I.Background and Legislative Intent · Web viewReview will be based on specific criteria listed in this RFA and scored using the scoring rubric provided in Appendix D. Final recommendations

OregonSchool District Collaboration Grant Program

Request for Application

Implementation Grant Year 2 & 3

2015-16

Grant Application Due Date: July 29, 2015

Oregon Department of EducationOffice of Educational Improvement and Innovation

255 Capitol Street NESalem, OR 97310-0203

Oregon School District Collaboration Implementation Grant – 2015-2016A Network for Quality Teaching and Learning Initiative

Implementation Years 2 & 3

Table of Contents

Background and Legislative Intent

General InformationA. DefinitionsB. PurposeC. Type of GrantD. Grant RequirementsE. EligibilityF. Use of FundsG. Reporting and Deliverables

Application ProcessA. Application Review and ScoringB. Timeline and Important DatesC. Instructions for Submission

Application NarrativeA. Implementation Leadership TeamB. School District Readiness for ImplementationC. Implementation Plan

Budget Worksheet and Budget NarrativeA. Appendix A: Application Cover PageB. Appendix B: School District AssurancesC. Appendix C: School District ProfileD. Appendix D: School District Collaboration Implementation Grant Rubric

It is the policy of the State Board of Education and a priority of the Oregon Department of Education that there will be no discrimination or harassment on the grounds of race, color, sex, marital status, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, age or disability in any educational programs, activities, or employment. Persons having questions about equal opportunity and nondiscrimination should contact the State Superintendent of Public Instruction at the Oregon Department of Education, 255 Capitol Street NE, Salem, OR 97310; Telephone (503) 947-5600; Fax (503) 378-5156.

Oregon Department of Education Page 1



I. Background and Legislative Intent

In 2013, under the leadership of Governor John Kitzhaber, the Oregon Education Investment Board proposed key strategic investments to support Oregon’s attainment of 40/40/20. Key to this work is a revitalization of the education profession and the establishment of a Network of Quality Teaching and Learning. Conceptualized and passed by legislature in HB 3233, the Network provides funding for a comprehensive system of support for educators that creates a culture of leadership, professionalism, continuous improvement and excellence for teachers and leaders across the P-20 system.

Paramount to the Network is the Oregon School District Collaboration Grant Program which was originally established by the 2011 State Legislature through passage of SB 252 and amended during the 2013 legislative session. It is designed to improve student achievement through the voluntary collaboration of teachers and administrators to implement new approaches to develop:

a) Career pathways for teachers and administrators;

b) Evaluation processes for teachers and administrators;

c) Compensation models for teachers and administrators; and

d) Enhanced professional development opportunities for teachers and administrators.

Senate Bill 252: Oregon School District Collaboration Grant Program

Amendments to House Bill 3233 revised the program specifications as outlined below:

(6) The amount of each grant shall be determined as follows:(a) For grants that are for the design of an approach identified in subsection (1) of this section, the amount determined by the department based on:

(A) The application submitted by the school district to the department;(B) The portion of the total funds available for grants that are for the design of an approach; and(C) Any other limitations established by the State Board of Education by rule, which may include a minimum amount or a maximum amount for a grant.

(b) For grants that are for the implementation of an approach identified in subsection (1) of this section, the Grant Amount = School district ADMw x (the total amount available for distribution for an implementation grant in a fiscal year through the School District Collaboration Grant Program / by the total ADMw of the school districts that receive an implementation grant for the fiscal year through the School District Collaboration Grant Program). For the purpose of the calculation made under this paragraph, ADMw shall be calculated as provided by ORS 327.013, 338.155 (1) and 338.165 (3) as of October 1st of the year the grant is issued. (c) In addition to any amounts received under subparagraphs (A), (B) and (C) of this paragraph, a school district that has an average daily membership of less than 1,500 may receive a supplemental amount of up to $50,000 if:

(i) The supplemental amount is used for expenses incurred in relation to a grant manager who:

(I) Manages the use of a grant received under this paragraph;(II) Supports the school district’s committees related to the grant;



Implementation Years 2 & 3(III) Monitors and measures the implementation of new approaches funded by the grant; (IV) Ensures timely and accurate communications with educators in the school district; (V) Completes all Department of Education requirements related to the grant; and(VI) Attends meetings and collaborates with other school districts; and

(ii) The total of the implementation grant and the supplemental amount does not exceed $150,000.

(7) The department shall award grants based on:(a) The application submitted by the school district to the department;(b) Other funds received by a school district for the purpose identified in subsection (1) of this section; and (c) Any other criteria established by the State Board of Education by rule.

Contact:Brian Putnam, Education SpecialistOregon Department of EducationOffice of Educational Improvement & Innovation255 Capitol Street NESalem, Oregon 97310-0203(503) [email protected]


mailto:[email protected]



II. General Information

A. Definitions Implementation Grants: Grants intended for districts to implement their blueprint

designs.

Blueprint: A description of the components of a school district’s strategies for implementation and integration of the four focus areas: career pathways, evaluation processes, compensation models and enhanced professional development for teachers and administrators addressing a problem(s) of practice

Career pathways: Descriptions of professional career achievement and advancement (e.g. Novice, Emerging Professional, Master Teacher) or specialized roles (e.g. Mentor Teacher, Master Teacher), and opportunities to increase professional responsibilities.

Compensation models: Alternative salary advancement systems based on a variety of elements aside from seniority (e.g. weighted systems based on professional involvement, increased expertise).

Enhanced professional development: Professional learning opportunities that are ongoing, collaborative in nature, and aligned to the needs of educators identified through the evaluation process and student data.

Evaluation processes: An educator performance evaluation system based on collaboration, that includes, but is not limited to standards of professional practice, four-level rubrics, multiple measures of professional practice, professional responsibilities and student learning and growth, an evaluation and growth cycle and professional learning aligned to student and educator performance data.

B. PurposeThe School District Collaboration Grant Program is intended to support Oregon school districts to improve student achievement through voluntary collaboration of teachers and administrators to design and implement new approaches to:

a) Career pathways for teachers and administrators;b) Evaluation processes for teachers and administrators;c) Compensation models for teachers and administrators; andd) Enhanced professional development opportunities for teachers and

administrators.These four components linked to educator effectiveness empower teachers, promote leadership and raise student achievement.

C. Type of GrantThe Oregon Department of Education will award an implementation grant to Oregon school districts, or consortia of collaborating school districts, that have previously developed blueprint designs and are in the implementation phase in all four focus areas: career pathways, evaluation processes, compensation models, and enhanced professional development opportunities for teachers and administrators to address a problem(s) of practice. School Districts will receive on-sight coaching and technical assistance from



Implementation Years 2 & 3experienced consultants. Implementation grants will be awarded to selected school districts, based on their application and the following legislative formula:

Grant Amount = school district ADMw x (the total amount available for distribution for an implementation grant in a fiscal year through the School District Collaboration Grant Program / the total ADMw of the School Districts that receive an implementation grant for the fiscal year. School Districts should build their budgets based on $100/student; however, the final amount is dependent upon the total application pool).

D. Grant Requirements a) School Districts will:

Establish a diverse collaborative leadership team and process. The team must include teachers, administrators, and bargaining representatives. Teachers who teach students with special needs and English Learners must be represented.

Provide release time for the administrators, teachers, and bargaining representatives participating in the leadership team. Use grant funds to provide stipends, release time, substitutes, needed materials and cover related travel costs.

Participate in a community of practice networking with other school districts in the School District Collaboration Grant Program.

Implement blueprints that are research-based in the four focus areas: career pathways, evaluation processes, compensation models, and enhanced professional development opportunities for teachers and administrators.

Use student and school district data and other measures to document and evaluate the impact on student achievement and other identified outcomes.

Meet the requirements of the Oregon Framework for Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems.

Participate in scheduled statewide grant meetings and training events. Identify two teachers on the team as district/consortia lead trainers. Funds must

be provided for them to attend up to three, two-day trainings throughout the year in addition to grant meetings.

Share lessons learned and school district models of the four focus areas through posting on the website and presenting at statewide and regional trainings.

Participate in data collection to examine impact of the Implementation process.

b) Oregon Department of Education (ODE) will: Provide grantees access to expert coaching and/or other onsite assistance to

support systems planning and innovative design. Facilitate a network of the school districts participating in the School District

Collaboration Grant Program. Evaluate and publish student achievement results of school districts receiving

grants to determine the effectiveness of the approaches implemented by the School Districts.

Disseminate lessons learned and school district models of design and implementation in the four focus areas.

Collect specific evidence or data on educator effectiveness and student achievement throughout the process to help monitor progress and examine impact of the implementation process.



Implementation Years 2 & 3E. EligibilityImplementation Grant: School districts may apply for an implementation grant based on the eligibility criteria listed below. Applications must demonstrate school district support, commitment and readiness to implement their blueprint integrating the four focus areas: career pathways, performance evaluation, compensation models, and enhanced professional development for teachers and administrators.

School District Support: School districts must be willing to build and maintain a collaborative leadership team, engage in developing district consensus, and build a sustainable plan for district-wide implementation.

School District Commitment: School districts must receive approval from the district superintendent, exclusive bargaining representative for the teachers of the school district and school board chair to apply for the grant. School Districts must demonstrate involvement of these stakeholders in the application and implementation process.

School District Readiness to Implement: School districts must provide a developed blueprint ready to implement and be able to describe an action plan for full implementation and integration of the four focus areas focused on the needs of educators and students in the district.

NOT ELIGIBLE: Districts who have received a federal Teacher Incentive Fund (TIF) grant. Districts who have received CLASS or District Collaboration Implementation Grants for

three years, including one of design and three of implementation or more Districts who are receiving CLASS grant dollars during the year their implementation

grant funds would be expended.

School District selection will also take into consideration the following: Grant awards will take into consideration geographic location of districts to insure

representation throughout the state. Districts with higher populations of students who are economically disadvantaged and

demonstrate achievement gaps between African American, Hispanic or Native American students and their peers.

F. Use of Fundsa) Funds should be used for costs associated with implementing the four focus areas with

an emphasis on building school and school district capacity to sustain efforts. Grantees must be able to spend the funds within the grant timeline according to acceptable accounting procedures.

Funds may be used for the following: Release time during the school year for activities aligned to project goals Substitute pay for teachers Stipends/compensation for certified and classified staff aligned to project goals Project Director expenses to coordinate project activities Professional development aligned to project goals Consultation services aligned to project goals Materials and supplies for the project Project evaluation expenses



Implementation Years 2 & 3 Travel reimbursements for individuals attending meetings, conferences, or other

professional development activities aligned to the project goals Administrative costs not to exceed 5% of the total proposed budget

b) Funds will be available upon receipt the grant award and must be expended by November 15, 2016.

G. Reporting and Deliverables The Oregon Department of Education will provide a template for an interim and final

grant report. Grantees are required to submit a final report prior to receiving their final request for funds and to participate in any state requested data collection for the purposes of documenting investment impacts.

Districts shall meet timelines, performance measures and other requirements related to the accumulation and evaluation of data collected as required by the Oregon Education Investment Board (OEIB) and the Oregon Department of Education, including student achievement.

Districts shall share lessons learned and school district models on the design and implementation of the four focus areas.




III. Application ProcessA. Application Review and Scoring

Applications will be reviewed and scored by a team of external stakeholders. Review will be based on specific criteria listed in this RFA and scored using the scoring rubric provided in Appendix D.

Final recommendations by the review committee will be based on the reviewer scores. The review committee may request further clarification on uses of funds and specific activities related to the application.

B. Timeline and Important Dates

Completion Dates ActivitiesJuly 7, 2015 Request for Application released

July 29, 2015 Request for Applications due

August 17, 2015 Districts notified of awards

January 31, 2016 Interim Report due

September 31, 2016 Last date to expend funds on grant activities

October 15, 2016 End of grant Final Report due; note 15% of the grant award will be withheld pending approval of the Final Report

November 15, 2016 Last date to draw funds

C. Instructions for Submission Format:

11-point font, Arial Double spaced 1-inch margins on the sides, top, and bottom of 8½” by 11” paper 20 page narrative maximum, including A-D (excluding cover page, assurances,

school district profile and budget worksheet / budget narrative, appendices) Numbered pages Faxed applications will not be accepted

Organization: Page 1: Cover Page (Appendix A) Page 2: Assurances (Appendix B) Page 3: School District Profile (Appendix C) Application Narrative Sections A-D (not to exceed 20 pages) Budget worksheet/narrative




Submission Instructions:Mail an original copy of the completed grant application plus three (3) copies to the Oregon Department of Education postmarked or delivered by July 29, 2015 AND submit application electronically (by Secure File Transfer) using Rich Text, PDF or Word format no later than 5:00 pm on July 29, 2015. Envelopes must be plainly marked Request for Application-District Collaboration Implementation Grant Years 2-3

Address your application packet to:Oregon Department of Education Attention: Sheli Dumas Office of Learning / ISAA Unit255 Capitol Street NESalem, Oregon 97310-0203

Secure File Transfer ProcessThe Secure File Transfer process uses an on-line function found on the ODE district web site https://district.ode.state.or.us/apps/xfers/. The transfer screen will be displayed. The following steps will complete the transfer process:

Either select ‘DUMAS Sheli’ from the ODE Email List or type Sheli’s email address ([email protected]) in the Recipients textbox. To select Sheli’s email address from the ODE Email List:

o Scroll down until ‘DUMAS Sheli is visible in the ODE Email List box. Click on Sheli’s name in the box.

o After you select Sheli’s name in the list, click the “Select” button under the list box. This will cause Sheli’s name to appear in the Recipients’ textbox.

Under the section “Who is Sending the File?” type your email address in the textbox at the right. Either type in the full path of the filename that you wish to send (your electronic application file)

or browse to the file that you wish to send. If you have a message that you want to include, enter it in the textbox under the “Enter Your

Message Here” section. When you are ready to transfer your file, click the “Send File” button. An email will be sent to Sheli with a link to this web site. When Sheli clicks on that link, she will

be able to download your application file. An email will be sent to the sender (you) informing you that an email has been sent in your name

to Sheli.Contact the ODE helpdesk at 503-947-5715 if you need assistance with the Secure File Transfer Process.

The original, plus three (3) copies of the Grant Application, must be received or postmarked by5:00 PM on July 29, 2015

The application must also be electronically submitted via ODE’s Secure File Transfer to Sheli Dumas at

https://district.ode.state.or.us/apps/xfers/No later than 5:00 PM on July 29, 2015


https://district.ode.state.or.us/apps/xfers/

https://district.ode.state.or.us/apps/xfers/



Implementation year 2 and 3

IV. Application Narrative

Instructions: Complete the information in Sections 1-6 below. Expand the boxes as needed. The number of pages for the combined sections may not exceed 20 pages. Leadership Team, Budget & Budget Narrative, and Appendices are not included in the 20 page maximum.

1. Implementation Leadership Team

List the names, title, and roles of the school district’s collaborative leadership team for this grant. The Implementation Leadership Team must include administrators, teachers (including EL and Special Education teachers), and bargaining representatives. Clearly define the roles and responsibilities of each team member.Name Title Role

2. Summarize work done to date within each of the four components. Include how the components have been integrated to support the district’s goals for student achievement and educator effectiveness. Include a reflection of what is working and what challenges you have had and how this will inform the next phase of implementation. (Will be scored using the Domain 1 in the scoring guide)

3. Submit a detailed implementation action plan; include a narrative if necessary, for the next year of work (2015-2016) that addresses the goals of the grant and which component each goal incorporates. Include the drivers (why this is



Implementation Years 2 & 3needed) for the goal and any essential training needed for teachers and administrators. Make sure to include your plan for collecting and evaluating evidence of impact and the results of any evidence you have already collected. (Will be scored using Domain 2 in the scoring guide)

EXAMPLE

EXAMPLE Increase the number of teachers who implement the best practices that they learn through in-house professional development opportunities.

Drivers/Current State:(why this is needed)

● Not enough time for relative, embedded, differentiated PD.● No shared understanding of best practices● No systems in place to identify which classrooms currently use and

succeed with best practices.● Teachers have no ownership of their professional learning

Action Plan:(Activities & Timelines)

● 30 individual or team mini grants of up to $XXX will be awarded in the fall to be completed in spring

● Adjust building schedules to increase the PLC time from 2 to 5 hours a week

Plan for Collection and Evaluating Evidence of Impact(Specify Evidence)

Mini GrantsOutputs (Measuring what was done):

● 30 teachers/teams will be awarded mini grants that meet the criteria as designed and determined by teacher led selection committee

● 30 teachers/teams will host a sharing session in the spring to explain their new learning

● 30 teachers/teams will create a log of activities, reflections and data throughout the course of the grant that meets the criteria outlined in their application

● At a minimum 4 of the mini grants will be selected based on criteria determined by mini grant committee for in-depth monitoring of student achievement and teacher practice outcomes

Outcomes (Measuring the impact of what was done):● Of the mini grants selected teacher(s) observations will include

data collection on the implementation of best practices identified in mini grants. Data will be taken on teacher practice, student engagement and student evidence, including work samples.

Increasing PLC times from 2 to 5 hoursOutputs:

● Review of each buildings master schedule● Collect PLC agendas and notes

Outcomes:● Each building leadership team will closely monitor at least 3

PLCs through observation and feedback conversations regarding the focus of the work completed during PLCs. They will use the checklist of highly effective PLCs to see if criteria throughout the year are being met.

Components Compensation



Implementation Years 2 & 3Addressed: Mini grants, PLC leaders, sub committee stipends for participants to

recognize their added contributions.EvaluationData collected around implementation of best practice will be aligned to the model core teaching standards and used to inform future professional development activitiesProfessional LearningIndividual and team mini grants around professional learning, high quality collaborative PLCs informed by observational data to improve teacher practices and student achievement.Career PathwaysMini grants will lead to sharing sessions or PD sessions for peers by peers, PLC leaders, Subcommittee members designing high quality criteria

GOAL ONE:

Action Plan:(Activities & Timelines)

Drivers/Current State:(why this is needed)Plan for Collection and Evaluating Evidence of Impact(Specify Evidence)Components Addressed:

Continue goals as needed

4. Communication: Describe your process for initiating, collecting and responding to stakeholder feedback. (Will be scored using Domain 3 in the scoring guide)

5. Describe your process of moving towards programmatic, cultural and fiscal sustainability. What has already occurred and what are your next steps? (Will be scored using Domain 4 in the scoring guide)




6. Budget Worksheet and Budget NarrativePlease complete the following budget materials. Base your budget on $100.00/ADMw. Note: This is an estimate only. Final budget amounts will be based on the total number of students for all grant awards.

a. Complete the following Budget Worksheet table:

Budget Worksheet Budget Narrative (expand boxes as needed)

Categories

Requested

Funding Amount

Leveraged Funds

Describe how the requested funds will be used for implementation

Salaries

Benefits

Stipends/Compensation

Substitute Costs

Consultation or Contracted ServicesSupplies & Materials

Travel

Other (must be allowable use of grant funds)

Administrative Costs @ 5 %

Total

b. Provide a summary of how these budget actions support implementation of grant goals.




Appendix A: Application Cover Page

Oregon School District Collaboration Grant Program2015-2016 Implementation Grant

If applying as consortia, this section must be completed for each district.

Please type or print

School District / Consortia Name:

Superintendent:

E-mail:

Mailing Address:

City: State: Zip:

Telephone Number: FAX:

Project Director:

E-mail:

Mailing Address:City: State: Zip:


Grant Fiscal Agent (Name & Title):

E-mail:

Mailing Address:City: State: Zip:





Appendix B: School District Assurances


School District Name:

The school district assures:1. Adherence to the expectations stated in the school district application.2. Participating teachers, administrators, and the project director will be released to participate

in planning and design activities. 3. None of the moneys received through this grant will be used to replace expenditures for

required programs that are the responsibility of the school district or sponsoring agency.4. The school district will participate fully in all agreed program evaluations and continuous

improvement processes with the Oregon Department of Education.5. The sponsoring agency agrees to abide by all terms of its grant application. The Oregon

Department of Education must approve any modifications to the application in writing.6. The following fiscal and program reports will be submitted to the Oregon Department of

Education by their respective due dates: Interim Progress Report due January 31, 2016; Final Report due October 15, 2016.

7. Grant recipients must commit to providing all of the requested reports and deliverables in order to receive the funds.

8. The school district will be required to share strategies, models, evaluation information, and lessons learned with other Oregon educators.

9. The undersigned have read the application packet, understand the requirements of the school district’s participation and commit their support.

Superintendent Name(Please print)

Superintendent Signature Date

Local Board Chair Name(Please print)

Local Board Chair Signature Date

Teachers’ Exclusive Bargaining Representative Name

(Please print)

Teachers’ Exclusive Bargaining Representative Signature

Date

Project Director Name(Please print)

Project Director Signature Date




Appendix C: School District Profile


Complete the following table as applicable. Add rows as needed.

School District Name:

Number of Certified Teachers:High SchoolsMiddle SchoolsElementary SchoolsOther (specify type--e.g. Teachers on Special Assignment, ESOL specialists)

Number of Licensed Administrators:High SchoolsMiddle SchoolsElementary SchoolsOther (specify type--e.g. School District Office)

Focus Schools Priority Schools Model Schools

High Schools

SchoolStudent Count

% English Learners

% Free & Reduced

LunchAve. Class

Size

No. of Certified Teachers

TOTAL



Implementation Years 2 & 3Middle Schools

SchoolStudent Count

% English Learners

% Free & Reduced

LunchAve. Class

Size


TOTAL

Elementary Schools

SchoolStudent Count

% English Learners

% Free & Reduced

LunchAve. Class

Size


TOTAL

Other Schools (Please Specify)

SchoolStudent Count

% English Learners

% Free & Reduced

LunchAve. Class

Size


TOTAL





Appendix D: School District Collaboration Implementation Grant Rubric

Grant Checklist: Failure to include any of the items below may exclude the grant from being scored.

Required Components Yes NoSuperintendent, School Chair, and Teacher Representative SignatureSigned AssurancesSchool District ProfileProper Format and OrganizationComplete Implementation Leadership Team with defined roles (Section A of Grant Application)




Scoring Guide

Domain 1: Aligning the four components to support district needsA: Meaningful Evaluations for Teachers and AdministratorsLevel 1: 0pts Level 2: 2pts Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5pts.The description of the work vaguely indicates that work has been initiated and fails to include evidence of the school district’s implementation of an evaluation system that aligns with the Oregon Framework. Evidence includes little or no rubric and SLG training for educators, and IRR and feedback training for administrators.

The description of the work indicates that work has been initiated but provides some evidence of the school district’s implementation of an evaluation system that aligns with the Oregon Framework. Evidence includes some rubric and SLG training for educators, and IRR and feedback training for administrators.

The description of work describes and provides evidence that aligns with the critical attributes of the school district’s implementation of a evaluation system that aligns with the Oregon Framework. Evidence includes rubric and SLG training for educators, and IRR and feedback training for administrators.

The description of work clearly describes and provides multiple pieces of evidence that aligns with the critical attributes of the school district’s implementation of a evaluation system that aligns with the Oregon Framework. Evidence includes deep rubric and SLG training for all educators, and IRR and feedback training for all administrators. Evidence that these trainings are moving practice is included.

Critical Attributes:1. Handbooks that align to

little or no components of the Framework.

2. Little or no training was provided to educators on SLGGs.

3. Little or no training was provided to evaluators.

Critical Attributes:1. Handbooks that align to

some of the components of the Framework.

2. Basic overview of the evaluation system for educators.

3. Rubrics are distributed to educators.

4. SLGG training is limited to completing the template.

5. Some IRR training is provided for evaluators.

6. Some feedback training

Critical Attributes:1. Handbooks that align to the

Framework.2. Documentation of training

on the evaluation system with educators (e.g. professional cycle, rubric, aligned PD, Oregon Matrix).

3. Training on understanding and conceptualization of the rubric.

4. Documentation of training including agenda, & evidence of content in IRR.

5. Documentation of training

Critical Attributes:1. Handbooks that align to the Framework.2. Documentation of training on the

evaluation system with all educators (e.g. professional cycle, rubric, aligned PD, Oregon Matrix).

3. Training on understanding and conceptualization of the rubric with all educators.

4. Documentation of sustained training including agenda, & evidence of content in IRR for all evaluators.

5. Documentation of sustained training including agenda, & evidence of content in effective feedback for all evaluators.




is provided for evaluators.

including agenda, & evidence of content in effective feedback for evaluators.

6. Documentation of training including agenda, & evidence of content in SLGGs that is aligned to state guidance.

6. Documentation of sustained training including agenda, & evidence of content in SLGGs that is aligned to state guidance for all educators.

7. Educator examples of SLGGs that demonstrate alignment to guidance, accurate scoring, pre and post assessment data, etc.

8. Evaluator examples of calibration of evaluators.

9. Evaluator examples of effective feedback.10. Evidence that evaluator feedback directly

impacts educator performance.

B: Aligned Professional LearningLevel 1: 0pts Level 2: 2pts Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5pts.The description of work vaguely indicates that work has been initiated and provides little or no evidence that the school district has a system of professional learning aligning to individual, building and district needs as identified by teacher and administrator evaluation outcomes. Professional Learning describes how school districts are training teachers.

The description of work indicates that work has been initiated and provides some evidence that the school district has developed a system of professional learning aligning to individual, building and district needs as identified by teacher and administrator evaluation outcomes.

The description of work describes and provides evidence that the school district has a system of professional learning aligning to individual, building and district needs as identified by teacher and administrator evaluation outcomes and that there is evidence that educators know how to access their PL options.

The description of work clearly describes and provides multiple pieces of evidence that the school district has a system of professional learning aligning to individual, building and district needs as identified by teacher and administrator evaluation outcomes and that there is evidence that educators know how to and have begun to access their PL options. A process for evaluating the effectiveness of PL options is in place.

Critical Attributes:1. There is little or no system

Critical Attributes:1. A system is in place to

Critical Attributes:1. A system is in place to

Critical Attributes:1. A system is in place to analyze summative




in place to analyze summative evaluation data to identify PL needs.

analyze summative evaluation data to identify PL needs.

2. Data is used to identify teacher leaders who can develop and lead professional learning at each of the levels.

3. A method for evaluating professional learning opportunities impact on student learning and educator has been designed.

analyze summative evaluation data to identify PL needs at the individual, grade/department, building, and district levels.

2. Training, standards, and an evaluation system for PL leaders has been designed.

3. A method for evaluating professional learning opportunities impact on student learning and educator has been designed.

evaluation data to identify PL needs at the individual, grade/department, building, and district levels.

2. Multiple data sources are used to identify a variety of teacher leaders who can develop and lead professional learning at each of the levels.

3. Training, standards, and an evaluation system for PL leaders is in place.

4. A method for evaluating professional learning opportunities impact on student learning and educator performance is in place.

C: Alternative Career PathwaysLevel 1: 0pts Level 2: 2pts Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5pts.The description of work vaguely indicates that work has been initiated and provides little or no evidence that the school districts is providing leadership opportunities for educators that align with the professional learning needs of their building and/or district. There is little or no description on how these roles and responsibilities align to an educator’s strengths and how an educator can access the opportunities.

The description of work indicates that work has been initiated and provides some evidence that the school district has developed leadership opportunities for educators that align with the professional learning needs of their building and/or district. There is a vague description on how these roles and responsibilities align to an educator’s strengths and how an educator can access the opportunities.

The description of work describes and provides evidence that the school district is providing leadership opportunities for educators that align with the professional learning needs of their building and/or district. There is a description on how these roles and responsibilities align to an educator’s strengths and how an educator can access the opportunities.

The description of work clearly describes and provides multiple pieces of evidence that the school district is providing multiple leadership opportunities for educators that align with the professional learning needs of their building and/or district. There is evidence on how these roles and responsibilities align to an educator’s strengths and how an educator can access the opportunities.




Critical Attributes:1. Access to leadership

opportunities is limited and these opportunities are not tied to instructional improvement or based on educator evaluation and/or student assessment data.

Critical Attributes:1. Some Leadership

opportunities are tied to instructional improvement and classroom practices based on educator evaluation and student assessment data.

2. Leadership opportunities are not available to everyone.

3. The process for selecting educators for leadership opportunities is not transparent.

Critical Attributes:1. Leadership opportunities are

tied to instructional improvement and classroom practices based on educator evaluation and student assessment data.

2. Leadership opportunities are available to educators who have demonstrated effectiveness (rated at a level of proficient or higher) in area they are supporting.

3. Access to the leadership opportunities is communicated with defined roles, responsibilities and qualifications.

Critical Attributes:1. Leadership opportunities are directly tied

to instructional improvement and classroom practices based on educator evaluation and student assessment data.

2. Leadership opportunities are available to all educators who have demonstrated effectiveness (rated at a level of proficient or higher) in area they are supporting.

3. Access to the leadership opportunities is transparent with clearly defined roles and responsibilities and qualifications.

4. A rigorous selection process is in place. Specific training and on-going support is provided to all leaders.

D: New Compensation ModelsLevel 1: 0pts Level 2: 3pts Level 3: 4pts Level 4: 5ptsThe description of work vaguely indicates that work has been initiated and provides little or no evidence that the school district’s compensation model aligns to their values and beliefs around teaching and learning.

The description of work indicates that the work has been initiated but provides limited evidence that the school district has developed compensation model aligns to their values and beliefs around teaching and learning.

The description of work describes and provides evidence that the school district’s compensation model aligns to their values and beliefs around teaching and learning and is supported by current best practice research.

The description of work clearly describes and provides multiple pieces of evidence that the school district’s compensation model aligns to their values and beliefs around effective teaching and learning and is supported by current best practice research

Critical Attributes:1. Little or no work has

been done to redesign the compensation

Critical Attributes:1. A plan for determining

whether the compensation system

Critical Attributes:

1. In theory the compensation system matches the district's

Critical Attributes:1. There is evidence that the compensation

system matches the district's vision, beliefs, values and goals around student




system of the district.2. Stipends for additional

roles and responsibilities may be available.

matches the district's vision, beliefs, values and goals around student learning and educator effectiveness has been designed.

2. A plan for how to determine if the salary schedule promotes educator effectiveness and student learning is designed.

vision, beliefs, values and goals around student learning and educator effectiveness.

2. In theory the proposed salary schedule promotes educator effectiveness and student learning and is supported by current best practice research.

3. A process is in place for monitoring and evaluating the compensation system’s effectiveness to support goals.

learning and educator effectiveness and is supported by current best practice research.

2. Evidence that the compensation system is multi-faceted and includes money, influence, recognition, released time, and relevant professional learning is included.

3. Stakeholder development and ownership are evident.

4. There is evidence that the salary schedule promotes educator effectiveness and student learning.

5. The compensation system is fiscally sustainable and there is an articulated plan for sustainability.

6. A process is in place for monitoring and evaluating the compensation system’s effectiveness to support the goals.

E: Integration of the Four Components to Support the Needs of the School DistrictLevel 1: 4 pts Level 2: 6 pts Level 3: 8 pts Level 4: 10ptsThe description of work provides little or no evidence on how the components will be integrated to support each other and how they align with the needs of all students and educators in the district.

The description of the work indicates that work has been initiated but provides evidence on how only some of the components will be integrated to support each other and how they align with the needs of all students and educators in the district.

The description of the work describes and provides evidence on how all four components are integrated to support each other and how they align with the needs of students and educators in the district.

The description of the work clearly describes and provides multiple pieces of evidence on how all four components are integrated to support each other and how they align with clearly evidenced needs of all students and educators in the district.

Critical Attributes:1. The work is organized as

Critical Attributes:1. Evaluation results are

Critical Attributes:1. Evaluation results are

Critical Attributes:1. Evaluation results are viewed as fair, trust




four separate blueprint areas with little integration.

used to inform some PD offerings.

2. The district’s base salary schedule is supplemented with stipends for additional roles and responsibilities that are listed under career pathways.

viewed as fair, trust worthy and reliable and are used to inform career pathway, compensation and PD decisions. Specialized positions are compensated.

2. The connection between most components is evident. As an example, evaluation results determine professional learning needs and career pathway positions are in place to provide support in areas of need.

worthy and reliable and are used to inform career pathway, compensation and PD decisions. A fully integrated model has a true alternative compensation model.

2. The four components are part of a seamless system with data and information from each component informing practice in other areas. Each component is supporting the other three areas.

Domain 2: Implementation PlansA: GoalsLevel 1: 0 pts Level 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5ptsThe implementation plan and/or narrative is vague and fails to describes how the goals are aligned to the four integrated components that support student and educator needs.

The implementation plan and/or narrative has some goals which loosely align to the four integrated components that support student and educator needs. A plan for collecting evidence of implementation is incomplete.

The implementation plan and/or narrative includes measurable goals and is aligned to the four integrated components that support student and educator needs. A plan for collecting data for evidence of implementation is included.

The implementation plan and/or narrative includes rigorous measurable goals and is aligned to the four integrated components that support student and educator needs. A clear plan for collecting data for evidence of implementation is included as well as how the data will inform future practice




Critical Attributes:1. The implementation plan

does not align to the goals.

2. The plan is incomplete or disjointed.

3. The plan focuses on only one or two components.

Critical Attributes:1. Goals are included and a

process for collecting evidence of implementation in some component areas that support student and educator needs.

2. A process for the collecting data is incomplete.

3. The implementation plan is focused on only some of the components.

Critical Attributes:1. Measureable goals are

included and a process for collecting evidence of implementation in all component areas that support student and educator needs.

2. A process is in place for the collecting data.

3. The implementation plan is tied to identified needs and supports most of the four components.

Critical Attributes:1. Specific measurable goals are included

as well as a clear process for collecting evidence of implementation in all component areas that support student and educator needs.

2. A process is in place for the review of data.

3. A clear description of the stakeholder group that will make recommendations based on the data is included.

4. The implementation plan is directly tied to identified needs and supports the four components.

B: ActivitiesLevel 1: 0 pts Level 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5ptsThe activities, both short term and long term, are vague and fail to indicate how they support the goals of the implementation plan.

The activities, both short term and long term support some of the goals of the implementation plan and the process for evaluating and reflecting on the success of the activities is limited.

The activities, both short term and long term, include a description on how they will support the goals of the implementation plan and a process for evaluating and reflecting on the success of the activities is in place.

The activities, both short term and long term, include a clear description on how they will support the goals of the implementation plan and a clearly defined process for evaluating and reflecting on the success of the activities is in place.

Critical Attributes:1. Activities are listed, but

do not align with implementation plan.

Critical Attributes:1. Activities only support

some of the implementation plan.

2. No clear process for evaluating impact of activities.

Critical Attributes:1. Activities align to the

implementation plan.2. Process for evaluating each

activity and it’s impact is in place.

Critical Attributes:1. Activities directly support goals of the

implementation plan.2. An ongoing process of evaluating the

impact of activities is in place as well as how to make midcourse adjustments if needed.




C: Evidence of ImpactLevel 1: 0 pts Level 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5ptsThe district’s system for measuring the impact of the activities included in the implementation plan on the districts identified needs around student learning and educator effectiveness does not exist.

The district’s system for measuring the impact of the activities included in the implementation plan on the districts identified needs around student learning and educator effectiveness is limited

The implementation plan/narrative describes and provides evidence on the district’s system for measuring the impact of the activities included in the implementation plan on the districts identified needs around student learning and educator effectiveness.

The implementation plan/narrative clearly describes and provides multiple pieces of evidence on the district’s system for measuring the impact of the activities included in the implementation plan on the districts identified needs around student learning and educator effectiveness.

Critical Attributes:1. There is no plan for

collecting and/or analyzing data regarding student learning and/or teaching practice.

Critical Attributes:1. There is a description of

needs in the areas of student learning and/or educator practice.

2. The system for measuring the impact on student learning and/or educator practice is not complete.

Critical Attributes:1. Measurable impact targets

related to identified needs are evident for both increases in student learning and improvements in teaching practice.

2. Data will be collected and analyzed to determine impact of student learning and teaching practice.

Critical Attributes:1. Specific measureable impact targets

directly tied to identified needs are evident for both increases in student learning and improvements in teaching practice.

2. It is clear what data will be collected and analyzed to determine impact of student learning and teaching practice.

Domain 3: Communication PlanA: Goals & RationaleLevel 1: 0 pts Level 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5ptsThe district’s communication plan is vague and fails to mention how two-way, on-going communication plan is essential for implementing the

The district’s communication plan includes some methods for on-going communication. Some methods for evaluating the effectiveness of the plan

The district’s communication plan is stated and show an understanding of how two-way, on-going communication is essential for implementing

The district’s communication plan is clearly stated, rigorous and shows deep understanding of how two-way, on-going communication is essential for implementing the work and evaluating its




work.There is little evidence in the communication plan as to who the stakeholders are or how and why they are being communicated with them.

are included.The communication plan describes how the team plans on communicating with some stakeholders.

the work and evaluating its effectiveness are partially in place.The communication plan describes and provides evidence of how the team plans on communicating with stakeholders. A rationale for why methods and/or stakeholders are communicated with is included.

effectiveness are fully in place.The communication plan clearly describes and provides multiple pieces of evidence of how the team plans on actively engaging communication with key stakeholders. A rationale for why those methods are being used and which stakeholders are communicated with is included.

Critical Attributes:1. The communication plan is

vague and does not include goals for how communication can support the work of the grant.

2. There is no plan for how the communication plan will support the work of the district.

3. There is little variation on types of communication methods to be used.

Critical Attributes:1. The communication plan

states the goals of communicating with key stakeholders for supporting the work of the grant.

2. There is a description of the method(s) the communication plan will include.

3. How these methods will be used to gather input and respond to questions of some stakeholders is included.

Critical Attributes:1. Communication plan has

clear goals for how an active feedback loop will drive the work and reach necessary stakeholders. There is a system in place for monitoring goal attainment.

2. Communication plan uses a variety of methods including face-to-face meetings, email, newsletters as a way for most stakeholders to ask questions and provide feedback at regularly during the year.

Critical Attributes:1. Communication plan has clear goals

for how an active and engaging feedback loop will drive the work and reach all necessary stakeholders. There is a system in place for collecting evidence to evaluate whether progress towards goals is being met. The goals will include a rationale from key stakeholders that need to be communicated with and why.

2. Communication plan uses a variety of methods including face-to-face meetings, email, newsletters.

3. Communication processes are part of an ongoing plan with clear ways for educators to ask questions and provide feedback to inform the work is included.

4. A specific plan for evaluating the effectiveness of communication is clearly described




Domain 4: SustainabilityA: Programmatic SustainabilityLevel 1: 0 pts Level 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5ptsThere is no plan for sustaining any of the components of the grant.

There is a limited plan for sustaining some of the components of the grant.

There is a plan for continuing most of the components of the grant and they are somewhat aligned to district practice.

The four components of the grant are an integrated part of practice within the district.

Critical Attributes:1. No evidence of future

district practice that will include any of the components of the grant.

Critical Attributes:1. Some funding is available

to support one or two components. A few of the leadership positions created under the grant will continue to be funded.

Critical Attributes:1. The district has a plan for

how resources will be reallocated to sustain most of the components of the grant throughout the district.

Critical Attributes:1. The district has provided evidence of

how resources will be reallocated to sustain all of the components throughout the district.

B: Cultural/ Shared Leadership SustainabilityLevel 1: 0 pts Level 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5ptsThere is little or no description of a shared leadership model.

There is some description of a leadership model, representing educators, that is loosely connected to district decision making around the four components

There is a description of a shared leadership model, representing educators, that is connected to district decision making around the four components

There is a clear description of a shared leadership model, representing a variety of educators, that is integrated into district decision making around the four components

Critical Attributes:1. District and building

leaders make decisions and share those with teachers.

Critical Attributes:1. Some teacher input is

gathered prior to the district and/or building leaders making decisions.

Critical Attributes:1. A committee made up of

administrators and teachers is the decision making body for the continued refinement and implementation of the four

Critical Attributes:1. A governance board made up of

administrators and teachers is the decision making body for the continued refinement and implementation of the four components.

2. Roles of educators involved in the




components.2. Roles of educators

involved in the shared leadership model are defined and demonstrate their role in decision making.

3. A consensus model is used for making decisions.

shared leadership model are clearly defined and demonstrate their role in decision making.

3. A consensus model is used for making decisions, with each member of the governance board (or other committee) having an equal voice.

4. There is a process for gathering input from educators throughout the district that will be impacted by the decisions of the board.

C: Fiscal SustainabilityLevel 1: 0 pts Level 2: 1pt Level 3: 3pts Level 4: 5ptsThere is no plan for sustainability. There is no evidence of the integration of other funding sources to support the focus areas.

The sustainability plan only focuses on one of the focus areas. There is little evidence of the integration of other funding sources to support the focus areas.

The sustainability plan only focuses on two or three of the focus areas. There is some evidence of the integration of other funding sources to support the focus areas.

The sustainability plan addresses how all of the four focus areas are an integrated piece of how you do business within the district. There is clear evidence of the integration of other funding sources to support all of the focus areas.

Critical Attributes:1. The district has not

determined a way to continue with the implementation of any of the four components once the grant funding has ended.

Critical Attributes:1. The district has determined

how to fund a few leadership positions from other funding sources.

2. Other funding sources are mentioned, but unclear how they will be integrated to support components.

Critical Attributes:1. The district has determined

how to fund leadership positions and professional learning, with some evidence of integration between the two components.

2. Funding decisions are made based on most of the components being present.

3. Educator performance and support is tied to the

Critical Attributes:1. Evaluation, professional learning,

leadership positions and compensation are viewed as an interconnected system.

2. Funding decisions are made based on all four components being present.

3. Educator performance and support is tied directly to the compensation system.

4. Human Capital Management System is clearly in place

5. Evidence of how these will be




compensation system.4. Human Capital

Management System is in place.

sustained is provided.


Documents

I.Background and Legislative Intent · Web viewReview will be based on specific criteria listed in this RFA and scored using the scoring rubric provided in Appendix D. Final recommendations