1

Accountability in Colorado:

A systems approach

Presentation to the School Finance PartnershipApril 2012

2

Presentation & Discussion Outline:

What are we holding ourselves accountable for?• Goals of the system• Performance measures & targets

Where are the connections and disconnections across the system?

Where does funding fit in?

Time & interest permitting…a deeper look at how the state’s school and district performance frameworks work

Building an Aligned Accountability System

3

Building an Aligned Accountability System

Students

Educators

Schools/Districts

State

Each component of the system should be held to the same expectations.

Believing that the state should hold itself accountable for the same measures we

hold students, educators, and schools/districts accountable for, CDE

articulated strategic goals and performance measures for the state as whole.

4

Strategic Goals• Globally competitive workforce• Ensure every student is on track to graduate postsecondary and workforce ready.• Ensure students graduate ready for success in postsecondary education and the workforce.• Increase achievement and national/international competitiveness for all students .

• Great teachers and leaders• Increase and support the effectiveness of all educators.• Optimize the preparation, retention, and effectiveness of new educators.• Eliminate the educator equity gap.

• Outstanding schools and districts• Increase school and district performance.• Foster innovation and expand access to a rich array of high quality school choices for students.

• Best state education agency in the nation• Develop and implement CDE’s strategic direction.• Increase customer satisfaction with CDE’s communication, services, and systems. • Attract and retain outstanding talent to CDE.

Students

Educators

Schools/Districts

State

Statewide Strategic Goals

5

Strategic Goals• Globally competitive workforce• On track to graduate postsecondary and workforce ready: Achievement & growth data• Graduate ready for success: Dropout rate, graduation rate, and ACT scores• National competiveness: NAEP achievement rates

• Great teachers and leaders• Increase and support the effectiveness of all educators: Establish baseline, improve over time• Optimize the preparation, retention, and effectiveness of new educators: Retention rates• Eliminate the educator equity gap: Effectiveness ratings in high poverty/high minority schools

• Outstanding schools and districts• Increase school/district perf.: Decrease # of turnaround, increase # accredited with distinction • Foster innovation and expand choice: Improve accreditation ratings of schools of choice

• Best state education agency in the nation• Develop and implement CDE’s strategic direction: % of performance targets met• Increase customer satisfaction: Improved efficiencies (2 week licensure turnaround time) • Attract and retain outstanding talent to CDE: Satisfaction and retention rates

Students

Educators

Schools/Districts

State

Statewide Performance Measures

How can a school finance formula assist districts in meeting these measures?

6

Setting Statewide Performance Targets

• Examined 5-year trend data for all student performance measures

• Calculated the 5-year growth rate

• Set targets at three times the historical growth rate

• Where there were declines over 5 years, CDE set targets to increase performance by 3-5 percentage points

• For student sub-populations, CDE established more aggressive growth expectations to work towards narrowing achievement gaps

• For non-student performance measures, CDE looked at relevant historical performance and set targets to achieve desired growth

Refer to CDE’s strategic direction document that includes tables with all of the performance targets.

Reading Proficiency TargetsActual CSAP Results 2006-07 to 2010-11

Targets 2011-12 to 2014-15

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-1560.0%

62.0%

64.0%

66.0%

68.0%

70.0%

72.0%

74.0%

76.0%

ElementaryMiddleHigh

Pe

rce

nt

pro

ficie

nt

an

d a

dva

nce

d

Actual Targets

Performance Targets: Example from Objective 1a.

Strengths, weaknesses of this approach

Learn over time

Improve calibration and target setting

Tighter alignment, but disconnects remain

With these performance measures, we’ve improved alignment of system-wide expectations, but…

• Alignment doesn’t mean strong connections across the system.

• We still need to tighten accountability for students.

• We’re still figuring out how best to hold educators accountable for student results.

• We don’t know yet if we’re looking at the right measures for schools and districts.

• We lack strong statewide leading indicators that can signal mid-course corrections.

• We need to tighten the links between performance, accountability, improvement, and return on investment.

Connecting the pieces

Performance

Accountability

Improvement

Return on Investment

How are we performing?

Is it good enough?

What are we doing to improve?

Are our investments yielding results?

Tightening the ROI connectionMaximizing the Role of:

• Transparency• What data do we make available?• What connections do we make between different data that

will inherently drive change?

• Incentives and rewards• How can the finance formula incent desired performance?• What role do rewards for good and/or removal of funds for

poor performance play?

• Eligibility requirements• Can we set eligibility requirements for certain funding

streams that drive specific behaviors?

What else should we be considering?

Delving deeper intothe State’s School & District Accountability Frameworks

(a discussion as time, interest permits)

12

School and District Accountability

• School and District Performance Frameworks• State and Federal- Title IA accountability• Focus attention on the data that matters the

most• SB-163 created a “5-year clock” for the lowest

performing schools and districts

13

Performance Indicators & DataPerformance Indicator Performance DataAcademic Achievement CSAP % proficient and advanced (reading,

mathematics, science and writing)

Academic Growth Median and adequate student growth percentile (reading, mathematics and writing) on CSAP, and English language proficiency on CELApro

Gaps in Academic Growth Median and adequate student growth percentile in reading, mathematics and writing for disaggregated groups on CSAP

Postsecondary and Workforce Readiness

Graduation Rate, Disaggregated Graduation Rate, Dropout Rate, Average Colorado ACT Composite Score

14

How does the framework focus on these indicators?

• Assigns a rating to each of the performance indicators:– Exceeds, Meets, Approaching, Does not meet

• The ratings roll up to an overall evaluation of the school/district’s performance, which determines the school’s plan type assignment:– Performance, Improvement, Priority Improvement,

Turnaround

15

16

17

18

Consolidated Federal Programs

• Federal formula dollars (Title IA, IIA, IIIA, IIIA-S) are distributed to districts through the Consolidated Application process

• The consolidated application asks districts to identify needs, meet program requirements, and submit an aligned budget

• In our NCLB Waiver, we stated that there will be increased scrutiny for low performing districts, in application approval

19

Consolidated Federal Programs

• Meeting with all districts on Priority Improvement/Turnaround prior to their application submission for 2012-13

• Discussing use of federal funds and checking for alignment with Unified Improvement Plan

• If districts remain on PI/Turnaround, they will have less discretion over funds

20

Questions• Leanne Emm, Assistant Commissioner, Public School

Financeemm_l@cde.state.co.us

• Jill Hawley, Chief of Staff & StrategyHawley_j@cde.state.co.us

• Alyssa Pearson, Executive Director, Accountability & Data AnalysisPearson_a@cde.state.co.us