School Improvement Grants

Application for FY 2014 New Awards Competition

Section 1003(g) of the

Elementary and Secondary Education Act

Fiscal Year 2014

District Name: Parkrose School District

Oregon Department of Education

Salem, OR 97310

.

Submission Information
Electronic Submission:
The Oregon Department of Education strongly prefers to receive a district’s FY 2014 SIG application electronically. The application should be sent as a Microsoft Word document, not as a PDF.
The district should submit its FY 2014 application to
The cover page must be signed by the superintendent and school board chairperson. It can be electronically signed and submitted with the application, or the district may submit a paper copy of the cover page signed by the district superintendent and school board chairperson to the address listed below under “Paper Submission.”
Paper Submission:
If a district is not able to submit its application electronically, it may submit the original and two copies of its SIG application to the following address:
Erica Anderson
Oregon Department of Education
255 Capitol St NE
Salem, OR 97310
Due to potential delays in government processing of mail sent through the U.S. Postal Service, districts are encouraged to use alternate carriers for paper submissions.
Application Deadline
Applications are due on or before May 20, 2015.
For Further Information
If you have any questions, please contact Erica Anderson at (503) 947-5880 or by e-mail at .

i

APPLICATION COVER SHEET

SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANTS

Legal Name of Applicant:
Michael Lopes-Serrao / Applicant’s Mailing Address:
10636 NE Prescott
Portland, OR 97220
District Contact for the School Improvement Grant
Name: Michael Lopes-Serrao
Position and Office: Director of School Improvement
Contact’s Mailing Address: 10636 NE Prescott, Portland, OR 97220
Telephone: 503-408-2124
Fax:
Email address:
District Superintendent (Printed Name):
Karen Fischer Gray / Telephone:
503-408-2135
Signature of the District Superintendent:
X / Date:
The district agrees to comply with all requirements applicable to the School Improvement Grants program, including the assurances contained herein and the conditions that apply to any waivers that the State and/or District receives through this application.
District School Board Chairperson (Printed Name):
Ed Grassel / Telephone:
Signature of the District School Board Chairperson:
X / Date:

42

DISTRICT APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS

A. SCHOOLS TO BE SERVED: A district must include the following information with respect to the schools it will serve with a School Improvement Grant.
A district must identify each school that it is applying to serve and that it commits to serve, and the district must identify the model that it will use in each school as applicable. Enter school information in the table below.
Intervention model districts may include are: (1) turnaround; (2) restart; (3) closure; (4) transformation; (5) evidence-based whole school reform model; and (6) early learning model.
SCHOOL
NAME / NCES ID # / STATE
SCHOOL ID # / Priority or Focus (Include ODE school improvement tier assigned fall 2014) / INTERVENTION:
Prescott Elementary / 410948000979 / 925 / Focus, Tier 3 / Transformation
B. DESCRIPTIVE INFORMATION: A district must include the following information in its application for a School Improvement Grant.
(1)  For each priority and focus school that the LEA commits to serve, the LEA must demonstrate that the LEA has analyzed the needs of each school, such as instructional programs, school leadership and school infrastructure, based on a needs analysis that, among other things, analyzes the needs identified by families and the community, and selected interventions for each school aligned to the needs each school has identified. [Respond to parts 1A – 1C]
Describe how family and community stakeholders have been engaged in identifying the needs of the school and selecting an intervention. See the evaluation rubric below for guidance.]
Prescott has worked with a larger planning group throughout the schools Focus status from 2012 to the present, and brought together collective stakeholders to discuss the planning of a school improvement grant. The following team has played a role in the assessment, analysis, and planning for Prescott’s Comprehensive Achievement Plan and have participated in the SIG planning process:
Cathy Mitchell Newly hired principal
Susan Fitzgerald Ed NW Coach
Caren Haldeman Reading Specialist- Leadership Team
Christa Struckmeier 2nd Grade Teacher
Julie Ugarte 4th Grade Teacher
Carolyn Langston Music Teacher
Molly Ennis ELD Teacher and Coordinator
Michael Lopes Director of School Improvement
Bob Goerke Ed NW District Liason Coach
Chris McMurray Instructional Coach
Parent
Prescott Elementary over the past 3 years has identified and worked with staff, students, and families to identify the needs of the school. This past year the Prescott Leadership team that is composed of representatives from the teaching staff and the principal have worked to implement the school’s comprehensive achievement plan. As part of this on-going process, we have analyzed family and community needs through formal monthly meetings with the Prescott Parent Group to identify key needs to support student learning and effective family communication.
The first step in collecting and analyzing parent and community needs was through a comprehensive parent survey provided by the School Appraisal Team in January of 2013. These results were analyzed by the school leadership team and shared with the Parent Group in the winter of 2013. The results demonstrated parent confidence in areas of teaching and learning, school culture, and family and community engagement. The most notable concern was whether their child would receive the level of assistance necessary to help them with their class work. At that time the school identified the need to continue a strong system a multi-tiered system of support. The comprehensive achievement plan looked to identify the key improvements to building a multi-tiered system of support. This process began with aligning curriculum standards and developing a viable core reading program. Furthermore, during the 2012-2013 school year parents were invited on multiple occasions to learn about the school improvement process and the goals of the school. This included learning the school appraisal teams recommended interventions and the results of the staff and parent surveys.
Our district went through a rigorous process that included parents in the turnaround principal hiring process that followed the use of the transformation toolkit from the Center of Innovation and Learning. This included formally meeting with parents to discuss the qualities families needed in a school leader for Prescott. This included having a representative parent be part of the interviewing and selection process for Prescott’s new principal.
Due to the change in leadership at Prescott we believed it was necessary to survey parents again to ask their perceptions of teaching and learning, school culture, and family and community engagement. This was the same survey questions that were provided in the winter of 2013. Key findings from this survey indicate need for improvement with high expectations for all students, consistent behavior policy, including conflicts regarding race, and access to materials and a variety of courses offered to their child.
In addition, our newly hired principal, Cathy Mitchell meets with the Prescott Parent Group monthly to provide information about the school improvement process and gather feedback regarding improvement efforts throughout her first year as Prescott principal.
3
strong / thorough response / 2
average / partial response / 1
weak / minimal response / 0
not addressed
The LEA, in conjunction with school leadership from each school it commits to serve, has engaged family and community stakeholders in multiple ways and at multiple times to allow for assessment and review of the needs of the school and proposed intervention model. / The LEA or the school it is committing to serve, have engaged family and community stakeholders to allow for assessment and review of the needs of the school and proposed intervention model. / The LEA or the school it is committing to serve, has informed family and community stakeholders of the proposed intervention model. / No action was taken to engage family and community stakeholders.
(1B) Describe how the needs analysis takes into account the current state of improvement efforts at the school.
The Leadership Team, District Leadership Team, and SIG Planning Team have met on multiple occasions to review and analyze needs assessments, student achievement data across the five major key indicators from our comprehensive achievement plans. The following data sources were used and analyzed:
·  Student Achievement: Oregon Report Card
·  Student Achievement: Report Card Rating Details
·  Student Achievement: OAKS Data Analysis Tool (Growth analysis student by student)
·  Teaching and Learning: Prescott Mini-Observation Data
·  Teaching and Learning: AMAO’s and ELPA data
·  Teaching and Learning: Master Schedule
·  Teaching and Learning: DIBELS DMG data (Pathways to Progress Analysis)
·  Teaching and Learning: Staff School Improvement Survey
·  Teaching and Learning: Professional Development Needs Assessment
Teams have analyzed Prescott’s data and improvement plan to determine if the current comprehensive achievement plan correlates with staff and parent/community feedback. The school conducted a self evaluation with school and district leadership in 2012-2013 that also included parent involvement in selecting priority indicators from Indistar to develop a comprehensive achievement plan. The report highlighted status of the school in the five key areas of effectiveness and included interventions in each of the areas to help focus the school’s overall improvement plan and academic achievement.
The prescribed interventions for Prescott were based on the school appraisal, self evaluation on Indistar, and analysis of data from 2001-2012. The interventions were as follows:
·  Active engagement and planning associated with implementation of Common Core State Standards. Initial focus was a choice between math and literacy, and determining how support will be provided to students with disabilities and English Language Learners. School and district leadership focused on literacy instruction as a focus based on the data analysis.
·  Active and collaborative involvement with district efforts associated with the Oregon Teacher and Administrator Evaluation and Support Systems. A particular focus on the use of an instructional observation tool, aligned with Oregon teaching standards, for both teacher evaluation purposes, as well as for use with identifying trend data used in determining professional development needs. Professional development planning should be focused on effective instructional delivery and engagement strategies in both reading and math.
·  With support from the Leadership Coach, the leadership team will analyze and address school level systems related to providing targeted support for all students. In particular, the team will analyze the current system to ensure plans are in place to address the manner in which student performance data will be collected and analyzed to differentiate instruction. Our leadership team selected the Professional Learning Community Implementation Rubric to start its analysis.
Since 2012 Prescott has undergone significant change in leadership. The principal in the 2012-13 school year left the position, and was replaced by an interim principal for the 2013-2014 school year. The district leadership team determined that a review of the new principals performance would be conducted in after the first trimester to determine if the district should seek a turnaround principal for the 2014-2015 school year. It was determined that the district would seek a new leader for the following school year, and include the interim principal as a candidate for the job. Moreover, half way through the 2013-2014 school year, the Prescott Leadership Coach and District Support Coach left the position, and was replaced in January of 2014. In winter of 2014 Parkrose posted a turnaround principal position and interviewed 4 applicants using the University of Chicago Turnaround Practices Toolkit to formulate questions and rubrics to evaluate each candidate. Our final candidates were asked to complete a performance task including meeting staff and parents.
The attached logic model highlights the indicators that are the focal points of Prescott’s comprehensive achievement plan.
The first prescribed intervention of engaging and implementing Common Core State Standards is evident in past tasks and current tasks in the CAP plan. In addition, the school and district leadership analyze every CAP review as well as the HASDE provided by the school coach. From 2012-2013, our district began a district-wide literacy focused mapping of the common core standards, including resources to differentiate instruction to meet the needs of students. In the first year of mapping, it was evident through teacher needs assessments that more job embedded professional learning was needed. Prescott leadership worked with a district-wide team to develop standards of practice for a multi-tiered system of support that included re-defining core reading expectations for every classroom in Parkrose. This included standards for use of time, assessment practices, engagement strategies, planning with Common Core, and tiered systems of support. These standards of practice were developed with a district-wide team including representatives from Prescott’s leadership team. Prescott received specific support from the ORTIi projects Jenice Pizzuto, who helped highlight needs to improve core instruction and further develop systems of support for Prescott. During this consultation and further data analysis, our district leadership team determined that the RTI model was an appropriate vehicle to focus on improving core instruction and engaging in the work of learning and implementing the Common Core State Standards.
Prescott has been addressing the second intervention by engaging in the on-going work with the development of teacher and leadership effectiveness through the changes presented by Senate Bill 290. Our system for teachers includes a summative analysis of four domains of teaching: Environment and Culture, Instruction, Professionalism, and Student Learning and Growth Goals. In addition, we developed a leadership effectiveness tool that focuses feedback and evaluation on six standards of practice (TASC): Visionary Leadership, Instructional Improvement, Effective Management, Inclusive Practice, Ethical Leadership, and Socio-Political Context. These practices are aligned with turnaround principal/leader key elements. We used this as a guide in the posting of our turnaround principal position in early 2014.
The third intervention directly relates to our implementation of the Common Core State Standards. Our district-wide effort to create multi-tiered systems of support in reading and mathematics. This includes the deeper development of a comprehensive assessment system, curriculum and instruction that clearly defines our core program, and systems of proactive response for students who are struggling with the core program. After the initial PLC assessment, it was evident that there was not a clear understanding of the core for reading and math, and that our district lacked common formative assessments that helped guide instruction to improve the core. In addition, Prescott’s protocols for supporting teachers and students that are struggling needed support and further planning. In addition, because each of our district schools were in Focus status, our Special Education and English Language Learner support teams helped identify supports and structures to improve instruction for students with disabilities and English Language Learners. However, it was evident that our core program was the critical place to begin to ensure that our core is healthy and providing clear, yet high expectations for students, teachers, and leaders.