Federal School Improvement

Welcome to the Federal School Improvement Unit within the Office of School Improvement of the Arizona Department of Education. We serve schools identified as in need of improvement through Federal Accountability. Our mission is to provide those supports and resources to improve educational outcomes for all students in Arizona.

 

Comprehensive Support and Improvement - Low Achievement (CSI-LA)

K-8 Schools

  • 60% Proficiency
  • 20% Growth
  • 10% English Learners (EL) - Achievement and growth
  • 10% Chronic Absenteeism

9-12 Schools

  • 60% Proficiency
  • 20% Graduation Rate
  • 10% English Learners (EL) - Achievement and growth
  • 10% Drop-out Rate

Combination to include Grade 12

  • 60% Proficiency
  • 15% Growth
  • 10% English Learners (EL)- Achievement and growth
  • 5% Chronic Absenteeism
  • 5% Graduation Rate
  • 5% Drop-out Rate

Combination NOT including Grade 12

  • 60% Proficiency
  • 20% Growth
  • 10% English Learners (EL)- Achievement and growth
  • 5% Chronic Absenteeism
  • 5% Drop-out Rate

    CSI-LA schools are identified every three years and have four years to exit.

     

    K-2 Model 

    As of the 2023 Federal Accountability Cycle, the K-2 Model is based on three components:

    • 80% Proficiency is based on the statewide and alternative assessments for English Language Arts (ELA) and Math statewide tests
      • K–2 Proficiency is calculated using the Grade 3 assessment results of former students at the  K–2 school, provided the former K–2 students were Full Academic Year (FAY) at the K–2 school for the two years prior to their third-grade assessments (in both 1st and 2nd grades). 
    • 10% Proficiency and learning of the English language based on the AZELLA statewide test for English proficiency levels
    • 10% Chronic Absenteeism among 1st and 2nd grade students

     

    Comprehensive Support and Improvement - Low Graduation Rate (CSI-G)

    Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) requires state educational agencies to identify ALL public high schools in the state failing to graduate one-third or more of their students. To provide support, we have identified two groups: 

    Over 100 Total School Enrollment

    High schools with student enrollment above 100 (whole school) that are graduating less than 66.7% of their 5-year cohort. 

    Under 100 Total School Enrollment

    High schools with student enrollment under 100 (whole school) that are graduating less than 66.7% of their 5-year cohort. 

    *Special Note: Enrolled students is defined as the number of students in a school’s October 1 report that coincides with the identification year.

    With respect to any high school identified in the state, it is at the state educational agency's discretion that they may permit differentiated improvement activities that utilize evidence-based interventions in the case of such a school that predominantly serves students returning to education after having exited secondary school without a regular high school diploma

    OR students, based on their grade or age, are significantly off track to accumulate sufficient academic credits to meet high school graduation requirements, as established by the state

    AND in the case of such a school that has a total enrollment of less than 100 students, permit the local educational agency (LEA) to forego implementation of improvement activities. 

    Any high school having a total enrollment of less than 100 students may forgo implementation of improvement activities or opt in per ESSA guidelines. If a high school with less than 100 students opts in for improvement activities, they must meet all programmatic requirements and must meet the criteria to exit.  

    *Please note: All high schools identified for low graduation rate (CSI-G) will retain their identification status until exit criteria have been met. 

     

    Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI) and Additional Targeted Support and Improvement (aTSI)

    ESSA designates two types of Targeted Support and Improvement schools: Additional Targeted Support and Improvement (aTSI), identified every three years, and Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI), identified annually.   

    Additional Targeted Support and Improvement (aTSI) schools are the schools that were first identified for School Year (SY) 2018-19, based on Spring 2018 AzMERIT scores. They are any school with any subgroup of students that, on its own, would lead to identification as Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI). They are reidentified every three years based on one year's prior data. If exit criteria is not met by the end of the fourth year, Title I schools become CSI, beginning 2024-25.

    Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI​) Schools are any school with consistently underperforming subgroups. They are reidentified every year based on three prior years' data.

    Criteria:

    • The N count is 20
    • All major subgroups are included:
      • Major ethnic/racial groups
      • Income Eligible (IE12) - formerly economically disadvantaged)
      • Students with Disabilities (SWD)
      • English Learners Fluent English Proficient (ELFEP14)
    • Subgroup achievement in the bottom 5% (less than 22 total points earned) of Title I schools based on CSI-LA criteria

     

    More Rigorous Options (MRO)

    Explore partnerships with Project Momentum and outside vendors to support schools identified for More Rigorous Options (MRO) based on previous identifications.​

    HELPFUL RESOURCES:

     

     

    Four Domains for Renovation 

    Explore a resource bank to help support the Local Education Agency (LEA) in transforming/improving systems, structures, and policies to advance positive, data-driven learning practices and leadership among educators, students, and families. 

    HELPFUL RESOURCES:

     

     

    Comprehensive Support and Improvement 101: Understanding Scores & Identification Process

     

    HELPFUL RESOURCES:

     

    Comprehensive Support and Improvement 102 a: The Data Dashboard

    HELPFUL RESOURCES:

     

     

    Comprehensive Support and Improvement 102 b: Querying the Static File

    HELPFUL RESOURCES:

    Comprehensive Support and Improvement 103: Interrogating the Data

    HELPFUL RESOURCES:

       

      General Grant Information and Resources

      aTSI and TSI Grant 

       

      HELPFUL RESOURCES:

       

      CSI-LA and CSI-G Grant

       

      HELPFUL RESOURCES:

       

       

      The Arizona Department of Education (ADE) neither endorses nor requires the use of any specific evidence-based clearinghouse; districts may use the clearinghouses or stand-alone research reviews conducted by a third party. Explore a variety of resources, evidence-based practices, and programs to support your school and district transformation. 

       

      Evidence-Based Practices Page Evidence-Based Guidance  Evidence-Based Resources Database

       

      Research and How to Use Clearinghouses

      HELPFUL RESOURCES:

      ​​​

      Practices, Strategies, Programs, and Intervention Resources

      ​​​​

      What Works Clearinghouse (WWC)

        What does it provide? 

        The What Works Clearinghouse (WWC) reviews the existing research on different programs, products, practices, and policies in education to provide educators with the information they need to make evidence-based decisions. Topics include: literacy, mathematics, science, behavior, children and youth with disabilities, the path to graduation, and early childhood.

        How does the What Works Clearinghouse evaluate evidence? 

        WWC uses a systematic review process to evaluate research studies to determine the quality of research and the strength of evidence produced.

         

        HELPFUL RESOURCES:

         

        Ohio's Evidence-Based Clearinghouse

        What does it provide?

        Explore a list of research- and evidence-based strategies that can be sorted by subject, grade band, demographics, evidence level, district typology, and resource type within the following categories:

        • Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment
        • Community Engagement
        • Human Capital Management
        • College and Career Readiness

         

        HELPFUL RESOURCES:

         

        Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development Database

        What does it provide? 

        Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development provides a registry of evidence-based positive youth development programs designed to promote the health and well-being of children and teens.

        How does Blueprints evaluate evidence? 

        Blueprints programs are rated as Promising, Model, or Model Plus. Promising programs meet the minimum standard of effectiveness. Model and Model Plus programs meet a higher standard and provide greater confidence in the program’s capacity to change behavior and developmental outcomes. 

         

        HELPFUL RESOURCES:

         

        Evidence for ESSA

        What does it provide? 

        Evidence for ESSA provides information on programs and practices that meet each of the top three ESSA evidence standards in a given subject and grade level. The site includes reading programs and math programs in grades K-12.

        How does Evidence for ESSA evaluate evidence? 

        The website uses four levels of evidence recognized by the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA):

        • Strong evidence: At least one well-designed and well-implemented experimental (i.e., randomized) study.
        • Moderate evidence: At least one well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental (i.e., matched) study.
        • Promising evidence: At least one well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias.
        • Demonstrates a rationale based on high-quality research findings or positive evaluation that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student or other relevant outcomes.

         

        HELPFUL RESOURCES:

         

        Move on When Reading (MOWR) Program and Intervention Guidance

        As a local control state, schools and districts have the liberty to select curriculum and instructional materials they feel best meet the needs of their student population. However, A.R.S. 15-704 requires all schools and charters that serve any K-3 students to adopt an instructional curriculum which meets select criteria:

        1. Aligned to standards
        2. Address the essential components of reading 
        3. ESSA evidence-based at one of the top three tiers

         

        Vendors used across the state submitted information which may or may not meet the legislative criteria and listed requirements. As a reminder, School Improvement funds can only be used for programs and interventions that are rated Strong, Moderate, and Promising.

        1. Programs in green meet all criteria. 
        2. Programs in yellow meet some criteria and may be under current additional review. Please note, there are new programs currently performing an efficacy study to establish an approved evidence level. 
        3. Programs in red do not currently meet legislation and should not be adopted for use with K-3 students in Arizona. 

         

        Each year, the ADE and the Move on When Reading (MOWR) team re-reviews all products to ensure materials maintain these standards and to assist LEAs in the decision-making process for all curricular materials. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of each schools' leadership and literacy team to ensure curriculum in use continues to meet the highest standards. 

        Understanding ESSA evidence provisions and MOWR legislation is an important step in the decision-making process. The ADE requires that all programs qualify for one of the top three ESSA tiers of evidence and show a statistically significant positive effect on a relevant outcome. It is crucial to consider the local context, especially the grade levels and demographics for which the studies’ student population were conducted, in determining if a program is the right fit for any LEA or school.  

         

        HELPFUL RESOURCES:

         

        Completing the Literacy Plan Core Reading Program: 

        Schools determine if curriculum used in K-3 classrooms meets legislative requirements. To assist in this process, however, the MOWR team has reached out to vendors directly to request additional helpful information when making this determination. All information provided in the table is directly from the vendors and is reported as is. Programs by vendors currently completing their studies have not been added to the MOWR portal but may be added at any time once criteria has been confirmed by the vendor. 

        When completing this year’s literacy plan, LEA approvers should select “*Core program under review or without established ESSA rating” and type current programs in the notes section at the aggregate district/charter level.

         

        Core Reading Programs  Visit the MOWR Webpage

         

         

        Universal Design for Learning Module

        HELPFUL RESOURCES:

         

         

         

         

         

         

         

        Youth Mental Health First Aid (YMHFA)

        HELPFUL RESOURCES:

         

        Register for upcoming YMHFA sessions with Federal School Improvement!

        Register Now