Common use of Plan to Address Accelerated learning Clause in Contracts

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students?

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. Summer School June 2022 - July 2022 $25,000 Students scoring 1 grade level or lower in reading or math on IXL will be invited to attend summer school for specialized instruction on Math and Reading. 0 (Xxxxxxxx has not had a summer school for over 4 years) A minimum of 50% of students invited attend Summer School. AND Show a grade level increase in IXL Math and/or Reading Credit Recovery May 2022 - August 2022 $15,000 Report produced by School Counselor at the end of Term 3 for students in grades 9th to 12th grade showing credit holes. 70 students were served for the 2020-2021 school year. 80 students to be served. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? (1) A minimum of 50% of students invited to attend due to their scores in IXL Reading and Math actually attend with an 80% attendance rate. (2) A grade level increase in their Reading and/or Math score on IXL Credit Recovery will be evaluated on the successful completion of credits for a minimum of 80 students iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students? USBE encourages LEAs to reference their needs assessment to support their narrative. (1) Monday to Thursday will be academic courses. Friday will be mental health activities. The nature of these activities will be to help with stress relief; exploration of social skills, emotions, and more. They will be activities that include field trips, hiking, and more. The need to have Friday activities like these is due to the nature of our community/stakeholders responding to the worry of mental health in our students. (2) The Academic focus on Monday to Thursdays will be to assist in credit recovery through projects coordinated with the counselor and to attend classes for one on one or small group instruction to improve Reading and Math Skills. (3) If families of low income are not able to pay the small fee of attending, then this grant will help to cover those costs.

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss.. <$190,750 total> 20% = $38,150 Budget total=$38,656 iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. 1. Our baseline data shows there are Covid-19 related gaps in math and literacy, as shown by our most recent state test scores. Providing 1:1 devices for all students and replacing older non-working devices is a practice which has been shown to have a statistically significant positive effect on student test scores in English, writing, math, and science, as noted in the following study: xxxxx://xxx.xxxxxx.xxx/technology/1-to-1-laptop-initiatives-boost-student- scores-study-finds/2016/05 2. Hiring math and literacy intervention specialists which will greatly enhance our ability to reach all students at their unique levels and address their individual needs. This is supported by the following research studies: xxxxx://xxx.xxxxx.xxx/files/docs/Strong_Communication_Students_School_Su ccess.pdf , xxxxx://xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx/research-and-links/ , xxxxx://xxx.xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.xxx/docs/default-source/bonus-materials/156- chapter- 1. pdf?sfvrsn=4#:~:text=Literacy%20coaching%20serves%20many%20purposes,c ontributes%20to%20increased%20student%20achievement. 3. Summer intervention will be enhanced to include more of our at risk students in literacy and math. This will help prevent summer learning loss and close gaps as supported by the following research: xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/west/Ask/Details/60 ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process based Implementation Total Measure measured effect Activity Budget for evaluating the success from at conclusion of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andDescription Activity 2018-2019 activity or 2019-2020 (as applicable)

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students? USBE encourages LEAs to reference their needs assessment to support their narrative.

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success Literacy Mentor October 2021 $68,000 i-Ready EOY Assessment 20/21 i- Ready Composite EOY: Red-26% Yellow-22% Move 10% of students out of the above activities respective Red and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andYellow indicator levels.

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. Xxxx Xxxxxxx Charter School received feedback from our stakeholders. An overwhelming 74% of respondents stated that they would like to see the ARP ESSR funding used to hire additional staff to help accelerate learning and reduce learning gaps for identified students. As a result, we will use most of the funding to accomplish this objective. Evidence has shown that small group instruction can provide a comfortable environment and boost the confidence of students who might not otherwise participate in a lesson or activity. Small group instruction encourages teamwork as everyone in the group is working toward achieving the same goal. The small group and individual instruction groups teach and reinforces core skills, emphasize content, and provides opportunities for personalization. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements?? Tier 2: Universal screeners are administered at least three times a year. The data collected from the screeners, teacher observations and classroom assessments are used to determine if a student should be referred to Tier 2. The MTSS team makes that decision using pre-determined cut scores set by the team. Tier 3 becomes more intensive by adding additional time and may be administered individually to ensure students are receiving the proper instruction and Tier 3 data collection occurs at least weekly. iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students? USBE encourages LEAs to reference their needs assessment to support their narrative. Xxxx Xxxxxxx Charter School recognizes that our students in every subgroup had an impact during the COVID-19 pandemic, especially regarding overall reading skills. Our needs assessment recognizes that students need additional support in reading instruction in all grade levels. Those subgroups of students disproportionately impacted the most included our children with disabilities and those from low-income families. The interventions we will provide using ARP XXXXX funds will provide these students opportunities to accelerate learning and address the learning gaps due to the pandemic. Students will have the opportunity to attend small group and individual instruction. Evidence has shown that small group instruction can provide a comfortable environment and boost the confidence of students who might not otherwise participate in a lesson or activity. Small group instruction encourages teamwork as everyone in the group is working toward achieving the same goal. Students will also have access to our mental health counselor. During the pandemic we had 17 students with chronic absenteeism directly attributed to the pandemic. Our school counselor has created a social emotional learning curriculum to address the stresses placed upon students and families. The counselor will meet with individual students, small groups, and classrooms to provide ongoing support. With this ongoing support we anticipate a decrease in the number of chronic absenteeism and an overall increase in attendance (except for students who must quarantine due to COVID 19 or exposure).

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color,

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss.. TOTAL $346,000 iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students? USBE encourages LEAs to reference their needs assessment to support their narrative. Xxxxx Preparatory Academy (OPA) will take the following measures to ensure that our interventions are targeted and relevant. We will do this in the following ways: Evidence Based: OPA will select and use research based intervention programs that correlate with our core curricular programs. We will also prioritize intervention programs validated by the Utah State Board of Education. Correlation with the TSI plan and relevant subgroups: Our Targeted School Improvement plan prioritizes strategies for Special Education Students and English Language Learners, two groups disproportionately impacted by Covid-19. OPA will ensure that strategies from the TSI plan are integrated into actions with ESSR funds, thereby addressing those populations. Disaggregated Data Dives: The Administrative team meets for monthly and quarterly strategic meetings. At those times, the Administrative team will look at data from relevant subgroups to ensure they are making progress and responding to the interventions provided.

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss.. Evidenced- Timeframe for Estimated Data Source for Baseline Target for based Implementation Total Measuring Effect Measure measured effect Activity Budget for (ex. Attendance, from 2018- at conclusion of iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv? XXX chose the attached metrics that would allow statistical analysis of the specific interventions and programs related to the ARP XXXXX plan. How The current process involves three primary processes. First, AAI’s Academic Advisory Committee analyzes available data on a quarterly basis. This committee looks for effective/ineffective strategies and provides ongoing coaching (though our coaching programs) to teachers and students. Additionally, the committee will put together an analysis for the LEA Board. During the analysis the curriculum coach, instructional coach, interventionalist, academic director, counselor, and director will discuss the impact of each program and determine relative levels of effectiveness based on impact. Once the data is compiled, a meeting with the board Academic Advisory Committee will ensue. Typically, this meeting involves the counselor, academic director, and two to three board members. Further discussion ensues usually resulting in further analysis and programming shifts. The third review is financial. Once the board committee meets, the updated data and ideas are brought to the financial team to discuss fiscal responsibilities and limitations. USBE encourages LEAs to reference their needs assessment to support their narrative. AAI will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to implements will address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andincluding students from low-income families, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students by utilizing our data/curriculum coach to extract demographic specific data directly tied to the intervention. This will allow our advisory team to dig down into the specific needs of these demographic groups. AAI then utilizes our coaching staff to provide direct interventions for the identified concerns. We have also onboarded contracted training directly related to social and emotional needs of all students by hiring a certified behavior specialist to train all teachers in tier one interventions in the classroom with a focus on supporting social, emotional, and mental health concerns. Additionally, AAI will administer an additional needs assessment, the Systemic Assessment and Curriculum Delivery Survey, by the end of the 2021-2022 school year that will further inform intervention strategies and effectiveness by gathering student input on specific programs.

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes.. Plan for Accelerated Learning ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. ? How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students?

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students?

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes.. ACCELERATED LEARNING PLAN: ii1) learn precisely what children know and do not know in relation to State and District standards, 2) communicate with both students and parents what this new baseline data shows and its implications for acceleration of learning, 3) match research-based interventions with student needs and offer new alternatives for students to catch up quickly. Please complete The following assessments will be used to pinpoint accurately each student starting point and to develop realistic and rigorous benchmark goals to ensure each student is on track to be on grade level or above. A Student Summary Profile will be developed, by the table below end of the first term, so teachers and parents can work together to ensure every student progresses satisfactorily. The following assessments will be used to establish new baseline data. ● Sown to Grow (K-12) ● Acadiance Reading & Math (K-6) ● Catapult Evaluate (3-6) o English Language Arts o Mathematics ● District Benchmarks (3-11) English Language Arts and Mathematics ● Mastery Connect (District wide) ● WIDA/ELLevation Data ● 4 year Graduation Plan ● Early Warning Systems (All schools have access) This Profile will compile both academic and behavioral data/information that will allow teachers, parents and students to develop individual plans for each of the activities that you will be pursuing child in order to address fully engage in school, accelerate learning lossand recover emotionally from any pandemic effects. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss.. based Implementation Total Measure measured effect Activity Budget for from at conclusion of Description Activity 2018-2019 activity or 2019-2020 (as applicable) iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii1. Please complete Secondary Reading Labs will be supported at each secondary school to assist students in the table below ongoing completion of reading modules. Students may be referred the reading lab or may participate through a self-referral. We will support any student who wants to work on his or her reading skills. Aides will be assigned to reading labs at each secondary school and secondary literacy coaches will oversee the implementation of our secondary literacy initiatives and the work in our reading labs. 2. Math aides will support classroom instruction at each of our elementary schools. 3. Ongoing support for the district leadership teams which includes the committees listed above. These teams will meet at least three times each school year to assess intervention effectiveness at each school and to produce reports for the school board. 4. The Elementary Literacy Committee determined the most effect way to further improve literacy outcomes for our elementary students would be to train as many teachers as possible in LETRS. LETRS Training for K-6 Teachers provided through the school district will receive a $1,000 stipend for each four modules completed of the activities that you eight LETRS modules. LETRS training is split into two consecutive years for each cohort. A certified LETRS trainer from Iron County School District will facilitate the training process. Access to LETRS online modules and training materials will also be supplied through the grant. 5. Additional district and school level professional development days will be pursuing used to address learning loss. iiifamiliarize teachers with strategies in literacy and mathematics instruction. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your The first year ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? ivfunds will be used for three additional professional learning days and followed by days at the beginning and end of each school year in subsequent years. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implementsConsultants, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotionalliteracy experts, and mental health needs program facilitators will educate our staff in the use of all studentsLETRS, andMath Acadience, Achieve 3000, XXXX, and best practices for both elementary and secondary learners in developing proficiency in reading and math.

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. Project 1 Tier II Reading Intervention Program (3% of funding) Due to declining reading scores for some students, resulting from the COVID-19 Pandemic, Summit Academy is creating a Tier II reading intervention program targeting students in grades 7 and 8. This program is designed to address the needs of students who have struggled more than others in reaching reading benchmarks. Students are selected for this program using Acadience assessment data as a screener. Those students who are in the most need are being placed in a pull-out class were they have access to staff and resources intended to address the their needs. Part of this program will include the use of Read 180 to supplement the Tier I instruction they are receiving in the classroom. Project 2 Tier I Reading Support (21% of funding) Summit Academy will purchase licenses for all students to have access to the Lexia Literacy Program. Grades K-5 will have access to Lexia Core5 Reading while grades 6-8 will have access to Lexia PowerUp Literacy. Access to these literacy program directly supports the instruction in literacy that students get in the classroom. Lexia is a research-based and proven instructional tool which allows students to use technology resources to improve their literacy skills. Project 3 Summer Learning Program (61% of funding) Summit Academy implemented a summer learning program in 2021 that was directed towards all students who needed additional support due to the COVID-19 Pandemic. Students were able to receive additional instruction in math and literacy. The purpose of this program is to assist any student who needs addition educational time with teachers to make up for learning loss. Summit Academy plans on using the funds granted through ARP ESSER to continue this summer learning program in 2022. The funding will go toward the salaries and benefits of teachers who work outside of their contracted days to run this program. Students will be invited to this program based on their scores on XXX and EOY assessments in math and literacy. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color,

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss.. based Implementation Total Measure measured effect Activity Budget for from 2018- at conclusion of Description Activity 2019 or activity 2019-2020 (as applicable) iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students?

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: •  Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or •  Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or Utah State Board of Education XXX XXX XXXXX Xxxxx other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. Evidenced- based Activity Description Timeframe for Implementation Estimated Total Budget for Activity Data Source for Measuring Effect (ex. Attendance, Acadience, RISE, ACT Aspire, local measure, etc. iii. What is your process ) Disaggregated by specific student subgroups Baseline Measure from 2018- 2019 or 2019-2020 (as applicable) Target for evaluating the success measured effect at conclusion of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andactivity

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-quasi- experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low- income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students? USBE encourages LEAs to reference their needs assessment to support their narrative. 1. The school saw over 36% of students fail one or more classes. This creates a significant number of students at risk for academic failure and not graduating 2. Of this population almost half (15%) were ELL students. The school recognizes the need to address ELL service needs and provide additional supports and services to ELL students. 3. Due to the decreased instructional time and in-person learning opportunities, some students were impacted. To address these three areas the school will be utilizing these funds for the following. The school will be hiring a new ELL coordinator to help with providing supports to teachers and ELL students. Additionally, they will be teaching an ELL course for students at each campus and will work with teachers and ELL aides to provide supports in the classroom for students. The coordinator will track student progress and provide ELL curriculum and educational services to ELL students. Student performance will be tracked using WIDA testing data as well as Edmentum progress data. A credit recovery program will be provided to students particularly the higher number ELL and lower SES and minority students who need to make up credit to remain on track to graduate. Counselors and administration will focus on these students by providing these services and supports so they can make up the credits they are deficient in and make up the areas of learning loss that occurred. The school will also purchase an SEL screener to identify areas where students are struggling socially and emotionally. Data will be used by the school psychologist as well as social worker to provide SEL supports and services as well as curriculum for teachers to provide these services to students. The school will use the SEL screener to progress monitor the school and students on improving social and emotional issues. Additionally, Low SES students, students of color specifically were identified as students at risk of failure. The school will utilize ESSR funds to provide an online credit recovery system supported by the counselors, teachers and administration to assist in making up credits lost. To address learning loss due to decreased in- person instructional time, the school will be offering summer extensions for students who are in need of remediation.

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: •  Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or •  Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. Evidenced- based Activity Description Timeframe for Implementation Estimated Total Budget for Activity Data Source for Measuring Effect (ex. Attendance, Acadience, RISE, ACT Aspire, local measure, etc.) Baseline Measure from 2018- 2019 or 2019-2020 (as applicable) Target for measured effect at conclusion of activity iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. ? How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the iv. academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students?

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. ? How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to to iv. address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students?

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based evidence‐based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage high‐dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school after‐school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 COVID‐19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-basedevidence‐based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-basedevidence‐based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-basedevidence‐based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: •  Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed well‐designed and well-implemented well‐implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed well‐designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental well‐implemented quasi‐experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed well‐designed and well-implemented well‐implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or •  Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality high‐quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 COVID‐19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 COVID‐19 pandemic to be considered evidence-basedevidence‐based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based evidence‐based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp.. Utah State Board of Education XXX XXX XXXXX Xxxxx i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color,

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: •  Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or •  Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss.. Evidenced- based Activity Description Timeframe for Implementation Estimated Total Budget for Activity Data Source for Measuring Effect Baseline Measure from 2018-2019, 2021-2021 Target for measured effect at conclusion of activity iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, and

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • ● Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • ● Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss. iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students? USBE encourages LEAs to reference their needs assessment to support their narrative. 1. The school saw over 36% of students fail one or more classes. This creates a significant number of students at risk for academic failure and not graduating 2. Of this population almost half (15%) were ELL students. The school recognizes the need to address ELL service needs and provide additional supports and services to ELL students. 3. Due to the decreased instructional time and in-person learning opportunities, some students were impacted. To address these three areas the school will be utilizing these funds for the following. The school will be hiring a new ELL coordinator to help with providing supports to teachers and ELL students. Additionally, they will be teaching an ELL course for students at each campus and will work with teachers and ELL aides to provide supports in the classroom for students. The coordinator will track student progress and provide ELL curriculum and educational services to ELL students. Student performance will be tracked using WIDA testing data as well as Edmentum progress data. A credit recovery program will be provided to students particularly the higher number ELL and lower SES and minority students who need to make up credit to remain on track to graduate. Counselors and administration will focus on these students by providing these services and supports so they can make up the credits they are deficient in and make up the areas of learning loss that occurred. The school will also purchase an SEL screener to identify areas where students are struggling socially and emotionally. Data will be used by the school psychologist as well as social worker to provide SEL supports and services as well as curriculum for teachers to provide these services to students. The school will use the SEL screener to progress monitor the school and students on improving social and emotional issues. Additionally, Low SES students, students of color specifically were identified as students at risk of failure. The school will utilize ESSR funds to provide an online credit recovery system supported by the counselors, teachers and administration to assist in making up credits lost. To address learning loss due to decreased in-person instructional time, the school will be offering summer extensions for students who are in need of remediation.

Plan to Address Accelerated learning. Please provide a narrative response for how your LEA plans to use at least 20 percent of funds to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based interventions (e.g., providing intensive or high-dosage tutoring or accelerating learning), such as summer learning or summer enrichment, extended day, comprehensive after-school programs, or extended school year programs, and ensure that those interventions respond to students’ social, emotional, and academic needs and address the disproportionate impact of COVID-19 on underrepresented student subgroups. The ARP Act defines the term “evidence-based” as having the meaning in section 8101(21) of the ESEA. Accordingly, “evidence-based” includes several tiers of evidence. Specifically, “evidence-based,” when used with respect to a State, LEA, or school activity, means an activity, strategy, or intervention that: • Demonstrates a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes or other relevant outcomes based on— o Strong evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental study (“tier 1”); o Moderate evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study (“tier 2”); or o Promising evidence from at least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias (“tier 3”); or • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes or other relevant outcomes and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention (“tier 4”). Given the novel context created by the COVID-19 pandemic, an activity need not have generated such evidence during the COVID-19 pandemic to be considered evidence-based. The Department’s What Works Clearinghouse (available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/wwc/) identifies the tier of evidence that reviewed studies meet, as applicable. As part of the “demonstrates a rationale (tier 4)” level of evidence, grantees may develop and use approaches that are novel, if they are consistent with theoretical and empirical findings from research and the grantee will continue to review the effects of the practice to build the evidence base. Developing a logic model can help to demonstrate a rationale. Logic model resources are available at xxxxx://xxx.xx.xxx/ncee/edlabs/regions/pacific/elm.asp. i. Narrative for how your LEA plans use at least 20% of the total ARP XXXXX award to address accelerated learning through the implementation of evidence-based outcomes. ii. Please complete the table below for each of the activities that you will be pursuing to address learning loss.. Evidenced- based Activity Description Timeframe for Implementation Estimated Total Budget for Activity Data Source for Measuring Effect Baseline Measure from 2018-2019 or 2019-2020 (as applicable) Target for measured effect at conclusion of activity iii. What is your process for evaluating the success of the above activities and revising your ARP XXXXX plan to reflect improvements? iv. How will the LEA will ensure that the interventions it implements, including but not limited to the interventions under section 2001(e)(1) of the ARP Act to address the academic impact of lost instructional time, will respond to the academic, social, emotional, and mental health needs of all students, andand particularly those students disproportionately impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, including students from low-income families, students of color, English learners, children with disabilities, students experiencing homelessness, children and youth in xxxxxx care, and migratory students? USBE encourages LEAs to reference their needs assessment to support their narrative. Annually, InTech updates its “Student Data Document” which contains information related to disaggregated, student achievement across multiple measures. The analysis of this data becomes the core of InTech’s annual Needs Assessment. InTech will use disaggregated student performance data from before, during, and after the pandemic to determine how to best deploy available intervention resources to all students and particularly those students disproportionately impacted by COVID. InTech’s plan for the use of ARP funds includes providing extended-day and extended year programing to target academic needs as well as providing additional school-based mental health to provide for students’ emotional and mental health needs. The use of ARP funds to provide additional COVID-related sanitation and hygiene materials will also make it more likely that InTech will be able to continue with robust in-person instructional offerings, thereby supporting students’ social needs. The use of ARP funds to enhance technology will focus on the academic needs of students when they need to learn remotely.