Falls Far Below Standard. Upon further review following a preliminary Pending rating, the Commission identifies significant financial risk and has concerns about financial viability such that heightened monitoring and/or intervention are necessary.
Falls Far Below Standard. The school failed to implement the program in the described manner; the failure(s) were material and significant to the viability of the school, or regardless of the severity of the failure(s), the board has not instituted remedies that have resulted in prompt and sufficient movement toward compliance to the satisfaction of the authorizer.
Falls Far Below Standard. The school did not meet its AMO or is equal to or below the Established Minimum Proficiency.
Falls Far Below Standard. The school fell far below its school-specific academic goal(s). About 4: Schools have been given Xxxxxxxx Xxx’x Making the Mission Matter literature as initial guidance in developing School-Specific Measures (SSMs). The Commission created an Ad Hoc Committee to establish official guidance on SSM development; this guidance is currently being finalized within the Performance and Accountability Committee before being approved by the General Commission for release to schools. 1. API Proficiency 50% 12.5% 12.5% 12.5% Student Growth 25.0% 22.5% 7.5% Readiness 2.5% 7.5% 25.0% Achievement Gaps 10.0% 7.5% 5.0% 2. Standards Goals: Achievement 2a. High-Needs Proficiency 25% 10.0% 10.0% 10.0% 2b. High-Needs Growth (SGP) 15.0% 15.0% 15.0% 2c. High-Needs Growth (AGP) - - -
Falls Far Below Standard. Upon further analysis, the school’s performance on this component signals a significant financial risk to the school.
Falls Far Below Standard. Upon further review following a preliminary Pending rating, the Commission identifies significant financial risk and has concerns about financial viability such that heightened monitoring and/or intervention are necessary. EXHIBIT B.2 . The purpose of the Organizational Performance Framework is to communicate to the charter school and public the compliance-related standards which the charter school must meet. The Organizational Framework includes the standards that the charter school is already required to meet through state and federal law, rules or the charter contract. NACSA Principles & Standards (2012) states that, “A Quality Authorizer implements an accountability system that effectively streamlines federal, state, and local…compliance requirements while protecting schools’ legally entitled autonomy and minimizing schools’ administrative and reporting burdens” (p. 16). For each measure a school receives one of three ratings.
Falls Far Below Standard. The school did not meet its progress goal and had a four-year ACGR below 66%.
Falls Far Below Standard. The school did not meet its progress goal and had a four-year ACGR below 66%. 0-65 0 Notes The school's graduation rate progress goal will be established by the state accountability system. If such goals are not established by the state accountability system in any given year, the school's graduation rate progress goal will be established as follows: The progress goal will represent the school's most recent four-year ACGR plus one-sixth of the amount of growth needed to decrease the rate of non- graduates by 50% within 6 years, using the most recent school year as the baseline year. If the school does not have baseline data, its progress goal will initially be based on the surrounding district average graduation rate. Graduation rates are calculated on a 4-year-plus-summer cohort; for this reason, data availability will always run one year behind (that is, annual reports will contain graduation rate data from the cohort preceding the most recent school year. For example, 2015-16 ACGRs will be reflected in 2017 reports.) The 66% "floor" established by the bottom two categories is based on ESSA's mandatory inclusion in Targeted Support of any school that graduates fewer than 2/3 of its students on time. 0
Falls Far Below Standard. Upon further review following a preliminary Pending rating, the Commission identifies significant financial risk and has concerns about financial viability such that heightened monitoring and/or intervention are necessary. 2. SUSTAINABILITY INDICATORS 2.a. Total Margin: Net Income divided by Total Revenue Aggregated Total Margin: Total 3 Year Net Income divided by Total 3 Year Revenues
Falls Far Below Standard. The school's median student growth percentile in math falls below the 30th percentile. 0-12 0 Notes Growth will be calculated using 8th and 10th grade ISAT scores. Individual students' growth will be compared to the growth of other students, statewide, who fell in the same category (below basic, basic, proficient, or advanced) on the 8th grade ISAT. 0 Measure 4b Are students making expected academic growth in English Language Arts compared to their academic peers? Result Points Possible Points Earned ELA Exceeds Standard: The school's median student growth percentile in ELA falls between the 66th and 99th percentile. 39-50 0 Meets Standard: The school's median student growth percentile in ELA falls between the 43rd and 65th percentile. 26-38 0 Does Not Meet Standard: The school's median student growth percentile in ELA falls between the 30th and 42nd percentile. 13-25 0 Falls Far Below Standard: The school's median student growth percentile in ELA falls below the 30th percentile. 0-12 0 Notes Growth will be calculated using 8th and 10th grade ISAT scores. Individual students' growth will be compared to the growth of other students, statewide, who fell in the same category (below basic, basic, proficient, or advanced) on the 8th grade ISAT. 0
