English language skills of LEP children

to assist parents in helping their children to improve their academic achievement by becoming active participants in the education of their children

improving the instruction of LEP children by providing for the following:

the acquisition or development of educational technology or instructional materials

access to and participation in electronic networks for materials, training, and communication

incorporation of these resources into curricula and programs

Note: Administrative costs, both direct and indirect, are restricted to no more than 2% of the current-year Title III, Part A—LEP entitlement.

42

In consultation with the local auditor, business office, administrators, and other campus professional staff, the decision was made to use the following

accounting method:

Title I, Part A Fund Code 211

Title II, Part A Fund Code 255/REAPd 100% into Title I, Part A Fund Code 211 using 8911

Title III, Part A Fund Code 263/REAPd 100% into Title I, Part A Fund Code 211 using 8911

State and Federal Fund Allocation by Campus

Fund Source

Allocation Amount

Presidio Elementary School Lucy Rede Franco Middle

School Presidio High School

Title I, Part A 153,113 65,743 200,885

Title I, Part C 10,2002 33,000 133,000

Title II, Part A 50,231 32,557 25,559

Title III, LEP 81,039

SCE Funds 524,150 317,895 373,775

State Bilingual 136,050 54,200 52,360

Total 954,785 470,428 652,712

43

The following campus activities and/or staff positions will be funded using the combined federal funds:

Comprehensive Needs Assessment Results

The following data sources were available for review to assess the district’s strengths and priorities:

Disaggregated student assessment information

TPRI

Compliance Reports

Highly Qualified Reports

Teacher and parent interviews/surveys

Technology, Fiscal and Facility Resources

Participation records of students enrolled in special programs (GT, Special Education, ESL)

Staff Development Records

Assessment data and curriculum alignment

Impact of initiatives on student performance

The AEIS reports indicate that the needs of most of our students are being addressed. As indicated in the comprehensive needs assessment section, we need

to address the needs of the ELL students in all areas. While the gap between ethnic groups and economically disadvantaged has improved slightly, we still

have gaps that need to be closed.

We have a schoolwide Title I school program with approximately 89.02% economically disadvantaged students and use the following fund sources to

improve our educational program.

Multiple sources are used to support each of the educational programs on the campus. The funds used and the amounts are allocated according to the

following table:

44

State and Federal Educational Program Funding

Fund Source Allocation Amount FTE

Title I, Part A 635,286

Title I, Part C 44,268

Title II, Part A 109,608

Title III, LEP 81,199 12.2 FTE-10.8%

SCE Funds 1,215.820

SPED 1,018.750 6.1 FTE-5.4%

ESL 273.760

Total Allocation Amount 3,378,691

NOTE:

(1) The Highly Qualified Recruitment and Retention Plan is a part of District Improvement Plan Focus Area: Student Learning, listed earlier in the

District Improvement Plan.

(2) The Migrant Priority for Services (PFS) Action Plan is a separate plan in the Sub-Population Plans Section of the District Improvement Plan.

45

Title I, Part A Schoolwide

Measurable Performance Objective: 100% of all students will pass all portions of STATE ASSESSMENTS tests taken. Presidio Elementary School,

Lucy Rede Franco Middle School, and Presidio High School are campuses that have a Title I, Part A Schoolwide Program with a student poverty rate of at

least 40 percent that combines federal funds with SCE funds to upgrade services for at-risk students on the Schoolwide Campus. All school staff are

expected to direct efforts toward upgrading the entire education program and improve achievement for all students, particularly low achieving.

Activities/Strategies/

Initiatives

Staff

Responsible

Time Line Resources Formative

Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

5.1. Conduct a comprehensive needs assessment of the entire school which

may include but is not limited to STATE

ASSESSMENT, TPRI, TELPAS,

STATE ASSESSMENT-Alt, STATE

ASSESSMENT-M, BENCHMARK,

PBM, AEIS indicators, AYP, staff

development, Safe & Drug Free Schools

& Communities (SDFSC) annual report,

HQ teachers, etc.

5.2. Ensure schoolwide reform strategies

address areas of weaknesses as

identified in the comprehensive needs

assessment such as: (Accelerated

Reader, RTI, Rosetta Stone, Content

Mastery Lab, Computer Assisted

Instruction, etc.)

Administrators Counselor

DWEIC

Administrators Teachers

DWEIC

Ongoing Daily

Federal, state, local AEIS-It,

CNA form Federal, MEP, ESL,

SCE, Local, Title III

Disaggregated data

Daily class schedules

Areas of strengths and weaknesses identified

Increased student scores

STATE ASSESSMENT

5.3. Ensure instruction of all students by highly qualified staff/complete highly

qualified forms for each teacher and

paraprofessional

5.4. Provide/require attendance of

research based staff development for

professional staff and paraprofessionals

to maintain 100% classes taught by HQ

teachers

5.5. Attend job fairs, recruit from

teacher certification programs,

advertisements to ensure avenues for

attracting highly qualified teachers to

high needs schools

Administrators

Administrators

Teachers, ESC

Administrators

Daily

Fall/Spring

Spring/Summer

Federal, state, MEP, ESL, local, SCE, Title

III

Federal, state, local


List of all teachers providing instruction

Teacher observation

Staff development

calendars Course vacancy list

Teacher Certificates HQ Teacher Survey Report

State assessment

Attendance Certificates

Highly qualified staff

46



Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

5.6. Provide parent involvement activities that are planned by

parents in order to increase parent

involvement

5.7. Principal completes Principal

Attestation form

5.8. Teachers collaborate with

PLCs to decide the use of

alternative assessments

5.9. Provide effective, timely,

additional assistance to students

(including homeless students) who

experience difficulty mastering the

proficient or advanced levels of

academic achievement standards

through frequent monitoring of

student progress and placement in

supplemental programs in the core

subject areas

5.10. Coordinate federal, state, and

local services and programs and

integration with the schoolwide

program

Administrators Parent

representatives

DWEIC, PTO,

Focus Area Team

#4

Administration

Administrator,

Teachers

Administrator

Counselors

Teachers

Homeless Education

Liaison

Administrator

DWEIC

ESC

Ongoing

December

Ongoing

Each six weeks

Ongoing

Federal, state MEP, Local

Federal

Local

Federal, state, MEP,

ESL, Title III, Local,

SCE,

Title I, Part A, ESL,

CTE, Dyslexia, Title II,

Part A, Title II, Part D,

Title III, Title IV, Title

I, Part C, G/T, OEY,

SCE, Local, Special

Education

Parent involvement activities scheduled on

school calendar

Forms in Principal’s

Office

PLCs Meetings

Three week progress

reports

Tutorial Schedule

Agenda, minutes of

meetings

Sign-in sheets at activities to determine increase/decrease

Forms in Superintendent’s

Office

List of assessments to be used

Report Cards

Credit awarded

List of programs by

campus/district

47



Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

5.11. Coordinate and integrate Title I, Part A

services with other

educational services

such as preschool

programs,

Bilingual/ESL

programs, special

education programs,

migratory children,

neglected or delinquent

youth, homeless

children, and immigrant

children in order to

increase program

effectiveness, eliminate

duplication, and reduce

fragmentation of the

instructional program

5.12. Evaluate parent

involvement program

and include parents in

the process

5.13. Review parent

involvement policy that

is developed jointly,

agreed upon, and

distributed to parents

Administration DWEIC

Administrators,

DWEIC, Focus Area Team #4, PTO

Administrators,

DWEIC, Focus Area

Team #4, PTO

Fall

Spring

Ongoing

Federal, state, local, BE/ESL, Special

Education, MEP, Title

III

Evaluation document

Time

schedules, agendas and minutes of planning

meetings

Results of evaluation

Meeting notifications,

agendas, minutes, sign-

in sheets, evaluation

data of parent

involvement

List of programs by campus/district

Adjustments made to

program

Sign-in sheets

Agenda

Handouts

48

Title I, Part A Schoolwide Activities/Strategies/ Initiatives

Staff Responsible

Time Line Resources Formative Evaluation

Summative Evaluation

5.14. Conduct an annual

Title I meeting with parents in order to

inform parents of their

school’s participation in

Title I, Part A and to

explain the requirements

and rights of parents to

be involved

5.15. Revise annually

the School-Parent

Compact and provide in

English and Spanish

5.16. Provide staff

development to

teachers, administrators,

other staff members and

parents in order to

collaborate and plan

program goals and

objectives for staff

development that will

build ties between

parents and school

Administration, Federal

Programs Consultant

Administration

DWEIC

Administrator, Focus

Area Team #2

Fall

Spring

May, August

Time

Time

Time

Meeting Scheduled

Agenda, minutes, draft

of compact

Agenda, minutes,

handouts from planning

meetings

Sign-in sheets

Agenda, Minutes

Written compact

Staff development

calendar

49



Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

5.17. Provide information/

communications in a

format and in a

language that parents

can understand

5.18. Provide parents

information on the level

of achievement of

parent’s child on State

Assessment and timely

notice that the parent’s

child has been assigned

to, or has been taught

for four or more

consecutive weeks by a

teacher who is not

certified

5.19. Continue to

monitor student

progress and

participation through

the accountability

system

5.20. Address PBM

Performance and

Compliance as required

by TEA

All Staff

Administrators

Administrators,

counselors, teachers

Administrators

August – May

Four Weeks

Spring

Fall

Title I, Part A, MEP, ESL

Title I, Part A

Local

Local

List of interpreters/translators

List of students and

teachers not certified

Accountability

report

disaggregation

PBM report

Copies of information/ communications

Copy of notice sent to

parents

Accountability

annual report

results

Strategies written

50


\\\Activities/Strategies/

Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

5.21. Needs identified as a result of the

comprehensive needs

assessment are listed on

Summary of CNA at

preface to plan

5.22. Discuss with

campus improvement

committee various

strategies/activities to

meet the measurable

achievement objectives

for teacher quality under

NCLB/ESEA

5.23. Ensure low

income students and

minority students are

not taught at higher

rates than other students

groups by teachers who

are not HQ by providing

qualified staff for every

classroom

* District is a single

attendance district

Campus Administrators,

Administration

Administration,

Counselor, Teachers

Summer

July, August,

Interviewing process

Summer

STATE ASSESSMENT

results, program evaluations

ESEA/NCLB HQ

Guidelines

HQ documentation

Campus STATE ASSESSMENT results, CAN forms

Teacher records, SBEC,

HQ forms

Draft schedules for low

income, high minority

students

Current year CIP

developed based on CAN

HQ Teacher Survey

Report

HQ Teacher Survey

Report

51

Title I, Part A Schoolwide Activities/Strategies/

Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

5.24. Contract with ESEA/NCLB

consultants to provide

services such as but not

limited to application

preparation, HQ

Compliance Reports,

ESEA/NCLB

Compliance Reports, etc

5.25. Maintain 100% of

paraprofessionals

meeting HQ

requirements

5.26. Notify parents of

students on campus

identified in need of

improvement of school

choice and supplemental

educational services

before the uniform

school start date as

required by TEA

5.27. Give public report

regarding the highly

qualified status of the

district and campus(es);

to include the

requirements in the

NCLB Report Card

public report

Superintendent, business manager,

campus administrators,

consultants

Administration

Administration

Administration

July 1, 2014-June 30, 2015

August-May

June 01, 2014

On or before December

12, 2015




TEA NCLB website

ESEA/NCLB application due date,

HQ Teacher

Compliance Report

deadline, ESEA/NCLB

Compliance Report

deadline date

HQ Form for

Paraprofessional completed

Letter to parents

Documents compiled

for report

Approved ESEA/NCLB Consolidated

Application with

NOGA, PBMAS

PBMAS HQ Reports

TEA monitoring

Board agenda and

minutes

52



Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

5.28. Campus/District HQ teacher/

paraprofessional plan

includes strategies to

ensure teachers

paraprofessionals, who

are not HQ in all core

academic subject areas

taught, become HQ in a

reasonable time frame

5.29. Submit all HQ

reports, compliance

reports, PBMAS reports

by deadline

5.30. Provide ongoing

mentoring program for

new teachers in order to

help retain HQ teachers

and reduce the turnover

rate.

Administration, DWEIC

Administration

Administration, CCI

Team, Focus Area Team

#2

Fall

Fall

Ongoing



Local, Federal, State

HQ Plan written

Copies of reports

Meeting minutes,

coaching reports,

monthly seminar

agendas

Agenda, minutes of meeting(s) to write plan

e-Grants, TEA follow-

up

Turnover rate and CCI

Program evaluation

53

6. Title I, Part C—Migrant Education

Intent and Purpose

The purpose of the Title I, Part C, Migrant Education Program (MEP) is to do all of the following:

1. Support high-quality and comprehensive education programs for migratory children to help reduce the educational disruptions and other problems that result from repeated moves;

2. Ensure that migratory children who move among the states are not penalized in any manner by disparities among the states in curriculum, graduation requirements, and state academic content and student academic achievement standards;

3. Ensure that migratory children are provided with appropriate education services (including supportive services) that address their special needs in a coordinated and efficient manner;

4. Ensure that migratory children receive full and appropriate opportunities to meet the same challenging State academic content and students’ academic achievement standards that all children are expected to meet;

5. Design programs to help migratory children overcome educational disruption, cultural and language barriers, social isolation, various health-related

problems and other factors that inhibit the ability of such children to do well in school, and to prepare such children to make a successful transition to

postsecondary education or employment; and,

6. Ensure that migratory children benefit from State and local systemic reforms (NCLB Title I, Part C).

The intended program beneficiaries are migratory children, ages 0 through 21, and their families.

1. MEP activities shall be used to do the following:

• meet the identified needs of migratory children that result from their migratory lifestyle to permit these children to participate effectively in

school

• address the unique needs of migratory children that are not addressed by services available from other Federal or non-Federal programs,

except that migratory children who are eligible to receive services under Title I, Part A, may receive those services through funds provided

under that part

2. In providing services with Title I, Part C, funds, you must give priority to migratory children who are failing or most at risk of failing to meet the

State’s challenging academic content and academic achievement standards, and whose education has been interrupted during the regular school year.

3. In the planning and operation of MEP projects and activities, you must consult regularly with migrant parents through the district’s parent advisory

council (PAC).

4. To the extent feasible, the district’s MEP will provide for the following:

• advocacy and outreach activities for migratory children and their families, including coordination to allow them to gain access to other

education, health, nutrition, and social services (Migrant Services Coordination (MSC))

• professional development programs, including mentoring, for teachers and other MEP personnel

• family literacy programs, including such programs that use models developed under Even Start

• the integration of information technology into educational and related programs

• programs to facilitate the transition of secondary school students to postsecondary education or employment

• supportive services for out-of-school youth

5. In the planning and operation of MEP projects, MSC, migrant student identification and recruitment (ID&R, and migrant student’s data collection

and entry on the New Generation System (NGS) and the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS)) are conducted on a year-round

basis.

54

Presidio ISD -Title I, Part C Migrant Education Program (212) funds shall not be consolidated with other federal, state, or local funds on any Title

I, Part A Schoolwide campus to upgrade its entire education program. However, the Title I, Part C Migrant Education program funds shall be

coordinated with all other federal, state, and local funds to provide programs and services to eligible migrant students and their families. Presidio ISD Title I, Part C

Migrant Education

Measurable Performance Objective: 100% of migrant students will pass all portions of the STATE ASSESSMENT


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

6.1Identify and recruit eligible migrant children

July 1-June 30 ages 3-21

through home visits,

visibility in community,

churches, grocery store, etc.

6.2.Remain current on NGS

and TMSTPS ages 3-21 and attend training

6.3 Provide MSC ages 3-21

to coordinate school

programs and provide

services for migrant

families

6.4Provide either a home-

based or school based early

childhood education

program ages 3 – Grade 2

6.5Ensure graduation

enhancement grades 7-12

by compiling data,

monitoring progress, and

providing educational

opportunities to meet

student needs

MEP Staff

MEP Staff

MSC

Administrator

MEP Staff

MEP Staff

Counselor

July 1 – June 30

Fall, Spring, Summer

Daily Weekly or

Daily Each

semester

MEP Funds, Local

MEP Funds

MEP Funds

Local

Title I, Part A, SCE,

Local, MEP

Local

MEP Funds

Logs/Schedules

Report dates, training

scheduled

Daily Schedule

Checklists, Progress

reports, report cards,

TPRI

NGS Records

COE

Daily/Weekly Schedule

Records of services

provided

Annual Evaluation

Report

Graduation rate of

migrant students

55

Presidio ISD Title I, Part C

Migrant Education


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

6.6Coordinate with available programs

offering options for

credit accrual and

recovery to ensure that

migrant secondary

students are accessing

opportunities available

to earn needed credits

and make up

coursework which is

lacking due to late

arrival and/or early

withdrawal. Student

participation must not

interfere with core

classes. (2) Ensure

consolidation of partial

secondary credits,

proper course

placement, and credit

accrual for on-time

graduation, including

accessing and reviewing

academic records from

NGS

6.7Provide a parent

involvement program

ages 3-21 including

establishing a PAC,

which meets regularly,

to work in partnership

with families and

communicate regularly

with children’s parents

and participates in

MEP Staff Counselor

MEP Staff

As needed

August – May

MEP Funds Local

MEP Funds

Local

NGS Records, transcripts

Parent involvement

activity calendar

Credits attained

Agendas, minutes, sign-

in sheets of meeting

56

school-sponsored activities- Provide

training for Migrant

Parents -committees –

parenting skills

6.8 Conduct a NGS Quality Control

6.9 Conduct a

comprehensive needs

assessment of migrant

student areas of

strengths and

weaknesses, including

preschool students

6.10Coordinate with

school staff and the

TMIP to ensure that

migrant students who

have failed STATE

ASSESSMENT in any

content area are

accessing local,

intrastate, and interstate


for summer STATE

ASSESSMENT

remediation

6.11Save course slots in

elective and core subject

areas, based on district’s

history of student

migration for migrant

students

6.12Coordinate with

TMIP during the

summer months in order

to serve students from

Texas who may attend

out-of-state summer

migrant programs

MEP Staff

Region 18

Administrator

MEP Staff

MSC, MEP staff

Administration, MSC,

counselor

MSC, MEP staff

Jan- May

April – August

June – August

1st

semester, 2nd

semester

June-August

MEP Funds

MEP Funds, Title I, Part

A, Local

MEP, local

Local

MEP, local

Quality Control

Checklist

Migrant student data

disaggregated

List of migrant students failing STATE

ASSESSMENT

NGS reports

NGS reports

Results of Quality

Control Checklist

Areas of strengths and

weaknesses identified

STATE ASSESSMENT

scores

Migrant student

schedules

NGS reports

57

Presidio ISD Title 1, Part C

Migrant Education


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

6.13Provide services that are migrant specific i.e.

tutorials, remediation,

computer-assisted

instruction, support

services, etc., based on

migrant student

performance data

Provide other

supplemental services

such as : School uniforms,

School supplies,

educational tools, eye

glasses-eye exams, other

services as necessary.

Provide Educational tools

such as rossetta stone

study buddies – state

assessment – Interactive

learning tool. Provide all

migrant students with

training in scholarship

applications – post

secondary education

search.

6.14Provide Migrant

Summer School Program

for all Migrant students–

MASTERS based –

6.15 Provide researched

based staff development

opportunities for

professionals as well as

paraprofessionals with

input from migrant staff

and ensure teachers/

paraprofessionals have

proper

certification/endorsements

Administrator MEP Staff

MEP Staff

ESC

Administration

Administration

SBDM

Daily

Summer

Fall, Spring

Spring, Summer

MEP Funds, Title I, Part A, BE/ESL, Special

Education, Local

MEP Funds

Title I, Part A

Title II, Part A

Local

Local

List of students who have greatest need

(Priority of Services

Students)

Summer school –

Attendance

Staff development

calendar/registration/

Staff development

forms, minutes of

meetings, etc.

Job description

STATE ASSESSMENT/TELPAS/

TPRI, Checklist scores

Summer School Report

Attendance certificates

Teacher/Para-

Professional Certificates

58


Migrant Education


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

6.16Designate and enter into NGS a district

summer contact person

who will be available

throughout the summer

months and will have

access to migrant

student records, such as

course grades and

immunizations

6.17Provide a list of the

migrant students who

have needs of the

highest priority to

campus principals,

teachers

6.18Provide PFS criteria

to principals,

appropriate staff, parents

6.19Review PBM

Performance and

Compliance Reports and

address by including in

CAN to make best

decision for the

program.

6.20Review NCLB

Consolidated

Application PS3103

6.21Encode all required

data into the NGS

system

MSC

MEP Staff

MEP Staff

Administrators

MEP Staff

MEP Program

Coordinator

Administration

NGS specialist

April

Monthly

August/September

September

August

July 1-June 30

MEP, local

MEP Funds

MEP Funds

MEP, local

Time

MEP

Person named

MSC Schedule

Copy of criteria

Agendas, sign-in sheets

of meetings

Scheduled time for

review

Schedule of NGS

specialist

Time and effort records

List of students

MEP Log

Strategies developed

Required MEP program

activities

scheduled/written, etc.

PBM ICR reports

NGS log

59


Migrant Education


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

6.22Encode COE education and health

data in NGS according to NGS timelines

6.23Conduct annual

residency verification

6.24Develop a written

PFS Action Plan for

serving PFS students

6.25Develop a written

ID&R Action Plan

6.26MSC ensure

accuracy of PEIMS

6.27Write a narrative

that explains: PFS

placements, access to

social workers and

community social

services/agencies

6.28Ensure a separate

PFS written plan

NGS Data specialist

MEP Staff

MEP

Staff/Administrators

MEP


MEP


PEIMS staff

MEP Staff

MEP


3 Days

Sept. 1 – Oct. 1

Before first day of school

Before Sept 15

By last Friday of Oct

Before 1

st day of school

Before 1st

day of school

MEP

MEP

MEP

MEP

MEP

MEP

MEP

NGS reports

MEP Logs/NGS

PFS Plan

ID&R Plan

Meeting scheduled

Written narrative

Draft of plan

PBM

NGS Reports

PFS Plan approved

ID&R Plan approved

PEIMS reports

Administrative meeting

Written plan approved

60


Migrant Education


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

6.29Ensure that within the first grading period (1)

determine individual

needs for instruction and

support services, (2)

identify available

resources to address said

needs, (3) coordinate with

entities to ensure that the

child has access to the

appropriate services, and

(4) follow up to monitor

and document progress

Middle school students:

6.30.1. Coordinate with

available mentoring

programs or support

organization to develop

students’ learning and

study skills and follow up

to monitor and document

progress 2. Provide

coordination of resources

by (1) contacting each

student or family to

establish the extent of

students needs for home

work assistance and tools,

(2) collaborate with

existing programs and

organization to coordinate

student access to

resources, and

Administration, MEP staff


MEP staff

1st

six weeks of school

Fall, spring

MEP, local

MEP, local

List of migrant students and their needs

Schedule of events

STATE ASSESSMENT, MEP

evaluation

Logs, information

provided, presentations,

brochures

61

Presidio ISDTitle I, Part C

Migrant Education


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

(3) provide students and parents with up-to-date

and easy-to-understand

information on how to

access homework

assistance when needed

6.31 Provide

presentation/information

to school staff to

increase their awareness

of migrant middle

school students’ need

for timely attention and

appropriate

interventions for

academic and

nonacademic problems

or concerns, including

direction for non-MEP

staff to notify MEP staff

of referrals and

interventions 4. Provide

supplemental

information to migrant

parents on how to

collaborate with school

staff and how to access

resources in order to

provide timely attention

and appropriate

interventions for the

middle school children

62

Presidio ISD Title I, Part Migrant Education


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

6.32 Students in

Grades 3-11-

Coordinate with school

staff and the TMIP to

ensure that migrant

students who have

failed any subject area

of the STATE

ASSESSMENT are

accessing local,

intrastate and interstate


for summer

6.33Early

Childhood/School

Readiness: within the

first 60 days of the

school year that eligible

preschool migratory

children, ages 3-5, are in

the school district,

determine individual

educational needs and,

to the extent possible,

coordinate or provide

services to meet the

identified needs

6.34Out-of-School

Youth: Based on

identified needs,

coordinate with

appropriate school staff

and other local, state,

and federally-funded

entities to provide

services to out-of-school

migrant youth

MSC, MEP staff

MSC, MEP staff

MSC, MEP staff

Summer

Within first 60 days of school

July 1-June 30

MEP

MEP

MEP

List of migrant students who failed STATE

ASSESSMENT

List of migrant 3-5 year

olds

List of migrant out-of-

school youth

STATE ASSESSMENT scores, MEP records

MEP logs

MEP staff logs

63


Migrant Education


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

6.35Complete the MEP Evaluation Report

provided by TEA

6.36 Provide Leadership

training for all Migrant

Students

6.37 Provide a list of

migrant students to be

encoded into PEIMS

with the Migrant

Indicator Code and

ensure PEIMS

identification numbers

are reported on NGS for

every enrolled migrant

student

6.38Encode

summer/intercession

enrollments in NGS

(reference NCLB

application)

6.39Encode Graduation

Plans for Migrant

students in grades 9-12

in NGS

6.40Give service priority

to migrant children who

are failing, or most at

risk of

failing, to meet the

State’s content and

performance standards

and who education has

been interrupted during

the regular school year

MSC, MEP staff

MEP staff

NGS data entry

specialist

NGS data entry

specialist

NGS data entry

specialist


MEP staff, counselor

No later than June 30

Ongoing

No later than the last

Friday of October

As of August 15, 2011

As of August 15, 2011

No later than August 15,

2011

Upon enrollment

Template provided by state MEP

MEP

MEP

MEP

MEP

Federal, State, Local

Template

Sign in sheets- Sessions

PEIMS report

NGS

NGS

NGS

List of migrant students

Results of template

Evaluations

PEIMS report

PBMAS

NGS

PBMAS

STATE ASSESMENT

64

7.Title I, Part C, Carl D. Perkins, Career and Technology Education Programs

Intent and Purpose These programs shall provide career and technical education (CTE) programs that are of such size, scope, and quality as to be effective; integrate

academic and CTE through a sequence of courses that are coherent and rigorous in content aligned with challenging academic standards and relevant

technical knowledge and skills needed to prepare for further education and careers in current and emerging careers; provide technical skill proficiency, an

industry-recognized credential, a certificate, or technical degree; and provide equitable participation in CTE programs for students who are members of

special populations.

CTE programs provide a career and technology education program that assists students who are educationally and economically disadvantaged

(including foster children); students of limited English proficiency, students preparing for training and employment that is nontraditional for their gender;

single parents, including single pregnant women, displaced homemakers; and students with disabilities to succeed through supportive services such as

counseling, English-language instruction, child care, transportation, and special aids and devices.

Career and Technology Education assists (1) students who are members of special populations to enter career and technology education programs,

and, with respect to students with disabilities, assist in fulfilling transitional services; assess (2) the special needs of students participating in programs in the

most integrated setting possible; provide (3) supplementary services to students who are members of special populations, including, with respect to

individuals with disabilities, (a) curriculum modification, (b) equipment modification, (c) classroom modification, (d) supportive personnel, and (e)

instructional aids and devices; provide (4) guidance, counseling, and career development activities conducted by professionally trained counselors and

teachers who are associated with the provision of such services; and provide (5) counseling and instructional services designed to facilitate the transition

from school to postsecondary education and training or to post-school employment and career opportunities.

65

Measurable Performance Objective: 100% of CTE students will pass all portions of the STATE ASSESSMENT. CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible Time Line Resources Formative

Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.1Provide vocational and technical education

programs to all eligible

students, especially

special populations

students

7.2Conduct a

comprehensive needs

assessment and an

overall program

evaluation to determine

areas of strengths and

weaknesses to

determine the size,

scope, quality, and

effectiveness/evaluation

of CTE programs,

including completion

graduation rates

demographics

7.3Utilize the local

advisory council in an

annual review and

update of instructional

objectives to ensure

relevance to current

business/industry

workforce preparation

practices.

School Board Administration

Administrators

Counselor

CTE staff

CTE Staff

Program administrator

August

May

Fall

Spring

CTE funds

CTE funds

STATE ASSESSMENT

surveys

CTE funds

Perkins funds

Student choice cards

Disaggregated data

Mid-year review of

programs

Courses scheduled

Annual evaluation

report of all individual

programs and the

overall CTE programs

Results of annual

program review and

update

7.4Integrate CTE and academic/technical

programs to improve

student learning

7.5Encourage students

to pursue a coherent

sequence of courses

CTE Staff Academic Staff

Counselor

On-going

Spring Semester

Tech Prep

Perkins, SCE funds

Meeting records Written plan for

integration


Annual CTE program evaluation

Courses scheduled

66

7.6Ensure CTE students have a four year plan

showing the coherent

sequence they are

pursing

7.7 Provide course

offerings in the

following areas:

Welding & Building

Trades, Family &

Consumer Science, &

Information Technology

7.8Continue to recruit,

develop, retain highly

qualified CTE staff

including minorities

Counselor

Administration

School Board

Administration

SBDM

Spring/Fall

August

Spring

semester/Summer

CTE funds

Local funds

Local funds

Mid year check of

student plans

List of course offerings

Positions posted

Number of CTE

students with four year

plans on file with

counselor

List of students enrolled in CTE classes

Fully certified staff

hired

67

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.9Provide staff development/technical

assistance for

professional staff that is

researched based with

input from staff

7.10Ensure that

information to parents/

students/community is

provided in the home

language

7.11Provide

opportunities for parents

of CTE students to

participate in school-

sponsored activities

7.12Strive to provide

CTE programs that lead

students to receiving

professional-level

license and/or

certification

7.13Continue to provide

Career Awareness

programs in grades 9 to

12

Administrators

Administrators

CTE teachers

Administrators

CTE teachers

Counselor

Administrators

School board

Administrator

Counselor

Fall/Spring/Summer

August –May

Fall/Spring

August – May

Spring

Perkins funds Local funds

Perkins funds, Local

funds, Title I funds,

MEP funds, ESL funds

CTE funds, Perkins

funds, Technology

funds, Local funds

CTE funds, Perkins

funds

Local Funds

CTE funds, Perkins

funds

Local Funds

Staff development registrations

List of translators

School calendar of

parent involvement

activities

Research presentation of

possible course

offerings

Schedule of programs

Attendance certificate

Copies of notices sent to

parents/students/parents

Parent Sign-In sheets

Courses offered for

licensing/certification

List of participating

students

68

CTE


Initiatives

Staff


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.14Research possibility of offering a Career

Investigation course at

middle school or a

Career Connections

course at high school

7.15Provide transition

activities for middle

school to high school to

work or to post

secondary education

through local articulation

agreements

7.16Address PBM/OCR

Performance/Compliance

by completing and

submitting on-time

required intervention

documents

7.17Ensure that students

with disabilities are

considered for placement

in CTE courses; ARD

committee includes all

required staff

Administrators Counselor

Administrators

Counselor

Administrator

Administration, CTE

staff, Special ed staff

Spring

Spring

Fall

Fall, spring

Local

Perkins funds

Local

Local

Local, federal, state

Presentation of possibility of course

offering

Lesson plans

Agenda

Schedule of ARDs

Course offerings

List of senior students

participating

Written strategies

developed

ARD minutes

69

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.19Ensure members of

special populations will

not be discriminated

against in the provision

of services

7.20Promote

preparation for non-

traditional employment

7.21Establish effective

working relationships

between secondary and

postsecondary

institutions

Counselor

Administration

SBDM

Administration

CTE teachers

Counselor

Administration,

Counselors, CTE

teachers

Ongoing

Fall

Fall , Spring

State, local, all federal

funds

CTE funds, state, local,

federal funds

Perkins funds, state,

local

District demographics

List of students

Meetings/presentations

scheduled between

district and

postsecondary

institutions

Special populations

participation in CTE

courses

Post-graduation follow-

up; Accountability data

Minutes, notes,

handouts from

meetings/presentations

70

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.22Ensure program

functions as an initiative

for promoting systemic

educational reform

7.23Promote

opportunities for student

participation in statewide

articulated courses

7.24Align high school

course curriculum with

postsecondary course

curriculum to improve the

rigor and effectiveness of

program

7.25 Develop marketing

plan for increasing public

awareness of program

opportunities, as well as

for increasing

nontraditional

enrollments in these

programs

Administration

Administration,

Counselor

Administration,

Counselor, CTE

teachers

CTE teachers,

Administration,

Counselor

Fall, Spring

Local Fall

Fall/Spring

Fall/Spring

Spring

Local

Local

Local

Meetings/presentations scheduled between

district and

postsecondary

institutions

Course needs

assessment

Scheduling of meeting

with students

List of courses

Draft of public

awareness plan

Courses offered

List of students who

participated

Evaluation of program

plan

71

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.27Promote/encourage

retention of students in

CTE programs;

completion of college

degrees and/or

postsecondary

certificates

7.28Evaluate student

performance according

to sex, ethnicity, and

special population

categories

7.29Advise students,

parents, employees, and

general public that CTE

programs will be

offered without regard

to race, color, national

origin, sex, or disability

CTE teachers,

Counselor

Counselor;

Administrator, PLC

Administration

Fall/Spring

Spring/Summer

Prior to start of school

Local

Local

Local


Data

Notification prepared

Student schedules

list of students with

degrees and/or

postsecondary

certificates

AEIS results

Copy of notification

72

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.30Designate employee to coordinate its efforts

to comply with and

carry out its

responsibilities under

Section 504, Title II,

and Title IX; notify

students and employees

of the name, office

address, and telephone

number of the

employee; employee is

aware of his/her

responsibilities and has

the training necessary to perform the

responsibilities

7.31Notify participants,

beneficiaries,

applicants, parents,

employees (including

those with impaired

vision or hearing), and

unions or professional

organizations holding

collective bargaining or

professional agreements

with the district that it

does not discriminate on

the basis of race, color,

national origin, sex, or

disability;

Administration

Administration

Before start of school and each time new

publication is printed

Before start of school

and each time new

publication is printed

Local

Local

Person Designated

Publications prepared

Evidence of name, office address, and

telephone number

distributed and training

documentation

Publications on file

73

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

a statement of nondiscrimination is

included on publications

and other materials that

are distributed to

students, applicants, and

employees

7.32Adopt and distribute

grievance procedures for

CTE and other programs

to resolve alleged

discrimination complaints

as required under Title IX

and Section 504;

grievance procedures

available to any

individual or class of

individuals who feel they

have been discriminated

against; grievance

procedures for employees

and students include a

nondiscrimination

statement based on race,

color, national origin, sex,

and disability

School board,

administration

Before school starts

Local

Procedures prepared

Procedures distributed

74

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.33Facilities housing programs located at

sites that are readily

accessible to persons

who are mobility

impaired

7.34Provide changing

rooms, showers, and

other restroom facilities

for CTE students of one

sex that are comparable

to those provided to

students of the other sex

7.35Provide access to

CTE programs to

disabled persons that

need related aids or

services in accordance

with the students’ IEPs

and/or Section 504

accommodation plans

7.36District/campus

does not deny access to

CTE programs to

national-origin minority

persons with limited

English language skills

on the grounds that the

student cannot

participate in and

benefit from CTE instruction to the same

extend as a student who

primary language is

Administration

Administration

Administration, CTE

teachers, special ed

teachers

Administration, CTE

teachers and staff

First day of school

First day of school

First day of school

Upon student

enrollment

Local

Local

Local, federal


Locations inspected

Locations inspected

ARD minutes, IEPs,

504 plans

Interviews

Inspection report

Inspection report

Inspection report

Results of interview

75

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

English; ensure CTE programs are open to

these students and that services are available

7.37CTE facilities are

located at sites that are

readily accessible to both

minority and non-

minority communities;

facilities or programs are

not identified as being for

non-minority or minority

person; and equal access

is provided without

regard to race, color,


disability

7.38District/campus does

not discriminate in its

admission practices on

the basis of limited

English skills; secondary

CTE program identifies

applicants with Limited

English and assesses their

ability to participate;

ensure CTE programs are

open to these students

Administration, CTE

staff

Administration, CTE

staff

Before first day of

school

Upon enrollment



Inspection

Observations, LEP

records, student

schedules

Inspection report

STATE

ASSESSMENT, student

report cards, class

rosters

76

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.39Ensure that

introductory, preliminary,

or exploratory courses are

not established as

prerequisite for admission

to a CTE program unless

the course has been and is

available to all students

without regard to race,

color, national origin, sex,

or disability


not exclude a woman

from admission to or

participation in any

program on the basis of

pregnancy nor treat a

temporary disability due

to pregnancy differently

from any other temporary

disabilities


not judge candidates for

admission to programs,

activities, or services on

the basis of criteria that

have the effect of

disproportionately

excluding persons of a

particular race, color,


disability

Administration,

counselor

Administration, counselor

Administration, counselor

Beginning of each

semester

Beginning of each semester

Upon enrollment

Local List of course of

offerings

Student records

List of participants

Student schedules

Student schedules

Interviews

77

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.42District/campus does not develop,

sponsor, or engage in

recruiting or counseling

activities, including the

development or

dissemination of

materials, that

discriminate against or

stereotype persons on

the basis of sex, race,

color, nation origin, or

disability; the curricula and program cover a broad range of

occupational

opportunities and are

not limited on the basis

of sex, race, color,

national origin, or

disability to potential

students for whom the

presentation is made

Administration, counselor, recruiters

Ongoing Local, state, federal Schedule of presentations, recruitment, curriculum

Written materials used in presentation, recruitment, curriculum

78

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.43Ensure that counselors or other staff

that counsel students do

not direct or urge any

student to enroll in a

particular program on the

basis of race, color,


disability; ensure that

counselors can effectively

communicate with LEP

students and with students

with sensory impairments

7.44 Facilities for students

with disabilities and the

services and activities

provided therein are

comparable to the other

facilities, services and

activities of the

district/campus

7.45Students with

disabilities are not

excluded from vocational,

career, or academic

programs, or courses,

services, or activities due

to equipment barriers or

because necessary related

aids and services or

auxiliary aids are not

available

Administrators, counselors

School board,

administration, special

ed administrators

Administration,

counselor, special ed

staff

Upon enrollment

Beginning of school

Beginning of first and second semester

Local

Local

Local

Observation, interviews

Inspection

List of special ed

students participating in

CTE courses and their

location

Results of observation, interviews

Inspection report

reports

79

CTE


Initiatives

Staff


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.46Students in a

program who are visually impaired, hearing

impaired, and/or speech

impaired have the

opportunity to receive and

present communication in

a manner that is

appropriate and effective;

ensure that counseling

services are provided to

such students

7.47Ensure that

communications with

applicants and members

of the public with

disabilities are as

effective as

communications with

others; communication

support is provided in a

manner that enables

people with disabilities to

participate on an equal

basis with all others,

unless to do so would

result in a fundamental

alternation in the nature

of a service, program, or

activity or an “undue”

financial or

administrative burden

Counselor, special ed

staff

Administration

Daily

Ongoing



List of students

Interviews with staff,

copies of

communications

Classroom observations

Results of interview and

communications

80

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.48Ensure that membership in CTE

student organizations

operated, administered, or

sponsored by the

district/campus are

available to all students in

the instructional program

without regard to sex,

race, color, national

origin, or disability

7.49District/campus

makes opportunities

available to students in

work-study, career prep

education, and job

placement programs

without regard to race,

color, nat’l origin, or

disability and does not

enter into any

arrangement with an

agency, union, business,

or other sponsor that

discriminates against

students on the basis of

sex, race, color, nat’l

origin, or disability in

recruitment, hiring,

placement, assignment to

work tasks, hours of

employment, levels of

Responsibility, or pay

Administration, CTE

staff

Administration, CTE

staff

Beginning of each semester

Ongoing


Local

Lists of CTE student organizations

List of students participating in

programs

Membership of CTE

student organizations

Copies of policies of

agencies, businesses, unions

81

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.50Ensure that students in protected groups do not

drop out of CTE

programs before

completion due to

unequal treatment or

because of a lack of

services to meet

language-or disability-

related needs

7.51District’s

employment and

promotion practices and

procedures are free from

discrimination against

CTE employees or

applicants on the basis of

race, color, national

origin, sex, disability , or

age

7.52Establish and

maintain faculty salary

scales and policies based

upon the conditions and

responsibilities of

employment without

regard to race, color,

national origin, age, sex,

or disability

Counselor

Administration

Administration

As situation occurs

Ongoing

Beginning of each

fiscal year

Local

Local

Local

List of students no

longer in program

Copies of employment

procedures

Salary scales, job

descriptions

Student’s’ Schedules

Non-discrimination

statement on documents

Non-discrimination

statement

82

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.53District will address any harassment

allegations based on race,

sex, and/or disability

7.54District leverages

Perkins funds and state

weighted funds with other

funding streams and

resources to support CTE

program implementation

and improvement to

include proper

expenditures and

reporting of state

weighted CTE funds

7.55Ensure a fiscal

management system in

place for the proper

expenditure and reporting

of Perkins funds

7.56Ensure a fiscal

management system to

utilize reallocated Perkins

funds

7.57Ensure PEIMS/other

data is reported correctly

Administration

Administration,

business manager

Administration,

business manager, CTE

staff

Administration, business manager

Administration, PEIMS

coordinator

As occurs

June-July

Monthly

Spring

Fall, mid-winter,

spring, summer

submissions

Local


Federal

Federal

Local

Interview

Perkins grant

application

Perkins grant

application

Perkins grant application

Preliminary PEIMS

reports

Board minutes

Audit reports, PBMAS

Invoices, expenditure

reports, audit

Expenditures, audit

PEIMS, PBMAS,

Procedures for data

quality

83

CTE


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

7.58District promotes business and industry

partnerships to offer

scholarships and other

financial supports for

CTE programs and

students, including

participation in Career

and Technical Student

Organization (CTSO)

leadership activities

7.69Use follow-up data to

assess CTE student

participation (including

placement, retention, and

completion) in

postsecondary education

and/or work

7.60Review labor market

data and workforce trends

to implement programs

that provide students with

technical knowledge and

skills essential for high

skill, high wage careers

Administrations, CTE staff

Administration,

counselor, CTE staff

CTE staff

Each new fiscal year

May

End of year

Local

Local

Local

List of available scholarships

List of students in CTE

programs who

graduated

Collect resources

Number of scholarship awarded

Follow-up interviews

Review of resources

84

8.Title III, Part A—English Language Acquisition, Language Enhancement, and Academic Achievement/Bilingual/English as

a Second Language Program Intent and Purpose The Title III, Part A, Bilingual/ESL program provides supplemental resources to help ensure that children who are limited English proficient (LEP) attain English proficiency at high levels in core academic subjects and can meet state mandated achievement performance standards. The requirements are to help

ensure that LEP children, including immigrant children and youth, attain English proficiency, develop high levels of academic attainment, and meet the same

challenging State academic content and student academic achievement standards as all children are expected to meet by doing the following:

1. Assisting all LEP and immigrant students to achieve at high levels in the core academic subject and achieve standards required 2. Developing high-quality language instruction educational programs designed to assist state education agencies, LEAs, and schools in teaching

LEP and immigrant students

3. Assisting state and local educational agencies to develop and enhance their capacity to provide high-quality instructional programs designed to

prepare LEP and immigrant students enter all-English instruction settings

4. Assisting state and local education agencies and schools to build their capacity to establish, implement, and sustain language instruction

educational programs and programs of English language development for LEP students

5. Promoting parental and community participation in language instruction education programs for LEP students

6. Streamlining language instruction educational programs to help LEP and immigrant students develop proficiency in English while meeting

challenging state academic content and student academic achievement standards

7. Holding state and local educational agencies and schools accountable for increases in English proficiency and core academic content knowledge of

LEP students

8. Providing state and local education agencies the flexibility to implement language instructional programs that are the most effective based on

scientifically based research on teaching LEP students

85

Title III LEP/BE/ESL

Measurable Performance Objective: Identified LEP students will pass 100% of required tests; 20% of LEP students will exit program.


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

8.1Identify and provide all LEP students a

BE/ESL program that

develops proficiency in

the comprehension,

speaking, reading, and

composition of the

English language

8.2Conduct a

comprehensive needs

assessment of all

BE/ESL student to

determine strengths and

weaknesses

8.3Reduce the

percentage of LEP

exemptions on State

assessment

8.4Reduce the number

of parent denials for

BE/ESL program

8.5Provide staff

development for

professional staff as

well as for

paraprofessionals that is

researched based with

input from staff

Administrators BE/ESL certified

teachers

Administrator

PLCs, Teachers

LPAC

Administrators

LPAC

Administrators

Beginning of each

school

year/as

new

student

enrolled

September

and/or

May

LPAC meetings

As needed

Fall and/or Spring

ESL funds, Title I funds, local funds, Title

III funds, SCE

State assessments,

TELPAS system, LPAC

Records, AEIS-It,

ESC Title III, Title I, SCE

Home Language Survey List of ESL students

Disaggregated scores of

students

List of students

exempted

Conference with parents

Registration for workshop

TELPAS Scores State assessment scores

Evaluation of BE/ESL

program

Performance Based

Monitoring (PBM)

List of students with

denials


86



Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

8.6Ensure that LEP students are not over

represented in special

education or

underrepresented in G/T

education

8.7Ensure that

information to parents is

provided in the home

language

8.8Provide opportunities

for parents of BE/ESL

students to participate in

school-sponsored

activities, be involved in

the education of their

children, be active

participants in assisting

their children to attain

English proficiency,

achieve at high levels in

core academic subjects,

and meet challenging

state standards expected

of all students

8.9Continue to recruit and

retain highly qualified

BE/ESL staff including

minorities

Administrators LPAC, ARD, GT staff

Administrators

BE/ESL teachers

LPAC

Administrators,

Teachers, LPAC

members, SBDM

committee

Administrators

SBDM

Fall/ Spring

Ongoing

Fall/

Spring

Spring semester/

Summer

ESL funds, Title I funds, Title III funds,

Local funds, Special

Education funds

ESL funds, Title I

funds, Title III funds,

Local funds

ESL funds, Title I

funds, Title III funds,

Local funds

Local funds

ESL funds

List of identified/recommended

students in either

program

List of qualified

translators

School calendar of

parent involvement

activities

Positions posted

PBM Reports

Copies of notices sent

to parents

Parent Sign-In sheets

Fully certified staff

hired

87



Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

8.10Address PBM

Performance and

Compliance Reports by

completing required

intervention level

8.11Increase the number

of LEP students in

learning English

8.12Use agency approved

tests to determine EXIT

eligibility: 1-2 TEA

approved achievement

test; 3-12 STATE

ASSESSMENT

administered in English

8.13Ensure that all

teachers in Title III

language instructional

programs for LEP

children are fluent in both

English and any other

language used for

instructions, including

having written and oral

communication skills.

Administrators/Intervention

teams/

Administrators, Teachers/

Paraprofessionals

Administrators

Counselor

BE/ESL Staff

LPAC

Administrators

Spring

Each six weeks

May

At time of hiring

Local

Title III, Part A,

Title I, Part A, Local,

State

BE/ESL/LEP

Local

Applicant Pool

Agenda

Benchmark Tests

Tests Administered

Interview process

Written strategies

developed

AMAOs, PBM,

LPAC records, PEIMS

Number of students

exited

Personnel Files

88



Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

8.14Student Two Year re- evaluation/follow-up required LPAC activities

1. amount of time

student enrolled

in BE/ESL

2. Grades in each

subject

3. STATE

ASSESSMENT

performance

4. Number of

credits earned

toward

graduation

5. Disciplinary

actions

LPAC Committee

Administrators

May BE/ESL/LEP Local

Student Schedules

Grades, State assessment results

Credits earned

Disciplinary actions

Number of students who meet two-year exit criteria

89

9. State Compensatory Education

Intent and Purpose State compensatory education (SCE) is a supplemental program designed to eliminate any disparity in performance on assessment instruments administered

under Subchapter B, Chapter 39, or disparity in the rates of high school completion between students at risk of dropping out of school, as defined by TEC

§29.081, and all other students. The purpose is to design and implement appropriate compensatory, intensive, or accelerated instruction that enable the

students to be performing at grade level at the conclusion of the next regular school term. In determining the appropriate intensive accelerated instruction or

SCE program, districts must use student performance data resulting from the basic skills assessment instrument and achievement tests administered under

Subchapter B, Chapter 39. Based on this needs assessment, district and campus staff shall design the appropriate strategies and include them in the campus

and/or district improvement plan.

In 2014-2015 at-risk students performance had slight increase writing. Economically Disadvantaged students performances, had slight increase Science,

Social Studies and Writing. Although there were slight decreases for both subgroups, we continue to provide targeted assistance to students in need. Thus

funds were used as in prior years.

90

Measurable Performance Objective: 100% of At-Risk students will pass State assessments; 0% Drop-out rate

SCE/At-Risk

All three campuses are Title I, Part A Schoolwide Program campuses with a student poverty rate of at least 40 percent that combines federal funds with SCE funds to upgrade

services for at-risk students on the Schoolwide Campus. All school staff are expected to direct efforts toward upgrading the entire education program and improving

achievement for all students, particularly low achieving.


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

9.1Develop a policy for identifying, entering, and exiting students from the

SCE program; calculation of 110% and

cost of regular ed program (per student

and/or instruction staff per student ratio)

9.2Identify students at risk of dropping

out of school using 13 state criteria and

report in PEIMS

9.3Provide teachers with the confidential

list of At-Risk students and supporting

criteria used for identification

9.4Conduct a comprehensive needs

assessment which includes but is not

limited to state assessment, dropout

rate, TELPAS, local assessments, etc. to

identify areas to accelerate

Superintendent, Campus Administrators,

business manager


Counselor, Teachers

Campus Administrators

Administrators

Teachers

Campus Quality Teams

August

End of 1st

six weeks and

through-out the school

year as needed

Beginning of school

May or August

Local

SCE

Local

Local, Title I, Part A,

SCE

Meeting to develop policy

At-risk criteria

distributed

List developed

Data disaggregated for

at-risk students

Local policy

List of at-risk students

identified

All teachers with list

and supporting

documentation

Results of

comprehensive needs

assessment

9.5Serve PK-2 students who failed

readiness test with accelerated, intensive

program for early literacy

9.6Serve 3-12 grade students with below

70 avg. in 2 or more subjects through the

Recovery Plan for Student Performance

9.7Serve pregnant students and student

parents through parenting programs

9.8Serve LEP students through an

accelerated program to acquire proficiency in the English language

Elementary Campus Administrators


Teachers

Counselor, Campus

Administrators,

Teachers

Bilingual/ESL and General Ed Teachers


Fall

Fall - May

August - May

Daily

SCE Local

SCE

Local

SCE

Bilingual/ESL funds

SCE

Local

Identified students

failing readiness test

placed in program

Identified students

placed in program

Program outline and

students placed in

programs

Progress reports

LPAC Meetings

TPRI results, CIRCLE Assessment

Report card grades

End of year grades

Completion rates

Completion rates

TELPAS

State Assessment results

91

SCE/At-Risk


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

9.9Provide accelerated, intensive program for At-Risk students failing

the State Assessments through

tutoring, computer-assisted instruction,

extended day, week, year, specialized

reading/math classes, etc.

9.10Provide program for students in

DAEP on probation and/or previous

drop-outs

9.11Compile a report that compares

State Assessment data of students at

risk of dropping out of school and all

other district students

9.12Compile a report that compares

high school completion between

students of risk of dropping out of

school and all other district students

9.13Provide research based

professional development for

professional/paraprofessional staff

designed to assist students at-risk of

dropping out of school using input

from staff

Campus Administrators Teachers


DAEP Teachers

Administrators

SCE Staff

SCE Staff

Administrators

Administrators,

ESC-18 Staff,

Professional

Consultants

Teachers

August -May

Daily

June

May


SCE, Local

SCE, Local

SCE

AEIS-It

DMAC

SCE

AEIS-It

DMAC

Local, State and

Federal, SCE

Progress reports Report card grades

Benchmark Tests

Disciplinary records

Report card grades

Disaggregated data

Data collected

Staff development calendar

State Assessments Completion rate

State Assessment

Results

Completion rate

Written report

Written report

Teacher/

Paraprofessional

attendance certificates

Sign in sheets

92

SCE/At-Risk


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

9.14Conference with parents. Encourage parental

involvement and provide

opportunities for parents to

participate in school-

sponsored activities i.e. open

house, fall festival, UIL,

parent booster clubs, etc.

9.15Evaluate the

effectiveness of the SCE

programs

9.16Submit DIP and 2 CIPs if

district receives more than

$150,000 SCE funds

9.17Budget/allocate at least

85% of funds to campuses

based on greatest need

Administrators SCE Staff

Teachers

PTO

Administrators

Teachers-PLC, CQT

Superintendent

Administrators

Business Manager

Superintendent, Administrators,

Business Manager

August – May

Ongoing

July

July

Local, Title I, Part A

Local

DIP/CIP for prior

school year

SCE funds

Parent involvement calendar

Records of SCE

programs collected

Plans completed

Budget

Evaluation of parent involvement activities

Evaluation of SCE

programs

Posting of plans on web

site or electronically

submitted to TEA

TEA confirmation

Audit

93

SCE/At-Risk


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

9.18SCE funds are coordinated with the

following federal funds:

Title I, Part A, Perkins,

Title II, Part A, Title II,

Part D, Title IV, Part A

9.19Local school board

annually evaluate SCE

program

9.20 Develop a

comprehensive parental

program to reinforce

skills at home

9.21 Personal Plan for all

at-risk students to prevent

and target areas of need and provide tutorials or

services related to their

need.

Superintendent, Business Manager

Administration, local

school board

July

Summer or fall

SCE, Federal Funds

Local

Preliminary budget

Data compiled

Audit

Board minutes

94

10.Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) - Special Education Program

Intent and Purpose IDEA and Special Education programs require school districts to provide individuals with disabilities between the ages of three and twenty-one a free

appropriate public education that is designed to meet each child’s unique needs and prepare them for employment and independent living.

The IDEA has three primary purposes:

1. To assure that all children with disabilities receive a free appropriate public education that emphasizes special education and related services

designed to meet their unique needs.

2. To protect the rights of children with disabilities and their parents and guardians.

3. To assist the states in providing for the effective education of all children with disabilities. Special Education

Measurable Performance Objective: 100% of all special education students will meet ARD expectations.


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

10.1Ensure all teachers and teacher assistants have the proper certification

and/or endorsements and/or certificates of

training required to teach in this special

program

10.2Provide research based staff

development, with input from staff

10.3Ensure that all students with

disabilities have access to the general

curriculum

10.4Provide training to teachers regarding

modifying the curriculum for students with

disabilities

10.5Provide parental involvement and

provide opportunities for parents of

students with disabilities to participate in

school-sponsored activities

Administration, Special Education Director,

588 Coop

Administrator, Special

Education Director, 588

Coop, Teachers, Teacher

assistants

Administrator, Counselor,

Special Education Director,

588 Coop, Special Teachers, Regular Education Teachers

Administrator, Counselor,

Special Education Director,

588 Coop, Special Teachers,

Regular Education Teachers

Administrator, Special


Coop

August

Fall, Spring,

Summer

August – May

August- May

Fall, Spring,

Summer

Special Ed

Special Ed

Special Ed

Special Ed

Local, Special

Education, Title I, Part

A

Review of personnel files

Staff development

calendar

ARD/IEP

Agenda

Parent Involvement

activity calendar

Teacher/Teacher

assistants certificates on file


Student schedules

IEPs, Sign-in sheets

Sign-in sheets

95

Special Education


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

10.6Reduce the percentage of special student exemptions from State

Assessments, TELPAS


assessment of students with disabilities to

determine areas of strengths and

weaknesses

10.8Provide training to ARD committee

10.9Address PBM Performance and

Compliance as required by TEA

ARD Committee, 588 Coop

Administrators Special


Coop, Special Education

Dept. Teachers

Administrators

Special Education

Director, 588 Coop

Administrators

Special Education

Director, 588 Coop

Fall, Spring

On going

August-

Spring

Special Education Funds

Local, State, federal

STATE

ASSESSMENT,

TELPAS, TPRI, IEPs,

etc.

Special Education

Funds

Local

PBM Reports/AYP Reports

Disaggregated data

Training scheduled

Agenda

Reduced percentage

Evaluation of Special

Ed. Program

IEP/Needs identified

Sign-in sheets

strategies developed

Sign-in sheets

strategies developed

96

11. Dyslexia

Intent and Purpose Dyslexic students have talents that may not always be evident in an academic setting. The students’ difficulty with academic tasks is not an indicator of their intelligence,

but of a difficulty with words and/or language that is not within the students’ control. Such students can attain academic success through proper assessment, identification,

and instruction. All staff should be made aware of a student’s difficulties and shall then help each student to deal with such difficulties effectively. Staff shall also

encourage and assist students to develop their talents while helping the students achieve academic success in school.

Measurable Performance Objective: 100% of all dyslexic students will pass all portions of the State Assessments.

DYSLEXIA


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

11.1Identify students with dyslexia or a related disorder and provide appropriate

instructional services

11.2Provide a program for early

identification, intervention, and support for

students at risk for dyslexia or other

reading difficulties

11.3Annually align approved procedures

and district/campus procedures

11.4Provide services for students who may

be eligible under Section 504

11.5Provide research based staff

development for teachers of dyslexia

students that uses individualized intensive,

multi-sensor, and phonetic methods to

teach reading with input from staff

Administration Dyslexia Staff

Dyslexia Staff

Administrators

Dyslexia Staff

Administrators

504 Committee

Administrator-Teachers

Ongoing -As needed

August

August

Daily

Ongoing

Local, SCE, Title I

Local, Title I

Local- time

Local, Title I

Local

Staff training

Written procedures

Procedures

List of students

identified

Training Schedule

List of students eligible for services

Students identified

Procedures adopted

List of students served

Attendance certificates

11.6 Ensure teachers of dyslexic students have proper certification and/or

endorsements-Monitor student progress


assessment to determine students in

program areas of strengths and weaknesses

11.8 Local school board annually evaluate

dyslexia program

Administrator Dyslexia Staff-Teachers

Administrators,

Teachers

Administration, local school board

Daily Each six weeks

Ongoing

Fall, spring, or summer

Local, Title I

Local, Title I, Part A

Title II, Part A, ESC

Training

Local

Class schedules Report cards, List

of teachers

providing services

List of students

Evaluation prepared

Evaluation prepared

List of students receiving services,

Skill mastery

Teaching certificates

Disaggregated data

Board minutes

97

12. Advanced Academics/Gifted and Talented Program

Intent and Purpose The intent and purpose of the Advanced Academics/Gifted and Talented program is to provide a program for students who demonstrate a high degree of

intellectual and/or creative ability (ies), exhibits an exceptionally high degree of motivation, and/or excels in specific academic fields, and who needs special

instruction and/or special ancillary services to achieve at levels commensurate with his or her abilities. Advanced Academics/Gifted and Talented

Measurable Performance Objective: 100% of all GT students will pass all portions of the STATE ASSESSMENT test.


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

12.1Update written policies that include provisions regarding

furloughs, reassessment, exiting of

students from program services,

transfer student, appeals of district

decisions regarding program

placement

12.2Continue an annual student

nomination process with particular

focus on BE/ESL, economically

disadvantaged, special education,

migrant, and minority student

nominations and/or placements

12.3Provide an advanced and

challenging curriculum to all G/T

students in all grades

12.4Ensure equity of opportunity

for all students for identification

selection, and placement of

students that includes the use of

native language and non-verbal

assessment

Administration G/T Staff

G/T Selection

Committee

Administrator

Teacher

G/T Selection

Committee

G/T Staff

G/T Staff

G/T Selection

Committee

May – August

August – May

August – May

Fall, Spring

Local

Local

Local, G/T funds, ESC

Local, G/T Funds

Agendas, Minutes, sign- in sheets

Training of staff on G/T

characteristics

Lesson Plans

List of students to be

tested

Written policies, handbooks

List and records of

student nominations

Student projects/

Student scores

STATE

ASSESSMENT/SAT/A

CT

List of tests for students

with language other

than English/

Non-verbal tests

98

Advanced Academics/Gifted and Talented


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

12.5Ensure a minimum of three appropriate

criteria that include both

qualitative and

quantitative measures in

the areas of general

intellectual ability

and/or specific

academic fields in

grades 1-12

12.6Continue to provide

opportunities for all

professional staff to

obtain 30 hours of G/T

training

12.7Revise and update

G/T curriculum

framework showing

depth and complexity

including the four core

academic areas

12.8Survey staff to

determine staff

development needs

12.9Provide

opportunities to work

together as a group,

work with other

students, and work

independently during

the school day as well

as the entire school year

G/T Selection

Committee G/T Staff

Administration

G/T Staff

Administrator

G/T Staff

Spring


April – August

Spring

Weekly

Local, G/T Funds, ESC

Local, G/T Funds

Local

Local

Local, G/T Funds

Planning meetings scheduled

Staff development calendar

Notes, minutes from

meetings

Survey

Lesson Plans, Schedules

Three criteria in place


G/T Curriculum

revisions

Summary of survey

Student surveys

99

Advanced Academics/Gifted and Talented


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

12.10Conduct an annual evaluation, including

surveys of families,

students, program staff,

and other district staff

12.11Ensure all teachers

who teach in the G/T

program have the proper

certification and/or

endorsements

12.12Encourage

parental involvement

and provide

opportunities for parents

to participate in school-

sponsored activities i.e.

annual meeting, UIL

activities, etc.

12.12Ensure all

Advanced Academics

teachers receive annual

update training

12.14Ensure all

administrators,

counselor received 6

hours required training

in nature and needs

12.15Local school

board annually

evaluates G/T program

G/T Staff

Administrator

Administrator

G/T Staff

AA staff

Administrators,

counselors

Administration, school

board

April

April – August

August – May

Fall, spring, summer

Summer, fall

Fall, spring, or summer

Local

Local, G/T Funds

Local

Local, state, federal

Local, state, federal

Local

Survey

Interviews

Parent Involvement

calendar

List of AA teachers

List of administrators

and counselors

Evaluation report

prepared

Summary report of survey

Teacher Certificates

Sign-in sheets, Surveys

Certificates showing 6

hours annual update

Training certificates

Board minutes showing

evaluation of program

100

13. advanced Academics/Early College High School Program

Intent and purpose:

The intent and purpose of the Early College High School Program is based on the principle that academic rigor, combined with the opportunity to save time

money, is a powerful motivator for students to work hard and meet serious intellectual challenges. Presidio

ISD is 100% .This program blends high school and college in a rigorous yet supportive program, compressing the time it takes to

Complete a high school diploma and the first two years of college. Advanced Academics/T-STEM Academy

Measurable Performance Object: Students Will be able to earn up 60 colleges credit hours by the time they graduate high school

Activities/Strategies/ Initiatives

13.1 Mission/Vision is developed, aligned and revised with ECHS

guidelines.

13.2 ECH guidelines are used in

decision making process using a

variety of Murces

13.3 Advisory Board develops

innovative and creative approaches to

support ECHS

13.4 Leadership team/staff attends

leadership conferences and cluster

meetings to share best practices and

improve student achievement

13.5 ECHS leadership/staff

collaborates with ECHS leaders and

coaches to improve student

achievement and teacher preparation

13.6 ECHS develops 4 year college

and career readiness plan for each

student

13.7Monitors students success in high

school to college transition

Staff Responsible

ECHS Director Administrators Teachers, staff

ECHS Director

Administrators Teachers, staff

ECHS Director Administrators Teachers, staff

ECHS Director


Teaching Staff

ECHS Director Administrators Teachers, staff ECHS Coach

ECHS Director


Time Line

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

August July

August-July

Resources

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Formative Evaluation ECHS guidelines

ECHS guidelines

Data sources

Agenda

Minutes

Calendar

Walk through

Staff Development

Calendar

Graduation plan

Graduation plan

College visits

Summative Evaluation Implementation of all

Guidelines

Alignment between

University and ECHS

Implementation of new

Initiatives

Evidence of best

Practices and instruction

Implementation of

college standards

in instruction and

assessment

College degree plan

Grade reports

101

s


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

13.8 Conduct Summer

Bridge Program for

incoming 9th grade

students

13.9 Provide multiple

opportunities for

placement testing

13.10 All testing fees

waived for students

13.11 Offer preparation

courses for COMPASS,

ACUPLACER,

IEXPLORER,PSAT,

PLAN, ACT, SAT

13.12 Purchase materials

which promote college

earliness

13.12 Use multiple sources

of data to guide

instructional planning and

identify best practices

13.13 Integrate technology

into lessons and foster

student use of technology

during instruction

13.14 Hold parent/student

orientation for all student

enrolled in a college course

ECHS Director

UTPB Liaison

ECHS Counselor

ECHS Counselor

ECHS Director

ECHS Director

ECHS Staff

ECHS Director

ECHS Director

Campus Principal

Teaching Staff

Teaching Staff

ECHS Director

ECHS Counselor

UTPB Liaison

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Data sources

Test results

Test results

Data sources

Data sources

Walk through

Student products

Meetings

Agendas

Minutes

TSI compliant

TSI compliant

TSI compliant

TSI compliant

Meeting college

entrance requirements

TSI compliant

Evidence of best practices

used in instruction

Technology use in every

classroom

Parental/student feedback

102

13.15 Expose ECHS

students to college

professors, programs

and facilities during

summer program or

at the beginning of

each semester

13.16 ECHS staff

provide students with

study skills,

time management

and test taking skills

13.17 Academic

achievement lab will

provide students with

resources to ensure

success in college

courses

13.18 Purchase

college text books

13.19 Provide field

trips to create real

life connections to

college life

13.20 Provide

incentives/awards

which recognize

student academic

achievement

ECHS Director

UTPB Liaison

ECHS Staff

ECHS Staff

ECHS Director

ECHS Director

ECHS Counselor

ECHS Director

Campus Principal

ECHS Counselor

UTPB Liaison

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Exposure to

college going

culture

Student feedback

Student grade

reports

Text book list

College

awareness/culture

Certificates

Successful course

completion

Successful course

completion

Students will meet

college course deadlines

Utilize books to complete

assignments on time

College admissions

letter

Student continued enrollment in college coursework

103

Activities/Strategies/ Staff

Initiatives Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

13.21 Utilize tutors to ECHS Staff

support college

eadiness standards and

dual credit enrollment

13.22 Incorporate Teaching Staff

student work product UTPB Professors

sharing and analysis

during UTPB/TSTC/ECHS

subject area meetings

August-July

August-July

Local Funds

Local Funds

Tutorial list

Joint evaluation

of high school

work product

Successful completion

of assignments

Progress toward more

sophisticated work

product

104

14. Advanced Academics/T-STEM Academy

Program Intent and Program Intent and Purpose: The intent and purpose of the T-STEM Academy Program is to focus on improving instruction and academic performance in Science and mathematics

related subjects and increasing the number of students who study and enter STEM careers. Presidio ISD is 100% committed to the implementation of the T- STEM Academy.

Advanced Academics/T-STEM Academy


Initiatives

Staff

Responsible

Time Line Resources Formative Summative

Evaluation Evaluation 14.1 Mission/Vision is

developed, aligned and revised

with T-STEM blueprint

14.2 T-STEM blueprint is used in decision

making process using a variety of data sources

14.3 Advisory Board develops innovative and

creative approaches to support Academy

Mission/Vision

14.4 Leadership team/staff attends T-STEM

leadership conferences and cluster meetings to

share best practices and improve student

achievement

T-STEM Director August-July Local Funds Administrator Teaching Staff

T-STEM Director August-July Local Funds

Administrator

T-STEM Director August-July Local Funds

Administrator Teaching Staff

T-STEM Director August-July Local Funds Administrato

r

Teaching Staff

Blueprint Template Results of

Template

Blueprint Template Results of Data Sources Template

Agenda Implementation Minutes of new Calendar initiatives

Walk through Evidence of

Best Practices

in instruction

105



Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

14.5 T-STEM

Leadership/staff

collaborates with T-

STEM leaders and

coaches to improve

student achievement and

teacher preparation

14.6 Academy develops 4

year college and career

readiness plan for each

student that address

STEM pathways

14.7 Monitors student

success in high school to

college transition

14.8 Establish

partnerships with higher

education to provide at

least 60 college credits

14.9 Academy participate

in Student Orientation/

Summer Bridge Programs

monitoring initial student,

success, identifying

struggling students and

providing additional

student support

T-STEM Director August-July

Administrator

Teaching Staff

STEM Counselor August-July


T-STEM Director August-July


Teaching Staff

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Staff Development

Calendar

Graduation Plan

Graduation Plan

College Visits

Course Offerings

Registration

Student Data Sources

Evidence of

implementation of college

standards embedded in

instruction and

assessment

College degree plan

Grade reports

Course completion

records

Student feedback

106



Initiatives

Staff

Responsible


Evaluation

Summative

Evaluation

14.10 Academy creates

STEM orientation and

participation

opportunities for

parents and stake

holders

14.11 Facilitate

teaching staff and

college professors in

planning curriculum

and instruction based

on college readiness

and project based

learning

14.12 Ensure teachers'

use of high quality

curricular materials

aligned with college

and career readiness

standards and industry

standards

14.13 Initiate

partnerships with

institutions of higher

education, businesses,

community and

industry

14.14 Students

demonstrate 21st

century skill by

internships with

business and industry

T-STEM Director

Administrate

STEM Counselor

Teaching Staff

T-STEM Director

University Liaison

Campus Principal

Teaching Staff

T-STEM Director

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Parent

Involvement

Calendar

College

Readiness

Standards

Staff

Development

List of materials

needed

Meetings

Parental involvement Feedback and data

Project Based Learning

activities Leading edge technology

MOU

107


Initiatives

14.15 Students

demonstrate 21st

century skills by

participating in

internships with

business and industry

14.16 Job shadowing

in occupational or

career fields of interest

will be implemented

14.17 Capstone/PBL

projects will be

embedded in all areas

of study

14.18 Teaching staff

will implement one

project based learning

activity each semester

14.19 I n t e r n s h i p s

will provide teachers

with hands on activities

in their field of study

14.19 Provide field

trips to create real life

connections to STEM

fields

Staff

Responsible T-STEM Director

Campus Principal

STEM Counselor

Teaching Staff

Business Partner

STEM Counselor

Business Partner

Teaching Staff

Teaching Staff

T-STEM Director

T-STEM Director

STEM Counselor

Time Line

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

August-July

Resources

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Local Funds

Formative

Evaluation

21st Century

Skills

Career

Awareness

Student Product

Student Product

Teacher Product

College

Awareness

Summative

Evaluation Business and industry feedback

Student essay

Student product

presented to industry

I

Student product


Teacher product


College Admission

letter

108

Presidio Migrant Program

Priority of Service Action Plan (PFS)

2015-2016

REQUIRED ACTION / ACTIVITY PERSON(S) RESPONSIBLE TIMELINE

I. Provide training to administrators and other staff working with migrant students on the significance and requirement by TEA to generate, print, and share “Priority for Services” Reports. ( Priority of Services

students are migrant students who are failing, or most at risk of failing, to meet the state’s content and

performance standards: and whose education has been interrupted during the regular school year. Based on

activities conducted as part as the LEA’s on-going, comprehensive needs assessment, the LEA must ensure

that “Priority for Services” students receive priority placement in any and all services and /or programs to

assist them in making academic progress.) Presidio ISD Migrant Procedural Manual p. 4

II. Conduct a presentation at the district’s beginning of the year staff development to inform all district

personnel of the definition of PFS students and the significance of prioritizing all instructional services for

these students for the compliance issues. Presidio ISD Migrant Procedural Manual p. 4

III. Determine individual needs of every migrant identified student and family for instructional support

services; identify available resources to address their needs. Coordinate with campus administrators, other

staff, and local entities to ensure that each child and family has access to appropriate services; and follow-up

to monitor and document progress. Presidio ISD Migrant Procedural Manual p. 6

IV. Coordinate training for migrant students’ teachers and campus

administrators to inform them of individual needs of migrant

Students in their class and on their campus. Stress the

significance of prioritizing all instructional services for these students to meet specific needs. Presidio ISD Migrant Procedural Manual p. 5

V. Make periodic home visits to update parents on the academic progress of their children. Presidio ISD Migrant Procedural Manual p. 7

VI. Coordinate with available programs offering options for credit accrual and recovery to

ensure that migrant secondary students are accessing opportunities available to earn needed

credits and make up coursework, which is lacking due to late arrival and/or early withdrawal.

Student participation must not interfere with core classes. Presidio ISD Migrant Procedural Manual

VII. Ensure consolidation of partial secondary credits, proper course placement, and credit

accrual for on-time graduation, including accessing and reviewing academic records from

NGS. Presidio ISD Migrant Procedural Manual p. 7

VIII. Monitor academic progress of migrant students while working cooperatively with

district administrators and staff to implement a total instructional and supportive program that

District Migrant Administrator (DMA)

Migrant Specialist (MS)

District Migrant Administrator

(DMA)

MS, DMA

DMA

DMA and MS

DMA and MS

DMA and MS

DMA and MS

By September 30

By September 30

Within the first grading

period of the school year that the child who is eligible for migrant

services is in the district

Within the first grading period of the school year

that the child who is eligible for migrant

services is in the district Ongoing throughout the

year

Ongoing throughout the year

Ongoing throughout the year

Ongoing throughout the

109

addresses the specific needs of migrant students. Maintain documentation of services

provided for Compliance Reporting. Presidio ISD Migrant Procedural Manual p. 7

IX. Coordinate with school staff and the Texas Migrant Interstate Program (TMIP) to ensure

that migrant students who have failed any state assessment in any content area are accessing

local, intrastate, remediation. Presidio ISD Migrant Procedural Manual p. 8

X. Generate PFS report for the district on a monthly basis and disseminate to campus

administrators. Presidio ISD Migrant Procedural Manual p. 4

XI. Provide campus administrators, appropriate campus staff, and parents the PFS criteria and

updated PFS reports. Presidio ISD Migrant Procedural Manual p. 4.

XII. Provide a parent involvement program ages 3-21 including establishing a Parent Advisory Council

which meets regularly to work in partnership with families and communicate regularly with children’s

parents and participates in school sponsored activities. Parent and staff coordinate, plan, implement and

evaluate local MEP activities and services and follow PAC bylaws established by the district.

XIII. Conduct a Comprehensive Needs Assessments of migrant students –areas of strength and weaknesses,

including preschool students.

XIV: Designate and enter into NGS a district summer contact person who will available and have access to

migrant student records such as course grades and immunizations.

XV: Conduct annual residency verification, Graduation plan for migrant students, encode summer

intersession enrollments in NGS, and encode COE, grades and credits, special needs, At – Risk students,

health data according to NGS timeline, ensure accuracy of PEIMS.

XVI: Coordinate with available mentoring programs or support organizations, provide coordination of

resources by contacting each student or family. Provide students and parents’ information on how to access

assistance or interventions.

XVII: Early childhood/ school readiness within the first 60 days eligible preschool migratory children ages

3-5 are in the school district to determine individual educational needs and coordinate or provide services to meet their needs.

XVIII: Out-of-school Youth based on academic needs coordination with appropriate school, state, and other

federally – funded entities. To Provide services to out- of-school migrant youth.

XIX: Presidio MEP program will implement a quality control check and coordinate with Region 18 to

schedule an NGS quality control check for accurate submissions.

DMA and MS

DMA and MS

DMA and MS

MEP Staff

MEP Staff

NGS Data Specialist

MEP Staff

MEP Staff

MEP Staff

MEP Staff

MEP Staff

year

Before migrant student’s early withdrawal and/or end of the school year

Monthly from July 1 to

June 30

Monthly from July 1 to

June

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

Ongoing

110

Comprehensive Needs Assessment

The following Campus Improvement Plan is a document outlining district initiatives to improve student performance and organizational effectiveness. Presidio Elementary School staff, students, and parents provided suggestions for writing the District Improvement Plan; however, the Campus Improvement Plan was written by elected Professional Educators, Community Representatives, and Other Professionals. To assess where our students are in relation to our mission and goals, a comprehensive needs assessment was completed to identify

strengths and areas of concern.

• Student Demographics

• Teacher Demographics

• State and Federal Rating

• Financial Data

CNA DATA

Focus Area: Student Learning-

State Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) Percent of students passing by subject and by sub populations Scale Scores Commended Performance Participation Rate

Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) Result

Focus Areas: Quality Learning and working Environment- The Quality Learning and Working Environment Focus Area measured by the following measurements at the District

Level: Attendance-Students -Teacher Percent of Teachers with Bilingual Certification and /or ESL Endorsement Number of student accidents Class Size Comparisons Student Behavior (by State and Federal student subgroups) Number of discipline referrals or incidents Number of student suspensions and expulsions Number of gang related, substance abuse, or other at-risk behaviors Student Teacher Ratios Teacher Attrition Rate

111

Focus Area: Effective and Efficient Organization Drop Out Rate Completion Rate Student Retention Rates Maintenance Work Order Completion Time Technology Work Order Completion Time


Parent and Community Members Participation in School Functions Open House Special Events

Needs Assessment Instruments Used in Planning:

1. State Assessment Information-Pearson Reports 2. Accountability Reports 4. Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy (DIBELS) 5. Texas Primary Reading Inventory (TPRI) 6. PEIMS Reports 7. PBMAS 8. Benchmark results 9. Surveys (student, Parent and Teachers and staff 10. CNA

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Student Enrollment 1,426 1,380 1,378 1,351 1,329

1,426

1,380

1,378

1,351

1,329

1,280

1,300

1,320

1,340

1,360

1,380

1,400

1,420

1,440

Nu

mb

er

of

Stu

de

nts

Total District Student Enrollment

114

0

5

10

15

20

25

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Per

cen

tage

of

Stu

den

ts

School Year

State Student Enrollment by Program

Bilingual/ESL Education State Career & Technology Education State Gifted & Talented Education State Special Education State

116

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Per

cen

tage

of

Stu

den

ts

School Year

Student Population by Ethnicity - State

Hispanic State White State Native American State Asian/Pacific Islander State

117

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Per

cen

tage

of

Stu

den

ta

School Year

Student Population by Federal and State Subgroups - District

Economically Disadvantaged District ELL District At-Risk District

118

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Per

cen

tage

of

Stu

den

ts

School Year

Student Population by Federal & State Subgroups - State

Economically Disadvantaged State ELL State At-Risk State

119

2010-

2011

2011-

2012

2012-

2013

2013-

2014

Number of Students per

Teacher State14.6 14.7 14.7 15.4

Number of Students per

Teacher District12.5 11.1 11.1 11.1

0.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

10.0

12.0

14.0

16.0

18.0

Num

ber

of

Stu

den

ts

School Year

Number of Students per Teacher

Number of Students per Teacher State

Number of Students per Teacher District

120

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Stu

de

nts

En

roll

ed

School Year

Student Enrollment by Program

Bilingual/ESL Education State

Bilingual/ESL Education District

Career & Technology Education State

Career & Technology Education District

Gifted & Talented Education State

Gifted & Talented Education District

Special Education State

Special Education District

121

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Distric % 68.4 40.9 68.1 75

68.4

40.9

68.1

75

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Par

cen

tage

of

Stu

de

nts

District Compensatory Education At-Risk Report

122

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

PHS # 244 132 130 175

Distric % 68.4 40.9 68.1 75

State % 48.3 52.1 44.7 49.9

Campus % 64.4 80 42.6 56.6

244

132 130

175

68.4

40.9

68.175

48.3 52.144.7

49.9

64.4

80

42.6

56.6

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Nu

mb

er

of

Stu

de

nts

State Compensatory Education At-Risk Report

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

LRFMS # 167 185 194 209

Distric % 68.4 45.4 68.1 75

State % 48.3 45.4 44.7 49.9

Campus % 55.1 45.4 54.2 61.1

167

185194

209

68.4

45.4

68.175

48.3 45.4 44.749.9

55.145.4

54.261.1

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Nu

mb

ert

of

Stu

de

nts


2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

PES # 510 623 657 668

Distric % 68.4 64.5 68.1 75

State % 48.3 64.5 44.7 49.9

Campus % 76.7 64.5 84.6 88.8

510

623

657668

68.4 64.5 68.1 75

48.364.5

44.7 49.9

76.764.5

84.6 88.8

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Nu

mb

er

of

Stu

de

nts


State Compensatory Education At-Risk

Report by Campus

123

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

20011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Percentage o

f P

op

ula

tio

n

School Year

Teacher Population by Years of Experience - PISD

Beginning 1-5 years 6-10 years 11-20 years Over 20 years

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

20011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Po

pula

tio

n P

ercentage

School Year

Teacher Population by Years of Experience - State


124

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

20011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Po

pula

tio

n P

ercentage

School Year

Teacher Population by Highest Degree Held - PISD

No Degree Bachelors Masters Doctorate

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

20011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Po

pula

tio

n P

ercentage

School Year

Teacher Population by Highest Degree Held - State

No Degree Bachelors Masters Doctorate

125

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

20011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Po

pu

lati

on

School Year

Teacher Population by Ethnicity

African American

Hispanic

White

Native American

Asian/ Pacific Islander

126

97.7

100.0 100.0 100.0

97

97

98

98

99

99

100

100

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Per

cen

t o

f T

eacher

s

School Year

Highly Qualified Teachers - District

Percent of Teachers Highly Qualified

127

20011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

No Degree 0.8 0.9 0.9

No Degree 0.8 0.0 0.0

Bachelors 76.9 75.4 75.4

Bachelors 79.8 79.5 83.0

Masters 21.8 23.1 23.2

Masters 18.7 19.7 16.1

Doctorate 0.5 0.6 0.6

Doctorate 0.8 0.8 0.9

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

Po

pu

lati

on

Pe

rce

nta

ge

School Year

Teacher Population by Highest Degree Held

No Degree

No Degree

Bachelors

Bachelors

Masters

Masters

Doctorate

Doctorate

128

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

20011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Aver

age

Sal

ary i

n D

olla

rs

School Year

Average Teacher Salary - State


129

10.1

15.5

11.6

6.2

11.6

7.3

-1.0

1.0

3.0

5.0

7.0

9.0

11.0

13.0

15.0

17.0

20011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Aver

age

Num

ber

of

Yea

rs

School Year

Teacher Retention - PISD

Average Years of Experience Average Years with District

130

State and Federal Ratings

Campus Rating

TEA maintains an annual district and campus rating system based on several indicators, including results of the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS),

high school completion rates, and dropout rates for grades 7 and 8. Recent state legislation (HB1) establishes swift and increasingly severe sanctions for

campuses or districts that are identified as “Academically Unacceptable” for one or more years. Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) is a federal requirement under

No Child Left Behind. The District must meet a minimum expectation of “Academically Acceptable” and “Met AYP”.

PHS State and Federal Accountability Rating

Year State Federal

2009-2010 Recognized Met AYP

2010-2011 Academically Acceptable Did Not Meet AYP

2011-2012 Academically Acceptable Did Not Meet AYP

2012-2013 Met Standard

2013-2014 Met Standard

131

Performance-Based Monitoring and Assessment System (PBMAS)

Development of the Performance-Based Monitoring Analysis System (PBMAS)

House Bill 3459 of the 78th Texas Legislature, Regular Session (2003), limited and redirected the monitoring activities conducted by the Texas

Education Agency (TEA or agency). The legislation also included a new performance-based section on bilingual education, new local board of

trustees’ responsibilities for ensuring school district compliance with all applicable requirements of state programs, and an emphasis on data

integrity. This statutory change resulted in a realignment of agency functions and an emphasis on a coordinated approach to agency monitoring.

Through this new approach, TEA began a coordinated implementation of several different agency evaluation and monitoring components.

Over the past decade state and federal statute have guided the Texas Education Agency (TEA) in its monitoring of students served in programs that

are supported by state and federal funds. These programs include special education, bilingual education, career and technical education, and many of

the federal Title programs under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which was reauthorized as the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act in

2001. Hence the Performance Based Measurement and Analysis System (PBMAS) was developed to ensure state compliance with requirements for

supplemental federal funding for all state-administered programs involving the delivery of instructional or related services to those student sub-

groups supported by these special programs.

Standards and Performance Levels

A performance level (PL) is the result that occurs when a standard is applied to a district’s performance on an indicator. The performance levels

available for indicators in the 2011 PBMAS include Not Assigned (NA) (including Not Assigned through SA, PJSA, or DI), 0, 0 SA, 0 PJSA, 0 RI, 1, 1

SA, 1 PJSA, 2, 2 SA, 2 PJSA, 3, 3 SA, or 3 PJSA. SA refers to special analysis, while PJSA refers to professional judgment special analysis; both are

described in the Minimum Size Requirements and Special Analysis section below. RI refers to Required Improvement, which is also described in a

separate section below. DI refers to data integrity and is used in combination with the NA performance level to address situations where

compromised data render any other performance level impossible to determine.

A performance level of 0 is the highest designation for any indicator, meaning the district met the standard for the indicator. A performance level of

3 is the lowest designation, indicating the district performance was farthest from the 0 - Met Standard designation. The performance level thresholds

are typically referred to as cut-points.

Types of Standards

Absolute standards are tied to an absolute requirement or goal that all districts have the possibility of achieving each year. The state accountability

system provides absolute standards to which PBMAS standards can be aligned for certain TAKS performance indicators. The standards, by subject,

132

PBMAS District Performance

State District

2012 68 48

2013 50 43

2014 62 40

68

4850

43

62

40

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PB

MA

S P

assi

ng

Rat

e

PBMAS Career &Technical Education LEP TAKS Passing Rate-Reading/ELA

State District

2012 63 61

2013 70 75

2014 69 65

6361

70

75

69

65

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PB

MA

S P

ass

ing R

ate

PBMAS Special Education TAKS Passing Rate -Mathematics

State District

2012 63 61

2013 70 75

2014 69 65

6361

70

75

69

65

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PB

MA

S P

ass

ing R

ate

PBMAS Special Education TAKS Passing Rate -Mathematics

State District

2012 68 42

2013 50 45

2014 62 41

68

42

50

45

62

41

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PB

MA

S P

ass

ing R

ate

PBMAS Billingual Education English TAKS Passing-Science

133

State Financial Ratings

School FIRST is a financial accountability system developed and implemented by the Texas Education Agency. To receive a Superior Achievement

Rating, a maximum of two indicators can be answered with a "no".

Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST)

Year Rating

2009-2010 Superior Achievement



2012-2013 Standard Achievement



134

Financial Data

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

20011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Average S

ala

ry in

D

ollars

School Year

Average Teacher Salary - PISD


0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

20011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Average S

ala

ry in

D

ollars

School Year

Average Teacher Salary - State


136

State District Hispanic White AsianTwo or more

RaceSpecial Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 78 75 74 73 74

2013 81 55 50 48

2014 76 72 70 72

7875 74 73 74

81

55

5048

76

7270

72

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

3rd Grade STAAR Reading Results 2012-2014


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 69 69 68 55 67

2013 70 61 57 55

2014 71 65 62 66

69 69 68

55

6770

61

5755

71

6562

66

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

3rd Grade STAAR Math Results 2012- 2014

STAAR Percent at Phase-in 1 Level II or Above 3rd grade

137



Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 73 77 78 38 77

2013 72 73 73 75 71

2014 71 70 69 72

73

77 78

38

77

72 73 7375

7171 70 6972

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

4th Grade STAAR Reading

2012-2014


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 54 69 64 54 65

2013 69 54 53 58 53

2014 71 41 38 39

54

69

64

54

65

69

54 53

58

53

71

4138 39

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

4th Grade STAAR Math 2012-2014

138


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 72 73 72 93 73

2013 70 66 65 75 64

2014 73 66 64 62

72 73 72

93

7370

66 65

75

64

73

6664

62

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f St

ud

en

ts

4th Grade STAAR Writing 2012-2014

STAAR Percent at Phase-1 Level II or Above 4th Grade

139



Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 78 73 72 83 71

2013 87 96 96 96 93

2014 86 84 83 83 83

78

73 72

83

71

87

96 96 9693

8684 83 83 83

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ga

e o

f S

tu

de

nts

5th GradeSTAAR Reading2012-2014


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 78 63 62 83 63

2013 88 86 85 75 85

2014 88 84 83 83 84

78

63 62

83

63

8886 85

75

8588

84 83 83 84

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

5th Grade STAAR Math2012-2014

STAAR Percent at Phase-in 1 Level or Above 5th Grade

140


RaceSpecial

EducationEconomically

DisadvantagedLimted English

Proficient

2012 73 66 62 83 66 39

2013 73 73 73 72 78

2014 74 64 62 50 60 36

73

66

62

83

66

39

73 73 73 72

78

74

6462

50

60

36

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge S

tud

en

t5th gradeSTAAR Science

2012-2014

141


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 76 67 66 100

2013 72 70 70 68

2014 78 87 87 100 86

76

67 66

100

7270 70

68

78

87 87

100

86

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

6th Grade STAAR Reading2012-2014


RaceSpecial


DisadvantagedLimited English

Proficient

2012 77 80 80 79 70

2013 74 71 71 69 47

2014 79 91 90 100 91 80

7780 80 79

70

7471 71

69

47

79

91 90

100

91

80

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

6th Grade STAAR Math2012-2014

STAAR Percent at Phase-in 1 Level II or Above 6th Grade

142



Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 77 63 60 62

2013 78 71 70 68

2014 76 77 77 63 75

77

6360

62

78

71 7068

76 77 77

63

75

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in I Level II or above 7th grade Reading2012-2014



Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 71 68 67 67

2013 72 80 80 79

2014 68 68 68 65

7168 67 67

72

80 80 79

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in I Level II or Above7th grade Math2012-2014

STAAR Percent at Phase-in 1 Level II or Above 7th Grade

143


RaceSpecial


Disadvantaged

2012 73 60 58 59

2013 71 68 68 64

2014 72 69 68 75 67

73

6058 59

7168 68

64

7269 68

75

67

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f St

ud

en

ts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in I Leve II or Above 7th grade Writing2012-2014

144



Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 81 78 78 77

2013 90 67 66 0

2014 90 81 80 79

8178 78 77

90

67 66

0

90

81 80 79

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in I Level II Above 8th grade Reading2012-2014



Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 73 48 47 48

2013 86 87 86 87

2014 86 82 81 80

73

48 47 48

86 87 86 87

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in I Leve II of Above 8th grade Math 2012-2014

145


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 71 59 58 61

2013 75 74 72 73

2014 72 77 78 73

71

59 5861

75 7472 7372

77 78

73

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in I Leve II of Above 8th grade Science2012-2014



Economically

Disadvantaged

2012 61 59 58 60

2013 64 67 65 64

2014 63 64 64 86 57

6159 58

60

6467

65 6463 64 64

86

57

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in I Level II or Above 8th grade Social Studies2012-2014

146

State Distric Bilingual Education BE-Trans Early Exit ESL ESL Content LEP with Services

2013 77 72 65 65 38 38 49

2014 77 71 59 59 48 48 53

77

72

65 65

38 38

49

77

71

59 59

48 48

53

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

erc

en

tage

of

Stu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in Satisfactory Standard or Above All GradeAll Subjects

147

State DistricBilingual

Education

BE-Trans Early

ExitESL ESL Content

LEP with

ServicesTotal ELL

2013 80 71 70 70 32 32 50 51

2014 76 70 66 66 35 35 50 51

80

71 70 70

32 32

50 51

76

70

66 66

35 35

50 51

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in Satisfactor Standard or Above All GradeReading


Education

BE-Trans Early

ExitESL ESL Content

LEP with

ServicesTotal ELL

2013 79 76 60 60 53 53 57 57

2014 78 72 56 56 59 59 57 57

7976

60 60

53 53

57 57

78

72

56 5659 59

57 57

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in Satisfactory Standard or Above All Grade

Mathematics

148


Education

BE-Trans Early

ExitESL ESL Content

LEP with

ServicesTotal ELL

2013 63 52 57 58 58 24 36 37

2014 72 59 67 59 59 44 53 53

63

52

57 58 58

24

36 37

72

59

67

59 59

44

53 53

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f St

ud

en

ts

STAARPercent at Phase-in Satisfactory Standard or Above Writing 2013-2014

149



Economically

Disadvantaged

2013 69 55 55 53

2014 67 54 53 53

69

55 5553

67

54 53 53

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in I Level II or Above End of Course ELA Reading I



Economically

Disadvantaged

2013 79 66 64 64

2014 69 55 55 54

79

6664 64

69

55 55 54

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Phase-in I Level II or Above End of Course ELA Reading II

150



Economically

Disadvantaged

2013 78 68 67 67

2014 80 72 71 72

78

68 67 67

80

72 71 72

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Alebra I End of Course



Economically

Disadvantaged

2013 71 65 63 100 100

2014 92 80 79 100 79

71

6563

100 100

92

80 79

100

79

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rse

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Alebra II End of the Course

151



Economically

Disadvantaged

2013 84 79 72 72

2014 89 84 59 100 58

84

79

72 72

89

84

59

100

58

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

erc

en

tage

of

Stu

de

nts

STAAR Geometry End of Course

152


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2013 77 72 71 94 100 54 70

2014 77 71 70 89 100 100 65 70

77

72 71

94

100

54

70

77

71 70

89

100 100

65

70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR ELA Writing I


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2013 80 71 100 70 100 56 69

2014 76 70 100 69 100 63 69

80

71

100

70

100

56

69

76

70

100

69

100

63

69

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR ELA Writing II

153


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2013 79 76 75 92 100 66 75

2014 78 72 71 100 100 58 71

7976 75

92

100

66

7578

72 71

100 100

58

71

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Biology


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2013 63 57 56 75 100 50 54

2014 72 67 66 83 65

63

57 56

75

100

50

54

72

67 66

83

65

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Chemistry

154


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2013 82 79 78 100 100 48 77

2014 78 68 68 100 53 65

8279 78

100 100

48

7778

68 68

100

53

65

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR World Geography


Race

Special

Education

Economically

Disadvantaged

2013 76 73 72 100 100 46 72

2014 76 75 75 86 71 73

7673 72

100 100

46

72

76 75 75

86

7173

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR World History

155

99 99 99 100 100 100 99 99 9999 99 100 100 100 100 99 99 99

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

State District Hispanic Asian White Two or More

Races

Special Ed Economically

Disadvantaged

ELL

STAAR Participation (All Grade) All Tests

2013 2014

156


Education

BE-Trans Early

ExitESL ESL Content

LEP with

ServicesTotal ELL

2014 41 31 8 8 5 5 6 6

41

31

8 85 5 6 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f St

ud

en

tsSTAAR Percentage at Postsecondary Readliness Standard All Grades Two or more Subjects

2014

157


Education

BE-Trans Early

ExitESL ESL Content

LEP with

ServicesTotal ELL

2014 39 24 34 16 16 16 16 16

39

24

34

16 16 16 16 16

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Postsecondary Readiness Standard All grade Mathematics 2014


Education

BE-Trans Early

ExitESL ESL Content

LEP with

ServicesTotal ELL

Limted English

Proficient

2014 45 32 43 11 11 6 6 8 8

45

32

43

11 11

6 68 8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Stu

de

nt

STAAR Percent at Postsecondary Readiness Strandard All grade Reading 2014

158


Education

BE-Trans Early

ExitESL ESL Content

LEP with

ServicesTotal ELL

Limted English

Proficient

2014 35 22 25

35

2225

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f St

ud

en

ts

STAAR Percent at Postsecondary Readiness Standard All grade Writing 2014

159


Education

BE-Trans Early

ExitESL ESL Content LEP with Services Total ELL

2014 43 30 36

43

30

36

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Postsecondary Readiness Standard Science All grade 2014


Education

BE-Trans Early

ExitESL ESL Content

LEP with

ServicesTotal ELL

2014 39 25 21

39

25

21

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Postsecondary Readiness Standard All grade Social Studies

2014

160


Education

BE-Trans Early


2014 15 11 12 12 4 4 8 8

15

11 12 12

4 4

8 9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

erc

en

tage

of

Stu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Advanced Stardard All grade 2014

161


EducationBE-Trans Early


2014 15 12 16 16 4 4 11 11

15

12

16 16

4 4

11 11

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Advanced Standard All grade Reading 2014

State Distric Bilingual Education BE-Trans Early Exit ESL ESL Content LEP with Services

2014 17 13 8 8 9 9 8

17

13

8 8 9 9 8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Advanced Standard Mathematics All grade 2014

162

Mathematics State DistricBilingual

Education

BE-Trans Early

ExitESL ESL Content LEP with Services

2014 8 7 18 18 12 12

8 7

18 18

12 12

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f St

ud

en

ts

STAAR Percent at Advanced Standard All grade Writing2014

163


EducationBE-Trans Early


2014 14 11

1411

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Advance StandardAll grade Science2014


Education

BE-Trans Early


2014 15 5

15

5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Advanced Stardard All grade Social Studies 2014

164

17 17

26 26

11 11

2120

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

2014

STAAR Percent Exceeded Progress All grade

State District Bilingual Education

BE-Trans Early Exit ESL ESL Content

LEP No Services LEPWith Services Total ELL

Linear (LEPWith Services )

165

State District Hispanic White AsianPacific

IslanderTwo or more

RaceSpecial

Education

EconomicallyDisadvantage

d

LimitedEnglish

Proficient

2013 59 55 54 88 64

59

55 54

88

64

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

erce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent Met or Exceeded Progress All Grade Math 2012-2013

6062

56 56

61 6158 58

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

State District BilingualEducation

BE-TransEarly Exit

ESL ESL Content LEP NoServices

LEPWithServices

Total ELL

STAAR Percent Met or Exceended Progress All Grades Mathematics 2013- 2014

166

61 60

67 67

45 45

59 59

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100


BE-TransEarly Exit


LEPWithServices

Total ELL

STAAR Percent Met or Exceeded Prograss All GradesReading 2013- 2014

State District Hispanic White Asian Pacific IslanderTwo or more

RaceSpecial



Proficient

2013 62 63 62 64 75 75

62 63 6264

75 75

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent Met or Exceeded Progress All Grade Reading 2012-2013

167

State District Hispanic White Asian Pacific IslanderTwo or more

RaceSpecial



Proficient

2013 45 50 49

45

50

49

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51P

erc

en

tage

of

Stu

de

nts

STAAR Percent Met or Exceeded Progress All Grade Writing2012-2013

168


IslanderTwo or more

RaceSpecial

Education


d

LimitedEnglish

Proficient

2013 15 15 15 27 25

15 15 15

27

25

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percentant Exceeded Progress All Grade Reading2012-2013

17 17

26 26

11 11

21

20

0

5

10

15

20

25

30


BE-Trans EarlyExit

ESL ESL Content LEP No Services LEPWith Services Total ELL

STAAR Percent Exceeded Progress All gradeReading 2013-2014

STAAR Percent Exceeded Progress All Grade

169

16

12

10

27

50

18

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

State Distric Hispanic White Asian Pacific

Islander

Two or more

Race

Special

Education

Econimically

Disadvantaged

Limited

English

Proficient

STAAR Percent Exceeded Progress All Mathe2013-2014

18

17

20 20 20

12

17 17

0

5

10

15

20

25


BE-Trans EarlyExit

ESL ESL Content LEP No Services LEPWith Services Total ELL

STAAR Percent Exceeded Progress All grade Mathematics 2013-2014

170


IslanderTwo or more

RaceSpecial

Education


d

LimitedEnglish

Proficient

2013 1 0 0

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2P

erc

en

tage

of

Stu

de

nts

STAAR Percent Exceeded Prograss All Grade Writing 2013

171

STAAR Failers (Percent of Failers Passing STAAR) Sum of Grade 4-8

13

39

46 46

26 26

35 35

4546

49 49

43 43

4645

0

10

20

30

40

50

60


BE-Trans EarlyExit


LEPWithServices

Total ELL

Progress of Prior Year STAAR Failers(Percent of Failers Passing STAAR) Sum of Grade 4-8 Reading

2013 2014

4643 43

47

41

36

46

50 50

71

51

41

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

State Distric Hispanic White Asian Pacific Islander Two or moreRace

SpecialEducation

EconimicallyDisadvantaged

Limited EnglishProficient

Progress of Prior Year STAAR Failers(Percent of Failers Passing STAAR) Sum of Grade 4-8Math

2013 2014

172

Economica

lly

Disadvatag

ed

Title I, Part

AMigrant LEP ESL Sp. Ed.

Gifted

/Talented

Career/Tec

h. Ed.

Number of Students Tested 65 109 8 22 22 4 40 66

Level II: Satisfactory 51 89 3 11 11 17 18

Level III: Advanced 5 10 1 1 1 8 9

Level I: Unusatisfactory 14 89 5 11 11 23 48

Achieved Minimum Score 5 8 0 5 5 1 2

65

109

8

22 22

4

40

66

51

89

3

11 11

17 18

510

1 1 1

8 914

89

5

11 11

23

48

58

05 5

1 2

0

20

40

60

80

100

120N

um

ber

of

Stu

den

ts T

este

d

Distric Enrollment by Program 2013

173

Comprehensive Needs Assessment

The purpose of a needs assessment is to identify the strengths and weaknesses of existing programs, practices, procedures, and

activities. There are many areas that data may be collected in order to get the big picture of the school. Data may come from

students’ norm reference, and criterion reference scores, archival data, school demographic data, surveys, and focus group

interviews. The stakeholders must know where they are and where they want to be. They must identify any hurdles that they

may encounter in order to achieve their goal. A Comprehensive Needs Assessment/Analysis the process of identifying causes

of performance problems in order to select methods, means, tactics, tools and approaches for solving the problems.

TEC §11.252(a)(1) District-Level Planning and Decision-Making requires a comprehensive needs assessment addressing

district student performance on the academic excellence indicators, and other appropriate measures of performance, that are

disaggregated by all student groups served by the district, including categories of ethnicity, socioeconomic status, sex, and

populations served by special programs; including students in special education programs under Subchapter A, Chapter 29.

NCLB Act of 2001--Title I, Part A--§1114(b)(1) School wide Programs requires a comprehensive needs assessment of the

entire school that is based on information on the achievement of children in relation to the State academic content standards and

student academic achievement standards.

District Focus Areas

The Board of Education has established four focus areas for Presidio Independent School District. They are: Student Learning,

Quality Learning and Working Environment, Effective and Efficient Organization, and Parent and Community Engagement.

Each of these focus areas will have a continuous improvement plan based on the comprehensive needs assessment. In addition,

each campus will have a continuous improvement plan that is aligned to the District continuous improvement plan. Each of the

four focus areas will have a goal and continuous improvement action steps. In addition, each focus area will have a

measurement system to keep everyone informed on how well the District is doing in meeting its goals. The data to assess the

needs of the District in the focus areas follows as a major part of the Comprehensive Needs Assessment. The other part of the

Comprehensive Needs Assessment will be the findings that result from the data. Note that additional data for each subgroup in

provided in the Appendices.

174

Focus Area: Student Learning

The Student Learning Focus Area will be measured by the following measurements at the District Level:

o Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS) Results

Percent of students passing by subject and by Federal and State mandated sub populations

Scale Scores

Commended Performance

Participation Rate

o Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) Results

o Passing Rates

o College Readiness Indicators

SAT/ACT Data

AP Course Performance

College Course Performance

Texas Success initiative(TSI)

175

READING

ALLSTUDEN

TS

HISPANIC

WHITE ASIANTWO OR

MORERACES

ECONDISADV

SPECIALED

CURRENT &

MONITORED

ELL

ELL

# AT PHASE-IN SATISFACTORY STANDARD 618 588 9 19 2 531 38 297 0

TOTAL TESTS 880 850 9 19 2 770 60 508 417

% AT PHSE-IN SATISFAC TORY STANDARD 70% 69% 100% 100% 100% 69% 63% 58% 0

618

588

9 192

531

38

297

0

880

850

9 192

770

60

508

417

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000READING PERFORMANCE AND PARTICIPATION

2014-2015

176

ALLSTUDENT

SHISPANIC WHITE ASIAN

TWO ORMORERACES

ECONDISADV

SPECIALED

CURRENT&

MONITORED ELL

ELL

# AT PHASE-IN SATISFACTORY STANDARD 501 476 7 16 2 436 35 286

TOTAL TESTS 698 673 7 16 2 611 53 442 356

% AT PHSE-IN SATISFAC TORY STANDARD 72% 71% 100% 100% 100% 71% 66% 65%

501476

7 162

436

35

286

698673

7 162

611

53

442

356

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

MATHEMATICS PERFORMANCE 2014-2015

177

ALLSTUDENTS

HISPANIC WHITE ASIANECON

DISADVSPECIAL

ED

CURRENT&

MONITORED ELL

ELL

# AT PHASE-IN SATISFACTORY STANDARD 124 118 2 4 100 10 59

TOTAL TESTS 184 178 2 4 155 12 110 107

% AT PHSE-IN SATISFAC TORY STANDARD 67% 66% 100% 100% 65% 83% 54%

124118

2 4

100

10

59

184178

2 4

155

12

110107

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

WRITING PERFORMANCE 2014-2015

178

ALLSTUDENTS

HISPANIC ASIANTWO OR

MORE RACESECON DISADV SPECIAL ED

CURRENT &MONITORED

ELLELL


TOTAL TESTS 249 241 5 1 215 19 153 108

% AT PHSE-IN SATISFAC TORY STANDARD 68% 68% 100% 100% 65% 53% 58% 0

162 163

5 1

139

10

89

0

249241

5 1

215

19

153

108

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Science Performance and Participation

2014-2015

179

ALLSTUDENTS

AFRICANAMERICAN


DISADVSPECIAL ED

CURRENT &MONITORED

ELLELL


TOTAL TESTS 353 1 341 7 3 313 14 145 130


266

1

255

6 3 2 0

89

0

353

1

341

7 3

313

14

145130

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Social Studies Performance

2014-2015

180

1,002 1,006

100%0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Number of Participating Total Students Participation rates

NUMBER AND PERCENTAGES OF READINGPARTICIPATION RATES 2014

181

1,002967

13 192

884

74

0

523

1,006 971

13 192

888

74

0

526

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

1,100

ALL STUDENTS HISPANIC WHITE ASIAN TWO OR MORE

RACES

ECON DISADV SPECIAL ED CURRENT &

MONITORED ELL

ELL

READING PARTCIPATION ETHNICITY RATES 2014-2015

182

Number of Participating Total Students Participation rates

ALL STUDENTS 788 792 99%

788 792

99%0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

NU

MB

ER

OF

PA

RT

ICIP

AT

ION

NUMBER AND PERCENTAGES OF MATHEMATICS

PARTICIPATION RATE

2014

183

967

13 192

884

74

523

971

13 192

888

74

526

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

HISPANIC WHITE ASIAN TWO OR MORE RACES ECON DISADV SPECIAL ED ELL

MATHEMATICS PARTICIPATION ETHNICITY RATES 2014-2015

184

ALLSTUDENT

S

AFRICANAMERICA

NHISPANIC WHITE

AMERICAN INDIAN

ASIANPACIFICISLANDE

R

TWO ORMORERACES

ECONDISADV

SPECIALED

CURRENT &

MONITORED ELL

ELLTOTAL

METTOTAL

ELIGIBLE

PERCENTAGE OF

ELIGIBLEMEASUR

E MET

STATE TARGET 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

PERFORMANCE STATUS-STATE TARGET

2014-2015

186

State District

2011 92 96

2012 93 100

2013- 94 88

2014 93 94

92

9693

100

94

88

93 94

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f st

uedents

District TAKS Exit-Level Cumulative Pass Rate

187


RaceSpecial



Proficient

2012 94 83 82 81

2013 95 97 97 97

94

83

82

81

95

97 97 97

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

TAKS 11th Grade Eng. Lang. Arts


RaceSpecial



Proficient

2012 91 93 93 93 71

2013 89 89 89 89

9193 93 93

71

89 89 89 89

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

TAKS 11th grade Math

188


RaceSpecial



Proficient

2012 93 89 89 87 57

2013 95 97 97 97

93

89 8987

57

9597 97 97

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

TAKS 11th grade Science


RaceSpecial



Proficient

2012 98 93 92 91 64

2013 98 95 95 94

98

93 92 91

64

9895 95 94

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

TAKS 11th grade Social Studies

189

43

3938

46

39

4546 46 46

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

State Distric Hispanic White Asian Pacific Islander Two or more

Race

Special

Education

Econimically

Disadvantaged

Progress of Prior Year STAAR Failers(Percent of Failers Passing STAAR) Sum of Grade 4-8 Reading

2013 2014

46

43

30 30

50 50

36

46

50

40 40

44 44

41

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

State District Bilingual Education BE-Trans Early Exit ESL ESL Content LEP No Services LEPWith Services

Progress of Prior Year STAAR Failers(Percent of Failers Passing STAAR) Sum of Grade 4-8Math

2013 2014

Progress of Prior Year STAAR Failers (Percent of Failers Passing STAAR) Grade 11

190

86.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2013

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f St

ud

en

ts

PISD Distric Graduated

191

Hispanic Special Ed Economically Disadvantaged

2012 95.1 94.7

2013 86.1 100 88.3

95.1 94.7

86.1

100

88.3

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Pe

rce

nta

ge

o

f S

tu

de

nts

Distric Graduated Federal & State Sub Population

State District Hispanic Special EdEconomically

Disadvantaged

Limted English

Proficient

2012 87.7 95.2 95.1 94.7 76.9

2013 88 85.8 85.3 87.4 63.2

87.7

95.2 95.1 94.7

76.9

8885.8 85.3

87.4

63.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Percenta

ge o

f S

tudents

PISD 4- Year Graduation Rate without Exclusion (Gr 9-12)

192

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

State 30.3 30.6 31.4

District 24.4 28.2 42.9

30.3 30.6 31.4

24.4

28.2

42.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f S

tudents

PISD College Readiness indicators

Advanced Course/Dual Enrollment Completion

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

State 80.1 82.9 83.5

District 72.6 89.9 82.5

80.182.9 83.5

72.6

89.9

82.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

en

tage

of

Stu

den

ts

PISD RHSP/DAP Graduates

Hispanic Asian Special EdEconomically

Disadvantaged

2012 89.8

2013 82.8 20 81.9

89.8

82.8

20

81.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f S

tudents

PISD RHSP/DAP Graduates Federal & State Sub Population

State District Hispanic Special EdEconomically

Disadvantaged

Limted English

Proficient

2012 87.7 95.2 95.1 94.7 76.9

2013 88 85.8 85.3 87.4 63.2

87.7

95.2 95.1 94.7

76.9

8885.8 85.3

87.4

63.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f S

tudents

PISD 4- Year Graduation Rate without Exclusion (Gr 9-12)

193

Hispanic

2010 41.6

2011 37.9

2012 31

41.637.9

31

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

erc

en

tage o

f S

tud

en

tsAP/IB Reuslt test of Federal & State Sub Population

Hispanic Asian Special Ed Economically Disadvantaged

2011 24.5 28.6 5.6 23.6

2012 27.7 57.1 28.2

2013 41.3 83.3 4.5 41.8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f St

ud

en

ts

Advance Course/Dual Enrollment Completion Federal & State Sub Population

2011 2012 2013

State 24 21.9 22.1

District 37.8 31 33.1

2421.9 22.1

37.8

3133.1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

en

tage o

f S

tud

en

ts

PISD AP/IB Results Tested

194

2011 2012 2013

State 49.3 50.8 50.9

District 56.9 53.8 89.6

49.350.8 50.9

56.953.8

89.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

en

tage

of

Stu

den

ts

PISD Examinees Criterion

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

State 80.1 82.9 83.5

District 72.6 89.9 82.5

80.182.9 83.5

72.6

89.9

82.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

en

tage

of

Stu

den

ts

PISD RHSP/DAP Graduates

2011 2012 2013

Hispanic 57.8 55.6 89.6

57.855.6

89.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

o

f S

tud

en

tsPISD Examinees Criterion Federal & State Sub Population

2011 2012 2013

State 49.3 50.8 50.9

District 56.9 53.8 89.6

49.350.8 50.9

56.953.8

89.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

en

tage

of

Stu

den

ts

PISD Examinees Criterion

195

Hispanic Economically Disadvantaged Limted English Proficient At-Risk

2011 48 48 1 22

2012 43 41 1 15

2013 48 48 1 16

48 48

1

22

4341

1

15

48 48

1

16

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ga

e o

f S

tu

de

nts

PISD Eng Lang Arts Texas Success Intiativia Federal & State Sub Population

State District

2011 66 48

2012 61 45

2013 69 48

66

48

61

45

69

48

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

o

f S

tu

de

nts

PISD Eng Lang Arts Taks Texas Success Intiativa (TSI)

196

State District

2011 69 64

2012 73 67

2013 70 62

69

64

73

6770

62

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

o

f S

tu

de

nts

PISD Mathematics Texas Success Intiativa (TSI) High Education Readiness Component

HispanicEconomically

DisadvantagedLimted English Proficient At-Risk

2011 63 63 38 46

2012 66 65 44 38

2013 59 60 43 32

63 63

38

46

66 65

44

38

59 60

43

32

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Percenta

ge o

f S

tudents

PISD Mathematics Federal & State Sub Population

197

Hispanic

2011 81.6

2012 78.2

2013 87

81.678.2

87

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

en

tag

e o

f S

tud

en

ts

PISD SAT/ACT Federal & State Sub Population

State District

2011 68.9 81.9

2012 66.9 78.6

2013 63.8 88.5

68.9

81.9

66.9

78.6

63.8

88.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f S

tudents

PISD SAT/ACT

State District

2011 26.9 3.5

2012 25.7 0

2013 24.9

26.9

3.5

25.7

0

24.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Stu

de

nts

PISD AT/above Criterion

198

State District

2011 20.5 16.1

2012 20.5 16.5

2013 20.5 16.5

20.5

16.1

20.5

16.5

20.5

16.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

erc

en

tage

of

Stu

den

ts

PISD Average ACT Score

199

State District

2011 66 42

2012 64 34

2013 69 48

66

42

64

34

69

48

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Percen

ta

ge o

f S

tu

den

ts

PISD Eng Lang Arts College- Ready Graduates

2011 2012 2013

Hispanic 42 33 48

Sspecial Ed 1

Economically Disadvantaged 36 28 48

Limted English Proficient 1 1 1

At-Risk 36 15

42

33

48

1

36

28

48

1 1 1

36

15

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

o

f S

tu

de

nts

PISD Eng Lang Arts Federal & State Sub Population

200

State District

2011 64 56

2012 67 50

2013 66 55

64

56

70

59

74

69

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Percentage of S

tudents

PISD Mathematics College-Ready Graduates

Hispanic Sspecial EdEconomically

Disadvantaged

Limted English

ProficientAt-Risk

2011 56 51 33 38

2012 49 1 48 25 21

2013 53 1 55 14 20

56

51

33

38

49

1

48

25

21

53

1

55

14

20

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Percen

ta

ge o

f S

tu

den

ts

PISD Mathematics College-Ready Graduates Federal & State Sub Population

201

State District

2011 68.9 81.9

2012 66.9 78.6

2013 63.8 88.5

68.9

81.9

66.9

78.6

63.8

88.5

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Percenta

ge o

f S

tudents

PISD SAT/ACT

Hispanic

2011 81.6

2012 78.2

2013 87

81.678.2

87

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Percentage of S

tudents

PISD SAT/ACT Federal & State Sub Population

202

State District

2011 26.9 3.5

2012 25.7 0

2013 24.9

26.9

3.5

25.7

0

24.9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of

Stu

de

nts

PISD AT/above Criterion

203

2011 2012 2013

State 976 1422 1422

District 916 1260 1375

976

1422 1422

916

1260

1375

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600P

erc

en

tage

of

Stu

de

nts

PISD Average SAT Score

204

State District

2011 52 31

2012 57 35

2013 56 40

52

31

57

35

56

40

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

o

f S

tu

de

nts

PISD Both Subjects

2011 2012 2013

Hispanic 29 34 39

Sspecial Ed

Economically Disadvantaged 23 33 36

29

34

39

23

3336

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

o

f S

tu

de

nts

PISD Both Subjects Federal & State Sub Population

205

93.395.2

86.6

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2011 2012 2013

PISD Distric Graduated 2011-2013

206

State District

2011 100 100

2012 100 100

2013 88 86.6

100 100100 100

88

86.6

75

80

85

90

95

100To

tal

of

Stu

de

nts

PISD Graduates (Class of 2013)

207

Focus Area: Quality Learning and Working Environment

The Quality Learning and Working Environment Focus Area will be measured by the following measurements at the District

Level:

o Attendance

Student

Teachers

o Professional Learning

Percent of teachers deploying Continuous Classroom Improvement

Percent using technology in the classrooms

Percent of Teachers with Bilingual Certification and/or ESL Endorsement

o Safety

Surveys (student, teacher, parent)

Number of student accidents

o Class Size Comparisons

o Student Behavior (by State and Federal student subgroups)

Number of discipline referrals or incidents

Number of student suspensions and expulsions

Number of gang related, substance abuse, or other at-risk behaviors

o Student Teacher Ratios

o Teacher Attrition Rate

208

State District

2010-2011 95.7 95

2011-2012 95.9 95.2

2012-2013 95.8 95.2

95.7 9595.9 95.295.8 95.2

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

erc

enta

gae o

f S

tudents

PISD Attendance Rate

209

Focus Area: Effective and Efficient Organization

The Effective and Efficient Organization Focus Area will be measured by the following measurements at the District Level:

o Drop Out Rate

o Completion Rate

o Student Retention Rates

o Maintenance Work Order Completion Time

o Technology Work Order Completion Time

210

2010-2011 2011-2012

State 0.2 0.3

District 0.4 0.4

0.2

0.3

0.4 0.4

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

Percentagae of S

tudents

District Annual Droupout

Hispanic Economically Disadvantaged

2011 1.3 1.2

2012 1.5 0.9

1.3

1.2

1.5

0.9

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

Pe

rce

nta

ge

o

f S

tu

de

nts

District Annual Droupout Rate (Gr 2-12)

211

Special Ed Economically Disadvantaged

2011 0 0.5

2012 0 0.5

2013 0 0

0

0.5

0

0.5

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6p

erce

nta

ge

o

f S

tu

de

nts


Hispanic Economically Disadvantaged

2011 1.3 1.2

2012 1.5 0.9

2013 1.1 1

1.3

1.2

1.5

0.9

1.1

1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

Percen

tage

of S

tu

den

ts


212

Maintenance Work Order Completion Time

213

Technology Work Order Completion Time

214

Appendix

Appendix A: TAKS Scale Scores

Appendix B: TAKS Results

Appendix C: Performance-based Monitoring and Assessment System Data

Appendix D: Surveys

Student

Staff Satisfaction and Climate Survey

Parent

Appendix E: Special Education CIP – PBMAS

Bilingual CIP –PBMAS

Appendix F: Highly Qualified Teacher Continuous Improvement Plan

215

State District

Eng Lang Arts TAKS 2012 94 83

Eng Lang Arts TAKS 2013 95 97

94

83

9597

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

erce

nta

ge

of

stu

den

tsDistrictTAKS English Language Arts 11th Grade


Disadvantaged

Limted English

ProficientAt-Risk

2012 82 81

2013 97 97

8281

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

Perc

en

tag

e o

f st

ud

en

ts

District TAKS Eng Lang Art 11th Grade-Federal & State Sub Populations

State District

2012 91 93

2013 89 89

91

93

89 89

82

84

86

88

90

92

94

96

98

100

Perc

en

tag

e S

tud

en

ts

District TAKS Math 11th Grade


DisadvantagedLimted English Proficient At-Risk

2012 93 93

2013 89 89

93 93

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

en

tag

e o

f S

tud

en

ts

District TAKS Math 11 th Grade Federal &State Sub Population

216

State District

2012 93 89

2013 95 97

93

89

9597

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

erce

nta

ge

of

Stu

den

ts

Didtrict TAKS Science 11th Grade

Hispanic Special EdEconomically

Disadvantaged

Limted English

ProficientAt-Risk

2012 89 40 87

2013 97 40 97

89

40

87

97

40

97

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Per

cen

tag

e o

f S

tud

ents

District TAKS Science 11th Grade Federal & State Sub Population

State District

2012 98 93

2013 98 95

98

93

9895

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

en

tage o

f S

tud

en

ts

Distric TAKS Soc. Studies 11th Grade

217

94

88 88 88

60

93 94 94 93

43

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

State District Hispanic Econ Disadv ELL

TAKS Exist-Level Cumulative Pass Rate

2013 2014

218

READINGALL

STUDENTS

HISPANIC WHITE ASIANTWO ORMORERACES

ECONDISADV

SPECIALED

CURRENT&

MONITORED ELL

ELL


TOTAL TESTS 859 839 7 12 760 34 568 485

% AT PHSE-IN SATISFAC TORY STANDARD 70% 69% 86% 92% 68% 32% 62% 0

599580

6 11

513

11

354

0

859839

7 12

760

34

568

485

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900


2015

READINGALL

STUDENTS

HISPANIC WHITE ASIANTWO OR

MORERACES

ECONDISADV

SPECIALED

CURRENT&

MONITORED ELL

ELL


TOTAL TESTS 880 850 9 19 2 770 60 508 417


618588

9 192

531

38

297

0

880850

9 192

770

60

508

417

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900


2014

219

ALLSTUDENT

SHISPANIC WHITE ASIAN

TWO ORMORERACES

ECONDISADV

SPECIALED

CURRENT&

MONITORED ELL

ELL

# AT PHASE-IN SATISFACTORY STANDARD 110 96 54

TOTAL TESTS 130 116 72 63

% AT PHSE-IN SATISFAC TORY STANDARD 85% 84% 83% 75%

110

96

54

130

116

72

63

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

MATHEMATICS PERFORMANCE 2015

ALL

STUDEN

TS

HISPANI

CWHITE ASIAN

TWO OR

MORE

RACES

ECON

DISADV

SPECIA

L ED

CURRE

NT &

MONITO

RED

ELL

ELL

# AT PHASE-IN SATISFACTORY

STANDARD501 476 7 16 2 436 35 286

TOTAL TESTS 698 673 7 16 2 611 53 442 356

% AT PHSE-IN SATISFAC TORY

STANDARD72% 71% 100% 100% 100% 71% 66% 65%

501476

7 16 2

436

35

286

698673

7 16 2

611

53

442

356

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

MATHEMATICS PERFORMANCE

2014

220

ALL

STUDENTSHISPANIC WHITE ASIAN ECON DISADV SPECIAL ED

CURRENT &

MONITORED

ELL

ELL

# AT PHASE-IN SATISFACTORY STANDARD 117 112 97 82

TOTAL TESTS 172 166 150 129 98

% AT PHSE-IN SATISFAC TORY STANDARD 68% 67% 65% 98%

117112

97

82

172166

150

129

98

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

WRITING PERFORMANCE 2015

ALL

STUDEN

TS

HISPANI

CWHITE ASIAN

ECON

DISADV

SPECIAL

ED

CURREN

T &

MONITO

RED ELL

ELL


STANDARD124 118 2 4 100 10 59

TOTAL TESTS 184 178 2 4 155 12 110 107


STANDARD67% 66% 100% 100% 65% 83% 54%

124118

2 4

100

10

59

184178

2 4

155

12

110 107

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

WRITING PERFORMANCE

2014

221

ALLSTUDENTS

HISPANIC ASIANTWO OR MORE

RACESECON DISADV SPECIAL ED

CURRENT &MONITORED

ELLELL

# AT PHASE-IN SATISFACTORY STANDARD 132 127 113 5 78 0

TOTAL TESTS 186 181 160 8 121 117

% AT PHSE-IN SATISFAC TORY STANDARD 71% 70% 65% 63% 64% 0

132127

113

5

78

0

186181

160

8

121117

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200


2015

ALL

STUDEN

TS

HISPANI

CASIAN

TWO OR

MORE

RACES

ECON

DISADV

SPECIAL

ED

CURREN

T &

MONITO

RED ELL

ELL


STANDARD162 163 5 1 139 10 89 0

TOTAL TESTS 249 241 5 1 215 19 153 108


STANDARD68% 68% 100% 100% 65% 53% 58% 0

162 163

5 1

139

10

89

0

249241

5 1

215

19

153

108

0

50

100

150

200

250

300


2014

222

ALLSTUDENTS

AFRICANAMERICAN


DISADVSPECIAL ED

CURRENT &MONITORED

ELLELL

# AT PHASE-IN SATISFACTORY STANDARD 145 140 127 59 0

TOTAL TESTS 210 205 188 110 100

% AT PHSE-IN SATISFAC TORY STANDARD 69% 68% 68% 54% 0

145140

127

59

0

210205

188

110

100

0

50

100

150

200

250

Social Studies Performance 2015

ALL

STUDEN

TS

AFRICA

N

AMERIC

AN

HISPANI

CWHITE ASIAN

ECON

DISADV

SPECIA

L ED

CURRE

NT &

MONITO

RED

ELL

ELL


STANDARD266 1 255 6 3 2 0 89 0

TOTAL TESTS 353 1 341 7 3 313 14 145 130


STANDARD75% 100% 75% 86% 100% 73% 71% 57% 0

266

1

255

6 3 2 0

89

0

353

1

341

7 3

313

14

145130

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

Social Studies Performance

2014

223

ALLSTUDENT

S

AFRICANAMERICA

NHISPANIC WHITE

AMERICAN INDIAN

ASIANPACIFICISLANDE

R

TWO ORMORERACES

ECONDISADV

SPECIALED

CURRENT &

MONITORED ELL

ELLTOTAL

METTOTAL

ELIGIBLE

PERCENTAGE OF

ELIGIBLEMEASUR

E MET

STATE TARGET 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60% 60%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE


2015

ALL

STUD

ENTS

AFRIC

AN

AMER

ICAN

HISPA

NIC

WHIT

E

AMER

ICAN

INDIA

N

ASIA

N

PACIF

IC

ISLAN

DER

TWO

OR

MORE

RACE

S

ECON

DISA

DV

SPECI

AL ED

CURR

ENT &

MONI

TORE

D ELL

ELLTOTA

L MET

TOTA

L

ELIGI

BLE

PERC

ENTA

GE OF

ELIGI

BLE

MEAS

URE

MET

STATE TARGET 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50% 50%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE


2014

224

ALL

STUDENTS

AFRICAN

AMERICANHISPANIC WHITE

ECON

DISADVSPECIAL ED

CURRENT &

MONITORED

ELL

2014 79% 79% 79% 79% 79% 79% 79%

79% 79% 79% 79% 79% 79% 79%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

PERFORMANCE STATUS-FEDERAL TARGET

2015

ALL

STUDENTS

AFRICAN

AMERICANHISPANIC WHITE

ECON

DISADVSPECIAL ED

CURRENT &

MONITORED

ELL

2014 79% 79% 79% 79% 79% 79% 79%

79% 79% 79% 79% 79% 79% 79%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

PERFORMANCE STATUS-FEDERAL TARGET

2014

225

9793

95

5

38

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

ALL STUDENTS HISPANIC WHITE ASIAN ECON DISADV SPECIAL ED ELL(EVER HS)

4 year Longitudinal Cohort Graduation Rate (Gr. 9-12) Class of 2014

226

NUMBER

PROFICIENT

TOTAL

FEDERAL

CAP LIMIT

1% CAP

SPILLOVER

MODIFIED

2%

NUMBER

PROFICIEN

TOTAL

FEDERAL

CAP LIMIT

2%

EXTENDE

CAP

(UNFILLED

SLOTS 26

EXTENDED

OVERALL

3% CAP

2014 6 11 5 23 21 26 32

6

11

5

23

21

26

32

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

District Met Federal Limits on alternative assessments Reading

227

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

GRADUATED 8 10 12

CLASS 10 13 19

8

10

12

10

13

19

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20N

UM

BE

RS

LEP GRADUATION RATE

228

NUMBER

PROFICIENT

TOTAL

FEDERAL

CAP LIMIT

1% CAP

SPILLOVER

MODIFIED

2%

NUMBER

PROFICIEN

TOTAL

FEDERAL

CAP LIMIT

2%

EXTENDE

CAP

(UNFILLED

SLOTS 26

EXTENDED

OVERALL

3% CAP

2015 6 11 5 23 21 26 32

6

11

5

23

21

26

32

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

District Met Federal Limits on alternative assessments Reading

229

NUMBERPROFICIENT

TOTALFEDERALCAP LIMIT

1% CAPSPILLOVER

MODIFIED 2%NUMBER

PROFICIEN

TOTALFEDERALCAP LIMIT

2% EXTENDECAP

(UNFILLEDSLOTS 26

EXTENDEDOVERALL 3%

CAP

2015 6 8 2 22 16 18 24

6

8

2

22

16

18

24

0

5

10

15

20

25

30P

ER

CC

EN

TA

GE

District Met Federal limit on Alternative assessments Mathematics

230

19

21

90%

9 9

100%

31

33

94%

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

TOTAL MET TOTAL ELIGIBLE PERCENT OF ELIGIBLE MEASUREMET

STATUS REPORT 2015

PERFORMANCE STATUS PARTICIPATION STATUS OVERALL TOTAL OVERALL TOTAL

231

District District District District District District District District

All

Students

African

AmericanHispanic White

Econ.

Disadv.

Special

Educatio

n

LEP

(Measure

:

Current&

Monitore

d)

LEP

(students)

Students -Met Standard % 2009-2010 84 0.0 83.0 99.0 84.0 82.0 76.0 0.0

Students -Met Standard % 2010-2011 79 0.0 78.0 93.0 78 62.0 68.0 0.0

Students -Met Standard % 2011-2012 84 0.0 84.0 100.0 84.0 69.0 76.0 0.0

84

0.0

83.0

99.0

84.082.0

76.0

0.0

79

0.0

78.0

93.0

78

62.0

68.0

0.0

84

0.0

84.0

100.0

84.0

69.0

76.0

0.00

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100AYP Performance Reading Students-Met Standard

District District District District District District District District

All StudentsAfrican

AmericanHispanic White

Econ.

Disadv.

Special

Education

LEP

(Measure:

Current&Mo

nitored)

LEP

(students)

Student Group % 2009-2010 100 0.0 96.0 0.0 86.0 4.0 0.0 30.0

Student Group % 2010-2011 100 0.0 96.0 0.0 90 7.0 0.0 39.0

Student Group % 2011-2012 100 0.0 96.0 2.0 91.0 6.0 0.0 44.0

100

0.0

96.0

0.0

86.0

4.0

0.0

30.0

100

0.0

96.0

0.0

90

7.0

0.0

39.0

100

0.0

96.0

2.0

91.0

6.0

0.0

44.0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100AYP Performance Reading Students Group

233

PBMAS District Performance

PBMAS STANDARD DISTRICT RATE

2014 70 53.8

70

53.8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

LEP RHSP/DAP DIPLOMA RATE


2014 75 71.4

75

71.4

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

LEP GRADUATION RATE

STANDARD/DISTRICT

234

Mathematics Reading Science Social Studies Writing

ESL PBMAS STANDARD 70 70 65 65 70

DISTRICT RATE 67.7 60.9 60.3 52.2 44.7

70 70

65 65

7067.7

60.9 60.3

52.2

44.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

ESL STAAR 3-8 PASSING RATE 2014


BE PBMAS STANDARD 70 70 65 65 70

DISTRICT RATE 52.5 65.8 37.3 56.6

70 70

65 65

70

52.5

65.8

37.3

56.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

T

BE STAAR 3-8 PASSING RATE

2014

235

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

RHSP/DAP 7 4 7

GRADUATED 13 6 13

7

4

7

13

6

13

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

NU

MB

ER

S

PBMAS STANDARD RHSP- DAP GRADUATED

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

GRADUATED 8 10 12

CLASS 10 13 19

8

10

12

10

13

19

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

NU

MB

ER

S

LEP GRADUATION RATE

236

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

DROPOUTS 4 6 0

ATTEND 162 191 236

4 60

162

191

236

0

50

100

150

200

250

NU

MB

ER

SLEP ANNUAL DROUP RATE (GRADE 7-12)

2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

RHSP/DAP 7 4 7

GRADUATED 13 6 13

7

4

7

13

6

13

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

NU

MB

ER

S

PBMAS STANDARD RHSP- DAP GRADUATED

237


2014 75 71.4

75

71.4

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

LEP GRADUATION RATE

STANDARD/DISTRICT

238


BE PBMAS STANDARD 70 70 65 65 70

DISTRICT RATE 52.5 65.8 37.3 56.6

70 70

65 65

70

52.5

65.8

37.3

56.6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

T


2014

Mathematics Reading ScienceSocial

StudiesWriting

2014 NUMBERATOR PASSING 115 114 19 0 43

2014 DENOMINATOR TESTED 219 219 51 0 76


2013 NUMBERATOR PASSING 150 169 46 50

2013 DENOMINATOR TESTED 250 250 68 83

115 114

19

0

43

219 219

51

0

76

150

169

46 50

250 250

6883

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

DE

NO

MIN

AT

OR


PASSING &TESTING

2013-2014

239



DISTRICT RATE 67.7 60.9 60.3 52.2 44.7

70 70

65 65

7067.7

60.9 60.3

52.2

44.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

ER

CE

NT

AG

E



StudiesWriting






4339

13 1217

64 64

24 23

38

54

44

22 20

7276

34

41

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

NU

MB

ER

AT

OR

ESL STAAR 3-8 PASSING RATE

PASSING & TESTING

2013-2014

240


PBMAS STANDARD 70 70 65 65 70

DISTRICT RATE 0 0 0

70 70

65 65

70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

LEP (NOT SERVED IN BE/ESL)

STAAR 3-8 PASSING RATE

2014

241

Mathematics Science Social Studies

ENGLISH

LANGUAGE

ARTS

60 64.7 62.7 25.5

50 50STATE RATE

71.8

STATE RATE

25.7


ENGLISH

LANGUAGE

ARTS

NUMBERATOR PASSING 30 11 42 24

DENOMINATOR TESTED 50 17 64 94

30

11

42

24

50

17

64

94

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

en

tag

e

LEP STAAR EOC PASSING RATE

PASSING / TESTING

2014


StudiesWriting






115 114

19

0

43

219 219

51

0

76

150

169

46 50

250 250

6883

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

DE

NO

MIN

AT

OR


PASSING &TESTING

2013-2014



DISTRICT RATE 67.7 60.9 60.3 52.2 44.7

70 70

65 65

7067.7

60.9 60.3

52.2

44.7

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE



StudiesWriting






4339

13 1217

64 64

24 23

38

54

44

22 20

7276

34

41

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

NU

MB

ER

AT

OR

ESL STAAR 3-8 PASSING RATE

PASSING & TESTING

2013-2014

242



DISTRICT RATE 96.1 98.7 86 70

70 70

65 65

70

96.198.7

86

70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

ER

CE

NT

AG

E

LEP YEAR-AFTER-EXIT (YEA)

STAAR 3-8

PASSING RATE 2014

Mathe

matics

Readin

gScience

Social

StudiesWriting






74 76

39

7

0

77 77

44

10

05 4

1 35 51 3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Nu

mb

er

Pass

ing

LEP YEAR -AFTER -EXIT (YAE) STAAR 3-8 NUMBERATOR

PASSING /DENOMINATOR TEST

2014



DISTRICT RATE 0 0 0

70 70

65 65

70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

LEP (NOT SERVED IN BE/ESL)

STAAR 3-8 PASSING RATE

2014







1 1 1

0 0

1 1 1

0

1 1 1

00

1

2

NU

MB

ER

AT

OR

LEP ( NOT SERVED IN BE/ESL) STAAR 3-8

PASSING RATE

2013-2014

243



DISTRICT RATE 96.1 98.7 86 70

70 70

65 65

70

96.198.7

86

70

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

ER

CE

NT

AG

E

LEP YEAR-AFTER-EXIT (YEA)

STAAR 3-8

PASSING RATE 2014

244

Mathe

matics

Readin

gScience

Social

StudiesWriting






74 76

39

7

0

77 77

44

10

05 4

1 35 51 3

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Nu

mb

er P

assi

ng

LEP YEAR -AFTER -EXIT (YAE) STAAR 3-8 NUMBERATOR

PASSING /DENOMINATOR TEST

2014

245


ENGLISH

LANGUAGE

ARTS

60 64.7 62.7 25.5

50 50STATE RATE

71.8

STATE RATE

25.7


ENGLISH

LANGUAGE

ARTS

NUMBERATOR PASSING 30 11 42 24

DENOMINATOR TESTED 50 17 64 94

30

11

42

24

50

17

64

94

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100P

erce

nta

ge

LEP STAAR EOC PASSING RATE

PASSING / TESTING

2014

246

STAAR Percent at Postsecondary Readiness Standard


EducationBE-TransEarly Exit

ESL ESL ContentLEP withServices

Total ELL

2014 41 31 8 8 5 5 6 6

41

31

8 85 5 6 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f St

ud

en

ts

STAAR Percentage at Postsecondary Readliness Standard All Grades Two or more Subjects2014




Total ELL

2014 41 31 8 8 5 5 6 6

41

31

8 85 5 6 6

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f St

ud

en

ts

STAAR Percentage at Postsecondary Readliness Standard All Grades Two or more Subjects2014




Total ELLLimtedEnglish

Proficient

2014 45 32 43 11 11 6 6 8 8

45

32

43

11 11

6 68 8

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

enta

ge S

tude

nt

STAAR Percent at Postsecondary Readiness Strandard All grade Reading 2014




Total ELL

2014 39 24 34 16 16 16 16 16

39

24

34

16 16 16 16 16

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Perc

enta

ge o

f St

uden

ts

STAAR Percent at Postsecondary Readiness Standard All grade Mathematics 2014

247


Education

BE-Trans Early

ExitESL ESL Content

LEP with

ServicesTotal ELL

Limted English

Proficient

2014 35 22 25

35

2225

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Postsecondary Readiness Standard All grade Writing 2014


Education

BE-Trans Early


2014 43 30 36

43

30

36

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts

STAAR Percent at Postsecondary Readiness Standard Science All grade 2014

248




Total ELL

2014 39 25 21

39

2521

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts


2014




Total ELL

2014 39 25 21

39

2521

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge

of S

tu

de

nts


2014

249




Total ELL

2014 15 11 12 12 4 4 8 8

1511 12 12

4 48 9

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Pe

rce

nta

ge o

f St

ud

en

ts

STAAR Percent at Advanced Stardard All grade 2014

250

Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS)

Reports of TELPAS student performance data provide information about the student’s second language development in the areas of listening,

speaking, reading, and writing. This information may be used in a variety of ways. For example, the results may be used for evaluating student

results for instructional decisions; evaluating programs, resources, and staffing patterns; and/or evaluating districts in federal accountability

measures.

The Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS) fulfills federal requirements for assessing the English language proficiency

of English language learners (ELLs) in kindergarten through grade 12 in four language domains: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. TELPAS

assesses students in alignment with the Texas English Language Proficiency Standards (ELPS), which are part of the Texas Essential Knowledge and

Skills (TEKS). Student performance is reported in terms of four English language proficiency levels: beginning, intermediate, advanced, and

advanced high. TELPAS results are used to meet state and federal reporting and accountability requirements.

Comprehension score

The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 requires states to generate comprehension scores from their English language proficiency assessments. The

TELPAS comprehension score ranges from 1 to 4. The score is determined from the listening and reading proficiency ratings. To derive the score,

the student’s listening and reading ratings are each converted to a number from 1 (Beginning) to 4 (Advanced High). The average of the two numbers

is the comprehension score.

Composite score and composite rating

The composite results indicate the student’s overall level of English language proficiency and are determined from the student’s listening, speaking,

reading, and writing proficiency ratings. The composite score ranges from 1 (ratings of Beginning in all language areas) to 4 (ratings of Advanced

High in all language areas). The student’s reading proficiency rating is given the greatest weight in determining composite results. Only students

rated in all four language areas receive composite results.

As required under the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001, Local Education Agencies (LEAs) that receive Title III funding for English

language acquisition programs are held accountable for their limited English proficient (LEP) students' achievement in learning the English language.

Each year, LEP students' English language proficiency in listening, speaking, reading and writing is assessed using the Texas English Language

Proficiency Assessment System (TELPAS). The achievement of a Title III-funded LEA's LEP student population then is measured against the state's

achievement standards known as the Annual Measurable Achievement Objectives (AMAOs). The AMAOs include indicators for measuring

Progress in learning the English language, Attainment of English language proficiency and LEP AYP -that is, the LEA's LEP student population's

adequate yearly progress in meeting the state's student academic achievement standards. Federal regulations also require that AMAO standards

increase annually unless substantive changes are made in the assessment used to evaluate achievement.

251

2014-2015

TELPAS Comprehension

Score TELPAS Composite Rating

Yearly Progress in TELPAS Composite Rating

Grade Level/Student

Group

# Students

Rated

Average Comprehension

Scorea

# Students

Rated

% Students

Rated Advanced

Highb

Average Composite

Scorea

# Students

Rated

# Progressing at least 1

Proficiency Level (13 to 14)c

Grades K - 2

All Students 231 1.5 231 2 1.5 151 30

Title I, Part A 231 1.5 231 2 1.5 151 30

Migrant 7 1.1 7 0 1.5 2 0

At Risk 231 1.5 231 2 1.5 151 46

2013-2014




Grade Level/Student

Group

# Students

Rated


Scorea

# Students

Rated

% Students

Rated Advanced

Highb

Average Composite

Scorea

# Students

Rated

# Progressing at least 1


Grades K - 2

All Students 227 1.6 227 2 1.5 131 39

Title I, Part A 227 1.6 227 2 1.5 131 39

Migrant 10 1.7 10 10 1.7 7 14

At Risk 226 1.5 226 2 1.5 130 38

252

2012-2013




Grade Level/Student

Group

# Students

Rated


Scorea

# Students

Rated

% Students

Rated Advanced

Highb

Average Composite

Scorea

# Students

Rated

% Progressing at least 1


Grades K - 2

All Students 226 1.6 226 7 1.6 130 51

Title I, Part A 225 1.6 225 7 1.6 115 48

Migrant 13 1.6 13 0 1.4 10 40

At Risk 223 1.6 223 7 1.6 129 50

2011-2012




Grade Level/Student

Group

# Students

Rated


Scorea

# Students

Rated

% Students

Rated Advanced

Highb

Average Composite

Scorea

# Students

Rated



Grades K - 2

All Students 214 1.8 214 7 1.8 66 66

Title I, Part A 214 1.8 214 7 1.8 66 66

Migrant 23 1.5 23 0 1.4 5 43

At Risk 211 1.8 211 8 1.8 66 67

253

2014-2015




Grade Level/Student

Group

# Students

Rated


Scorea

# Students

Rated

% Students

Rated Advanced

Highb

Average Composite

Scorea

# Students

Rated



Grades 3 - 12

All Students 472 3.0 471 36 2.9 422 55

Title I, Part A 471 3.0 470 36 2.9 421 55

Migrant 19 3.2 19 47 3.1 17 59

At Risk 469 3.0 468 36 2.9 421 55

2013-2014




Grade Level/Student

Group

# Students

Rated


Scorea

# Students

Rated

% Students

Rated Advanced

Highb

Average Composite

Scorea

# Students

Rated



Grades 3 - 12

All Students 458 2.9 458 29 2.8 377 48

Title I, Part A 457 2.9 457 29 2.8 376 48

Migrant 17 3.4 17 47 3.2 16 56

At Risk 457 2.9 457 29 2.8 377 48

254

2012-2013




Grade Level/Student

Group

# Students

Rated


Scorea

# Students

Rated

% Students

Rated Advanced

Highb

Average Composite

Scorea

# Students

Rated

%Progressing at least 1


Grades 3 - 12

All Students 476 3.1 476 47 3.1 375 66

Title I, Part A 474 3.1 474 47 3.1 375 66

Migrant 31 3.5 31 48 3.3 30 60

At Risk 467 3.1 467 47 3 374 66

2011-2012




Grade Level/Student

Group

# Students

Rated


Scorea

# Students

Rated

% Students

Rated Advanced

Highb

Average Composite

Scorea

# Students

Rated



Grades 3-12

All Students 388 3.1 388 46 3.0 190 68

Title I, Part A 385 3.1 385 46 3.1 190 68

Migrant 40 3.5 40 50 3.3 24 62

At Risk 382 3.1 382 46 3.1 189 67

255


2014 4.5 4.3

4.5

4.3

4.2

4.25

4.3

4.35

4.4

4.45

4.5

4.55

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

TELPAS READING BEGINING PROFICIENCY LEVEL RATE

2012-2013 2013-2014

BEGINNING 0 18

TESTING 378 358

018

378

358

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

NU

MB

ER

S

TELPAS READING BEGINING/TESTING PROFICIENCY

LEVEL RATE

256


2014 7.5 8.3

7.5

8.3

7

7.2

7.4

7.6

7.8

8

8.2

8.4

PE

RC

EN

TA

GE

TELPAS COMPOSITE RATING LEVEL FOR STUDENTS IN U.S SCHOOL

MULTIPLE YEARS

2012-2013 2013-2014

BEGINNING 0 18

TESTING 378 358

0

18

378

358

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

TE

ST

IN

G

TELPAS COMPOSITE RATING LEVELS FOR STUDENTS IN U.S SCHOOL

MULTIPLE YEARS 2014

257


The Parent and Community Engagement Focus Area will be measured by the following measurements at the Campus Level:

o Parent and Community Members Participation in School Functions

Open House

258

8/21/2014 9/25/2014 11/13/2014 1/22/2015 2/26/2015 3/5/2015 4/23/2015 5/6/2015 5/7/2015 5/8/2015 6/3-4/2015

Open House PTO PTO PTO PTOFam. Reading

NightPTO

STEM DISTFam Night

Mother dayprogm

Fam. ReadingNight

AwardsAssembly

Parents Signing In 315 282 226 147 117 131 254 120 128 129 292

315

282

226

147

117

131

254

120128 129

292

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

Num

ber

of P

aren

ts S

igni

ng In

PES Community Engagement

259

158

54

62

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

9/1/2014 3/1/2015 4/1/2015

/PTO PTO PTO

LRFMS Community Engagement

260

85

42

83

37

32

45

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

8/18/2014 9/18/2014 10/16/2014 1/15/2015 2/19/2015 4/16/2015

PHS Open House/PTO PHS /ECHS PTO PHS/ECHS PTO PHS /ECHS PTO PHS/ECHS PTO PHS/ECHS PTO

PHS Community Engagement

Presidio Independent School District Presidio Independent School District Improvement Plan 2015-2016...

Documents

Transcript of Presidio Independent School District Presidio Independent School District Improvement Plan 2015-2016...