Outcomes for the Sample Clauses

Outcomes for the young people supported by ABP funding There was limited data available on pupil outcomes for the cohorts supported by ABP funding. More data should become available in future as, from September 2014, the four ABPs had agreed to collect systematic data on attendance, exclusions, progress in attainment, and planned progression route. Data to 2012-13 indicated a marked reduction in Permanent Exclusions and to a lesser extent in Fixed Term Exclusions compared to the national trend and to Warwickshire’s statistical neighbours. This is a very positive finding. On the other hand, rates of positive progression had declined since that achieved by the final cohort leaving the former PRU in 2012. Participants argued strongly for a greater focus on achieving positive progression for young people supported by the ABPs. Internal end-of-year reports from the ABPs to the LA also painted a mixed picture regarding outcomes. One ABP did not submit such a report, a concerning omission. Analysis of the three reports that were submitted showed that, whilst some pupils appeared to be flourishing, others very clearly were not. On the one hand, it could be argued that the fact that some pupils were doing well is a sign of the success of the ABP system. On the other hand, it is worrying to read about the young people who are out of mainstream school and are also struggling in, or disengaged from, their alternative provision. This makes them extremely vulnerable to negative long-term outcomes (and these are vulnerable young people in the first place). The views of school and ABP representatives suggest that the key problems to be addressed to support the most vulnerable young people is to offer an improved range and quality of alternative provision, plus easier access to effective professionals who can work with mental health and/or substance misuse issues and/or holistic family work.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Outcomes for the

  • GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWS We may provide you areas on the Site to leave reviews or ratings. When posting a review, you must comply with the following criteria:

  • Benchmarks for Measuring Accessibility For the purposes of this Agreement, the accessibility of online content and functionality will be measured according to the W3C’s Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 Level AA and the Web Accessibility Initiative Accessible Rich Internet Applications Suite (WAI-ARIA) 1.0 for web content, which are incorporated by reference. Adherence to these accessible technology standards is one way to ensure compliance with the College’s underlying legal obligations to ensure that people with disabilities are able to acquire the same information, engage in the same interactions, and enjoy the same benefits and services within the same timeframe as their nondisabled peers, with substantially equivalent ease of use; that they are not excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or otherwise subjected to discrimination in any College programs, services, and activities delivered online, as required by Section 504 and the ADA and their implementing regulations; and that they receive effective communication of the College’s programs, services, and activities delivered online.

  • Evaluation 1. The purposes of evaluation provisions include providing employees with feedback, and employers and employees with the opportunity and responsibility to address concerns. Where a grievance proceeds to arbitration, the arbitrator must consider these purposes, and may relieve on just and reasonable terms against breaches of time limits or other procedural requirements.

  • EVALUATION OF BIDS i) Bids submitted by the tenderer will be opened first and evaluated for fulfilling the Pre-qualification criteria and other conditions in NIT/Tender documents, based on documentary evidence submitted along with the offer.

  • PROCEDURES FOR EVALUATION A. The evaluations of school year employees covered by this agreement shall be completed no later than May 30 of each school year for 9-month employees and by June 30 for 10/12-month employees. The evaluation shall be reviewed with the employee, with a copy given to the employee at the conclusion of the review. An employee may present written comments, which shall be attached to the written evaluation document. The evaluator and employee shall sign the evaluation document. The employee’s signature does not constitute approval or disapproval, but only that the evaluation has been reviewed with the employee.

  • BID EVALUATION The Commissioner reserves the right to accept or reject any and all Bids, or separable portions of Bids, and waive technicalities, irregularities, and omissions if the Commissioner determines the best interests of the State will be served. The Commissioner, in his/her sole discretion, may accept or reject illegible, incomplete or vague Bids and his/her decision shall be final. A conditional or revocable Bid which clearly communicates the terms or limitations of acceptance may be considered, and Contract award may be made in compliance with the Bidder’s conditional or revocable terms in the Bid.

  • Response to Evaluation The teacher shall have the right to make a written response to the evaluation and to have it attached to the evaluation report to be placed in the teacher's personnel file. A copy, signed by both parties, shall be provided to the teacher.

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • TEACHER EVALUATION A. All monitoring or observation of the work performance of a teacher shall be conducted openly and with full knowledge of the teacher.

  • Evaluation Criteria 5.2.1. The responses will be evaluated based on the following: (edit evaluation criteria below as appropriate for your project)

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.