District Leadership: Performance and Accountability

The Broad Prize Framework for School District Excellence

Performance and Accountability Requirements

The district provides and enforces a clear set of expectations for staff performance.
The district meets all federal, state and local accountability expectations.
The district holds schools accountable and supports schools in improving their performance.

Best Practice Performance and Accountability Requirements Documents

Evaluating and Supporting School Administrators – Broward County Public Schools

Broward County Public Schools have implemented a comprehensive system designed to communicate clear performance expectations for school administrators and to identify and support struggling administrators. The responsibility for assessing the performance of principals —and for providing support to those who need additional help— falls to the area director, who oversees multiple schools.

1 – District Interventions for Struggling Principals Overview of Broward’s approach to supporting struggling principals.
What to Notice Broward empowers the area director —a type of regional superintendent— to determine when a principal is not meeting performance expectations. The area director considers different types of evidence in his or her evaluation: test scores, site observations, audits, teacher input, satisfaction surveys, etc. Principals are offered many types of support in their effort to meet improvement expectations.	Questions to Ask What percentage of principals has a professional improvement plan at any given point? Of these, how many are eventually dismissed? How many are able to turn around their performance? How does the district measure the success of the intervention programs? Does the district offer area directors any more specific guidance about performance expectations for principals? If so, how is it communicated? What kind of training does the district provide to area directors about assisting struggling principals? How were these interventions identified?
> Download Document (pdf)

2 – Administrator Performance Planning and Appraisal System Evaluation Tool Evaluation tool for school administrators.
What to Notice The area director uses this evaluation tool to assess the performance of a school principal in seven key areas: (1) leadership, (2) information analysis, (3) strategic quality planning, (4) customer focus, (5) human resources, (6) management of processes, and (7) operational results and student achievement. Notice that Broward uses a three-point scale: highly effective, effective and ineffective. Each area requires a rating, plus text comments and a description of the principal’s “focus for professional growth.”	Questions to Ask How did Broward select the seven areas of performance? Were any principals involved in the development of the tool? How frequently are principals evaluated using this tool? What kinds of interim discussions occur between the area director and the principal to provide feedback? How effective is the evaluation process in guiding professional growth? How do principals and area directors use it as an opportunity to reflect on past performance and agree on improvement plans? What percentage of principals falls into each of the rating categories? How effective is the evaluation process in identifying low performers? What are the consequences of poor performance?
> Download Document (pdf)

3 – Performance Improvement Plan (PIP) One-page worksheet for principals to articulate improvement plan in an area of “deficiency.”
What to Notice For principals who are determined to have a performance concern, this worksheet allows the area director to articulate a specific improvement plan. Notice that each “area of deficiency” requires a separate improvement plan. The area director specifies the activities necessary to demonstrate improvement, along with a timeline, and the principal is given the opportunity to respond to the area director’s assessment and recommendations.	Questions to Ask What are the benefits and disadvantages of using a word like “deficiency” to describe an area in which an employee is not meeting the expectations for their position? How effective is the PIP in improving performance? What challenges has the district faced in its communication or implementation? Can the area director describe specific quantitative targets for performance (e.g. test scores)? What are the advantages and disadvantages of this approach? How much time will an area director spend with a principal who has been designated as having performance deficiencies? What types of training do area directors receive in coaching and mentoring?
> Download Document (pdf)

4 – Manual of Evaluation Procedures Handbook of policies and procedures for the evaluation of school and district administrators.
What to Notice At the beginning of the manual, the district outlines the purpose of the Administrator Performance Planning and Appraisal System (APPAS). These goals are framed positively, focusing on the communication of clear expectations and the provision of effective feedback. Later, the manual provides much more detailed performance expectations, as well as clear descriptions of what “highly effective” vs. “effective” vs. “ineffective” performance looks like. Finally, the guide outlines the five stages of the APPAS process, starting with orientation and ending with professional development.	Questions to Ask How consistent is the process for providing new principals with an orientation on the performance planning and appraisal system? How are administrators made aware of the performance expectations which apply to their position? How does the district ensure that different supervisors are applying standards consistently? What process exists for area directors to conduct “calibration” meetings in which they compare evaluation ratings and try to ensure consistency? How does the district assess the effectiveness of evaluation procedures? How is principal feedback collected?
> Download Document (pdf)

Intervening in Low-Performing Schools – Aldine Independent School District

Aldine Independent School District intervenes aggressively in schools that perform below district expectations. Such schools are designated “accelerated campuses” and are provided intensive instructional support by content-specific program directors.

1 – Overview of Strategies for Intervening in Low-Performing Schools One-page description of the district’s “accelerated campus” program for underperforming schools.
What to Notice Aldine uses prior year results on the state test —the Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (TAKS)— to identify schools that are in need of additional support. Schools with low overall scores or low subgroup scores are designated “accelerated campuses” and are assigned content-specific program directors for improvement planning. The process ensures that the program directors provide progress reports every six weeks to the assistant superintendent and executive director of curriculum and instruction.	Questions to Ask What experience does a program director typically have? How are they selected and trained? What best practices has Aldine identified among its program directors in their efforts to turn around schools? What are the implications of remaining an accelerated campus over time? Who is responsible for making difficult judgments about the performance of the principal? If a principal needs to be replaced, who is involved in the decision? How does Aldine track the progress of its accelerated campuses over time? What are the characteristics of the schools that have been able to improve their student achievement relatively quickly?
> Download Document (pdf)

2 – Campus Intervention Team (CIT) Sample Report Final report of the team responsible for conducting an on-site evaluation of an underperforming school and formulating recommendations for improvement.
What to Notice Aldine uses this state-mandated process to identify key needs for a struggling campus and to recommend specific actions that will improve student achievement. Notice that the Campus Intervention Team includes members both internal to and external to the school, ensuring objectivity. Also, the report specifically focuses on key variables that may have a direct impact on student achievement: discipline, teacher quality, parental involvement, etc.	Questions to Ask How does this state-mandated process enhance or support district-specific strategies? How does Aldine determine the members on the school’s Campus Intervention Team? What does the district look for in potential team members? How long does the evaluation last? How does the team balance different fact-finding activities, such as staff interviews, parent interviews, classroom walkthroughs, etc.? Does the team have any implementation responsibilities after the evaluation report has been completed? What processes are in place to ensure that recommendations are acted upon?
> Download Document (pdf)

3 – Underperforming School Professional Development Plan Memo and attached summary describing professional development efforts for an accelerated campus.
What to Notice Aldine district staff intervene very aggressively in schools that exhibit poor student achievement results. This document summarizes the high-intensity professional development supports deployed to an underperforming school. Notice that each department has at least five meetings with district staff over the course of one semester. The “comments” column allows the program director to highlight successes and draw attention to teachers with attendance or attitude problems.	Questions to Ask What are the connotations of being identified as an accelerated campus? How does the district manage these connotations amongst teachers and principals on these campuses? How does the district identify best practices for leading productive professional development sessions with teachers who know that their school has been identified as underperforming? What are the consequences for teachers who do not attend required professional development sessions? How does Aldine track the success of these professional development sessions?
> Download Document (pdf)

Measuring District Performance Against Benchmarks – New York City Department of Education

Many high-performing districts are data-driven, meaning that they collect and analyze student achievement data to identify opportunities to improve instruction. One component of a data-driven strategy is internal benchmarking, comparing the relative performance of schools or classrooms within the district. Another important component—reflected in these documents from the New York City Department of Education—is external benchmarking, which allows district staff to compare the district’s performance to other districts in order to identify areas of strength or opportunities for improvement.

1 – Graduation Rates Compares the district’s graduation rate for high school students to two external benchmarks.
What to Notice As a district with over one million enrolled students and a high degree of poverty, the New York school system might regard itself as a unique entity, incomparable to other local districts. But this document shows that the district takes external benchmarking seriously. Here they compare their performance on graduation rates to two different benchmarks: (1) the Big 4, which consists of the other four large urban districts in New York State, and (2) the rest of the state. Notice that, even with significant gains in recent years, New York City’s graduation rate is still less than 60 percent.	Questions to Ask How does New York City calculate graduation rates? Does it capture the full population of potential students? Or does it undercount them? How confident is the district in the accuracy of the numbers? Where does New York City get the state-wide data? Who is responsible for collecting the data, analyzing it, and creating external benchmarking reports? Is there a specific department that is assigned this function by the chancellor? What kinds of initiatives or changes might grow out of this type of analysis? How does New York City use this information to improve the lives of students?
> Download Document (pdf)

2 – District’s Performance on State Math Assessments Compares the district’s performance on the state math assessment to external benchmarks in the state.
What to Notice Like the previous document, this presentation compares New York City’s performance to a series of benchmarks within the state. Specifically, it looks at performance on the state math assessment, comparing the New York City schools to the Big 4 (other urban districts in the state), the rest of the state, and the rest of the state with New York City taken out. Notice that, because New York City is so large, the statewide numbers are heavily influenced by the performance of the district. In order to make a better comparison, they subtract New York City from the state numbers.	Questions to Ask What is the “best” external benchmark for the New York City schools? If you were the superintendent, which comparison would you value most? How does New York City compare to other urban districts in their state? What do you think accounts for the difference? Where does New York City get the state-wide data? Who is responsible for collecting the data, analyzing it, and creating external benchmarking reports? Is there a specific department that is assigned this function by the chancellor? What kinds of initiatives or changes might grow out of this type of analysis? How does New York City use this information to improve the lives of students?
> Download Document (pdf)

Setting School Performance Goals – New York City Department of Education

The New York City Department of Education places a strong emphasis on goal-setting, for both principals and schools. Intervention processes are designed to help turnaround schools that are chronically failing or simply struggling.

1 – Developing a School-Wide Action Plan Leads school leaders through a process for developing a school action plan to improve student achievement.
What to Notice The tool starts with “areas in need of strengthening” and then maps strategies, resources and benchmarks to these critical areas. The end goal is, of course, evidence that student performance on state and district assessments is improving.	Questions to Ask What is the office of academic intervention services? How is this office staffed? And how many staff members are available to work directly with struggling schools? How are school-site team members identified? What is the typical make-up of an ASA team? What training do district staff members and school-site personnel receive in how to use the tool effectively? How often does a school-site team revisit the tool and progress made?
> Download Document (doc)

2 – Sample Letters to Principals Re: Goal Setting Provides regional district staff with template letters regarding academic goal setting to be sent to principals three times a year.
What to Notice New York has built its Principal Performance Review (PPR) system around goals set by the principals themselves. The primary area of focus is instructional leadership, as evidenced by improvements in student achievement data. Principals also set goals in the following areas: organizational leadership, professional development and community relations. Notice that the first letter is sent to principals in early October, to ensure that goals are set as early as possible in the year. The midyear letter is generally positive and encouraging, but the regional superintendent uses this opportunity to focus the principal –once again–on specific goals that may need more attention before the end of the year. The final letter of the year is even more positive, starting with recognition of the principal’s accomplishments, but also including a preliminary list of possible improvement goals for the following year.	Questions to Ask What are the advantages of encouraging principals to take the lead in setting the goals upon which they will be evaluated? What are the challenges of this approach? When should the goal-setting process start? How specific should the goals be? How much are these template letters personalized? What is the most effective mix of encouragement, recognition of past accomplishments and identification of areas for potential improvement? What would the personalized letter look like for a chronically underperforming principal? For a first-year principal who struggled quite a bit, but who showed promise? For a veteran principal whose school had not shown much improvement over the past few years?
> Download Document (doc)

3 – Interventions in Low-Performing Schools Describes full range of New York City’s programs to turn around failing schools.
What to Notice New York City places its intervention strategies within the context of the federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, as well as state efforts to implement standards and assessments. To address the problem of chronically failing schools, the district has developed a coordinated restructuring plan which includes school redesigns, closures, openings and the formation of “small learning communities” within larger schools. In addition, the office of school improvement and restructuring (OSIR) offers intensive support and coaching for struggling schools in need of assistance. Professional development and additional financial resources are specifically targeted to schools in the midst of a turnaround. A final section specifically addresses NCLB issues.	Questions to Ask How is a school judged to be failing and in need of restructuring? What is a school redesign? How radical are the changes? And who is primarily responsible for turning the school’s performance around? What qualities does the district seek in a principal to be placed into one of these schools? How large is the OSIR, and how many employees are available to assist schools? What kind of background do these “turnaround specialists” have?
> Download Document (doc)