Chapter 38 of the Acts of 2013 Line Item 7061-9408 and G.L. c.69, §1J (z)
June 2014
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
75 Pleasant Street, Malden, MA 02148-4906
Phone 781-338-3000 TTY: N.E.T. Relay 800-439-2370
www.doe.mass.edu
This document was prepared by the
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D.
Commissioner
Board of Elementary and Secondary Education Members
Ms. Maura Banta, Chair, Melrose
Mr. Daniel Brogan, Chair, Student Advisory Council, Dennis
Dr. Vanessa Calderón-Rosado, Milton
Ms. Harneen Chernow, Jamaica Plain
Ms. Karen Daniels, Milton
Ms. Ruth Kaplan, Brookline
Dr. Matthew Malone, Secretary of Education, Roslindale
Mr. James O'S. Morton, Springfield
Dr. Pendred E. Noyce, Weston
Mr. David Roach, Sutton
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D., Commissioner and Secretary to the Board
The Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, an affirmative action employer, is committed to ensuring that all of its programs and facilities are accessible to all members of the public.
We do not discriminate on the basis of age, color, disability, national origin, race, religion, sex, gender identity, or sexual orientation.
Inquiries regarding the Department’s compliance with Title IX and other civil rights laws may be directed to the
Human Resources Director, 75 Pleasant St., Malden, MA 02148-4906. Phone: 781-338-6105.
© 2014 Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
Permission is hereby granted to copy any or all parts of this document for non-commercial educational purposes. Please credit the “Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education.”
This document is printed on recycled paper.
Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education
75 Pleasant Street, Malden, MA 02148-4906
Phone 781-338-3000 TTY: N.E.T. Relay 800-439-2370
www.doe.mass.edu
Massachusetts Department of
Elementary Secondary Education
75 Pleasant Street, Malden, Massachusetts 02148-4906 Telephone: (781) 338-3000
TTY: N.E.T. Relay 1-800-439-2370
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D.Commissioner
June 2014
Dear Members of the General Court:
I am pleased to present a progress report on the ongoing work of the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (Department) to provide targeted assistance to the districts and schools across the Commonwealth with the highest needs, pursuant to Chapter 38 of the Acts of 2013, line item 7061-9408, and Massachusetts General Law Chapter 69 section 1J, which directs the Department to provide:
[T]argeted intervention to schools and districts at risk of or determined to be underperforming under sections 1J and 1K of chapter 69 of the General Laws, schools and districts which have been placed in the accountability status of identified for improvement, corrective action or restructuring pursuant to departmental regulations, or which have been designated commonwealth priority schools or commonwealth pilot schools pursuant to said regulations…
This work originally began in March 2010, when 35 Level 4 schools were announced and were the first to undertake a new turnaround planning process defined in An Act Relative to the Achievement Gap, signed into law by Governor Patrick in January 2010.[1] This statute provided new flexibilities to turn around our state’s lowest performing schools. School year 2013 marked the final evaluation point for this cohort of schools, and I am pleased to say that 14 schools exited Level 4, with 5 schools moving to Level 1, the highest performance level.
Targeted Assistance funds were vital to the improvements in these schools. These funds helped finance new and innovative strategies to build strong practices in schools and districts necessary to meet the arduous challenge of turning around schools that had been the lowest performing in the state for many years. Targeted assistance funds were also used to document progress and conduct research to identify and share the strategies that were effective. The findings from this research, “Emerging and Sustaining Practices for School Turnaround June 2013” are attached to this report. This research has informed our strategies to foster rapid improvement in other schools that rank in the lowest 20 percent of the state’s performance.
In addition, under the authorities provided in An Act Relative to the Achievement Gap, the Board of Elementary and Secondary Education took the extraordinary step of placing the Lawrence Public School District under receivership, as a Level 5 district. To meet this unprecedented responsibility and opportunity, ESE directed Targeted Intervention and Assistance funds to provide expert assistance and targeted instruction in the states highest need district.
Finally, funds were used to provide an array of direct financial and professional development support to districts and school leaders and educators across the spectrum of Level 3, 4 and 5 districts to meet the challenges in closing the achievement gap for the wide range of students in their schools. As expectations rise to meet more rigorous standards, Level 3, 4 and 5 districts and schools depend on support efforts, networking, and targeted activities to expand their knowledge of effective practices to meet the growing and more challenging demands their students face.
The Targeted Intervention and Assistance funds are allocated to intervene in the state’s lowest performing schools and to help prevent further decline in student performance in other very low performing schools. This report summarizes and provides examples of the funds’ uses and illustrates the impact of the resources on the students and educators in the served districts.
Please let me know if I may provide you with any further information. I appreciate your support of the work we have been undertaking.
Sincerely,
Mitchell D. Chester, Ed.D.
Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education
Table of Contents
Introduction 1
Overview 3
Summary of Targeted Assistance Fund Use in 2012-2013 4
Examples of Impact of Targeted Assistance Funded through 7061-9408 6
Use of Funds During July and August 8
Appendices
Introduction
The Department of Elementary and Secondary Education respectfully submits this Report to the Legislature: Intervention and Targeted Assistance pursuant to Chapter 38 of the Acts of 2013, line item 7061-9408:
For targeted intervention to schools and districts at risk of or determined to be underperforming under sections 1J and 1K of chapter 69 of the General Laws, schools and districts which have been placed in the accountability status of identified for improvement, corrective action or restructuring under departmental regulations, or which have been designated commonwealth priority schools or commonwealth pilot schools pursuant to said regulations; provided, that no money shall be expended in any school or district that fails to file a comprehensive district plan pursuant to the provisions of section 1I of said chapter 69; provided further, that the department shall only approve reform plans with proven, replicable results in improving student performance; provided further, that in carrying out the provisions of this item, the department may contract with school support specialists, turnaround partners and such other external assistance as is needed in the opinion of the commissioner to successfully turn around failing school and district performance; provided further, that no funds shall be expended on targeted intervention unless the department shall have approved, as part of the comprehensive district improvement plan, a professional development plan which addresses the needs of the district as determined by the department; provided further, that eligible professional development activities for the purposes of this item shall include, but not be limited to: professional development among teachers of the same grade levels and teachers of the same subject matter across grade levels, professional development focused on improving the teachers’ content knowledge in the field or subject area in which the teacher is practicing, professional development which provides teachers with research based strategies for increasing student success, professional development teaching the principles of data driven instruction and funding which helps provide common planning time for teachers within a school and within the school district; provided further, that funds may be expended for the purchase of instructional materials pursuant to section 57 of chapter 15 of the General Laws; provided further, that no funds shall be expended on instructional materials except where the purchase of the materials is part of a comprehensive plan to align the school or district curriculum with the Massachusetts curriculum frameworks; provided further, that preference in distributing funds shall be made for proposals which coordinate reform efforts within all schools of a district in order to prevent conflicts between multiple reforms and interventions among the schools; provided further, that the department shall issue a report not later than January 10, 2014 describing and analyzing all intervention and targeted assistance efforts funded by this item; provided further, that the report shall be provided to the secretary of administration and finance, the senate president, the speaker of the house, the house and senate ways and means committees and the joint committee on education; provided further, that no funds shall be expended on recurring school or school district expenditures unless the department and school district have developed a long-term plan to fund such expenditures from the districts operational budget; provided further, that for the purpose of this item, appropriated funds may be expended through August 31, 2014, to allow for intervention and school and district improvement planning in the summer months; provided further, that any funds distributed from this item to a city, town or regional school district shall be deposited with the treasurer of such city, town or regional school district and held in a separate account and shall be expended by the school committee of such city, town or regional school district without further appropriation, notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary; provided further, that $250,000 shall be expended for the continuation of a parent engagement program established in item 7061-9408 in section 2 of chapter 182 of the acts of 2008; and provided further, the department shall give priority to programs that have the capacity to serve not less than 25 per cent of a districts middle school population and make available documentation of a minimum of $1 in private sector, local or federal funds for every $1 in state funds
Massachusetts General Law Chapter 69 Section 1J (z)
The commissioner shall report annually to the joint committee on education, the house and senate committees on ways and means, the speaker of the house of representatives and the senate president on the implementation and fiscal impact of this section and section 1K. The report shall include, but not be limited to, a list of all schools currently designated as underperforming or chronically underperforming, a list of all districts currently designated as chronically underperforming, the plans and timetable for returning the schools and districts to the local school committee and strategies used in each of the schools and districts to maximize the rapid academic achievement of students
Overview
Targeted Assistance to high-need districts and schools is provided by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (the Department) primarily through the Center for Accountability, Assistance, and Partnerships’ Statewide System of Support. The Statewide System of Support prioritizes assistance to those districts in Levels 3, 4, and 5 in the Accountability and Assistance Framework (see Appendix I), per its legal obligation to serve those with highest need. Pursuant to the provisions of M.G.L. c. 69, §§ 1J & 1K, the Department is required to intervene in Levels 4 and 5 districts and must make assistance available to Level 3 districts. All assistance is designed to broaden the knowledge and strengthen the use of effective practices in districts so their schools are able to implement the most current and effective instructional and supportive practices. The focus of the activity stems from the successful work of the Department, which demonstrated that school gains were generally sustainable only if the district supports to undergird them were in place, well defined, and strong. Based on this realization, efforts of team members in the Statewide System of Support and resources from Targeted Assistance to Schools and Districts, state budget line 7061-9408, are centered on district capacity-building initiatives which will be highlighted in this report.
To set context, it is important to note that the Statewide System of Support is comprised of two offices that provide customized supports to districts and their schools. These offices use a mix of experienced educators, consultants, and high quality partners with vast experience in education to provide district and school assistance. They offer high quality and credible support with the insight, coaching, and resources essential for improvement. The two offices are organized as follows:
- The Office of District and School Turnaround (ODST) serves the 10 largest high-poverty districts in the Commonwealth which, when combined, serve 191,431 students (2013 enrollment data). Liaisons, who are full-time employees of the Department, are assigned to these districts as point-people to address a number of district needs. The Liaisons provide direct services to these districts and access and coordinate supports from other offices at the Department based on needs highlighted in data, through improvement plans, through districts’ self-assessments, and through direct observations conducted by the Liaisons themselves. These ten high-poverty districts, known as the Commissioner’s Districts[2], also are eligible to be part of specialized projects for district and school improvement such as the Wraparound Zone project[3], and for connections with Priority Partners (consulting groups and individuals) who specialize in school turnaround work. Because these districts already have significant infrastructure in place, the work of the Liaisons and the focus of the turnaround projects often center on refining systems, improving communication and schools’ access to services, and strengthening the link between the central office and school sites.
- The Office for the Regional System of Support delivers services through District and School Assistance Centers (DSACs), which are “virtual centers,” organized into six regions across the state. This office was created to address the needs of small and medium-sized districts, primarily in Levels 3 and 4, which have fewer schools and fewer central leadership positions to deliver the complex array of supports necessary to improve schools. Despite their smaller size, these districts, when taken together, serve 208,966 students (2013 data). The DSACs are staffed by educators who have expertise in school and district leadership, mathematics, literacy, and data use. Regional Assistance Directors (retired school superintendents) and Support Facilitators (retired principals), funded through 7061-9408, provide experienced leadership and guidance for targeted assistance efforts. These Department representatives, who operate as an integrated regional assistance team, offer districts a focused menu of assistance, customizing that assistance to meet districts’ specific needs.
The offices that comprise the Statewide System of Support focus on districts serving 42 percent of the students in the Commonwealth, with a high percentage being low-income students and English language learners.