Education Service Agencies

1. Vision and Direction

> 4 Standards
The agency maintains and communicates at all levels of the organization a purpose and direction for continuous improvement that commits to providing programs and services, active learning, and high expectations for professional practice as well as shared values and beliefs.

Indicator 1.1 The agency engages in a systematic, inclusive, and comprehensive process to review, revise, and communicate an agency purpose.

Level 4 The process for review, revision, and communication of the agency’s purpose is clearly documented, and a record of the use and results of the process is maintained. The process is formalized and implemented with fidelity on a regular schedule. The process includes active participation by representatives selected from all stakeholder groups.

Level 3 The agency’s process for review, revision, and communication of the purpose statement is documented. The process is formalized and implemented on a regular schedule. The process includes participation by representatives from all stakeholder groups.

Level 2 The agency has a process for review, revision, and communication of its purpose. The process has been implemented. The process includes participation by representatives from stakeholder groups.

Level 1 No process to review, revise or communicate an agency purpose exists. Stakeholders are rarely asked for input regarding the purpose of the agency.

Indicator 1.2 The agency leadership and staff at all levels commit to a culture that is based on shared values and beliefs that include provision of relevant and targeted educational programs and services, equitable support, active engagement in learning, application of knowledge and skills, and high expectations for professional practice.

Level 4 Commitment to shared values and beliefs is clearly evident in documentation and decision making. This commitment is always reflected in communication among leaders and staff. Relevant and targeted educational programs and services are implemented in a measurable way. There is equitable support for all schools/systems served by the agency. Evidence indicates a strong commitment to instructional practices that include active engagement in learning and the application of knowledge and skills. System leadership and staff hold one another accountable to high expectations for professional practice.

Level 3 Commitment to shared values and beliefs is evident in documentation and decision making. This commitment is regularly reflected in communication among leaders and staff. Relevant and targeted educational programs and services are implemented. There is a commitment to equitable support for all schools/systems served by the agency. Evidence indicates a commitment to instructional practices that include active engagement in learning and the application of knowledge and skills. System leadership and staff share high expectations for professional practice.

Level 2 Commitment to shared values and beliefs about teaching and learning is sometimes evident in documentation. This commitment is sometimes reflected in communication among leaders and most staff. Educational programs are provided. There is some commitment to providing equitable support for schools/systems served by the agency. Evidence indicates some commitment to instructional practices that include active engagement in learning and the application of knowledge and skills. System leadership maintains high expectations for professional practice.

Level 1 Minimal or no evidence exists that indicates the culture of the system is based on shared values and beliefs. Educational programs are rarely meaningful. Support for schools/systems served by the agency is rarely equitable. There is little commitment to instructional practices that include active engagement in learning and the application of knowledge and skills. Little or no commitment to high expectations for professional practice is evident.

Indicator 1.3 Leadership of the agency implements a continuous improvement process that provides clear direction for improving conditions that support learning.

Level 4 Leaders at all levels of the system require the use of a documented, systematic continuous improvement process for improving the conditions that support learning. All stakeholder groups work collaboratively and consistently in authentic and meaningful ways that build and sustain ownership of the agency’s purpose and direction. Personnel systematically maintain, use, and communicate a profile with current and comprehensive data on the agency and its schools/systems. The profile contains thorough analyses of a broad range of data used to identify goals for the improvement of conditions that support learning and that are aligned with the agency’s purpose. All improvement goals have measurable performance targets. The process includes action planning that identifies measurable objectives, strategies, activities, resources, and timelines for achieving all improvement goals. Agency personnel hold one another accountable for and evaluate the overall quality of the implementation of all interventions and strategies. The process is reviewed and evaluated regularly. Documentation that the process is implemented with fidelity and yields improved conditions that support learning is available and communicated to stakeholders.

Level 3 Leaders at all levels of the system implement a documented, systematic continuous improvement process for improving the conditions that support learning. All stakeholder groups are engaged in the process. Personnel maintain a profile with current and comprehensive data on the agency and its schools/systems. The profile contains analyses of data used to identify goals for the improvement of conditions that support learning and that are aligned with the agency’s purpose. Improvement goals have measurable performance targets. The process includes action planning that identifies measurable objectives, strategies, activities, resources, and timelines for achieving improvement goals. Leaders hold all personnel accountable for and evaluate the overall quality of the implementation of all interventions and strategies. The process is reviewed and evaluated. Documentation that the process yields improved conditions that support learning is available and communicated to stakeholders.

Level 2 Most leaders throughout the system implement a continuous improvement process for improving the conditions that support learning. Some stakeholder groups are engaged in the process. School personnel maintain a profile on the agency and its schools/systems. The profile contains data used to identify goals for the improvement that are aligned with the system’s purpose. The process includes action planning that identifies measurable objectives, strategies, activities, resources, and timelines for achieving improvement goals. Most interventions and strategies are implemented with fidelity. Some documentation that the process yields improved conditions that support learning is available.

Level 1 A continuous improvement process for improving the conditions that support learning is used randomly and/or ineffectively. The profile is rarely updated or used by personnel and contains little or no useful data. Goals selected for improvement, if they exist, are minimal. Few or no interventions and strategies are implemented with fidelity. Documentation linking the process to improved conditions that support learning is unclear or non-existent.

THE REMAINING INDICATOR IS FOR ESAs THAT OPERATE SCHOOLS.

Indicator 1.4 The agency ensures that each school engages in a systematic, inclusive, and comprehensive process to review, revise, and communicate a school purpose for student success.

Level 4 Agency policies and procedures clearly outline the expectations for schools regarding a systematic, inclusive, and comprehensive process for review, revision, and communication of a purpose for student success. Agency personnel monitor and maintain data about each school and provide feedback and training for the improvement of the implementation of the process to school personnel.

Level 3 Agency policies and procedures outline the expectations for schools regarding a systematic, inclusive, and comprehensive process for review, revision, and communication of a purpose for student success. Agency personnel monitor and maintain data about each school and provide feedback for the improvement of the implementation of the process to school personnel.

Level 2 Agency policies and procedures outline the expectations for schools regarding a process for review, revision, and communication of a purpose for student success. Agency personnel monitor each school and sometimes provide feedback for the improvement of the implementation of the process to school personnel.

Level 1 Agency policies outline the expectations for schools regarding a process for review, revision, and communication of a purpose for student success. Agency personnel occasionally monitor each school and sometimes provide feedback concerning the process to school personnel.

2. Governance and Leadership

> 10 Standards
The agency operates under governance and leadership that promote and support student performance and agency effectiveness.

Indicator 2.1 The governing body establishes policies and support practices that ensure effective administration of the agency.

Level 4 Policies and practices clearly and directly support the agency’s purpose and direction and its effective operation. Policies and practices require and have mechanisms in place for monitoring effective teaching and learning as well as equitable, relevant and targeted learning experiences. There are policies and practices requiring and giving direction for professional growth of all staff. Policies and practices provide clear requirements, direction for, and oversight of fiscal management of the agency.

Level 3 Policies and practices support the agency’s purpose and direction and its effective operation. Policies and practices promote effective teaching and learning as well as equitable, relevant and targeted learning experiences. There are policies and practices regarding professional growth of all staff. Policies and practices provide requirements, direction for, and oversight of
fiscal management of the agency.

Level 2 Policies and practices generally support the agency’s purpose and direction and its effective operation. Most policies and practices promote effective teaching and learning as well as equitable, relevant and targeted learning experiences. There are policies and practices regarding professional growth of staff. Policies and practices provide requirements and oversight of fiscal management.

Level 1 Little connection exists between policies and practices of the governing board and the purpose, direction and effective operation of the agency. Policies and practices seldom or never promote effective teaching and learning or equitable, relevant and targeted learning experiences. There are few or no policies and practices regarding professional growth of staff. Policies provide requirements of fiscal management.

Indicator 2.2 The governing body operates responsibly and functions effectively.

Level 4 The governing body has implemented a process to evaluate its decisions and actions to ensure they are in accordance with defined roles and responsibilities, a formally adopted code of ethics, and free of conflict of interest. Governing body members are required to participate in a systematic, formal professional development process regarding roles and the responsibilities of the governing body and its individual members. The professional learning also includes conflict resolution, decision-making, supervision and evaluation, and fiscal responsibility. Members comply with all policies, procedures, laws, and regulations and function as a cohesive unit for the benefit of effective agency operation and student learning.

Level 3 The governing body has a process to ensure that its decisions and actions are in accordance with defined roles and responsibilities, a code of ethics, and free of conflict of interest. Governing body members participate in systematic, formal professional learning regarding roles and the responsibilities of the governing body and its individual members. The governing body complies with all policies, procedures, laws, and regulations, and function as a cohesive unit.

Level 2 The governing body ensures that its decisions and actions are in accordance with defined roles and responsibilities, are ethical, and free of conflict of interest. Governing body members participate in professional learning regarding roles and the responsibilities of the governing body and its individual members. The governing body complies with all policies, procedures, laws, and regulations.

Level 1 The governing body has no method for or does not ensure that decisions and actions are free of conflict of interest, are ethical, and in accordance with defined roles and responsibilities. Governing body members rarely or never participate in professional learning regarding roles and the responsibilities of the governing body and its individual members. Evidence indicates the governing body does not always comply with policies, procedures, laws, and regulations.

Indicator 2.3 The governing body ensures that agency leadership has the autonomy to meet established goals and to manage day-to-day operations effectively.

Level 4 The governing body consistently protects, supports, and respects the autonomy of agency leadership to accomplish improvement and to manage day-to-day operations of the agency. The governing body maintains a clear distinction between its roles and responsibilities and those of agency leadership.

Level 3 The governing body protects, supports, and respects the autonomy of agency leadership to accomplish goals for improvement and to manage day-to-day operations of the agency. The governing body maintains a distinction between its roles and responsibilities and those of agency leadership.

Level 2 The governing body generally protects, supports, and respects the autonomy of agency leadership to accomplish goals for improvement and to manage day-to-day operations of the agency. The governing body usually maintains a distinction between its roles and responsibilities and those of agency leadership.

Level 1 The governing body rarely or never protects, supports, and respects the autonomy of agency leadership to accomplish goals for improvement and to manage day-to-day operations of the system and its schools. The governing body does not distinguish between its roles and responsibilities and those of agency leadership, or frequently usurps the autonomy of agency leadership.

Indicator 2.4 Leadership and staff throughout the agency foster a culture consistent with the agency’s purpose and direction.

Level 4 Leaders and staff throughout the agency deliberately and consistently align their decisions and actions toward continuous improvement to achieve the agency’s purpose. They encourage, support, and expect all personnel to maintain high professional standards and to promote high academic performance. All stakeholders are collectively accountable for maintaining and improving conditions that support student performance and agency effectiveness. Leaders throughout the system actively and consistently support and encourage innovation, collaboration, shared leadership, and rigorous professional growth. The culture is characterized by collaboration and a sense of community among all stakeholders.

Level 3 Leaders and staff throughout the system align their decisions and actions toward continuous improvement to achieve the agency’s purpose. They expect all personnel to maintain high standards. All leaders and staff are collectively accountable for maintaining and improving conditions that support student performance and agency effectiveness. Leaders throughout the system support innovation, collaboration, shared leadership, and professional growth. The culture is characterized by collaboration and a sense of community.

Level 2 Most leaders and staff within the system make some decisions and take some actions toward continuous improvement. They expect all personnel to be held to standards. Leaders and staff express a desire for collectively accountability for maintaining the conditions that student performance and agency effectiveness. Leaders sometimes
support innovation, collaboration, shared leadership, and professional growth. The culture is characterized by a minimal degree of collaboration and limited sense of community.

Level 1 Decisions and actions seldom or never support continuous improvement. Leaders may or may not expect personnel to maintain standards. There is little or no evidence of or desire for collective accountability for agency effectiveness. Leaders seldom or never support innovation, collaboration, shared leadership, and professional growth. The culture is characterized by a minimal degree of collaboration and little or no sense of community.

Indicator 2.5 Leadership engages stakeholders effectively in support of the agency’s purpose and direction.

Level 4 Leaders consistently communicate effectively with appropriate and varied representatives from stakeholder groups, provide opportunities for stakeholders to shape decisions, solicit feedback and respond to stakeholders, work collaboratively on agency improvement efforts, and provide and support meaningful leadership roles for stakeholders. Agency leaders’ proactive and persistent efforts result in measurable, active stakeholder participation, positive engagement in the agency, a strong sense of community, and ownership.

Level 3 Leaders communicate effectively with appropriate and varied representatives from stakeholder groups, provide opportunities for stakeholders to shape decisions, solicit feedback and respond to stakeholders, work collaboratively on agency improvement efforts, and provide and support meaningful leadership roles for stakeholders. Agency leaders’ efforts result in measurable, active stakeholder participation, engagement in the agency, a sense of community, and ownership.

Level 2 Leaders sometimes communicate effectively with stakeholder groups, provide opportunities for stakeholders to shape decisions, solicit feedback from stakeholders, work collaboratively on agency improvement efforts, and provide some leadership roles for stakeholders. Agency leaders’ efforts result in some stakeholder participation and engagement in the agency.

Level 1 Leaders rarely or never communicate with stakeholder groups. Little or no work on agency improvement efforts is collaborative, and stakeholders have little or no opportunity for leadership. Agency leaders’ efforts result in limited or no stakeholder participation and engagement in the agency.

Indicator 2.6 The agency’s supervision and evaluation processes result in improved professional practice.

Level 4 The primary focus of the criteria and processes of supervision and evaluation is improving professional practice in all areas of the agency. Supervision and evaluation processes are consistently and regularly implemented. The results of the supervision and evaluation processes are analyzed carefully and used to monitor and effectively adjust professional practice throughout the agency.

Level 3 The focus of the criteria and processes of supervision and evaluation is improving professional practice throughout the agency. Supervision and evaluation processes are regularly implemented. The results of the supervision and evaluation processes are used to monitor and effectively adjust professional practice throughout the agency.

Level 2 The criteria and processes of supervision and evaluation include references to agencywide professional practices and student success. Supervision and evaluation processes are implemented at minimal levels. The results of the supervision and evaluation processes are used sometimes to monitor and effectively adjust professional practice.

Level 1 The criteria and processes of supervision and evaluation have little or no focus on improving professional practice. Supervision and evaluation processes are randomly implemented if at all. Results of the supervision and evaluation processes, if any, are used rarely or never.

THE REMAINING INDICATORS FOR THIS STANDARD ARE FOR ESAs THAT OPERATE SCHOOLS.

Indicator 2.7 The governing body ensures that the school leadership has the autonomy to meet goals for achievement and instruction and to manage day-to-day operations effectively.

Level 4 The governing body consistently protects, supports, and respects the autonomy of school leadership to accomplish goals for achievement and instruction and to manage day-to-day operations of the school. The governing body maintains a clear distinction between its roles and responsibilities and those of school leadership.

Level 3 The governing body protects, supports, and respects the autonomy of school leadership to accomplish goals for improvement in student learning and instruction and to manage day-to-day operations of the school. The governing body maintains a distinction between its roles and responsibilities and those of school leadership.

Level 2 The governing body generally protects, supports, and respects the autonomy of school leadership to accomplish goals for improvement in student learning and instruction and to manage day-to-day operations of the school. The governing body usually maintains a distinction between its roles and responsibilities and those of school leadership.

Level 1 The governing body rarely or never protects, supports, and respects the autonomy of school leadership to accomplish goals for improvement in student learning and instruction and to manage day-to-day operations of the school. The governing body does not distinguish between its roles and responsibilities and those of school leadership, or frequently usurps the autonomy of school leadership.

Indicator 2.8 Leadership and staff foster a culture consistent with the school’s purpose and direction.

Level 4 Leaders and staff deliberately and consistently align their decisions and actions toward continuous improvement to achieve the school’s purpose. They encourage, support, and expect all students to be held to high standards in all courses of study. All stakeholders are collectively accountable for student learning. School leaders actively and consistently support and encourage innovation, collaboration, shared leadership, and rigorous professional growth. The culture is characterized by collaboration and a sense of community among all stakeholders.

Level 3 Leaders and staff align their decisions and actions toward continuous improvement to achieve the school’s purpose. They expect all students to be held to high standards in all courses of study. All leaders and staff are collectively accountable for student learning. School leaders support innovation, collaboration, shared leadership, and professional growth. The culture is characterized by collaboration and a sense of community.

Level 2 Leaders and staff make some decisions and take some actions toward continuous improvement. They expect all students to be held to standards. Leaders and staff express a desire for collective accountability for student learning. School leaders sometimes support innovation, collaboration, shared leadership, and professional growth. The culture is
characterized by a minimal degree of collaboration and limited sense of community.

Level 1 Decisions and actions seldom or never support continuous improvement. School leaders and staff may or may not expect students to learn. There is no evidence of or desire for collective accountability for student learning. School leaders seldom or never support innovation, collaboration, shared leadership, and professional growth. The culture is characterized by a minimal degree of collaboration and little or no sense of community.

Indicator 2.9 Leadership engages stakeholders effectively in support of the school’s purpose and direction.

Level 4 Leaders consistently communicate effectively with appropriate and varied representatives from stakeholder groups, provide opportunities for stakeholders to shape decisions, solicit feedback and respond to stakeholders, work collaboratively on school improvement efforts, and provide and support meaningful leadership roles for stakeholders. School leaders’ proactive and persistent efforts result in measurable, active stakeholder participation, positive engagement in the school, a strong sense of community, and ownership.

Level 3 Leaders communicate effectively with appropriate and varied representatives from stakeholder groups, provide opportunities for stakeholders to shape decisions, solicit feedback and respond to stakeholders, work collaboratively on school improvement efforts, and provide and support meaningful leadership roles for stakeholders. School leaders’ efforts result in measurable, active stakeholder participation, engagement in the school, a sense of community, and ownership.

Level 2 Leaders sometimes communicate effectively with stakeholder groups, provide opportunities for stakeholders to shape decisions, solicit feedback from stakeholders, work collaboratively on school improvement efforts, and provide some leadership roles for stakeholders. School leaders’ efforts result in some stakeholder participation and engagement in the school.

Level 1 Leaders rarely or never communicate with stakeholder groups. Little or no work on school improvement efforts is collaborative, and stakeholders have little or no opportunity for leadership. School leaders’ efforts result in limited or no stakeholder participation and engagement in the school.

Indicator 2.10 Leadership and staff supervision and evaluation processes result in improved professional practice and student success.

Level 4 The primary focus of the criteria and processes of supervision and evaluation is improving
professional practice and ensuring student success. Supervision and evaluation processes are consistently and regularly implemented. The results of the supervision and evaluation processes are analyzed carefully and used to monitor and effectively adjust professional practice and student learning.

Level 3 The focus of the criteria and processes of supervision and evaluation is improving professional practice and improving student success. Supervision and evaluation processes are regularly implemented. The results of the supervision and evaluation processes are used to monitor and effectively adjust professional practice and student learning.

Level 2 The criteria and processes of supervision and evaluation include references to professional practice and student success. Supervision and evaluation processes are implemented at minimal levels. The results of the supervision and evaluation processes are used sometimes to monitor and effectively adjust professional practice and student learning.

Level 1 The criteria and processes of supervision and evaluation have little or no focus on improving professional practice or student success. Supervision and evaluation processes are randomly implemented if at all. Results of the supervision and evaluation processes, if any, are used rarely or never.

3. Teaching and Assessing for Learning

> 18 Standards
The agency's services and programs support the educational needs of its constituent schools/systems through meaningful professional learning experiences.

Indicator 3.1 The agency provides equitable, relevant and targeted support programs and/or services for all schools/systems.

Level 4 Support programs and services provide adult learners with equitable, relevant and targeted learning experiences. Evidence clearly indicates that such learning experiences prepare learners to be successful. Similar learning activities have the same high expectations across the agency and are individualized to meet students’ needs.

Level 3 Support programs and services provide adult learners with equitable, relevant and targeted learning experiences. There is some evidence to indicate learning experiences prepare learners to be successful. Similar learning activities have equivalent learning expectations across the agency. Learning activities are individualized for some learning activities.

Level 2 Support programs and services provide most adult learners with equitable, relevant and targeted learning experiences. There is little evidence to indicate learning experiences prepare learners to be successful. Similar learning activities have some equivalent learning expectations. Learning activities are randomly individualized.

Level 1 Support programs and services rarely provide adult learners with equitable, relevant or targeted learning experiences. There is no evidence to indicate that learning experiences prepare learners to be successful. Similar learning activities rarely or never have the same learning expectations. Few or no individualized learning activities are evident.

Indicator 3.2 The agency monitors its programs and services to measure effectiveness and to guide ongoing adjustments in delivery.

Level 4 Using data from multiple assessments and an examination of professional practice, agency personnel systematically monitor and adjust programs and services to ensure alignment with the agency’s purpose and improvement goals, and to guide ongoing adjustments in delivery. There is a systematic, collaborative process in place to ensure alignment each time programs and services are reviewed or revised.

Level 3 Using data from assessments and an examination of professional practice, agency personnel monitor and adjust programs and services to ensure alignment with agency’s purpose and improvement goals and to guide ongoing adjustments in delivery. There is a process in place to ensure such alignment each time programs and services are reviewed or revised.

Level 2 Agency personnel monitor and adjust programs and services to ensure alignment with the agency’s purpose and improvement goals and to guide adjustments in delivery. A process is sometimes implemented to ensure such alignment when programs and services are reviewed or revised.

Level 1 Agency personnel rarely or never monitor and adjust programs and services to ensure alignment with the agency’s purpose and improvement goals or to guide ongoing
adjustments in delivery. No process exists to ensure alignment when programs and services are reviewed or revised.

Indicator 3.3 Agency staff provide professional learning opportunities that engage practitioners in their learning.

Level 4 Agency staff are consistent and deliberate in planning and using instructional strategies that require engagement of practitioners in their learning. Personalized instructional strategies and interventions are used to address individual learning needs of practitioners. Instructional strategies require learners to apply knowledge and skills, and use technologies as learning tools. Technologies are consistently used as instructional resources.

Level 3 Agency staff throughout the agency plan and use instructional strategies that require engagement of practitioners in their learning. Personalized instructional strategies and interventions are used to address individual learning needs of students when necessary. Instructional strategies require learners to apply knowledge and skills and to use technologies as learning tools. Technologies are used as instructional resources.

Level 2 Agency staff sometimes use instructional strategies that require engagement of practitioners in their learning. Personalized instructional strategies and interventions are used to address individual learning needs of groups of learners when necessary. Instructional strategies sometimes require learners to apply knowledge and skills and to use technologies as learning tools. Technologies are sometimes used as instructional resources.

Level 1 Agency staff rarely or never use instructional strategies that require engagement of practitioners in their learning. Personalized instructional strategies and interventions are seldom or never used. Instructional strategies rarely or never require learners to apply knowledge and skills or to use technologies as learning tools. Technologies are rarely or never used as instructional resources.

Indicator 3.4 The agency uses collaboration as an essential operating principle in the development and delivery of its services and programs.

Level 4 All agency staff participate in collaborative learning communities that meet both informally and formally on a regular schedule. Frequent collaboration occurs with constituent schools/systems. Agency staff implement a formal process that promotes productive discussion about the delivery of services and programs. Examination of the results of inquiry practices regarding program and services effectiveness is a part of the daily routine of all staff members. Agency personnel can clearly link collaboration to improvement results in the delivery of programs and services and the support of constituent schools/systems.

Level 3 All agency staff participate in collaborative learning communities that meet both informally and formally. Collaboration often occurs with constituent schools/systems. Staff members have been trained to implement a formal process that promotes discussion about the delivery of services and programs. Examination of the results of inquiry practices regarding program and services effectiveness occurs regularly among most agency personnel. Agency personnel indicate that collaboration has encouraged improvement results in the delivery of programs and services and the support of constituent schools/systems.

Level 2 Some agency staff participate in collaborative learning communities that meet both informally and formally. Collaboration occasionally occurs with constituent schools/systems. Staff members promote discussion about the delivery of services and programs. Examination of the results of inquiry practices regarding the effectiveness of programs and services sometimes occurs among agency personnel. Agency personnel express belief in the value of collaborative learning communities.

Level 1 Collaborative learning communities randomly self-organize and meet informally. Collaboration seldom occurs with constituent schools/systems. Agency staff members rarely discuss the delivery of programs and services. Examination of the results of inquiry practices regarding the effectiveness of programs and services rarely occurs among agency personnel. Agency personnel see little value in collaborative learning communities.

Indicator 3.5 All agency staff members participate in a continuous program of professional learning.

Level 4 All agency staff members participate in a rigorous, continuous program of professional learning that is aligned with the agency’s purpose and direction. Professional learning is individualized based on an assessment of needs of the agency and the individual. The program builds measurable capacity among all professional and support staff. The program is rigorously and systematically evaluated for effectiveness in staff performance and agency effectiveness.

Level 3 All agency staff members participate in a continuous program of professional learning that is aligned with the agency’s purpose and direction. Professional learning is based on assessment of needs of the agency. The program builds capacity among all professional and support staff. The program is systematically evaluated for effectiveness in improving staff performance and agency effectiveness.

Level 2 Most agency staff members participate in a program of professional learning that is aligned with the agency’s purpose and direction. Professional learning is based on needs of the agency. The program builds capacity among staff members who participate. The program is regularly evaluated for effectiveness.

Level 1 Few or no agency staff members participate in professional learning. Professional learning, when available, may or may not address the needs of the agency or build capacity among staff members. If a program exists, it is rarely and/or randomly evaluated.

Indicator 3.6 The agency’s support services meet the unique learning needs of its constituent schools/systems.

Level 4 Agency personnel systematically and continuously use data to identify unique learning needs of its constituent schools/systems at all levels of proficiency. Agency personnel stay current on research related to effective schools/systems and provide or coordinate related individualized learning support services to all schools/systems.

Level 3 Agency personnel use data to identify unique learning needs of its constituent schools/systems at all levels of proficiency. Agency personnel stay current on research related to effective schools/systems and provide or coordinate related learning support services to all schools/systems.

Level 2 Agency personnel use data to identify unique learning needs of some of its constituent schools/systems. Agency personnel are familiar with research related to effective schools/systems and provide or coordinate related learning support services for certain schools/systems.

Level 1 Agency personnel identify special schools/systems based on identified learning needs. Agency personnel provide or coordinate some learning support services to these schools/systems.

THE REMAINING INDICATORS FOR THIS STANDARD ARE FOR ESAs THAT OPERATE SCHOOLS.

Indicator 3.7 The agency’s curriculum provides equitable and challenging learning experiences that ensure all students have sufficient opportunities to develop learning, thinking, and life skills that lead to success at the next level.

Level 4 Curriculum and learning experiences in each course/class throughout the agency provide all students with challenging and equitable opportunities to develop learning skills, thinking skills, and life skills that align with the agency’s and school’s purpose. Evidence clearly indicates curriculum and learning experiences prepare students for success at the next level. Like courses/classes have the same high learning expectations across the agency. Learning activities are individualized for each student in a way that supports achievement of expectations.

Level 3 Curriculum and learning experiences in each course/class throughout the agency provide all students with challenging and equitable opportunities to develop learning skills, thinking skills, and life skills. There is some evidence to indicate curriculum and learning experiences prepare students for success at the next level. Like courses/classes have equivalent learning expectations across the agency. Some learning activities are individualized for each student in a way that supports achievement of expectations.

Level 2 Curriculum and learning experiences in each course/class throughout the agency provide most students with challenging and equitable opportunities to develop learning skills, thinking skills, and life skills. There is little evidence to indicate curriculum and learning experiences prepare students for success at the next level. Most like courses/classes have equivalent learning expectations across the agency. Little individualization for each student is evident.

Level 1 Curriculum and learning experiences in each course/class throughout the agency provide few or no students with challenging and equitable opportunities to develop learning skills, thinking skills, and life skills. There is no evidence to indicate how successful students will be at the next level. Like courses/classes do not always have the same learning expectations across the agency. No individualization for students is evident.

Indicator 3.8 Curriculum, instruction, and assessment are monitored and adjusted systematically in response to data from multiple assessments of student learning and an examination of professional practice.

Level 4 Using data from multiple assessments of student learning and an examination of professional practice, agency and school personnel systematically monitor and adjust curriculum, instruction, and assessment to ensure vertical and horizontal alignment and alignment with the school’s goals for achievement and instruction and statement of purpose. There is a systematic, collaborative process in place to ensure alignment each time curriculum, instruction, and/or assessments are reviewed or revised at the agency or school level. The continuous improvement process has clear guidelines to ensure that vertical and horizontal alignment as well as alignment with the school’s purpose are maintained and enhanced in curriculum, instruction, and assessment.

Level 3 Using data from student assessments and an examination of professional practice, agency and school personnel monitor and adjust curriculum, instruction, and assessment to ensure vertical and horizontal alignment and alignment with the school’s goals for achievement and instruction and statement of purpose. There is a process in place to ensure alignment each time curriculum, instruction, and/or assessments are reviewed or revised at the agency or school level. The continuous improvement process ensures that vertical and horizontal alignment as well as alignment with the school’s purpose are maintained and enhanced in curriculum, instruction, and assessment.

Level 2 Agency and school personnel monitor and adjust curriculum, instruction, and assessment to ensure for vertical and horizontal alignment and alignment with the school’s goals for achievement and instruction and statement of purpose. A process is implemented sometimes to ensure alignment when curriculum, instruction, and/or assessments are reviewed or revised at the agency or school level. There is limited evidence that the continuous improvement process ensures vertical and horizontal alignment and alignment with the school’s purpose in curriculum, instruction, and assessment.

Level 1 Agency and school personnel rarely or never monitor and adjust curriculum, instruction, and assessment to ensure vertical and horizontal alignment or alignment with the school’s goals for achievement and instruction and statement of purpose. No process exists to ensure alignment when curriculum, instruction, and/or assessments are reviewed or revised at the agency or school level. There is little or no evidence that the continuous improvement process is connected with vertical and horizontal alignment or alignment with the school’s purpose in curriculum, instruction, and assessment.\

Indicator 3.9 Teachers throughout the agency engage students in their learning through instructional strategies that ensure achievement of learning expectations.

Level 4 Teachers are consistent and deliberate in planning and using instructional strategies that require student collaboration, self-reflection, and development of critical thinking skills. Teachers personalize instructional strategies and interventions to address individual learning needs of each student. Teachers consistently use instructional strategies that require students to apply knowledge and skills, integrate content and skills with other disciplines, and use technologies as instructional resources and learning tools.

Level 3 Teachers plan and use instructional strategies that require student collaboration, self-reflection, and development of critical thinking skills. Teachers personalize instructional strategies and interventions to address individual learning needs of students when necessary. Teachers use instructional strategies that require students to apply knowledge and skills, integrate content and skills with other disciplines, and use technologies as instructional resources and learning tools.

Level 2 Teachers sometimes use instructional strategies that require student collaboration, self-reflection, and development of critical thinking skills. Teachers personalize instructional strategies and interventions to address individual learning needs of groups of students when necessary. Teachers sometimes use instructional strategies that require students to apply knowledge and skills, integrate content and skills with other disciplines, and use technologies as instructional resources and learning tools.

Level 1 Teachers rarely or never use instructional strategies that require student collaboration, self-reflection, and development of critical thinking skills. Teachers seldom or never personalize instructional strategies. Teachers rarely or never use instructional strategies that require students to apply knowledge and skills, integrate content and skills with other disciplines, and use technologies as instructional resources and learning tools.

Indicator 3.10 Agency and school leaders monitor and support the improvement of instructional practices of teachers to ensure student success.

Level 4 Agency and school leaders formally and consistently monitor instructional practices through supervision and evaluation procedures beyond classroom observation to ensure that they 1) are aligned with the agency’s values and beliefs about teaching and learning, 2) are teaching the approved curriculum, 3) are directly engaged with all students in the oversight of their learning, and 4) use content-specific standards of professional practice.

Level 3 Agency and school leaders formally and consistently monitor instructional practices through supervision and evaluation procedures to ensure that they 1) are aligned with the agency’s values and beliefs about teaching and learning, 2) are teaching the approved curriculum, 3) are directly engaged with all students in the oversight of their learning, and 4) use content-specific standards of professional practice.

Level 2 Agency and school leaders monitor instructional practices through supervision and evaluation procedures to ensure that they 1) are aligned with the agency’s values and beliefs about teaching and learning, 2) are teaching the approved curriculum, 3) are directly engaged with all students in the oversight of their learning, and 4) use content-specific standards of professional practice.

Level 1 Agency and school leaders occasionally or randomly monitor instructional practices through supervision and evaluation procedures to ensure that they 1) are aligned with the agency’s values and beliefs about teaching and learning, 2) are teaching the approved curriculum, 3) are directly engaged with all students in the oversight of their learning, and 4) use content-specific standards of professional practice.

Indicator 3.11 Teachers participate in collaborative learning communities to improve instruction and student learning.

Level 4 All members of the school staff participate in collaborative learning communities that meet both informally and formally on a regular schedule. Frequent collaboration occurs across grade levels and content areas. Staff members implement a formal process that promotes productive discussion about student learning. Learning, using, and discussing the results of inquiry practices such as action research, the examination of student work, reflection, study teams, and peer coaching are a part of the daily routine of school staff members. School personnel can clearly link collaboration to improvement results in instructional practice and student performance.

Level 3 All members of the school staff participate in collaborative learning communities that meet both informally and formally. Collaboration often occurs across grade levels and content areas. Staff members have been trained to implement a formal process that promotes discussion about student learning. Learning, using, and discussing the results of inquiry practices such as action research, the examination of student work, reflection, study teams, and peer coaching occur regularly among most school personnel. School personnel indicate that collaboration causes improvement results in instructional practice and student performance.

Level 2 Some members of the school staff participate in collaborative learning communities that meet both informally and formally. Collaboration occasionally occurs across grade levels and content areas. Staff members promote discussion about student learning. Learning, using, and discussing the results of inquiry practices such as action research, the examination of student work, reflection, study teams, and peer coaching sometimes occur among school personnel. School personnel express belief in the value of collaborative learning communities.

Level 1 Collaborative learning communities randomly self-organize and meet informally. Collaboration seldom occurs across grade levels and content areas. Staff members rarely discuss student learning. Learning, using, and discussing the results of inquiry practices such as action research, the examination of student work, reflection, study teams, and peer coaching rarely occur among school personnel. School personnel see little value in collaborative learning communities.

Indicator 3.12 Teachers implement the agency’s instructional process in support of student learning.

Level 4 All teachers throughout the agency systematically use an instructional process that clearly informs students of learning expectations and standards of performance. Exemplars are provided to guide and inform students. The process requires the use of multiple measures, including formative assessments, to inform the ongoing modification of instruction and provide data for possible curriculum revision. The process provides students with specific and immediate feedback about their learning.

Level 3 All teachers throughout the agency use an instructional process that informs students of learning expectations and standards of performance. Exemplars are often provided to guide and inform students. The process includes multiple measures, including formative assessments, to inform the ongoing modification of instruction and provide data for possible curriculum revision. The process provides students with specific and timely feedback about their learning.

Level 2 Most teachers throughout the agency use an instructional process that informs students of learning expectations and standards of performance. Exemplars are sometimes provided to guide and inform students. The process may include multiple measures, including formative assessments, to inform the ongoing modification of instruction. The process provides students with feedback about their learning.

Level 1 Few teachers throughout the agency use an instructional process that informs students of learning expectations and standards of performance. Exemplars are rarely provided to guide and inform students. The process includes limited measures to inform the ongoing modification of instruction. The process provides students with minimal feedback of little value about their learning.

Indicator 3.13 Mentoring, coaching, and induction programs support instructional improvement consistent with the agency’s values and beliefs about teaching and learning.

Level 4 All agency personnel are engaged in systematic mentoring, coaching, and induction programs that are consistent with the agency’s values and beliefs about teaching, learning, and the conditions that support learning. These programs set high expectations for all agency personnel and include valid and reliable measures of performance.

Level 3 Agency personnel are engaged in mentoring, coaching, and induction programs that are consistent with the agency’s values and beliefs about teaching, learning, and the conditions that support learning. These programs set expectations for all agency personnel and include measures of performance.

Level 2 Some agency personnel are engaged in mentoring, coaching, and induction programs that are consistent with the agency’s values and beliefs about teaching, learning, and the conditions that support learning. These programs set expectations for agency personnel.

Level 1 Few or no agency personnel are engaged in mentoring, coaching, and induction programs that are consistent with the agency’s values and beliefs about teaching, learning, and the conditions that support learning. Limited or no expectations for agency personnel are included.

Indicator 3.14 The agency and its schools engage families in meaningful ways in their children’s education and keep them informed of their children’s learning progress.

Level 4 Programs that engage families in meaningful ways in their children’s education are designed, implemented, and evaluated. Families have multiple ways of staying informed of their children’s learning process.

Level 3 Programs that engage families in meaningful ways in their children’s education are designed and implemented. School personnel regularly inform families of their children’s learning process.

Level 2 Programs that engage families in their children’s education are available. School personnel provide information about children’s learning.

Level 1 Few or no programs that engage families in their children’s education are available. School personnel provide little relevant information about children’s learning.

Indicator 3.15 The agency designs and evaluates structures in all schools whereby each student is well known by at least one adult advocate in the student’s school who supports that student’s educational experience.

Level 4 School personnel participate in a structure designed and evaluated by the agency that gives them long-term interaction with individual students, allowing them to build strong relationships over time with the student and related adults. All students participate in the structure. The structure allows the school employee to gain significant insight into and serve as an advocate for the student’s needs regarding learning skills, thinking skills, and life skills.

Level 3 School personnel participate in a structure designed and evaluated by the agency that gives them long-term interaction with individual students, allowing them to build strong relationships over time with the student. All students may participate in the structure. The structure allows the school employee to gain insight into and serve as an advocate for the student’s needs regarding learning skills, thinking skills, and life skills.

Level 2 School personnel participate in a structure designed and evaluated by the agency that gives them interaction with individual students, allowing them to build relationships over time with the student. Most students participate in the structure. The structure allows the school employee to gain insight into the student’s needs regarding learning skills, thinking skills, and life skills.

Level 1 Few or no opportunities exist for school personnel to build long-term interaction with individual students. Few or no students have a school employee who advocates for their needs regarding learning skills, thinking skills, and life skills.

Indicator 3.16 The agency ensures that school staff participate in a continuous program of professional learning.

Level 4 All staff members participate in a rigorous, continuous program of professional learning that is aligned with the agency’s purpose and direction. Professional development is individually based on an assessment of needs of the agency, school, and the individual. The program builds measurable capacity among all professional and support staff. The program is rigorously and systematically evaluated for effectiveness in improving instruction, student learning, and the conditions that support learning.

Level 3 All staff members participate in a continuous program of professional learning that is aligned with the agency’s purpose and direction. Professional development is based on an assessment of needs of the agency, school, and the individual. The program builds capacity among all professional and support staff. The program is systematically evaluated for effectiveness in improving instruction, student learning, and the conditions that support learning.

Level 2 Most staff members participate in a program of professional learning that is aligned with the agency’s purpose and direction. Professional development is based on needs of the agency. The program builds capacity among staff members who participate. The program is regularly evaluated for effectiveness.

Level 1 Few or no staff members participate in professional learning. Professional development, when available, may or may not address the needs of the agency, school (if applicable), or build capacity among staff members. If a program exists, it is rarely and/or randomly evaluated.

Indicator 3.17 Grading and reporting are based on clearly defined criteria that represent the attainment of content knowledge and skills and are consistent across grade levels and courses.

Level 4 All teachers across the agency consistently use common grading and reporting policies, processes, and procedures based on clearly defined criteria that represent each student’s attainment of content knowledge and skills. These policies, processes, and procedures are implemented without fail in all schools across all grade levels and all courses. All stakeholders are aware of the policies, processes, and procedures. The policies, processes, and procedures are formally and regularly evaluated.

Level 3 Teachers across the agency use common grading and reporting policies, processes, and procedures based on clearly defined criteria that represent each student’s attainment of content knowledge and skills. These policies, processes, and procedures are implemented consistently in all schools across grade levels and courses. Stakeholders are aware of the policies, processes, and procedures. The policies, processes, and procedures are regularly evaluated.

Level 2 Most teachers across the agency use common grading and reporting policies, processes, and procedures based on criteria that represent each student’s attainment of content knowledge and skills. These policies, processes, and procedures are implemented in most or all schools across grade levels and courses. Most stakeholders are aware of the policies, processes, and procedures. The policies, processes, and procedures may or may not be evaluated.

Level 1 Few or no teachers use common grading and reporting policies, processes, and procedures. Policies, processes, and procedures, if they exist, are rarely implemented across grade levels or courses, and may not be well understood by stakeholders. No process for evaluation of grading and reporting practices is evident.

Indicator 3.18 The agency and its schools provide and coordinate learning support services to meet the unique learning needs of students.

Level 4 Agency and school personnel systematically and continuously use data to identify unique learning needs of all students at all levels of proficiency as well as other learning needs (such as second languages). Agency and school personnel stay current on research related to unique characteristics of learning (such as learning styles, multiple intelligences, personality type indicators) and provide or coordinate related individualized learning support services to all students.

Level 3 Agency and school personnel use data to identify unique learning needs of all students at all levels of proficiency as well as other learning needs (such as second languages). Agency and school personnel stay current on research related to unique characteristics of learning (such as learning styles, multiple intelligences, personality type indicators) and provide or coordinate related learning support services to all students.

Level 2 Agency and school personnel use data to identify unique learning needs of special populations of students based on proficiency and/or other learning needs (such as second languages). Agency and school personnel are familiar with research related to unique characteristics of learning (such as learning styles, multiple intelligences, personality type indicators) and provide or coordinate related learning support services to students within these special populations.

Level 1 Agency and school personnel identify special populations of students based on proficiency and/or other learning needs (such as second languages). Agency and school personnel provide or coordinate some learning support services to students within these special populations.

4. Resources and Support Systems

> 10 Standards
The agency provides resources, programs and services that support its purpose and direction for all constituent schools/systems.

Indicator 4.1 The agency engages in a systematic process to recruit, employ, and retain a sufficient number of qualified professional and support staff to fulfill their roles and responsibilities and support the purpose and direction of the agency.

Level 4 Clearly defined policies, processes, and procedures ensure that agency leaders hire, place, and retain qualified professional support staff. Agency leaders use a formal, systematic process to determine staffing needs to support school purposes, educational programs, and continuous improvement throughout the agency. Sustained fiscal resources are available to fund all positions critical to achieving the purpose and direction of the agency.

Level 3 Policies, processes, and procedures ensure that agency leaders hire, place, and retain qualified professional support staff. Agency leaders systematically determine staffing needs to support school purposes, educational programs, and continuous improvement throughout the agency. Sustained fiscal resources are available to fund positions critical to achieving the purpose and direction of the agency.

Level 2 Policies, processes, and procedures describe how agency leaders hire, place, and retain qualified professional support staff. Agency leaders determine the staffing needs to support school purposes, educational programs, and continuous improvement in the agency. Sustained fiscal resources are available to fund most positions critical to achieving the purpose and direction of the agency.

Level 1 Policies, processes, and procedures often but not always ensure that agency leaders hire, place, and retain qualified professional support staff. Agency leaders attempt to determine staffing needs to support school purposes, educational programs, and continuous improvement in the agency. Sustained fiscal resources rarely are available to fund positions critical to achieve the purpose and direction of the agency.

Indicator 4.2 Material and fiscal resources are sufficient to support the purpose and direction of the agency.

Level 4 Material and fiscal resources are focused solely on supporting the purpose and direction of the agency’s operations. Agency leaders pursue multiple options to secure material and fiscal resources to meet the needs of all constituents and improve agency effectiveness. Agency leaders demonstrate that material and fiscal resources are allocated to ensure that all constituents have equitable learning experiences and support.

Level 3 Material and fiscal resources are focused on supporting the purpose and direction of the agency’s operations. Agency leaders work to secure material and fiscal resources to meet the needs of all constituents and improve the effectiveness of the agency. Agency leaders demonstrate that material and fiscal resources are allocated so that all constituents have equitable opportunities to attain challenging learning experiences or support.

Level 2 Material and fiscal resources are sometimes focused on supporting the purpose and direction of the agency’s operations. Agency leaders attempt to secure material and fiscal resources to meet the needs of all constituents and improve the effectiveness of the agency. Agency leaders express a desire to allocate material and fiscal resources so that all constituents have equitable opportunities to attain challenging learning experiences or support.

Level 1 Little or no link exists between the purpose of the agency and material and fiscal resources. Agency leaders spend little or no effort allocating material and fiscal resources so that all constituents have equitable opportunities to attain challenging learning experiences or support.

Indicator 4.3 The agency maintains facilities, services, and equipment to provide a safe, clean, and healthy environment for all.

Level 4 Agency leaders have involved stakeholders in creating or adopting clear definitions and expectations for maintaining a safe, clean, and healthy environment, and have shared these definitions and expectations with all stakeholders. All agency personnel are accountable for maintaining these expectations. Valid measures are in place that allow for continuous tracking of these conditions. Improvement plans are developed and implemented by appropriate personnel to continuously improve these conditions. The results of improvement efforts are systematically evaluated regularly.

Level 3 Agency leaders have created or adopted clear expectations for maintaining a safe, clean, and a healthy environment, and have shared these definitions and expectations with stakeholders. Agency personnel are accountable for maintaining these expectations. Measures are in place that allow for continuous tracking of these conditions. Improvement plans are developed and implemented by appropriate personnel as necessary to improve these conditions. Results of improvement efforts are evaluated.

Level 2 Agency leaders have some expectations for maintaining a safe, clean, and healthy environment, and have shared these definitions and expectations with most stakeholders. Selected agency personnel are accountable for maintaining these expectations. Some measures are in place that allow for tracking of these conditions. Personnel work to improve these conditions. Results of improvement efforts are monitored.

Level 1 Agency leaders have few or no expectations for maintaining a safe, clean, and healthy environment. Stakeholders are generally unaware of any existing definitions and expectations. Little or no accountability exists for maintaining these expectations. Few or no measures that assess these conditions are in place. Few or no personnel work to improve these conditions.

Indicator 4.4 The agency demonstrates strategic resource management that includes long-range planning in support of the purpose and direction of the agency.

Level 4 The agency has clearly defined policies and procedures for resource management. The agency employs a systematic, long-range, strategic planning process to manage budgets, facilities, and other agency components. The strategic planning process is regularly evaluated for effectiveness, and improvement plans related to the process are developed and implemented when necessary. All strategic plans are implemented with fidelity by the governing body and agency leaders, and have built-in measures used to monitor and ensure successful implementation and completion.

Level 3 The agency has policies and procedures for resource management. The agency employs a long-range strategic planning process to manage budgets, facilities, and other agency components. The strategic planning process is evaluated for effectiveness, and improvement plans related to the process are developed and implemented when necessary. Strategic plans are implemented with fidelity by the governing body and agency leaders, and have built-in measures used to monitor implementation and completion.

Level 2 The agency has some policies related to resource management. The agency has a long-range strategic planning process. The strategic planning process is reviewed for effectiveness when necessary. Strategic plans are implemented effectively by the governing body and agency leaders.

Level 1 The agency has few or no policies related to resource management. The agency has a general strategic planning process. Strategic plans, if they exist, are sometimes implemented by the governing body and agency leaders.

Indicator 4.5 The agency provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of programs and services delivered to constituent schools and systems.

Level 4 The agency provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of programs and services to ensure that all constituent schools and systems have access to exceptional resources to achieve the educational programs of the agency. The agency designs, implements, and evaluates processes to ensure highly qualified personnel are recruited, hired, and retained to effectively deliver its programs and services.

Level 3 The agency provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of programs and services to ensure that all schools and systems have access to the resources necessary to achieve the educational programs of the agency and its schools. The agency implements and evaluates processes to ensure highly qualified personnel are recruited, hired, and retained to effectively deliver its programs and services.

Level 2 The agency provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of programs and services to ensure that all schools and systems have access to the resources necessary to achieve the educational programs of the agency and its schools. The agency attempts to implement and evaluate processes to ensure highly qualified personnel are recruited, hired, and retained to effectively deliver its programs and services.

Level 1 The agency provides little or no coordination or evaluation on the effectiveness of programs and services to ensure that all schools and systems have access to the resources necessary to achieve the educational programs of the agency and its schools. The agency may or may not attempt to implement and evaluate processes to ensure highly qualified personnel are recruited, hired, and retained to effectively deliver its programs and services.

Indicator 4.6 The agency provides technology infrastructure and equipment to support the teaching, informational, and operational needs of the agency and the schools/systems it serves.

Level 4 The agency provides a modern, fully functional technology infrastructure, state-of-the-art equipment, and a highly qualified technical support staff to meet the teaching, learning, and operational needs of all stakeholders throughout the system. Agency personnel routinely collect data concerning needs, and use the resulting data to develop and implement a technology plan to continuously improve technology services, infrastructure, and equipment.

Level 3 The agency provides a modern, functional technology infrastructure, modern, updated equipment, and a qualified technical support staff to meet the teaching, learning, and operational needs of all stakeholders throughout the system. Agency personnel collect data concerning needs, and use the resulting data to develop and implement a technology plan to continuously improve technology services, infrastructure, and equipment.

Level 2 The agency provides a functional technology infrastructure, working equipment, and a technical support staff to meet the operational needs of stakeholders. Agency personnel develop and implement a technology plan to continuously improve technology services, infrastructure, and equipment.

Level 1 The agency provides some degree of technology infrastructure, equipment, and limited technical support staff to meet the operational needs of stakeholders. The agency may or may not have a technology plan related to improvement of technology services, infrastructure, and equipment.

THE REMAINING INDICATORS FOR THIS STANDARD ARE FOR ESAs THAT OPERATE SCHOOLS.

Indicator 4.7 — For ESAs that operate schools Instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources are sufficient to support the purpose and direction of the agency and its schools.

Level 4 Instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources are focused solely on supporting the purpose and direction of the agency and its schools. Instructional time is fiercely protected in policy and practice. Agency and school leaders exhaust every option to secure material and fiscal resources to meet the needs of all students. Agency and school leaders measurably demonstrate that instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources are allocated so that all students have equitable opportunities to attain challenging learning expectations. Efforts toward the continuous improvement of instruction and operations concentrate on achieving the purpose and direction of the agency and its schools.

Level 3 Instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources are focused on supporting the purpose and direction of the agency and its schools. Instructional time is protected in policy and practice. Agency and school leaders work to secure material and fiscal resources to meet the needs of all students. Agency and school leaders demonstrate that instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources are allocated so that all students have equitable opportunities to attain challenging learning expectations. Efforts toward the continuous improvement of instruction and operations include achieving the purpose and direction of the agency and its schools.

Level 2 Instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources are sometimes focused on supporting the purpose and direction of the school. Instructional time is usually protected. Agency and school leaders attempt to secure material and fiscal resources to meet the needs of all students. Agency and school leaders express a desire to allocate instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources so that all students have equitable opportunities to attain challenging learning expectations. Efforts toward the continuous improvement of instruction and operations sometimes include achieving the purpose and direction of the agency and its schools.

Level 1 Little or no link exists between the purpose of the school and instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources. Protection of instructional time is not a priority. Agency and school leaders use available material and fiscal resources to meet the needs of students. Agency and school leaders spend little or no effort allocating instructional time, material resources, and fiscal resources so that all students have equitable opportunities to attain challenging learning expectations. Efforts toward the continuous improvement of instruction and operations rarely or never include achievement of the purpose and direction of the agency and its schools.

Indicator 4.8 The agency provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of information resources and related personnel to support its schools’ educational programs throughout the agency.

Level 4 The system provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of information resources and related personnel to ensure that all students and school personnel have access to an exceptional collection of media and information resources necessary to achieve the educational programs of the school. Qualified personnel in sufficient numbers are available to assist students and school personnel in learning about the tools and locations for finding and retrieving information.

Level 3 The system provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of information resources and related personnel to ensure that students and school personnel have access to media and information resources necessary to achieve the educational programs of the school. Qualified personnel are available to assist students and school personnel in learning about the tools and locations for finding and retrieving information.

Level 2 The system provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of information resources and related personnel to ensure that students and school personnel have access to media and information resources necessary to achieve most of the educational programs of the school. Personnel are available to assist students and school personnel in learning about the tools and locations for finding and retrieving information.

Level 1 The system provides little or no coordination of information resources and related personnel to ensure that students and school personnel have access to media and information resources necessary to achieve most of the educational programs of the school. Limited assistance may be available for students and school personnel to learn about the tools and locations for finding and retrieving information.

Indicator 4.9 The agency provides, coordinates, and evaluates the effectiveness of support systems to meet the physical, social, and emotional needs of the student population being served.

Level 4 Agency and school personnel implement a clearly defined process to determine the physical, social, and emotional needs of each student in the school. Agency and school personnel provide or coordinate programs to meet the needs of all students. Valid and reliable measures of program effectiveness are in place, and agency and school personnel use the data from these measures to regularly evaluate all programs. Improvement plans related to these programs are designed and implemented to more effectively meet the needs of all students.

Level 3 Agency and school personnel implement a process to determine the physical, social, and emotional needs of each student in the school. Agency and school personnel provide or coordinate programs to meet the needs of students as necessary. Measures of program effectiveness are in place, and agency and school personnel use the data from these measures to evaluate all programs. Improvement plans related to these programs are designed and implemented when needed to more effectively meet the needs of students.

Level 2 Agency and school personnel endeavor to determine the physical, social, and emotional needs of students in the school. Agency and school personnel provide or coordinate programs to meet the needs of students when possible. Agency and school personnel evaluate all programs. Improvement plans related to these programs are sometimes designed and implemented to meet the needs of students.

Level 1 Agency and school personnel attempt to determine the physical, social, and emotional needs of some students in the school. Agency and school personnel sometimes provide or coordinate programs to meet the needs of students. Agency and school personnel rarely or never evaluate programs. Improvement plans related to these programs are rarely or never developed.

Indicator 4.10 The agency provides services that support the counseling, assessment, referral, educational, and career planning needs of all students.

Level 4 The agency has designed and implemented a clearly defined, systematic process to determine the counseling, assessment, referral, educational, and career planning needs of all students. Agency and school personnel provide or coordinate programs necessary to meet the needs of all students. Valid and reliable measures of program effectiveness are in place, and agency and school personnel use the data from these measures to regularly evaluate all programs. Improvement plans related to these programs are designed and implemented to more effectively meet the needs of all students.

Level 3 The agency has designed and implemented a process to determine the counseling, assessment, referral, educational, and career planning needs of all students. Agency and school personnel provide or coordinate programs necessary to meet the needs of students whenever possible. Measures of program effectiveness are in place, and agency and school personnel use the data from these measures to evaluate all programs. Improvement plans related to these programs are designed and implemented when needed to more effectively meet the needs of students.

Level 2 The agency has a process to determine the counseling, assessment, referral, educational, and career planning needs of students in the school. Agency and school personnel provide or coordinate programs to meet the needs of students when possible. Agency and school personnel evaluate all programs. Improvement plans related to these programs are sometimes designed and implemented to meet the needs of students.

Level 1 The agency attempts to determine the counseling, assessment, referral, educational, and career planning needs of some students in the school. Agency and school personnel sometimes provide or coordinate programs to meet the needs of students. Agency and school personnel rarely or never evaluate programs. Improvement plans related to these programs are rarely or never developed.

5. Using Results for Continuous Improvementt

> 5 Standards
The agency implements a comprehensive evaluation system that generates a range of data about the effectiveness of the agency and uses the results to guide continuous improvement.

Indicator 5.1 The agency establishes and maintains a clearly defined and comprehensive evaluation system.

Level 4 All agency personnel maintain and consistently use a comprehensive assessment system that produces data from multiple assessment measures. These measures include locally developed assessments about program effectiveness. The comprehensive assessment system ensures consistent measurement across all programs and services. All assessments are reliable and bias free. The comprehensive assessment system is regularly and systematically evaluated for reliability and effectiveness in improving programs and services.

Level 3 Agency personnel maintain and use a comprehensive assessment system that produces data from multiple assessment measures. These measures include locally developed assessments about program effectiveness. The comprehensive assessment system ensures consistent measurement across all programs and services. Most assessments are reliable and bias free. The comprehensive assessment system is regularly evaluated for reliability and effectiveness in improving programs and services.

Level 2 Agency personnel use an assessment system that produces data from multiple assessment measures. These measures include locally developed assessments about program effectiveness. The assessment system provides consistent measurement across programs and services. Some assessments are reliable and bias free. The assessment system is evaluated for effectiveness in improving programs and services.

Level 1 Agency personnel use an assessment system that produces data from assessment measures. These measures include assessments about program effectiveness. The assessment system provides a limited degree of consistency of measurement across programs and services. Few assessments are reliable and bias free. The assessment system is rarely or never evaluated for effectiveness in improving programs and services.

Indicator 5.2 Professional and support staff throughout the agency continuously collect, analyze and use a range of data sources, including comparison and trend data related to program evaluation and organizational conditions.

Level 4 Professional and support staff throughout the agency document the consistent use of systematic processes and procedures to collect, analyze, and use data. Data sources include comparison and trend data that provide a comprehensive and complete picture of programs and services. All agency personnel use data to design, implement, and evaluate continuous plans to improve the effectiveness of programs and services.

Level 3 Agency staff use systematic processes and procedures to collect, analyze, and use data. Data sources include comparison and trend data that provide a picture of the effectiveness of programs and services. Agency personnel use data to design, implement, and evaluate continuous plans to improve the effectiveness of programs and services.

Level 2 Agency staff use processes and procedures to collect, analyze, and use data. Data sources provide a picture of the effectiveness of programs, and services. Agency personnel use data to design and implement plans to improve the effectiveness of programs, and services.

Level 1 Agency staff use few or no processes and procedures to collect, analyze, and use data. Data sources provide a limited picture of the effectiveness of programs and services. Agency personnel rarely use data to design and implement plans to improve the effectiveness of programs and services.

Indicator 5.3 The agency’s leadership monitors and communicates comprehensive information about learning and the achievement of agency improvement goals to stakeholders.

Level 4 Agency leaders monitor comprehensive information about agency effectiveness and the achievement of agency improvement goals and communicate results using multiple delivery methods for all stakeholder groups.

Level 3 Agency leaders monitor comprehensive information about agency effectiveness and the achievement of agency improvement goals and communicate results to all stakeholder groups.

Level 2 Agency leaders monitor information about agency effectiveness and the achievement agency improvement goals and communicate results to some stakeholder groups.

Level 1 Agency leaders monitor some information about agency effectiveness and the achievement of agency improvement goals and sometimes communicate results to stakeholder

THE REMAINING INDICATORS FOR THIS STANDARD ARE FOR ESAs THAT OPERATE SCHOOLS.

Indicator 5.4 — For ESAs that operate schools The agency establishes and maintains a clearly defined and comprehensive student assessment system.

Level 4 All agency and school personnel maintain and consistently use a comprehensive assessment system that produces data from multiple assessment measures, including locally developed and standardized assessments about student learning and school performance. The system ensures consistent measurement across all classrooms and courses. All assessments are proven reliable and bias free. The system is regularly and systematically evaluated for reliability and effectiveness in improving instruction, student learning, and the conditions that support learning.

Level 3 Agency and school personnel maintain and use an assessment system that produces data from multiple assessment measures, including locally developed and standardized assessments about student learning and school performance. The system ensures consistent measurement across classrooms and courses. Most assessments, especially those related to student learning, are proven reliable and bias free. The system is regularly evaluated for reliability and effectiveness in improving instruction, student learning, and the conditions that support learning.

Level 2 Agency and school personnel use an assessment system that produces data from multiple assessment measures about student learning and school performance. The system generally provides consistent measurement across classrooms and courses. Some assessments, especially those related to student learning, are proven reliable and bias free. The system is evaluated for effectiveness in improving instruction, student learning, and the conditions that support learning.

Level 1 Agency and school personnel maintain an assessment system that produces data from assessment measures about student learning and school performance. The system provides a limited degree of consistent measurement across classrooms and courses. Assessments are seldom proven reliable and bias free. The system is rarely or never evaluated for effectiveness in improving instruction, student learning, and the conditions that support learning.

Indicator 5.5 Professional and support staff continuously collect, analyze and apply learning from a range of data sources, including comparison and trend data about student learning, instruction, program evaluation, and organizational conditions.

Level 4 Systematic processes and procedures for collecting, analyzing, and applying learning from all data sources are documented and used consistently by professional and support staff. Data sources include comparison and trend data that provide a comprehensive and complete picture of student learning, instruction, the effectiveness of programs, and the conditions that support learning. All school personnel use data to design, implement, and evaluate continuous improvement plans to improve student learning, instruction, the effectiveness of programs, and organizational conditions.

Level 3 Systematic processes and procedures for collecting, analyzing, and applying learning from multiple data sources are used consistently by professional and support staff. Data sources include comparison and trend data that provide a complete picture of student learning, instruction, the effectiveness of programs, and the conditions that support learning. School personnel use data to design, implement, and evaluate continuous improvement plans to improve student learning, instruction, the effectiveness of programs, and organizational conditions.

Level 2 Some processes and procedures for collecting, analyzing, and applying learning from data sources are used by professional and support staff. Data sources include limited comparison and trend data about student learning, instruction, the effectiveness of programs, and organizational conditions. School personnel use data to design, implement, and evaluate continuous improvement plans.

Level 1 Few or no processes and procedures for collecting, analyzing, and applying learning from data sources are used by professional and support staff. Data sources include little or no comparison and trend data about student learning, instruction, the effectiveness of programs, and organizational conditions. School personnel rarely use data to design and implement continuous improvement plans.

Indicator 5.6 Professional and support staff are trained in the evaluation, interpretation, and use of data.

Level 4 All professional and support staff members are regularly and systematically assessed and trained in a rigorous, individualized professional development program related to the evaluation, interpretation, and use of data.

Level 3 All professional and support staff members are assessed and trained in a rigorous professional development program related to the evaluation, interpretation, and use of data.

Level 2 Most professional and support staff members are assessed and trained in a professional development program related to the evaluation, interpretation, and use of data.

Level 1 Few or no professional and support staff members are trained in the evaluation, interpretation, and use of data.

Indicator 5.7 The agency engages in a continuous process to determine verifiable improvement in student learning, including readiness for and success at the next level.

Level 4 Policies and procedures clearly define and describe a process for analyzing data that determine verifiable improvement in student learning including readiness for and success at the next level. Results indicate significant improvement, and agency and school personnel systematically and consistently use these results to design, implement, and evaluate the results of continuous improvement action plans related to student learning, including readiness for and success at the next level.

Level 3 Policies and procedures describe a process for analyzing data that determine verifiable improvement in student learning, including readiness for and success at the next level. Results indicate improvement, and agency and school personnel consistently use these results to design, implement, and evaluate the results of continuous improvement action plans related to student learning, including readiness for and success at the next level.

Level 2 A process exists for analyzing data that determine improvement in student learning, including readiness for and success at the next level. Results indicate mixed levels of improvement, and agency and school personnel sometimes use these results to design, implement, and evaluate the results of continuous improvement action plans related to student learning, including readiness for and success at the next level.

Level 1 An incomplete or no process exists for analyzing data that determine improvement in student learning, including readiness for and success at the next level. Results indicate no improvement, and agency and school personnel rarely use results to design and implement continuous improvement action plans related to student learning, including readiness for and success at the next level.

Indicator 5.8 Agency and school leaders monitor and communicate comprehensive information about student learning, conditions that support student learning, and the achievement of school improvement goals to stakeholders.

Level 4 Agency and school leaders monitor comprehensive information about student learning, conditions that support student learning, and the achievement of school improvement goals and regularly communicate results using multiple delivery methods and in appropriate degrees of sophistication for all stakeholder groups.

Level 3 Agency and school leaders monitor comprehensive information about student learning, conditions that support student learning, and the achievement of school improvement goals and regularly communicate results using multiple delivery methods to all stakeholder groups.

Level 2 Agency and school leaders monitor information about student learning, conditions that support student learning, and the achievement of school improvement goals and communicate results to all stakeholder groups.

Level 1 Agency and school leaders monitor some information about student learning, conditions that support student learning, and the achievement of school improvement goals and sometimes communicate results to stakeholders.

Quick Links: Top Standard 2 Standard 3 Standard 4 Standard 5