FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM
2009 – 2010 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

School Name: HARTRIDGE ACADEMY

District Name: Polk

Principal: Debra Richards

SAC Chair: TBA

Superintendent: NA

Date of School Board Approval: TBA

Last Modified on: 09-18-2009

Dr.Eric J.Smith, Commissioner
Florida Department of Education
325 West Gaines Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Dr.Frances Haithcock, Chancellor
K-12 Public Schools
Florida Department of Education
325 West Gaines Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399

VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS

Students will meet then exceed minimum academic requirements and personal goals, while combining traditional effective methods with interactive technology, cooperative learning, single gender settings, language immeresion, hands on experiences, individual education plans, and family participation and interaction.

PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS

Brief History and Background of the School

Startup charter 2001 and has been renewed twice, most recently through 2014.

Unique School Strengths for Next Year

100% of staff returned for new school year. 100% of teaching and adminisistartive staff is HQ and teaching in-field. Majority have additional nonrequired subject areas and endorse,ents including ESOL, ESE, MGIC, and Reading.

Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

We have expanded by 20% this year so we are not familiar with those students needs as yet. This may require changes.

Student Demographics

Percent of total enrollment of 123
White 63 Black 14 Multiracial 6 Asian 6 Hispanic 11
SWD 11 ELL 7 F/R 62

Student Attendance Rates

06/07 95.64%
07/08 96.48%
08/09 95.44%

Student Mobility

Student mobility defined as "the enrollment or withdrawal of a student at any time during the school year (not including the first 15 days of school) divided by the number of students who attended the school during that year after the 15th day."
07/08 13.18%
08/09 16.67%

Student Suspension Rates

No ISS No OSS 2006/2007

Student Retention Rates

06/07 No rentention
07/08 None K; First 5%; None 2nd - 5th
08/09 K 9%; First 3%; 2nd 5%; 3rd 16%; 4th & 5th 0%

Class Size

Year K-3 4&5
06/07 16.75 19
07/08 17.66 19
08/09 17 18

Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

No feeder into Hartridge
Our students are permitted priority into Discovery Academy for middle school

Partnerships and Grants

No partnerships
No grants

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA

Note: The following links will open in a separate browser window.

School Grades Trend Data

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Trend Data

Florida Comprehensive Assessment Test (FCAT) Trend Data

HIGHLY QUALIFIED ADMINISTRATORS

Position	Name	Degree(s)/ Certification(s)	# of Years at Current School	# of Years as an Administrator	Prior Performance Record *
Principal	Debra Richards	Masters Ed Leadership ESE El Ed K-6 MGIC Prek - primary Bus Ed Art FELE ESOL	8	8	Made AYP annually Have never been SINI or DA

* Note: Prior Performance Record (including prior School Grades and AYP information along with the associated school year)

HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

Subject Area	Name	Degree(s)/ Certification(s)	# of Years at Current School	# of Years as a Coach	Prior Performance Record *
No data submitted

* Note: Prior Performance Record (including prior School Grades and AYP information along with the associated school year)

HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS

Description of Strategy	Person Responsible	Projected Completion Date
Limit number of admin positions to free funds for higher more competitive teacher salaries	Debra Richards	ongoing, 100% teacher retention this year
Build one on one time in schedule for all teacher/students	Debra Richards	ongoing
Priority enrollment for teachers' children	Debra Richards	ongoing
Partner with preschool onsite for free teachers' childcare	Debra Richards	ongoing

Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

Name	Certification	Teaching Assignment	Professional Development/Support to Become Highly Qualified
None	NA	NA	NA

Staff Demographics

Total Number of Instructional Staff	% of First-Year Teachers	% of Teachers with 1-5 Years of Experience	% of Teachers with 6-14 Years of Experience	% of Teachers with 15+ Years of Experience	% of Teachers with Advanced Degrees	% Highly Qualified	% Reading Endorsed Teachers	% National Board Certified Teachers	% ESOL Endorsed
9	11	44	44	11	22	100	11	0	66

Teacher Mentoring Program

Mentor Name	Mentee Assigned	Rationale for Pairing	Planned Mentoring Activities
Debra Richards	Kristina Vandor Currens	First year teacher	as needed and ongoing

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration

Note: For Title I schools only

Title I, Part A

As required if applicable

Title I, Part C- Migrant

not applicable at this time

Title I, Part D

As required if applicable

Title II

does not apply

Title III

does not apply

Title X- Homeless

does not apply at this time

Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)

as needed

Violence Prevention Programs

Implement required bully prevention and reporting program

Nutrition Programs

USDA school to home handouts

Housing Programs

does not apply

Head Start

does not apply

Adult Education

does not apply

Career and Technical Education

does not apply

Job Training

does not apply

Other

Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)

School-based RtI Team

Identify the school-based RtI Leadership Team.

Debra Richards
Lance Bruno
Deborah Perez
Rebecca Glass

Describe how the school-based RtI Leadership Team functions (e.g. meeting processes and roles/functions).

Meets proactively quarterly and as needed

Describe the role of the school-based RtI Leadership Team in the development and implementation of the school improvement plan

Input ideas, discussion, consensus, and review

RtI Implementation

Describe the data management system used to summarize tiered data.

As instructed in RtI manual

Describe the plan to train staff on RtI.

During staff meeting if not available on PD360 district program

School Wide Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model

Plan

Data Disaggregation 2008-2009 FCAT Data

What strengths and weaknesses were identified in the 2009 data by grade level, subject area, and clusters/strands?

Instructional Calendar Development

What is the process for developing, implementing, and monitoring an Instructional Focus Calendar for reading, writing, mathematics, and science?

Which instructional Benchmarks will be given priority focus, based on need, for each content area (reading, writing, mathematics, and science)?

What is the process to ensure instruction is based on individual students’ needs, as opposed to the master schedule?

How does the school incorporate applied and integrated courses to help students see the relationships between subjects and relevance to their future?

How does the school incorporate students’ academic and career planning, as well as promote student course selections, so that students’ course of study is personally meaningful?

Direct the Instructional Focus

How are lesson plans and instructional delivery aligned across grade levels and subject areas?

How are instructional focus lessons developed and delivered?

How will instructional focus lessons be revised and monitored?

CHECK

Assessment

Describe the types of ongoing formative assessments to be used during the school year to measure student progress in core, supplemental, and intensive instruction/intervention.

How are assessments used to identify students reaching mastery and those not reaching mastery?

Maintenance

How is ongoing assessment and maintenance of Benchmark mastery for each grade level and content area built into the Instructional Focus Calendar?

Describe the process and schedule for teams to review progress monitoring data (summative and mini assessments) to identify the required instructional modifications that are needed to increase student achievement.

Monitoring

Describe the Principal’s and Leadership Team’s roles as instructional leaders and how they will be continuously involved in the teaching and learning process.

ACT

Supplemental and Intensive Instruction/Interventions

Identify the core, supplemental, and intensive instruction and interventions.

How are supplemental and intensive instruction/interventions and tutorials structured to re-teach non-mastered target areas?

How does the school identify staff’s professional development needs to improve their instructional strategies?

Which students will be targeted for supplemental and intensive instruction/interventions?

How will the effectiveness of the interventions be measured throughout the year?

Enrichment

Describe alternative instructional delivery methods to support acceleration and enrichment activities.

Describe how students are identified for enrichment strategies.

Professional Learning Communities

PLC Organization (grade level, subject, etc.)	PLC Leader	Frequency of PLC Meetings	Schedule (when)	Primary Focus of PLC (include Lesson Study and Data Analysis)
No data submitted

NCLB Public School Choice

Note: For Title I schools only

Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status
No Attached Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status
Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification
No Attached Public School Choice with Transportation (CWT) Notification
Notification of (School in Need of Improvement) SINI Status
No Attached Supplemental Educational Services (SES) Notification

Pre-School Transition

A licensed private VPK program is located in another building on site during the school year. The teacher has a professional teaching certificate (Prek-primary, ESOL, ESE, K-6) and works closely with our kindergarten teachers throughout the year.

Free summer VPK is arranged for all K applicants who have not completed a VPK program.

Our staff meets with new kindergarten families the summer before school starts.

Ealry interevntion referrals to the appropriate services.

Postsecondary Transition

Note: Required for High School- Sec. 1008.37(4), F.S.

PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS

Reading Goal

Needs Assessment:

Based on School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:

Did the total percent proficient increase or decrease? What is the percent change?

What clusters/strands, by grade level, showed decrease in proficiency?

Did all student subgroups meet AYP targets? If not, which subgroups did not meet the targets?

Did 50% or more of the lowest 25% make learning gains? What is the percent of the lowest 25% of students making learning gains?

Did 50% or more of the total number tested make learning gains? What is the percent of students making learning gains?

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Maintain or improve % students scoring 3 or above on reading FCAT: 60% of grades 3-5 students will score 3 or higher on the FCAT reading			Students will become proficient in reading
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

Academic Intervention Facilitator

Debra Richards, Principal

Ongoing progress monitoring

FCAT

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed	Content/Topic	Facilitator	Target Date	Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring	Person Responsible for Monitoring
Comprehension strategies	Vocabulary and comprehension	PD360	Feb 1 2010	observation	AIF or Principal or Peer

For Schools with Grades 6-12, Describe the Plan to Ensure the Responsibility of Teaching Reading for Every Teacher

Budget:

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Literacy Place	FTE	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Technology
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Computers and associated costs	Title I	$11,000.00
Total: $11,000.00
Professional Development
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
PD360	none needed	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Other
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
No Data	No Data	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Final Total: $11,000.00

End of Reading Goal

Mathematics Goal

Needs Assessment:

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Maintain or improve % students scoring 3 or above on math FCAT: 60% of grades 3-5 students will score 3 or higher on the FCAT math			Students will become proficient in math word problems
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

AIF will facilitate reading in the content area for math

Prinicpal, Debra Richards

Ongoing progress monitoring

FCAT

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed	Content/Topic	Facilitator	Target Date	Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring	Person Responsible for Monitoring
Word problems	Math	AIF PD360	Feb 1 2010	observation	Principal or peer or AIF
Basic facts strategies	Math	PD360	Feb 1 2010	observation	Principal or peer

Budget:

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Studyguides and/or flash cards	Title I	$400.00
Total: $400.00
Technology
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Computers and associated costs	Title I	$11,000.00
Total: $11,000.00
Professional Development
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
PD360	none needed	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Other
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
No Data	No Data	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Final Total: $11,400.00

End of Mathematics Goal

Science Goal

Needs Assessment:

Based on School Grade Data:

Did the total percent proficient increase or was the percent proficient maintained?

What clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Maintain or improve % students scoring 3 or above on science FCAT: 60% of grade 5 students will score 3 or higher on the FCAT science			Studetn will become proficient in science
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

AIF will facilitate reading in the content area for science with an emphasis on vocabulary

Principal Debra Richards

Ongoing Progress monitoring

FCAT

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed	Content/Topic	Facilitator	Target Date	Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring	Person Responsible for Monitoring
Vocabulary reading in the content area	science	AIF PD360	Nov 1 2009	observation	Principal

Budget:

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Science journals	Title I	$750.00
Total: $750.00
Technology
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Computers	Title I	$11,000.00
Total: $11,000.00
Professional Development
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
PD360	none needed	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Other
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
No Data	No Data	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Final Total: $11,750.00

End of Science Goal

Writing Goal

Needs Assessment:

Based on School Grade Data:

Did the total percent proficient increase or was the percent proficient maintained?

What clusters/strands showed decrease in proficiency?

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Maintain or improve % students scoring 3.5 or above on writing FCAT: 60% of grade 4 students will score 3.5 or higher on the FCAT writing			Students will become proficient writers
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

AIF will facilitate learning stronger vocabulary to applay in writing and responses to reading comprehension

Principal, Debra Richards

Ongoing progress monitoring

FCAT

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed	Content/Topic	Facilitator	Target Date	Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring	Person Responsible for Monitoring
Improve vocabulary and grammar skills	Writing	AIF PD360	Nov 1 2010	observation	Princiapl

Budget:

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Grammar skillbook	Title I	$600.00
Total: $600.00
Technology
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
No Data	No Data	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Professional Development
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
PD360	none needed	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Other
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
No Data	No Data	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Final Total: $600.00

End of Science Goal

Parent Involvement Goal

Needs Assessment:

Based on information from School Grade and Adequate Yearly Progress Data:

Were parent involvement activities and strategies targeted to areas of academic need?

Based on information from surveys, evaluations, agendas, or sign-ins:

Was the percent of parent participation in school activities maintained or increased from the prior year?

Generally, what strategies or activities can be employed to increase parent involvement?

Based on the Needs Assessment, Identify Area(s) for Improvement			Objective Linked to Area of Improvement
Actively involve parent in THEIR child's academic progress			Parents will facilitate or participate in their child's practice and studying at home.
	Action Step	Person Responsible for Monitoring the Action Step	Process Used to Determine Effectiveness of Action Step	Evaluation Tool

Provide parents with tangible and intangible tools to use at home for math,science, writing, and reading

Debra Richards, Principal

Ongoing progress monitoring

Survey

Professional Development Aligned with Objective:

Objective Addressed	Content/Topic	Facilitator	Target Date	Strategy for Follow-up/ Monitoring	Person Responsible for Monitoring
No data submitted

Budget:

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
No Data	No Data	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Technology
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Computer training and materials	Title 1	$3,000.00
Total: $3,000.00
Professional Development
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
No Data	No Data	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Other
Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
No Data	No Data	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Final Total: $3,000.00

End of Parent Involvement Goal

Other Goals

No Other Goals were submitted for this school

FINAL BUDGET

Evidence-based Program(s)/Material(s)
Goal	Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Reading	Literacy Place	FTE	$0.00
Mathematics	Studyguides and/or flash cards	Title I	$400.00
Writing	Grammar skillbook	Title I	$600.00
Science	Science journals	Title I	$750.00
Total: $1,750.00
Technology
Goal	Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Reading	Computers and associated costs	Title I	$11,000.00
Mathematics	Computers and associated costs	Title I	$11,000.00
Science	Computers	Title I	$11,000.00
Parental Involvement	Computer training and materials	Title 1	$3,000.00
Total: $36,000.00
Professional Development
Goal	Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
Reading	PD360	none needed	$0.00
Mathematics	PD360	none needed	$0.00
Writing	PD360	none needed	$0.00
Science	PD360	none needed	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Other
Goal	Description of Resources	Funding Source	Available Amount
No Data	No Data	No Data	$0.00
Total: $0.00
Final Total: $37,750.00

Differentiated Accountability

School-level Differentiated Accountability Compliance

No Attached school’s Differentiated Accountability Checklist of Compliance

School Advisory Council

School Advisory Council (SAC) Membership Compliance

The majority of the SAC members are not employed by the school district. The SAC is composed of the principal and an appropriately balanced number of teachers, education support employees, students (for middle and high school only), parents, and other business and community citizens who are representative of the ethnic, racial, and economic community served by the school.

No. Disagree with the above statement.

Measures Being Taken to Comply with SAC Requirement

Projected use of SAC Funds	Amount
No data submitted

Describe the Activities of the School Advisory Council for the Upcoming Year

SAC Members

AYP DATA

2008-2009 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2

Polk HARTRIDGE ACADEMY 8121

Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:

Read: 46
Math: 46

2008-2009
School Grade¹:

Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress?

YES

This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c²).

This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b²).

This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model.

Group

Reading
Tested 95% of the students?

Math
Tested 95% of the students?

65% scoring at or above grade level in Reading?

68% scoring at or above grade level in Math?

Improved performance in Writing by 1%?

Increased Graduation Rate³by 1%?

Percent of Students below grade level in Reading

Safe
Harbor
Reading

Percent of Students below grade level in Math

Safe
Harbor
Math

% of students on track to be proficient in reading

Growth model reading

% of students on track to be proficient in math

Growth model math

2009

Y/N

2009

Y/N

2009

Y/N

2009

Y/N

2008

2009

Y/N

2007

2008

Y/N

2008

2009

Y/N

2008

2009

Y/N

2009

Y/N

2009

Y/N

TOTAL⁴

100

WHITE

100

BLACK

HISPANIC

ASIAN

AMERICAN INDIAN

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

2007-2008 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2

Polk HARTRIDGE ACADEMY 8121

Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:

Read: 41
Math: 41

2007-2008
School Grade¹:

Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress?

YES

This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c²).

This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b²).

This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model.

Group

Reading
Tested 95% of the students?

Math
Tested 95% of the students?

58% scoring at or above grade level in Reading?

62% scoring at or above grade level in Math?

Improved performance in Writing by 1%?

Increased Graduation Rate³by 1%?

Percent of Students below grade level in Reading

Safe
Harbor
Reading

Percent of Students below grade level in Math

Safe
Harbor
Math

% of students on track to be proficient in reading

Growth model reading

% of students on track to be proficient in math

Growth model math

2008

Y/N

2008

Y/N

2008

Y/N

2008

Y/N

2007

2008

Y/N

2006

2007

Y/N

2007

2008

Y/N

2007

2008

Y/N

2008

Y/N

2008

Y/N

TOTAL⁴

100

WHITE

BLACK

HISPANIC

ASIAN

AMERICAN INDIAN

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

2006-2007 Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Report - Page 2

Polk HARTRIDGE ACADEMY 8121

Number of students enrolled in the grades tested:

Read: 45
Math: 45

2006-2007
School Grade¹:

Did the School make Adequate Yearly Progress?

YES

This section shows the percent tested and performance for each group used to determine AYP (Parts a and c²).

This section shows the improvement for each group used to determine AYP via safe harbor (Part b²).

This section shows the percent of students "on track" to be proficient used to determine AYP via the growth model.

Group

Reading
Tested 95% of the students?

Math
Tested 95% of the students?

51% scoring at or above grade level in Reading?

56% scoring at or above grade level in Math?

Improved performance in Writing by 1%?

Increased Graduation Rate³by 1%?

Percent of Students below grade level in Reading

Safe
Harbor
Reading

Percent of Students below grade level in Math

Safe
Harbor
Math

% of students on track to be proficient in reading

Growth model reading

% of students on track to be proficient in math

Growth model math

2007

Y/N

2007

Y/N

2007

Y/N

2007

Y/N

2006

2007

Y/N

2005

2006

Y/N

2006

2007

Y/N

2006

2007

Y/N

2007

Y/N

2007

Y/N

TOTAL⁴

100

WHITE

100

BLACK

HISPANIC

ASIAN

AMERICAN INDIAN

ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED

ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

SCHOOL GRADE DATA

Polk School District HARTRIDGE ACADEMY 2008-2009
	Reading	Math	Writing	Science	Grade Points Earned
% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above)	90%	95%	89%	45%	319	Writing and Science: Takes into account the % scoring 3.5 and above on Writing and the % scoring 3 and above on Science. Sometimes the District writing and/or science average is substituted for the writing and/or science component.
% of Students Making Learning Gains	75%	60%			135	3 ways to make gains: Improve FCAT Levels Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5 Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2
Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School?	75% (YES)	60% (YES)			135	Adequate Progress based on gains of lowest 25% of students in reading and math. Yes, if 50% or more make gains in both reading and math.
Points Earned					589
Percent Tested = 99%						Percent of eligible students tested
School Grade						Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested

School District 2007-2008
	Reading	Math	Writing	Science	Grade Points Earned
% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above)	0%	0%	%	%		Writing and Science: Takes into account the % scoring 3.5 and above on Writing and the % scoring 3 and above on Science. Sometimes the District writing and/or science average is substituted for the writing and/or science component.
% of Students Making Learning Gains	0%	0%				3 ways to make gains: Improve FCAT Levels Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5 Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2
Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School?	% (0)	% (0)			0	Adequate Progress based on gains of lowest 25% of students in reading and math. Yes, if 50% or more make gains in both reading and math.
Points Earned					0
Percent Tested = 0%						Percent of eligible students tested
School Grade						Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested

School District 2006-2007
	Reading	Math	Writing	Science	Grade Points Earned
% Meeting High Standards (FCAT Level 3 and Above)	0%	0%	%	%		Writing and Science: Takes into account the % scoring 3.5 and above on Writing and the % scoring 3 and above on Science. Sometimes the District writing and/or science average is substituted for the writing and/or science component.
% of Students Making Learning Gains	0%	0%				3 ways to make gains: Improve FCAT Levels Maintain Level 3, 4, or 5 Improve more than one year within Level 1 or 2
Adequate Progress of Lowest 25% in the School?	% (0)	% (0)			0	Adequate Progress based on gains of lowest 25% of students in reading and math. Yes, if 50% or more make gains in both reading and math.
Points Earned					0
Percent Tested = 0%						Percent of eligible students tested
School Grade						Grade based on total points, adequate progress, and % of students tested

FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM2009 – 2010 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN

VISION and MISSION STATEMENTS

PART I: CURRENT SCHOOL STATUS

SCHOOL PROFILE/DEMOGRAPHICS

Brief History and Background of the School

Unique School Strengths for Next Year

Unique School Weaknesses for Next Year

Student Demographics

Student Attendance Rates

Student Mobility

Student Suspension Rates

Student Retention Rates

Class Size

Academic Performance of Feeder Pattern

Partnerships and Grants

STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA

HIGHLY QUALIFIED ADMINISTRATORS

HIGHLY QUALIFIED INSTRUCTIONAL COACHES

HIGHLY QUALIFIED TEACHERS

Non-Highly Qualified Instructors

Staff Demographics

Teacher Mentoring Program

ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

Coordination and Integration

Title I, Part A

Title I, Part C- Migrant

Title I, Part D

Title II

Title III

Title X- Homeless

Supplemental Academic Instruction (SAI)

Violence Prevention Programs

Nutrition Programs

Housing Programs

Head Start

Adult Education

Career and Technical Education

Job Training

Other

Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtI)

School Wide Florida’s Continuous Improvement Model

Professional Learning Communities

NCLB Public School Choice

Pre-School Transition

Postsecondary Transition

PART II: EXPECTED IMPROVEMENTS

Reading Goal

Mathematics Goal

Science Goal

Writing Goal

Parent Involvement Goal

Other Goals

FINAL BUDGET

Differentiated Accountability

School Advisory Council

School Advisory Council (SAC) Membership Compliance

Measures Being Taken to Comply with SAC Requirement

Describe the Activities of the School Advisory Council for the Upcoming Year

SAC Members

AYP DATA

SCHOOL GRADE DATA

FLORIDA DIFFERENTIATED ACCOUNTABILITY PROGRAM
2009 – 2010 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN