Table 4.A: PGCPS Central Support Team Level of Implementation for Table 4.A: Not Met

Title I School Improvement Grant (SIG), section 1003(g) MSDE SIG Monitoring Teams Second Onsite Visit Feedback for Prince George s County Public Schools (PGCPS), Drew Freeman, G. James Gholson, Benjamin Stoddert, and Thurgood Marshall Middle Schools MSDE Onsite Monitoring Dates: February 2011 Title I School Improvement Grant (SIG): The School Improvement Grant (SIG) Program, authorized under section 1003(g) of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Act of 1965, provides funding through State educational agencies (SEAs) to local educational agencies (LEAs) with the lowest-achieving schools that have the greatest need for the funds and demonstrate the strongest commitment to use the funds to raise significantly the achievement of students. The United States Department of Education (USDE) views the large infusion of Federal funds into the SIG program through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) as a historic opportunity to address one of the most intractable challenges for America s education system: turning around or closing down our Nation s persistently lowest-achieving schools. Purpose of the SIG Monitoring Teams Second Onsite Visit: As approved by USED, MSDE, through SIG Monitoring Teams, will conduct three onsite monitoring visits annually in each LEA that receives a school improvement grant to ensure that the LEA is implementing its intervention model fully and effectively in Maryland s Tier I and Tier II schools. The purpose of the SIG Teams second onsite visit is to review documentation that substantiates the LEA s implementation, both programmatic and fiscal, of its SIG Grant, as approved by MSDE. Once all documentation provided by the LEA has been reviewed, SIG Monitoring Teams will determine a level of implementation for each section/component/strategy/action that consists of being MET, PARTIALLY MET, or NOT MET. For areas that are MET in this feedback, MSDE will continue to monitor sustainability of the level of implementation. Based on the SIG Teams Onsite Visit Feedback, MSDE expects the LEA to review and analyze the feedback and make adjustments to its approved SIG application through the system s internal controls and submission of programmatic and fiscal amendments to MSDE. Table Organization of SIG Teams Second Onsite Visit Feedback Table 1 Section 4: LEA Commitments and Capacity Table 2 Levels of Implementation At -a -Glance for SIG Schools Table 3 Section 2: Drew Freeman Middle School, Tier II Table 4 Section 2: G. James Gholson Middle School, Tier II Table 5 Section 2: Benjamin Stoddert Middle School, Tier II Table 6 Section 2: Thurgood Marshall Middle School, Tier II Table 7 Section 5: SIG Consolidated Budget Table 8 Section 5: SIG LEA Budget Table 9 Section 5: SIG School Budget for Drew Freeman Middle School Table 10 Section 5: SIG School Budget for G. James Gholson Middle School Table 11 Section 5: SIG School Budget for Benjamin Stoddert Middle School Table 12 Section 5: SIG School Budget for Thurgood Marshall Middle School Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 1

TABLE 1: Section 4 LEA Commitments and Capacity by Prince George s County Public Schools MSDE SIG Monitoring Team Members: Jim Newkirk and Geri Taylor Lawrence Monitoring Date: February 23, 2011 Table 4.A: PGCPS Central Support Team Level of Implementation for Table 4.A: Not Met PGCPS Presented Evidence: As part of PGCPS SIG Application, Table 4.A identifies the names of its 1003(g) Central Support Team Members, Titles, Responsibilities, Tier II School Assignments, and Estimate Time Each Will Devote to Supporting Tier II Schools. PGCPS SIG Application was approved by MSDE on July 1, 2010. Since that approval, PGCPS made changes to its 1003(g) Central Support Team Members. PGCPS has implemented a SIG Turnaround Executive Committee that will perform the duties and responsibilities of the Central Support Team. MSDE informed PGCPS that Section 4: LEA Capacity and Commitment requires a SIG amendment as programmatic change. a. How often will the LEA 1003(g) central support team meet? Level of Implementation: PGCPS Presented Evidence: The central support team did not meet bi-weekly; however, the central support team has met once a month to discuss SIG. All individuals that are identified as of PGCPS Central Support Team did not meet as a total group. However, PGCPS has implemented a SIG Turnaround Executive Committee that will perform the duties and responsibilities of the Central Support Team. PGCPS is aware that this programmatic change requires a SIG amendment. PGCPS provided Turnaround Executive Committee Meeting Agendas from August-January. MSDE noted all agendas did not have sign-in sheets. PGCPS provided agendas that combined Turnaround Executive Committee with the MSDE Breakthrough Center meetings. At these meetings PGCPS turnaround schools were discussed. In the meeting notes for the SIG Turnaround Executive Committee, PGCPS outlined pressing issues (school hiring for next year, incentives, school and culture and climate, families in crisis, alternative placement for overage students, professional development) and identified required responses to the issues in the summary notes. b. How often will they report on their work and the work on Tier I, II and III schools to the Superintendent? Level of Implementation: Met PGCPS Presented Evidence: The Turnaround Director is part of the Central Support Team (Turnaround Executive Committee). At that time the Turnaround Director provided SIG updates to the team. PGCPS provided documentation of these monthly meetings. PGCPS provided documentation that the Deputy Superintendent attended January 2011 meeting as the Superintendent s designee. PGCPS provided documentation that the Deputy Superintendent met with the Turnaround Director in November 29, 2010 to discuss SIG Turnaround Support. Deputy Superintendent shared SIG information with Superintendent Hite. This documentation was not provided. PGCPS informed MSDE that Superintendent Hite has visited each of the 4 SIG schools twice during this current school year and met with the Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 2

principals. There was no documentation provided to substantiate this communication. In its SIG infrastructure, PGCPS convened SIG Steering Committee with members from major system departments that support each school. This group is led by the Turnaround Director. PGCPS provided documentation on their work from September through January. PGCPS provided its Turnaround Support Pyramid to guide their work when supporting each SIG school. PGCPS provided a newly developed Turnaround Framework Model (that is taken from the Maryland Instructional Leadership Framework and the Maryland Restructuring Implementation Technical Assistance Standards and Indicators). This model has become operational within the last month. This model addresses current needs for the SIG Schools, as well as planning and addressing those district and school needs for next school year. Inclusive with this model, PGCPS provided logic model documentation that included inputs, activities, short term outcomes, and long term outcomes to guide SIG implementation. c. How often will they report on their work and the work on Tier I, II and III schools Level of Implementation: Not Met to the Board of Education? PGCPS Presented Evidence: At this time, PGCPS has not presented to its Board of Education on the progress of its Tier II schools. PGCPS provided email documentation that a 20 minute board presentation by the Turnaround Director is scheduled for March 10, 2011. PGCPS provided documentation of the Turnaround Director s powerpoint presentation that will be used by the Turnaround Director for his March 2011 presentation. d. Has the LEA 1003(g) central support team met prior to the submission of the grant Level of Implementation: Met application to review the individual school descriptions and to discuss how it will coordinate and manage the support, monitoring and assessment outlined in those plans? PGCPS Presented Evidence: PGCPS provided documentation that included MSDE s feedbacks to PGCPS first and second drafts of its SIG Application. In the feedback, PGCPS provided written documentation that addressed each MSDE Overarching Issue outlined in the feedback. PGCPS provided emails from the Central Support Team respective departments that addressed issues in order to have its SIG Grant approved by MSDE. PGCPS requested technical assistance meetings by MSDE SIG Leads that focused on programmatic and fiscal issues. PGCPS provided agendas and sign-in sheets for those technical assistance meetings prior to PGCPS SIG Application that was approved by MSDE on July 1, 2010. PGCPS provided documentation of draft SIG Job Descriptions and Job Postings for the following: Turnaround Director; Turnaround Principal; Interdisciplinary Lead Teacher; Administrative Secretary Supervisor; and Academic Dean. PGCPS provided documentation that was entitled 2009-2010 1003(g) Grant Proposal: Staffing Implications and Human Resource Processes. In the document, it outlined Principals Commitment, Area Office Commitments, Human Resources Commitment, Teacher Criteria, and Incentives. The documentation included a process timeline with person responsible. Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 3

e. What role has or will the LEA 1003(g) central support team play in the creation of annual Level of Implementation: Met goals for student achievement and annual review/assessment of progress based on these goals described in sections 2 and 3 of this proposal? PGCPS Presented Evidence: PGCPS provided documentation that how the system addressed the annual goals for student achievement prior to its SIG application approval. PGCPS provided documentation of the annual review/assessment of student progress that aligns to the specific goals. In that documentation, PGCPS shared benchmark targets for each quarter, specifically first and second quarter. The Chief Academic Officer shared this information with Cabinet Executives, SIG Turnaround Executive Committee, and Turnaround Principals. The documentation is part of the system s Performance, Management, and Planning Process (PMAPP). The dates this information was shared with the SIG schools are Feb. 15 (Drew Freeman); Feb. 18 (Benjamin Stoddert); Feb. 17 (Thurgood Marshall); and Feb. 17 (G. James Gholson). PGCPS provided documentation that specific benchmark targets were shared November 9, 2010 for the entire school year. f. What steps will the LEA take to ensure that the school improvement funds are utilized Level of Implementation: (1) in a timely way and (2) effectively and efficiently to support the required components of the selected intervention? Specifically, what assurances will the LEA make that schools and LEA support teams have access to these funds, even during annual rollover processes? How will the LEA support principals timely and effective use of these funds? PGCPS Presented Evidence: PGCPS provided documentation that the Turnaround Director provides leadership in the implementation of SIG Grant Funds, ensuring that all funds align with the goals and activities for each school. PGCPS has a procurement process for the Turnaround Office and Turnaround Schools to approve, purchase, and receive materials and services that align with PGCPS approved SIG application. PGCPS has hired an administrative budget specialist in the Turnaround Office to ensure fiscal accountability. PGCPS provided documentation that the budget specialist is responsible for 5 out of the 6 designated responsibilities that are listed above. The LEA made the decision not to have this specialist to conduct school-level audits on spending and share findings with turnaround principal because all expenditures are processed by the budget specialist in the Turnaround Office. PGCPS provided documentation of monthly spend down meetings from October through January, excluding the month of December. Attendees include representatives from Title I, Turnaround Office, and the Office of Finance and Budget. g. Within this proposal, the LEA identified actions taken or in the planning to support Level of Implementation: individual Tier I and Tier II schools implementation of the selected interventions. Looking across the commitments made for the schools, and considering as well the strategies selected by the LEA for identified Tier III schools, what additional actions will the LEA take to ensure that the selected interventions are implemented as designed and to make the other changes such as: (1) realignment of other resources; (2) removal of expectations that might run counter to the approach outlined in the selected intervention; (3) timely modification of practices and policies (those anticipated ahead of time and those that will emerge during implementation); and (4) engaging in reflective and sustained, collaborative conversation and planning to ensure that improvement efforts can be sustained once this funding ends? Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 4

PGCPS Presented Evidence: PGCPS provided documentation that included the following: Turnaround Director s September 7, 2010 memorandum to Deputy Superintendent and Chief Academic Officer, outlining policies and practice changes for SIG during 2011-2012 school year. Agenda and Sign-in for October 22, 2010, November 13, 2010, and December 6, 2010 meetings between Turnaround Director and Human Resources in preparation for SIG staffing for the 2011-2012 school year. Agenda and Sign-in for November 19, 2010 meeting between Turnaround Director and a represented from the Prince George s County Educator Association (PGCEA) on teacher incentives and early notification discussion. Agenda and Sign-in for October 1, 2010 meeting between Chief Academic Officer, Employee and Labor Relations Director, PGCEA, ASASP, and the Turnaround Director to discuss extended day, incentive criteria for Turnaround Teacher, FIRST Participation, Three-Year Commitment, Staffing and Memorandum of Understanding for all groups at this meeting. Recruitment Posting entitled Teach in a TurnAround School. February 12, Teacher Career Fair at G. James Gholson Middle School. Contract between Mid-Atlantic Equity Consortium, Inc. (MAEC) and PGCPS. August Academy for students did not occur. The increase by 90 minutes to the school day did not occur. PGCPS decided to implement and Extending Learning Opportunity (ELO) for its SIG schools. The length of the ELO is 90 minutes for 4 days per week. PGCPS provided documentation that 2 of its SIG schools began in December 2010, and the remaining 2 SIG schools began January 2011. This programmatic change was included in PGCPS November 30, 2010 amendment that was approved by MSDE. This change must be included in Section 4: LEA Capacity and Commitment. PGCPS provided documentation of LEA coordination meetings with stakeholders from various departments within the school system. This documentation substantiated collaborative conversation to plan, modify, and improve the activities funded under this grant. PGCPS provided no documentation that included parent and community groups representing each school to explore strategies for success and sustainability of improvements once funding ends. PGCPS informed this documentation may have been provided at the school level when MSDE SIG Monitoring Teams conducted its 2 nd Onsite Monitoring February 1-10, 2011. MSDE reviewed the SIG Monitoring Teams preliminary reports for the 4 SIG Tier II Middle Schools and found: G. James Gholson Middle School: No documentation to support community engagement partnerships and no documentation to support strategies to increase parent engagement. It mentioned there is proposal in process to work with an outside organization to support this requirement. Drew Freeman Middle School: No documentation provided to support strategies to increase parent engagement. The school is in conversation with Suitland Family; Life Development Corporation and Promise Neighborhood; and another provider to support this requirement for next school year. Benjamin Stoddert Middle School: There is no evidence that a brochure has been developed detailing available school and community resources and services. There is no documentation to support on-going professional development with staff members regarding team building, whole-child development, behavior management, and effective parent/family/community engagement. Documents provided regarding partnership initiatives but no evidence that the partnerships have been formed. No document provided to support strategies to increase parent engagement. The school is in conversation with Maryland PIRC to support Family Engagement at Benjamin Stoddert. Thurgood Marshall Middle School: No document provided to support strategies to increase parent engagement. The school is in conversation with Maryland PIRC to support Family Engagement at Thurgood Marshall. Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 5

h. What are the major challenges to full and effective implementation of all components Level of Implementation: Met of the SIG grant that the LEA 1003 (g) central support team has identified and how will the team address these challenges in the early phases of the work? PGCPS Presented Evidence: PGCPS provided meeting notes from September 2010 through February 2011 of the Turnaround Executive Committee that outlined specific challenges to the implementation of the first year of its SIG grant at its 4 Tier II schools. Those major challenges included: Staffing: late start in hiring teachers Negotiations with Education Associations School Culture and Climate Limited District Turnaround Office Staff Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 6

TABLE 2: Levels of Implementation At a Glance on the Requirements for the Turnaround Intervention Model in PGCPS Tier II SIG Schools 1Replace the principal and grant the principal sufficient operational flexibility 2 Screen all existing staff and rehire no more than 50 percent; and select new staff 3 Implement such strategies as financial incentives, increased opportunities for promotion and career growth 4 Provide staff with ongoing, high quality, jobembedded professional development that is aligned with the school s comprehensive instructional program Drew Freeman Middle School Requirement Level of Implementation M-Met PM NM Not Met G. James Gholson Middle School Requirement Level of Implementation M-Met PM NM Not Met Benjamin Stoddert Middle School Requirement Level of Implementation M-Met PM NM Not Met Thurgood Marshall Middle School Requirement Level of Implementation M-Met PM NM Not Met PM PM PM PM PM M PM PM PM M PM PM M M PM M 5 Adopt a new governance structure PM PM PM PM PM PM M PM 6 Use data to identify and implement an instructional program that is research based and vertically aligned 7 Promote the continuous use of student data (such as from formative, interim, and summative assessments) to inform and differentiate instruction 8 Establish schedules and implement strategies that provide increased learning time 9 Provide appropriate social emotional and community oriented services and supports for students PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM PM NM NM PM Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 7

TABLE 3: Drew Freeman Middle School, Tier II LEA: Prince George s County Public Schools MSDE SIG Monitoring Team: Carol Crouse, Kristine Angelis, Teresa Knott, Sally Dorman, Rhona Fisher Monitoring Dates: February 3-4, 2011 Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 8 Overall Level of Implementation: Comp # Description Requirement Level of Implementation Replace the principal and grant the principal sufficient 1 operational flexibility (including in staffing, calendars/time, and budgeting) to implement fully a comprehensive approach in order to substantially improve student achievement outcomes and increase high school graduation rates Use locally adopted competencies to measure the 2 effectiveness of staff who can work within the turnaround environment to meet the needs of students (A) Screen all existing staff and rehire no more than 50 percent; and (B) Select new staff 3 4 5 Implement such strategies as financial incentives, increased opportunities for promotion and career growth, and more flexible work conditions that are designed to recruit, place, and retain staff with the skills necessary to meet the needs of the students in the turnaround school Provide staff with ongoing, high-quality, job-embedded professional development that is aligned with the school s comprehensive instructional program and designed with school staff to ensure that they are equipped to facilitate effective teaching and learning and have the capacity to successfully implement school reform strategies Adopt a new governance structure, which may include, but is not limited to, requiring the school to report to a new turnaround office in the LEA or SEA, hire a Met Insufficient Evidence by Component and Action Item 1.c-e: Provide evidence of the interview panel, the selection committee, and the recommendations for the Turnaround principal position. 1.2.a: Human Resources provided a roster of positions but no names were provided and we could not cross-walk the information for accuracy. 2.1.d: Provide evidence of individual teacher three year commitment to work at Drew Freeman. --Turnaround Director reports that it did not happen this year. The new Offer Letter will not include a three year commitment but will have conditions that teachers must satisfy in order to work in a Turnaround School. A Program Amendment will be forthcoming. 3.2.c.iv: Provide an explanation of why the decision was made to reduce the number of Instructional Learning Teachers (ILTs) from four, as stated in the grant, to two as presented on the school organization chart. --Turnaround Director indicated that the 0riginal grant language stated four ILTs but this was an error. It should have stated that schools will have two ILTs and have the flexibility of hiring two additional ILTs, as desired. Program Amendment is forthcoming. 3.3: Provide documentation of a succession plan for Academic Deans and ILTs. Dr. Ryan will provide a written explanation as to where the school/lea is in this process. 5.2.b: Performance Planning Conferences are occurring quarterly and not monthly as per the plan. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming.

6 7 8 9 turnaround leader who reports directly to the Superintendent or Chief Academic Officer, or enter into a multi-year contract with the LEA or SEA to obtain added flexibility in exchange for greater accountability Use data to identify and implement an instructional program that is research-based and vertically aligned from one grade to the next as well as aligned with State academic standards Promote the continuous use of student data (such as from formative, interim, and summative assessments) to inform and differentiate instruction in order to meet the academic needs of individual students Establish schedules and implement strategies that provide increased learning time Provide appropriate social-emotional and communityoriented services and supports for students 5.2.c-d: Detailed documentation as to the discussions held to support regular and ongoing Turnaround Director mentoring and coaching feedback to principals/ teachers was not provided. 5.2.f: Teacher evaluations have not yet occurred as per the FIRST timeline. 6.1.e: A Comprehensive Tool Kit Planning session was to occur in January. However, the contract was halted for this year and will be revisited for the future. The event was cancelled. -- Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 7.1.e: Documentation of a flex schedule for teachers was missing. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 7.2: See comment on 6.5. 7.3.a-g: Aside from two teachers (ESOL and Sp. Ed.) attending an LEA training on Special Education and General Education, no other evidence was provided to support the implementation of this Requirement. 8.1.d: The Independent Reading Book Club is not a part of the extended learning opportunities. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 8.4.a-c: The August Academy for 6 th /7 th grade did not take place during the summer of 2010 as reported in the grant. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 8.5: Increased learning time for teachers is not occurring. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 9.2.a: A baseline (buy-in) PBIS staff survey was not completed. A Statement of Intent was not provided. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 9.6. Provide additional documentation (i.e. sign-in sheets, outcome and effectiveness information) to support the biweekly management and accountability meetings to analyze relevant student data. 9.9: No documentation provided to support strategies to increase parent engagement. -- The school is in conversation with Suitland Family and Life Development Corp. Promise Neighborhood and with another provider to support this requirement for next year. Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 9

TABLE 4: G. James Gholson Middle School, Tier II LEA: Prince George s County Public Schools MSDE SIG Monitoring Team: Carol Crouse, Kristine Angelis, Teresa Knott, Sally Dorman, Rhona Fisher Monitoring Dates: February 1-2, 2011 Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 10 Overall Level of Implementation: Comp # Description Requirement Level of Implementation Replace the principal and grant the principal sufficient 1 operational flexibility (including in staffing, calendars/time, and budgeting) to implement fully a comprehensive approach in order to substantially improve student achievement outcomes and increase high school graduation rates 2 3 4 5 Use locally adopted competencies to measure the effectiveness of staff who can work within the turnaround environment to meet the needs of students (A) Screen all existing staff and rehire no more than 50 percent; and (B) Select new staff Implement such strategies as financial incentives, increased opportunities for promotion and career growth, and more flexible work conditions that are designed to recruit, place, and retain staff with the skills necessary to meet the needs of the students in the turnaround school Provide staff with ongoing, high-quality, job-embedded professional development that is aligned with the school s comprehensive instructional program and designed with school staff to ensure that they are equipped to facilitate effective teaching and learning and have the capacity to successfully implement school reform strategies Adopt a new governance structure, which may include, but is not limited to, requiring the school to report to a new turnaround office in the LEA or SEA, hire a turnaround leader who reports directly to the Superintendent or Chief Academic Officer, or enter into a multi-year contract with the LEA or SEA to obtain added flexibility in exchange for greater accountability Met Met Met Insufficient Evidence by Component and Action Item 1.c-e: LEA principal hiring documentation not available at the school. Turnaround Director reported that it is possibly housed in Human Resources at Central Office. 1.2.a. Staff roster for 2009-2010 school year was missing that would have demonstrated the reported 68% staff change. Human Resources provided a roster of positions which we were unable to compare it since there were no names attached. 5.2.b: Performance Planning Conferences are occurring quarterly and not monthly as per the plan. Turnaround Director reports that program amendment is forthcoming. --Documentation for the Performance Planning Conference on November 17, 2010 lacked participant sign-in sheets. 5.2.c-d: Detailed documentation as to the discussions held to support regular and ongoing mentoring and coaching feedback to principals/teachers was missing. 5.2.e: All attendees must sign-in marking their attendance at Leadership Team meetings.

6 7 8 9 Use data to identify and implement an instructional program that is research-based and vertically aligned from one grade to the next as well as aligned with State academic standards Promote the continuous use of student data (such as from formative, interim, and summative assessments) to inform and differentiate instruction in order to meet the academic needs of individual students Establish schedules and implement strategies that provide increased learning time Provide appropriate social-emotional and communityoriented services and supports for students 5.2.f: Teacher evaluations have not yet occurred as per the FIRST timeline. 6.1.e: Comprehensive Tool Kit Planning session was to occur in January. However, the contract was halted and the event was cancelled. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 6.3.a-f: AVID is not being implemented at this school. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 7.1.d: Detailed student running records (September through December 2010) documenting the use of the Comprehensive Tool Kit were missing. 7.1.e: Documentation of a flex schedule for teachers was missing. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 7.2: See comment on 6.5. 7.3.a-g: There are no ESOL students. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 8.1.d: The Independent Reading Book Club is not a part of the extended learning opportunities. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 8.4.a-c: The August Academy for 6 th /7 th grade did not take place during the summer of 2010 as reported in the grant. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 8.5: Increased learning time for teachers is not occurring. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 9.2.a: The 2010 PBIS Summer Institute was not attended by school personnel. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 9.2.b: No documentation of the Statement of Intent and completion of Staff Survey was available. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. 9.7 & 8: No documentation to support the bi-weekly management and accountability meetings. 9.9: No documentation to support community engagement partnerships. 9.10.b-k: No documentation to support strategies to increase parent engagement. Proposal in process to work with an outside organization to support these requirements. Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 11

TABLE 5: Benjamin Stoddert Middle School, Tier II LEA: Prince George s County Public Schools MSDE SIG Monitoring Team: William Cohee, Robert Murphy, Young-chan Han, Scottie Griffin Monitoring Dates: February 7-8, 2011 Overall Level of Implementation: Comp # Description Requirement Level of Implementation Replace the principal and grant the principal sufficient 1 operational flexibility (including in staffing, calendars/time, and budgeting) to implement fully a comprehensive approach in order to substantially improve student achievement outcomes and increase high school graduation rates 2 3 4 Use locally adopted competencies to measure the effectiveness of staff who can work within the turnaround environment to meet the needs of students (A) Screen all existing staff and rehire no more than 50 percent; and (B) Select new staff Implement such strategies as financial incentives, increased opportunities for promotion and career growth, and more flexible work conditions that are designed to recruit, place, and retain staff with the skills necessary to meet the needs of the students in the turnaround school Provide staff with ongoing, high-quality, job-embedded professional development that is aligned with the school s comprehensive instructional program and designed with school staff to ensure that they are equipped to facilitate effective teaching and learning and have the capacity to successfully implement school reform strategies Insufficient Evidence by Component and Action Item 1.b: There is no evidence that principal position was advertised beyond district s website. 1.c-e: There is no evidence of the interview panel, the selection committee, and the recommendations for the Turnaround principal position. 3a: Flowchart provided by the Turnaround department does not include the budget specialist/admin. assistant. 2.1.c: Evidence of teacher impact on student achievement as required when interviewing new staff. Please provide. 2.1.d: Provide evidence of individual teacher three year commitment to work at Benjamin Stoddert. --Turnaround Director reports that it did not happen this year. The new Offer Letter will not include a three year commitment but will have conditions that teachers must satisfy in order to work in a Turnaround School. A Program Amendment will be forthcoming. (via e-mail dated February 7, 2011) 3.2.c.iv: Provide an explanation of why the decision was made to reduce the number of ILTs from four to two, as stated in the final approved SIG plan. 3.4: Provide documentation of a succession plan for Academic Deans and ILTs. Dr. Ryan will provide a written explanation as to where the school/lea is in this process. (information from Team 5) 4.1.a: Signatures for original sign-in sheet (Mathematics Collaborative Planning, November 3, 10, 17, and December 8 th ) for teacher professional development-math collaborative planning-are identical/duplicate. 4.1.b.iv: There is no evidence that the Academic Deans met with MSDE staff at Breakthrough Center to establish protocols for collaborative planning. 4.1.c: There is no evidence to support an assistant principal s position designated for school operations and management. Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 12

5 6 7 8 Adopt a new governance structure, which may include, but is not limited to, requiring the school to report to a new turnaround office in the LEA or SEA, hire a turnaround leader who reports directly to the Superintendent or Chief Academic Officer, or enter into a multi-year contract with the LEA or SEA to obtain added flexibility in exchange for greater accountability Use data to identify and implement an instructional program that is research-based and vertically aligned from one grade to the next as well as aligned with State academic standards Promote the continuous use of student data (such as from formative, interim, and summative assessments) to inform and differentiate instruction in order to meet the academic needs of individual students Establish schedules and implement strategies that provide increased learning time Met 5.2.: Lack of documentation showing direct assistance provided to schools by Turnaround Director. 5.2.a: There is no evidence that the Turnaround Director is providing specific assistance to principals regarding completing the clinical observation cycle or supporting school leadership office. 5.2.b: There is no documentation indicating that Turnaround Director is in the process of conducting a performance planning conference per month. 5.2.c: There is no evidence of regular and ongoing feedback to principals and teachers regarding formative evaluation. 5.2.d: There is no documentation indicating that the Turnaround Director is providing mentoring and coaching to principal and teachers. 5.2.e: Though listed on the calendar (Nov. 5, 2010), there is no documentation (agenda/sign-in sheet) suggesting that the Turnaround Director is conducting leadership team meetings. 5.2.f: There is no evidence to show that teachers are being evaluated and provided meaningful feedback on their work. 5.3a: There is no evidence of new professional programs for Principals and APs. (Only referenced in Turnaround Director s schedule) 5.3.b: No documentation of the development and design of a teacher-leader program focused on specified area. 6.1.e: A Comprehensive Tool Kit Planning session was to occur in January. However, the contract was halted for this year and will be revisited for the future. The event was cancelled. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. (from Team 5) 7.1.d: Detailed student running records (September through December 2010) documenting student progress and the use of the Comprehensive Tool Kit were not provided. (from Team 5) 7.1.e: Documentation of a flex schedule for teachers was missing. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. (from team 5) 7.1.f: No documentation of formative data being discussed monthly during the Principal/Turnaround Director was provided. (from team 5) 7.2: There is no documentation of criteria for TAG. 8.4.a-c: The August Academy for 6 th /7 th grade did not take place during the summer of 2010 as reported in the grant. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 13

9 Provide appropriate social-emotional and communityoriented services and supports for students Not Met forthcoming. (from team 5) 9.1: Documentation does not exist to support monthly parent meetings and training sessions in specified areas (one attendance meeting for teachers held on September 7, 2010 without sign-in sheet is provided) 9.1.a: No documentation that the Turnaround Director is monitoring the social-emotional support provided to students and families in Benjamin Stoddert. 9.2.a: There is no documentation indicating that the school team attended the two-day PBIS summer institute in 2010. 9.3: While social worker position is listed on staff roster, there is no evidence that a full-time social worker was hired. 9.4: There is no evidence that a brochure has been developed detailing available school and community resources and services. 9.5: There is no documentation to support on-going professional development with staff members regarding team building, whole-child development, behavior management, and effective parent/family/community engagement. 9.6: There is no documentation to support the bi-weekly management and accountability meetings to analyze relevant student data. 9.7: No documentation provided to support collaboration between school s management team and the LEA. 9.8: Documents provided regarding partnership initiatives no evidence that the partnerships have been formed. 9.9 a-h: No documentation provided to support strategies to increase parent engagement. The school is in conversation with Maryland PIRC to support Family Engagement at Benjamin Stoddert. Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 14

TABLE 6: Thurgood Marshall Middle School, Tier II LEA: Prince George s County Public Schools MSDE SIG Monitoring Team: William Cohee, Robert Murphy, Young-chan Han, Scottie Griffin Monitoring Dates: February 7-8, 2011 Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 15 Overall Level of Implementation: Comp # Description Requirement Level of Implementation Replace the principal and grant the principal sufficient 1 operational flexibility (including in staffing, calendars/time, and budgeting) to implement fully a comprehensive approach in order to substantially improve student achievement outcomes and increase high school graduation rates 2 3 4 5 Use locally adopted competencies to measure the effectiveness of staff who can work within the turnaround environment to meet the needs of students (A) Screen all existing staff and rehire no more than 50 percent; and (B) Select new staff Implement such strategies as financial incentives, increased opportunities for promotion and career growth, and more flexible work conditions that are designed to recruit, place, and retain staff with the skills necessary to meet the needs of the students in the turnaround school Provide staff with ongoing, high-quality, job-embedded professional development that is aligned with the school s comprehensive instructional program and designed with school staff to ensure that they are equipped to facilitate effective teaching and learning and have the capacity to successfully implement school reform strategies Adopt a new governance structure, which may include, but is not limited to, requiring the school to report to a new turnaround office in the LEA or SEA, hire a turnaround leader who reports directly to the Superintendent or Chief Academic Officer, or enter into a multi-year contract with the LEA or SEA to obtain Met Insufficient Evidence by Component and Action Item 1.b: There is no evidence that principal position was advertised beyond district s website. 1.c-e: There is no evidence of the interview panel, the selection committee, and the recommendations for the Turnaround principal position. 3.a: Flowchart provided by the Turnaround department does not include the budget specialist/admin. assistant. 2.1.c: Evidence of teacher impact on student achievement as required when interviewing new staff. Please provide. 2.1.d: There is no evidence of individual teacher three year commitment to work at Thurgood Marshall. --Turnaround Director reports that it did not happen this year. The new Offer Letter will not include a three year commitment but will have conditions that teachers must satisfy in order to work in a Turnaround School. A Program Amendment will be forthcoming. (via e-mail dated February 7, 2011) 1.i: (PM) There is a list of participating staff noted (no evidence of teacher agreement). 1.a.iv.:(NM) There is no evidence of teachers being given opportunities for leadership projects. 2.: (PM) There was documentation showing that hiring bonus was received by administrators, but not for classroom teachers. 5.2.a: Lack of documentation showing direct assistance provided to schools by Director of Turnaround schools. 5.2.a-f: There is no evidence that the Turnaround Director is providing specific assistance to principals regarding completing the clinical observation cycle or supporting school leadership office.

6 7 8 9 added flexibility in exchange for greater accountability Use data to identify and implement an instructional program that is research-based and vertically aligned from one grade to the next as well as aligned with State academic standards Promote the continuous use of student data (such as from formative, interim, and summative assessments) to inform and differentiate instruction in order to meet the academic needs of individual students Establish schedules and implement strategies that provide increased learning time Provide appropriate social-emotional and communityoriented services and supports for students 5.3a: There is no evidence of new professional programs for Principals and APs. (Only referenced in Turnaround Director s schedule) 5.3.b: No documentation of the development and design of a teacher-leader program focused on specified area. 5.4: There is no evidence that PGCPS created multidisciplinary that meets with the school monthly. (There is evidence that individual LEA leadership team members do drop-ins and walk-throughs.) 6.3.a-f: There is no evidence of AVID training, AVID team staff meetings, or AVID coordinator at TMMS. 7.3.f: There is no evidence that the ESOL teacher collaborate with the content area teachers to design appropriate support for instruction. 7.3.g.: There is no evidence that teachers of ESOL participated in collaborative planning with general education teachers and also participated in systemic development around teaching and co-teaching. 8.4.a-c: The August Academy for 6 th /7 th grade did not take place during the summer of 2010 as reported in the grant. Turnaround Director reports that a program amendment is forthcoming. (from team 5) 9.1.a: No documentation that the Turnaround Director is monitoring the social-emotional support provided to students and families in Thurgood Marshall MS. 9.2.a: There is no documentation indicating that the school team attended the two-day PBIS summer institute in 2010. 9.7: No documentation provided to support collaboration between school s management team and the LEA. 9.8: Documents provided regarding partnership initiatives no evidence that the partnerships have been formed. 9.9 a-h: The school is currently consulting with Maryland PIRC to discuss possible partnership initiatives for supporting Family Engagement at Thurgood Marshall MS. Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 16

TABLE 7 Section 5: SIG Consolidated Budget LEA: Prince George s County Public Schools MSDE Reviewers: Geri Taylor Lawrence, Jim Newkirk Monitoring Date: February 23, 2011 Level of Implementation: NOT MET SIG 1003(g) ARRA SIG 1003(g) Title I, Part A Total Allocation $5,200,473 Total Allocation $1,013,314 Amount Spent $1,495,984 Amount Spent 0 Percent Spent 31% Percent Spent 0 Amount Encumbered $98,842 Amount Encumbered 0 Spend Down Data as of : February 22, 2011 Spend Down Data as of : February 22, 2011 Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 17

TABLE 8 Section 5: SIG LEA Budget LEA: Prince George s County Public Schools MSDE Reviewers: Geri Taylor Lawrence, Jim Newkirk Monitoring Date: February 23, 2011 Level of Implementation: NOT MET Total SIG LEA Allocation: $1,478,223 LEA Budget Spent: $452,804 Percent of LEA Budget Spent: 36% Spend Down Data as of: February 22, 2011 Salaries & Wages Contractual Services Supplies & Materials Other Budgeted: $549,806 Budgeted: $521,359 Budgeted: $9,000 Budgeted: Travel: $19,710 Equipment: $6,892 Encumbered: 0 Encumbered: 79,344 Encumbered: $454 Encumbered: Travel: $543 Equipment: 0 Spent: Travel $7,129 (39%) Equipment $4,073 (59%) Spent (amount): $198,824 Spent (amount): $210,622 Spent (amount): $4,612 Spent (%): 36% Spent (%): 56% Spent (%): 56% 1. How much of the LEA SIG 1003(g) ARRA budget, based on your system s approved application, has been expended to date (amount and percent)? PGCPS provided documentation that indicated that the LEA has spent $452,804. This amount is 36% of the LEA SIG budget. An additional amount of $84,414 has been encumbered. 2. How much of the LEA SIG 1003(g) Title I Part A, budget has been expended to date (amount and %)? PGCPS provided documentation that showed that no funds have been spent out of the SIG Title I, Part A budget of $1,013,134. 3. Is the LEA spending consistent with budget timeline? If not, what steps are being taken to expend the funds as planned? PGCPS indicated that overall much of the LEA spending is consistent with the timeline outlined in the proposal. The budget amendment submitted in November 2010 realigned funds in several categories. 4. What action steps or planned activities have not taken place that would impact the LEA budget? PGCPS provided evidence that indicated that the recruitment and retention incentives for principals, assistant principals and teachers are the action steps that has not fully been implemented and impacts the LEA budget. 5. Has a budget amendment been submitted? If yes, what budget changes were requested for the LEA? PGCPS provided evidence that a budget amendment was submitted to MSDE on November 30, 2010 and subsequently approved. Budget changes for the LEA budget included an increase in incentive funds for principals and assistant principals. This increase covered the increase in the number of principals and assistant principals at the SIG schools. This budget amendment also included a substantial decrease in the incentive amount originally allocated for teachers. 6. How often are LEA expenditures monitored? Who monitors? PGCPS provided evidence that monthly spend down meetings are held to discuss the activities and spending of the LEA budget. Stakeholders in attendance at these meetings are Turnaround Director, Turnaround Budget Specialist, Title I specialists, Director of School and Leadership, and staff from Budget Management Services. This group is responsible for monitoring the SIG LEA and school budgets. Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 18

TABLE 9 Section 5: SIG School Budget for Drew Freeman Middle School, Tier II MSDE Reviewers: Geri Taylor Lawrence, Jim Newkirk Monitoring Date: February 23, 2011 Level of Implementation: NOT MET Total SIG Allocation: $916,071 School Budget Spent: $255,054 Percent of School Budget Spent: 28% Spend Down Data as of: February 22, 2011 Salaries & Wages Contractual Services Supplies & Materials Other Budgeted: $504,322 Budgeted: $122,727 Budgeted: $147,754 Budgeted: $21,000 Conference Registration &Travel Encumbered: 0 Encumbered: 0 Encumbered: $4,424 Encumbered: 0 Spent (amount): $158,170 Spent (amount): $13,363 Spent (amount): $37,932 Spent (amount): 0 Spent (%): 31% Spent (%): 11% Spent (%): 29% Spent (%): 0 1. How much of the school budget, based on the LEA s approved application, has been expended to date (amount and %)? PGCPS provided documentation that showed that Drew Freeman has spent $255, 054. This amount is 28% of their approved SIG budget. An additional amount of $4,424 has been encumbered. 2. Is school spending consistent with budget timeline? If not, what steps are being taken to expend the funds as planned? PGCPS indicated that much of the school spending is not consistent with the budget timeline denoted in the SIG proposal. Some activities that have not occurred have been rescheduled and the LEA will be submitting a budget and programmatic amendment. 3. What action steps or planned activities have not taken place that would impact the budget? PGCPS indicated that the following activities have not occurred or were delayed in starting. All of the below activities or action steps resulted in substantial amounts of money remaining in different categories of their budget. Avid Conference for teachers August Academy for teachers Late start of the ELO PBIS Training for teachers Financial Incentives for teachers 4. Has a budget amendment been submitted? If yes, what budget changes were requested for this school? PGCPS provided evidence that a budget amendment was submitted to MSDE on November 30, 2010 and subsequently approved. Budget changes for Drew Freeman in this amendment included an increase in salaries & wages which would cover stipends for teachers participating in the ELO, and an increase in transportation for students participating in the ELO. PGCPS indicated that another budget amendment would be submitted to MSDE in March 2011. This amendment will include additional changes for Drew Freeman s SIG budget. 5. How often are school expenditures monitored by the LEA? Who monitors? PGCPS outlined the procurement process that is used by SIG schools. All materials and services are submitted to the Turnaround Office and the administrative budget specialist reviews the plan, approves or disapproves the expenditure and enters the procurement information into the Oracle Financial System. PGCPS provided evidence that monthly spend down meetings are held to discuss the activities and spending of the school. Stakeholders in attendance at these meetings are Turnaround Director, Turnaround Budget Specialist, Title I specialists, Director of School and Leadership, and staff from Budget Management Services. This group is responsible for monitoring the SIG school budgets. Division of Student, Family and School Support Page 19