Skip to Content

State Fiscal Stabilization Fund Program - Phase II

Contact(s)

On this page...

Implementation Progress of SFSF II.

Iowa's SFSF II Approved Application

SFSF II - Amended Indicators or Descriptors

Iowa's SFSF II Original Application

I. Assurance (a): Achieving Equity in Teacher Distribution

A State must collect and publicly report data and other information on: (1) the extent that students in high- and low-poverty schools in the State have access to highly qualified teachers; (2) the extent that current strategies and efforts to address inequities in the distribution of inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers; (3) how teacher and principal performance is evaluated and how performance ratings are used; and (4) the distribution of performance evaluation ratings or levels among teachers and principals.

Indicator (a)(1)
Confirm, for the State, the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) of core academic courses taught, in the highest-poverty and lowest-poverty schools, by teachers who are highly qualified consistent with section 9101(23) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, as amended (ESEA).

State Report Card

Highly Qualified Teacher (HQT) Data for 2011-2012
All Schools by Poverty Status

  High Poverty Schools Low Poverty Schools >All Schools
#Sections in Selected Areas 41,328 42,325 145,440
# Sections in Selected Areas Not Taught by HQT 12 15 34
% Sections in Selected Areas Not Taught by HQT 0.03% 0.04% 0.02%
# Full-Time Teachers 9,400 9,036 32,818
# Advanced Degrees 3,334 3,357 10,747
% Advanced Degrees 35.5% 37.2% 32.7%
# Bachelor Degrees 6,066 5,679 22,071
Avg. District Experience 10.7 10.1 11.0
Avg. Total Experience 13.7 13.9 14.4
Average Age 41.8 40.5 41.7
Average Salary $50,565 $51,721 $50,170
# Students Served 128,967 139,614 466,923

Source: Iowa Department of Education, Teacher Licensure Files and Basic Educational Data Survey, Staff Files.

Notes: District office and AEA teachers and students are NOT included. High/low poverty based on top and bottom 25 percent of schools in terms of percent of their students eligible for free/reduced price lunch. The selected academic areas include English, reading/language arts, mathematics, science, foreign language, civics/government, economics, arts, history, geography, elementary (K-8), and special education.

Indicator (a)(2)
Confirm whether the State's Teacher Equity Plan (as part of the State's Highly Qualified Teacher Plan) fully reflects the steps the State is currently taking to ensure that students from low-income families and minority students are not taught at higher rates than other students by inexperienced, unqualified, or out-of-field teachers (as required in section 1111(b)(8)(C) of the ESEA).

Teacher Quality Approval Letter

Teacher Quality State Plan

Teacher Quality Equity Plan

 

Descriptor (a)(1)
Describe, for each local educational agency (LEA) in the state, the systems used to evaluate the performance of teachers and the use of results from those systems in decisions regarding teacher development, compensation, promotion, retention, and removal.

2012 Updated Status

Teacher Evaluation Systems 2011-2012

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/11: The Iowa Department of Education will collect these data in spring 2011 as part of the Basic Education Data Survey (Spring BEDS) collection. Once the data is collected it will be reported by September, 30 2011.

2010 Original Status

Overview of Descriptor: Currently, Iowa has a uniform teacher evaluation process. Iowa Code Section 284.3 requires that all teachers are evaluated using the Iowa Teaching Standards. Beginning teachers must demonstrate competence of the standards within their two years of teaching in order to be eligible to receive a standard license. The local district is responsible for this determination and for the recommendation to the Board of Educational Examiners for the license to be issued. Each evaluator for these district determinations must have completed an intensive evaluator training course and have obtained a skill-based endorsement in order to complete any evaluation of educators.

All teachers who have a standard license must be evaluated using the Iowa Teaching Standards. Any teacher who does not meet the standards must be placed on an intensive assistance plan. Both beginning and career teachers must also be evaluated using this same tool. LEA's are allowed to add additional evaluation criterion to this instrument, but the statutory standards and criteria are the minimum for all districts. The evaluation process and instrument used is comprehensive in scope. Career teachers are required to have a summative evaluation at a minimum of one time every three years. In the intervening years, a formative evaluation is held regarding progress on individual professional development plans based on student achievement.

Although a common form must be used by districts in determining the competence of beginning teachers, there is no consistent statewide method of collection of information to determine rankings of teachers based on their evaluations.

The first standard, of the Iowa Teaching Standards, to be evaluated requires the use of student achievement data to improve learning. The Iowa Teaching Standards and criteria are evidence-based measures of a knowledge and skill set representing quality teaching. The purpose of the standards and criteria is to provide LEAs with a consistent representation of the complexities and the possibilities of quality teaching. The Teaching Standards and supporting criteria are linked to the teacher evaluation system and individual professional development plans.

The IDE does not currently collect how these systems are used in making decisions regarding teacher or principal development, compensation, promotion, retention and removal. These data can be collected from each LEA in the State. However, there are significant barriers to collecting this information.

Milestones:

  1. Developing the collection capacity - September 1, 2010
  2. Roll out the collection capacity to all LEAs in the State - April, 1 2011
  3. Collect data from all LEAs in the State - May 1, 2011
  4. Building the reporting capacity to report these data publicly - June, 1 2011
  5. Rollout of Public Reporting - September 30, 2011

The IDE plans to work with the Great Teachers and Leaders stakeholder group on designing and implementing a reporting structure that will provide useful information on the evaluation systems required under IC 284.3, and deciding how these systems are used in evaluation decisions. Other milestones to be achieved will include the collection of data from each LEA, building a data load and integration capacity within the IDE data warehouse and developing a reporting structure in order to deliver new information.

The IDE has also submitted a grant application in collaboration with Stanford University and the University of Northern Iowa under the Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant (TQEG). If received this grant will fund the opportunity to scale and evaluate teaching and learning artifacts that demonstrate effective teaching and teachers.

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles: The IDE does not have the funds, personnel or resources to build this collection mechanism and reporting capacity. Iowa is unique in that the Iowa Legislature appropriated the ARRA SFSF but chose to reserve none of those funds for the IDE. In order for the IDE to meet this new requirement, it will require federal funding from the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA # 84.384) or receipt of the Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant (TQEG) grant. Without these funds, the IDE will have difficulty meeting this new requirement.

Like most applicant states, Iowa's budget is in dire circumstances. This fiscal year, State agencies were ordered to make a ten percent (10%) across-the-board budget cut. At the IDE, these cuts require a reduction in the current workforce. Next fiscal year, the State is projected to have more than a $1 billion shortfall of a $6 billion budget.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE plans to collect information allowed by Iowa law and the Supreme Court ruling from each LEA in the state and will build the reporting capacity for the public to access this information. Significant barriers to successful completion are noted above.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is https://www.educateiowa.gov/state-fiscal-stabilization-fund-program-phase-ii.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: To meet this new requirement, the IDE will need to support this effort with 100% percent federal funds.

Budget: There are recurring costs to collecting this information annually from each LEA. The IDE will need DE consultant time to work with districts on transmission of these data, answer questions related to the collection of this descriptor, and ensure information is accurate. If you combine all of the teacher and principal evaluation indicators and descriptors, this is conservatively a full time education program consultant. The average salary is $70,000 for an education program consultant. Including fringe (31%) equals $91,700. These are recurring costs which would need to be funded each year. SFSF Phase II funding is a one time appropriation. Without recurring funding it will be difficult to collect and report the data annually. Further, these costs do not include the cost of collection an input of these data for each LEA in the State. It should be noted that this will require additional labor for each district across not only this descriptor but all of the new requirements related to teacher and principal evaluations.

Developer time = $100,000

Consultant Recurring Costs = $91,700

Total = $191,700

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE will be the responsible agency for the development, execution and oversight of descriptor (a)(1).

 

Indicator (a)(3)
Indicate, for each LEA in the State, whether the systems used to evaluate the performance of teachers include student achievement outcomes or student growth data as an evaluation criterion.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/11: The Iowa Department of Education will collect these data in spring 2011 as part of the Basic Education Data Survey (Spring BEDS) collection. Once the data is collected it will be reported by September, 30 2011.

2010 Original Status

Overview of Indicator: Iowa Code (IC 284.3) requires evaluations of teachers using the Iowa Teaching Standards, eight (8) standards that meet research-driven criteria for effective teaching. The first standard requires teachers to use student achievement data to improve student performance. It does not require the use of student achievement outcomes to be used in isolation for performance evaluations. Multiple measures need to be included in the evaluation process for all teachers.

Iowa Code section 256.7(27) requires all principals to be evaluated according to the Iowa Leadership Standards. Iowa Administrative Code 281-83.10(284A) describes the leadership standards and criteria that are in place for all school districts. LEAs can add additional criteria to the assessment process. The IDE will collect information from districts on these additional criteria.

Milestones:

  1. Developing the collection capacity - September 1, 2010
  2. Roll out the collection capacity to all LEAs in the State - April, 1 2011
  3. Collect data from all LEAs in the State - May 1, 2011
  4. Building the reporting capacity to report these data publicly - June, 1 2011
  5. Rollout of Public Reporting - September 30, 2011

The IDE plans to work with the Great Teachers and Leaders stakeholder group on designing and implementing a reporting structure that will provide useful information on the evaluation systems required under IC 284.3 and deciding how these systems will be used in evaluation decisions.

The IDE has also submitted a grant application in collaboration with Stanford University and the University of Northern Iowa under the Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant (TQEG). If received this grant will fund the opportunity to scale and evaluate teaching and learning artifacts that demonstrate effective teaching and teachers. Other milestones to be achieved will include the collection of data from each LEA, building a data load and integration capacity within the IDE data warehouse and developing a reporting structure in order to deliver new information.

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles: The IDE does not have the funds, personnel or resources to build this collection mechanism and reporting capacity. Iowa is unique in that the Iowa Legislature appropriated the ARRA SFSF but chose not to reserve any of these funds for the IDE. In order for the IDE to meet this new requirement, it will require funding from the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA # 84.384). Without these funds, the IDE will have difficulty meeting this new requirement.

Like most applicant states, Iowa's budget is in dire circumstances. This fiscal year, State agencies were ordered to make a ten percent (10%) across-the-board budget cut. Over the last two state fiscal years, state funding for the Department has been reduced by thirty-two percent. At the IDE, these cuts require a reduction in the current workforce. Next fiscal year, the State is projected to have more than a $1 billion shortfall of a $6.5 billion budget.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE plans collect annually from each LEA in the state and will build the reporting capacity for the public dissemination. Significant barriers to successful completion are noted above.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is https://www.educateiowa.gov/state-fiscal-stabilization-fund-program-phase-ii.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: To meet this new requirement, the IDE will need to have this effort supported by 100% percent federal funds. The IDE has requested funds for this capacity in the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA # 84.384)

Additional Budget Expenses: The IDE will build the collection and reporting capacity for this indictor.

Additional Developer time = $25,000

Total = $25,000

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE will be the responsible agency for the development, execution, and oversight of indicator (a)(3).

 

Indicator (a)(4)
Provide, for each LEA in the State whose teachers receive performance ratings or levels through an evaluation system, the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) of teachers rated at each performance rating or level.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/11: The Iowa Department of Education will collect these data in spring 2011 as part of the Basic Education Data Survey (Spring BEDS) collection. Once the data is collected it will be reported by September, 30 2011.

2010 Original Status

Overview of Indicator: Iowa Code (IC 284.3) requires LEAs to evaluate teachers, at a minimum, by indicating whether the teacher does or does not meet the criteria selection. All districts must comply with evaluation of teachers per this Code requirement.

The IDE has proposed to amend Iowa administrative rule in order to clearly indicate teacher evaluation systems will provide multiple forms of evidence of student learning and growth to students, families and staff. This change is further supported by individual teacher development plans that align with student achievement goals of the teacher's classroom tied to the comprehensive school improvement plans and the needs of the teacher.

The IDE agrees that it will be able to fulfill the requirements of SFSF Phase II application and still protect confidential personnel records protects by the Iowa Supreme Court, in Clymer v. City of Cedar Rapids, 601 N.W.2d 42 (Iowa 1999) ruling. The IDE can collect and report these data for all LEAs in the State.

None of Iowa's LEA currently publicly report the teachers rated at each performance level. The IDE will build the reporting capacity in order to meet this new requirement.

Milestones:

  1. Develop the collection capacity - September 1, 2010
  2. Roll out the collection capacity to all LEAs in the State - April, 1 2011
  3. Collect data from all LEAs in the State - May 1, 2011
  4. Build the reporting capacity to report these data publicly - June, 1 2011
  5. Rollout of Public Reporting - September 30, 2011

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles: The lack of funding or personnel required to collect this information annually from school districts is a barrier. Because the current IDE data collection and reporting systems need modification in order to meet this requirement, funding and personnel resources must be secured.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE plans to collect information annually from each LEA in the state and will build the reporting capacity for public dissemination. Significant barriers to successful completion are noted above.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the newly created SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is https://www.educateiowa.gov/state-fiscal-stabilization-fund-program-phase-ii.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: To meet this new requirement, the IDE will need to support this effort with 100% percent federal funds.

Additional Budget Expense:

Developer time = $50,000

As mentioned above cost will involve IDE personnel time. A dedicated FTE included in the above costs would be used for this work as well.

Total = $50,000

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE will be the responsible agency for the development, execution, and oversight of indicator (a)(4) and (a)(5).

 

Indicator (a)(5)
Indicate, for each LEA in the State whose teachers receive performance ratings or levels through an evaluation system, whether the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) of teachers rated at each performance rating or level are publicly reported for each school in the LEA.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/11: The Iowa Department of Education will collect these data in spring 2011 as part of the Basic Education Data Survey (Spring BEDS) collection. Once the data is collected it will be reported by September, 30 2011.

2010 Original Status

See Indicator (a)(4).

 

Descriptor (a)(2)
Describe, for each LEA in the State, the systems used to evaluate the performance of principals and the use of results from those systems in decisions regarding principal development, compensation, promotion, retention, and removal.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/11: The Iowa Department of Education will collect these data in spring 2011 as part of the Basic Education Data Survey (Spring BEDS) collection. Once the data is collected it will be reported by September, 30 2011.

2010 Original Status

Overview of Descriptor: After further discussion with the United States Department of Education regarding the details of these indicators/descriptor, the IDE agrees that it will be able to fulfill the requirements of SFSF Phase II application and still protect confidential personnel records protects by the Iowa Supreme Court, in Clymer v. City of Cedar Rapids, 601 N.W.2d 42 (Iowa 1999) ruling.

Iowa Code Section 256.7 (27) requires all administrators to be evaluated according to the Iowa Leadership Standards. The first standard requires an educational leader to promote the success of all students by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared and supported by the school community. Criteria further explain that the administrator must, in collaboration with others, use appropriate data to establish rigorous, concrete goals using the context of student achievement and instructional programs. The evaluation process then mirrors that of all teachers as described above.

Milestones:

  1. Developing the collection capacity - September 1, 2010
  2. Roll out the collection capacity to all LEAs in the State - April, 1 2011
  3. Collect data from all LEAs in the State - May 1, 2011
  4. Building the reporting capacity to report these data publicly - June, 1 2011
  5. Rollout of Public Reporting - September 30, 2011

The IDE plans to work with the Great Teachers and Leaders stakeholder group on designing and implementing a reporting structure that will provide useful information on the evaluation systems required under IC 256.7, and deciding how these system will be used in evaluation decisions. Other milestones to be achieved will include the collection of data from each LEA, building a data load and integration capacity within the IDE data warehouse and developing a reporting structure in order to deliver new information.

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles: The IDE does not have the funds, personnel or resources to build this collection mechanism and reporting capacity. Iowa is unique in that the Iowa Legislature appropriated the ARRA SFSF but chose to reserve none of those funds for the IDE. In order for the IDE to meet this new requirement, it will require federal funding from the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA # 84.384) or receipt of the Teacher Quality Enhancement Grant (TQEG) grant. Without these funds, the IDE will have difficulty meeting this new requirement.

Like most applicant states, Iowa's budget is in dire circumstances. This fiscal year, State agencies were ordered to make a ten percent (10%) across-the-board budget cut. At the IDE, these cuts require a reduction in the current workforce. Next fiscal year, the State is projected to have more than a $1 billion shortfall of a $6 billion budget.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE plans to collect information annually from each LEA in the state and will build the reporting capacity for the public to access this information. Significant obstacles to implementing this indicator are listed above.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is https://www.educateiowa.gov/state-fiscal-stabilization-fund-program-phase-ii.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: To meet this new requirement, the IDE will need to support this effort with 100% percent federal funds.

Budget: As mentioned above, there are recurring costs to collecting this information annually from each LEA. The IDE will need DE consultant time to work with districts on transmission of these data, answer questions related to the collection of this descriptor, and ensure information is accurate. If you combine all of the teacher and principal evaluation indicators and descriptors, this is conservatively a full time education program consultant. The average salary is $70,000 for an education program consultant. Including fringe (31%) equals $91,700. These are recurring costs which would need to be funded each year. SFSF Phase II funding is a one time appropriation. Without recurring funding it will be difficult to collect and report these data annually. Further, these costs do not include the cost of collection an input of these data for each LEA in the State. It should be noted that this will require additional labor for each district across not only this descriptor but all of the new requirements related to teacher and principal evaluations.

Additional Budget Expenses:

Additional Developer time = $25,000

Total = $25,000

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE will be the responsible agency for the development, execution and oversight of descriptor (a)(2).

 

Indicator (a)(6)
Indicate, for each LEA in the State, whether the systems used to evaluate the performance of principals include student achievement outcomes or student growth data as an evaluation criterion.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/11: The Iowa Department of Education will collect these data in spring 2011 as part of the Basic Education Data Survey (Spring BEDS) collection. Once the data is collected it will be reported by September, 30 2011.

2010 Original Status

Overview of Descriptor: As mentioned above, Iowa Code Section 256.7 (27) requires all administrators to be evaluated according to the Iowa Leadership Standards. The first standard requires that an educational leader promotes the success of all students by facilitating the development, articulation, implementation, and stewardship of a vision of learning that is shared and supported by the school community. Criteria further explain that the administrator must, in collaboration with others, use appropriate data to establish rigorous, concrete goals using the context of student achievement and instructional programs. The evaluation process then mirrors that of all teachers as described above. Therefore, all principals in the state must use student achievement outcomes as part of their evaluation system.

Iowa Code section 256.7(27) requires all principals to be evaluated according to the Iowa Leadership Standards. Iowa Administrative Code 281-83.10(284A) describes the leadership standards and criteria that are in place for all school districts. LEAs can add additional criteria to the assessment process. The IDE will collect information from districts on these additional criteria.

Milestones:

  1. Developing the collection capacity - September 1, 2010
  2. Roll out the collection capacity to all LEAs in the State - April, 1 2011
  3. Collect data from all LEAs in the State - May 1, 2011
  4. Building the reporting capacity to report these data publicly - June, 1 2011
  5. Rollout of Public Reporting - September 30, 2011

The IDE plans to work with the Great Teachers and Leaders stakeholder group on designing and implementing a reporting structure that will provide useful information on the evaluation systems required under IC 284.3 and deciding how these systems will be used in evaluation decisions. Other milestones to be achieved will include the collection of data from each LEA, building a data load and integration capacity within the IDE data warehouse and developing a reporting structure in order to deliver new information.

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles: The IDE does not have the funds, personnel or resources to build this collection mechanism and reporting capacity. Iowa is unique in that the Iowa Legislature appropriated the ARRA SFSF but chose not to reserve any of those funds for the IDE. In order for the IDE to meet this new requirement, it will require funding from the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA # 84.384). Without these funds, the IDE will have difficulty meeting this new requirement.

Iowa's budget is in dire circumstances. This fiscal year, State agencies were ordered to make a ten percent (10%) across-the-board budget cut. Over the last two state fiscal years, state funding for the Department has been reduced by thirty-two percent. At the IDE, these cuts require a reduction in the current workforce. Next fiscal year, the State is projected to have more than a $1 billion shortfall of a $6.5 billion budget.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE plans to collect information annually from each LEA in the state and will build the reporting capacity for the public to access. Significant barriers to successful completion are noted above.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is https://www.educateiowa.gov/state-fiscal-stabilization-fund-program-phase-ii.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: To meet this new requirement, the IDE will need to support this effort with 100% percent federal funds. The IDE has requested funds for this capacity in the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA # 84.384).

Additional Budget Expenses: The IDE will build the collection and reporting capacity for this indictor.

Additional Developer time = $25,000

Total = $25,000

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE will be the responsible agency for the development, execution, and oversight of indicator (a)(6).

 

Indicator (a)(7)
Provide, for each LEA in the State whose principals receive performance ratings or levels through an evaluation system, the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) of principals rated at each performance rating or level.

2012 Updated Status

2011-2012 Principal Evaluation Systems

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/11: The Iowa Department of Education will collect these data in spring 2011 as part of the Basic Education Data Survey (Spring BEDS) collection. Once the data is collected it will be reported by September, 30 2011.

2010 Original Status

Overview of Indicator: Iowa Code (IC 284.3) requires LEAs to evaluate teachers, at a minimum, by indicating whether the teacher does or does not meet the criteria selection. All districts must comply with evaluation of teachers per this Code requirement.

Iowa Code section 256.7(27) requires all principals to be evaluated according to the Iowa Leadership Standards. Iowa Administrative Code 281-83.10(284A) describes the leadership standards and criteria that are in place for all school districts. LEAs can add additional criteria to the assessment process. The IDE will collect information from districts on these additional criteria.

The IDE has proposed to amend Iowa administrative rule in order to clearly indicate teacher evaluation systems will provide multiple forms of evidence of student learning and growth to students, families and staff. This change is further supported by individual teacher development plans that align with student achievement goals of the teacher's classroom tied to the comprehensive school improvement plans and the needs of the teacher.

The IDE agrees that it will be able to fulfill the requirements of SFSF Phase II application and still protect confidential personnel records protects by the Iowa Supreme Court, in Clymer v. City of Cedar Rapids, 601 N.W.2d 42 (Iowa 1999) ruling. The IDE can collect and report these data for all LEAs in the State.

Milestones:

  1. Develop the collection capacity - September 1, 2010
  2. Roll out the collection capacity to all LEAs in the State - April, 1 2011
  3. Collect data from all LEAs in the State - May 1, 2011
  4. Build the reporting capacity to report these data publicly - June, 1 2011
  5. Rollout of Public Reporting - September 30, 2011

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles:. The lack of funding or personnel required to collect this information annually from school districts is a barrier. Because the current IDE data collection and reporting systems need modification in order to meet this requirement, funding and personnel resources must be secured.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE plans to collect information annually from each LEA in the state and will build the reporting capacity for public dissemination. Significant barriers to successful completion are noted above.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is https://www.educateiowa.gov/state-fiscal-stabilization-fund-program-phase-ii.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: To meet this new requirement, the IDE will need to support this effort with 100% percent federal funds.

Additional Budget Expense:
Developer time = $50,000
As mentioned above cost will involve IDE personnel time. A dedicated FTE included in the above costs would be used for this work as well.
Total = $50,000

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE will be the responsible agency for the development, execution, and oversight of indicator (a)(7).

 

II. Assurance (b): Improving Collection and Use of Data

A State must collect and publicly report information on the elements of its statewide longitudinal data system, on whether teachers receive data on student growth in a manner that is timely and informs instructional programs, and on whether the State provides teachers with reports of individual teacher impact on student achievement.

Indicator (b)(1)
Indicate which of the 12 elements described in section 6401(e)(2)(D) of the America COMPETES Act are included in the State's statewide longitudinal data system.

2012 Updated Status

Update 9/17/12: The DE has received a waiver for this indicator until December 2013.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/11: The Iowa Department of Education (DE) has made significant progress in completion of a statewide longitudinal data system that includes the twelve elements of the America COMPETES Act. Iowa currently has 9 of the 12 data elements completed. The outstanding data elements include:

  1. Student-level enrollment, demographic, and program participation information
  2. Student-level information about the points at which students exit, transfer in, transfer out, drop out, or complete pre-K through postsecondary education programs?
  3. Information regarding the extent to which students transition successfully from secondary school to postsecondary education, including whether students enroll in remedial coursework?

The DE formed a post-secondary committee in order to address the missing data elements from the SFSF Phase II application. This committee is comprised of representatives from the Iowa Board of Regents, Regent Universities, Community Colleges, Private Colleges, and Iowa Workforce Development. This committee has met regularly over the past year and has developed plan and has an agreement in place to complete the missing components.These data elements will be complete by September 30, 2011.

2010 Original Status

The IDE has nine (9) of the twelve (12) data elements required by The America COMPETES Act. The data elements that need to be completed are listed below.

(i) PRESCHOOL THROUGH GRADE 12 EDUCATION AND POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION- With respect to preschool through grade 12 education and postsecondary education-- Data Element #2 and #3 (II) student-level enrollment, demographic, and program participation information. (III) student-level information about the points at which students exit, transfer in, transfer out, drop out, or complete P-16 education programs.

Overview of Data Elements: Currently, the IDE has student-level enrollment data, demographic data, program participation data as well as exit, transfer in-and-out, dropout, and completion data for all students in the K-12 system and the community college system (grades 12-14). The IDE does not have this information for public Regent universities.

The Iowa Department of Education (IDE) has been working with the Iowa Board of Regents and Regent Universities on fulfilling the requirements outlined in the ARRA SFSF Phase II application. However, there are legal barriers that still exist that will need to overcome in order to adequately complete the indicators/descriptors and data elements in the application. The IDE does not have direct oversight of the Board of Regents or Regent Universities. These are separate agencies which complicates the sharing of information across agencies. FERPA outlines the need to protect student privacy and does not allow for the redisclosure of information. The IDE, Board of Regents and Regent Universities will continue to work on finding a solution and meet the requirements in the SFSF Phase II application. If it is determined necessary, the IDE will request legislative language that ensures permissive sharing of these data between governmental entities. These milestones are outline in the below addendum to the original application.

Milestones:

  1. Host monthly meeting with the Board of Regents, Regent Universities and IDE to discuss legal options in meeting these requirements (could include recommendations on necessary statutory changes) - May 2010
  2. Develop the linking and collection capacity - October 2010
  3. Develop the loading capacity into statewide longitudinal data system - February 2011
  4. Build the reporting capacity- June, 1 2011
  5. Rollout of reporting - September 30, 2011

Projected milestones include expansion of the IDE's data collection capacity to include the Regent university system in Iowa and the integration of the community college system data into a common SLDS. The IDE met with the Iowa Board of Regents and representatives of each public university to discuss these new requirements. An agreement in principle has been made by all parties involved. However, there are legal barriers that need to be addressed prior to the sharing of these data.

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles: The Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) prevents re-disclosure of personally identifiable student information that is needed in order for Iowa to meet this requirement. This legal barrier needs to be resolved in order for Iowa to complete this required data element. This may require additional action at the federal or state level to resolve.

The IDE does not have the funds, personnel, time or resources to expand its data collection capacity. Iowa is unique in that the Iowa Legislature appropriated the ARRA SFSF and but chose not to reserve any of those funds for the IDE. In order for the IDE to meet this new requirement, it will require funding from the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA # 84.384). Without these funds, the IDE will have difficulty meeting this new requirement.

Iowa's budget is in dire circumstances. This fiscal year, State agencies were ordered to make a ten percent (10%) across-the-board budget cut. At the IDE, these cuts require a reduction in the current workforce. Next fiscal year, the State is projected to have more than a $1 billion shortfall in a $6 billion budget.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE plans to create a staged rollout and expansion of its data collection capacity to include postsecondary data. Data will be collected annually. Significant barriers to implementation of this new data element are noted above.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is https://www.educateiowa.gov/state-fiscal-stabilization-fund-program-phase-ii.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: Expansion of this collection system will cost approximately $550,000 over a three-year period. This amount is composed of one-time costs necessary to expand the data collection capacity and to fully integrate the data into the IDE systems. Additionally, there will be recurring costs for ongoing maintenance and support of this new capability.

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE will be the responsible agency for the development, execution, and oversight of data elements 2 and 3.

(iii) POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION- With respect to postsecondary education, data that provide- Data Element #11 (I) information regarding the extent to which students transition successfully from secondary school to postsecondary education, including whether students enroll in remedial coursework

Overview of Data Element: The IDE has been working with the Regent universities and community college system to complete this new requirement. Integrating community college data is in our current project plan and will be possible during the prescribed timeframe. The IDE has an agreement in principle to share information with the Board of Regents and public postsecondary Regent universities. However, legal barriers, such as the re-disclosure of educational records, could deter completion of this requirement.

Milestones:

  1. Host monthly meeting with the Board of Regents, Regent Universities and IDE to discuss legal options in meeting these requirements (could include recommendations on necessary statutory changes) - May 2010
  2. Develop the linking and collection capacity - October 2010
  3. Develop the loading capacity into statewide longitudinal data system - February 2011
  4. Build the reporting capacity- June, 1 2011
  5. Rollout of reporting - September 30, 2011

The IDE has held several meetings with the Iowa Board of Regents and the Regent universities. An information sharing agreement will have to be created and direct oversight of these data will need to be addressed by all parties prior to completion of this data element. Once the policy issues are resolved, the technical integration will be created, implemented, and rolled out. This includes creating a common repository of shared data, loading data into the repository and the creating of reports to disseminate this student information.

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles: FERPA prevents re-disclosure of personally identifiable student information that is required in order for Iowa to meet this requirement. This legal barrier needs to be resolved in order for Iowa to complete this required data element. This may require additional action at the federal or state level to resolve. The IDE will continue to work with the Iowa Board of Regents and Regent Universities in order to find a way to meet this new requirement.

In Iowa, the IDE has oversight for the K-12 system and community colleges. The Iowa Board of Regents oversees public higher education institutions. The Regent universities are separate agencies without direct oversight which complicates the legality of sharing information across multiple agencies. While some progress has been made in discussing the need to share information, and while the assurances in the ARRA provide a potential mechanism, it is not clear that there are adequate incentives to build a SLDS for student information across the educational spectrum.

The ARRA provides a mechanism for funding and requires all SEAs to build a SLDS that includes postsecondary data without legal authority to do so. Assuming the legal issues can be resolved, it is not clear that adequate incentives have been offered to higher education institutions provide student data on an ongoing basis to a SLDS.

The IDE does not have the funds, personnel or resources to expand its data collection capacity to the Board of Regents and Regent universities. The IDE was funded partially by the 2009 IDE SLDS grant competition to include community college data.

Iowa is unique in that the Iowa Legislature appropriated the ARRA SFSF but chose not to reserve any of those funds for the IDE. In order for the IDE to meet this new requirement for all postsecondary student information, it will require funding from the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA # 84.384). Without full funding, the IDE will have difficulty meeting this new requirement.

Iowa's budget is in dire circumstances. This fiscal year, State agencies were ordered to make a ten percent (10%) across-the-board budget cut. At the IDE, these cuts require a reduction in the current workforce. Next fiscal year, the State is projected to have more than a $1 billion shortfall of a $6 billion budget.

Nature and Frequency: Assuming the cited barriers can be overcome, the IDE plans to collect these data annually from the Regents and community colleges.

The IDE will post the current status of this data element on the newly created SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is: http://www.iowa.gov/educate/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1917.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: Expansion of this collection system will cost approximately $550,000 over a three-year period. This amount is composed of one-time costs necessary to expand the data collection capacity and to fully integrate the data into the IDE systems. Additionally, there will be recurring costs for ongoing maintenance and support of this new capability.

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE, Iowa Board of Regents and Regent universities will be jointly responsible for the development, execution and oversight of data element 11.

 

Indicator (b)(2)
Indicate whether the State provides student growth data on their current students and the students they taught in the previous year to, at a minimum, teachers of reading/language arts and mathematics in grades in which the State administers assessments in those subjects in a manner that is timely and informs instructional programs.

Not Applicable.

Indicator (b)(3)
Indicate whether the State provides teachers of reading/language arts and mathematics in grades in which the State administers assessments in those subjects with reports of individual teacher impact on student achievement on those assessments.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/11: The IDE is working on indicator(b)(3). However, the IDE does not have the funding that is required to create a metric and set of reports that measures individual teacher impact on student achievement. The IDE estimates that this would cost over $400,000. The IDE is attempting on securing financing, however, given the current State budget shortfall this is unlikely. Like many States Iowa is facing a budget gap in Fiscal Year 2012 of approximately $300 million. Iowa is unique in that the Iowa Legislature appropriated the ARRA SFSF but chose not to reserve any of those funds for the IDE. It is likely that this type requirement will not be met until September 30, 2012.

2010 Original Status

The IDE will implement this indicator for all teachers of reading/language arts and mathematics in the grades which the State administers assessments in those subjects with reports of individual teacher impact on student achievement on those assessments.

Overview of Data Element: The IDE does not currently provide teachers of reading/language arts and mathematics in grades in which the state administers assessments in those subjects with reports on individual teacher impact on student achievement on those assessments. Teachers in Iowa have historically received reports for each of their students showing growth using the Iowa Test of Basic Skills or the Iowa Test of Educational Development. The IDE is concerned about using only one measure in determining teacher impact on student achievement. In order to responsibly create such a report, the IDE believes it is important to add multiple measures into a formula for determining teacher impact. Additionally, the IDE strongly suggests that student achievement reports should include data regarding other variables impacting student achievement in order to be valid measures.

Milestones:

  1. Stakeholder input regarding teacher impact on student achievement. - Recurring meetings beginning September 1, 2010.
  2. Work with Iowa Testing Programs on measurement design and report development. - February 2011
  3. Rollout of report - September 30, 2011

The IDE formed a stakeholder group to examine this new requirement in depth. This group, comprised of many education system stakeholders including representatives from the Iowa Association of School Boards, Iowa State Education Association, School Administrators of Iowa, Iowa Testing Programs, Regent universities and LEA personnel will assist in discussing this new requirement to responsibly create a set of metrics which can assist in determining teacher impact. Once these metrics have been defined, the IDE will work toward the creation of a report which provides feedback on the potential impact of a teacher on student achievement. Lastly, significant training will be required in order to rollout this out the thousands of teachers that are affected.

Date of Metrics Completion: September 30, 2012

Obstacles: The IDE currently does not have the funds, personnel or resources to implement this new requirement. Iowa is unique in that the Iowa Legislature appropriated the ARRA SFSF but chose not to reserve any of those funds for the IDE. In order for the IDE to meet this new requirement, it will require funding from the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA # 84.384). Without full funding, the IDE will have difficulty meeting this new requirement.

Iowa's budget is in dire circumstances. This fiscal year, State agencies were ordered to make a ten percent (10%) across-the-board budget cut. At the IDE, these cuts require a reduction in the current workforce. Next fiscal year, the State is projected to have more than a $1 billion shortfall in a $6 billion budget.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE plans to design a report which will meet the requirement of this indicator. Once this report is designed it will be distributed annually.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is https://www.educateiowa.gov/state-fiscal-stabilization-fund-program-phase-ii.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: The IDE does not currently have the funds or personnel to meet this new requirement. In order to implement this collection and reporting capacity, it will need funding from the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA# 84.384). The cost to implement this new requirement is approximately $412,000. There are significant training costs associated with reporting these data appropriately. These costs include report development, metric design and implementation and roll out of reporting capacity.

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: Working with stakeholders, the IDE will be responsible for the development, execution and oversight of indicator (b)(3).

 

III. Assurance (c): Standards and Assessments

A State must collect and publicly report data and other information on whether students are provided high-quality State assessments; whether students with disabilities and limited English proficient students are included in State assessment systems; whether the State makes information available regarding student academic performance in the State compared to the academic performance of students in other States; and on the extent to which students graduate from high school in four years with a regular high school diploma and continue on to pursue a college education.

Indicator (c)(1)
Confirm the approval status, as determined by the Department, of the State's assessment system under section 1111(b)(3) of the ESEA with respect to reading/language arts, mathematics, and science assessments.

NCLB Assessment Approval Letter

 

Indicator (c)(2)
Confirm whether the State has developed and implemented valid and reliable alternate assessments for students with disabilities that are approved by the Department.

NCLB Assessment Approval Letter

 

Indicator (c)(3)
Confirm whether the State's alternate assessments for students with disabilities, if approved by the Department, are based on grade-level, modified, or alternate academic achievement standards.

NCLB Assessment Approval Letter

The Iowa Alternate Assessment is based on alternate achievement standards.

 

Indicator (c)(4)
Indicate whether the State has completed, within the last two years, an analysis of the appropriateness and effectiveness of the accommodations it provides students with disabilities to ensure their meaningful participation in State assessments.

There is no federal requirement to complete an analysis of the appropriateness and effectiveness of the accommodations it provides students with disabilities. The Iowa Department of Education, therefore, has not completed a study of accommodations as described above.

Indicator (c)(5)
Confirm the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) of students with disabilities who are included in State reading/language arts and mathematics assessments.

2012 Updated Status

2011-12 Math

Grade

Numerator Denominator Percentage
3 4,453 4,500 98.7
4 4,817 4,868 98.7
5 5,055 5,094 99
6 5,038 5,100 99.8
7 4,935 5,014 98.3
8 4,854 4,934 98.2
11 3,978 4,146

96.1

 

2011-12 Reading

Grade Numerator Denominator Percentage
3  4,446  4,503 99.0
4  4,810  4,872 99.0
5  5,045  5,096 99.2
6  5,045  5,101 98.8
7  4,931  5,017 98.4
8  4,851  4,938 98.4
11  3,984  4,145 95.9

State Report Card

 

2011 Updated Status

2009-10 Math

Grade

Numerator Denominator Percentage
3 4280 4311 99.3
4 4710 4744 99.3
5 4972 5009 99.3
6 4919 4940 99.6
7 5017 5051 99.3
8 4942 4981 99.2
11 4576 4643 98.6

 

2009-10 Reading

Grade Numerator Denominator Percentage
3 4283 4331 98.9
4 4713 4742 99.4
5 4990 5020 99.4
6 4921 4940 99.6
7 5037 5064 99.5
8 4949 4983 99.3
11 4548 4640 98.0

State Report Card

 

2010 Original Status

2008-2009 Math

Grade

Numerator Denominator Percentage
3 4197 4237 99.1
4 4767 4795 99.4
5 4975 5016 99.2
6 5026 5056 99.4
7 4966 5012 99.1
8 4955 5125 96.7
11 4545 4625 98.3

 

2008-2009 Reading

Grade Numerator Denominator Percentage
3 4220 4247 99.4
4 4766 4796 99.4
5 4989 5017 99.4
6 5032 5060 99.4
7 4973 5018 99.1
8 4985 5019 99.3
11 4539 4625 98.1

State Report Card

 

Indicator (c)(6)
Indicate whether the State has completed, within the last two years, an analysis of the appropriateness and effectiveness of the accommodations it provides limited English proficient students to ensure their meaningful participation in State assessments.

There is no federal requirement to complete an analysis of the appropriateness and effectiveness of the accommodations it provides limited English proficient students. The Iowa Department of Education, therefore, has not completed a study of accommodations as described above.

 

Indicator (c)(7)
Confirm whether the State provides native language versions of State assessments for limited English proficient students that are approved by the Department.

The State provides the Iowa Test of Basic Skills and the Iowa Test of Educational Development in English. The State does not provide a native language version of our State assessment for limited English proficient students that is approved by the Department.

 

Indicator (c)(8)
Confirm the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) of limited English proficient students who are included in State reading/language arts and mathematics assessments.

2012 Updated Status

2011-2012 Math

Grade

Numerator Denominator Percentage
3  2347  2359  99.5
4  2164  2172  99.6
5  1885  1898  99.3
6  1582  1588  99.6
7  1265  1270  99.6
8  1147  1155  99.3
11  798  822  97.1

2011-2012 Reading

Grade Numerator Denominator Percentage
3  2326  2361  98.5
4  2142  2172  98.6
5  1868  1899  98.4
6  1559  1591  98.0
7  1237  1269  97.5
8  1117  1156  96.6
11  785  823  95.4

State Report Card

2011 Updated Status

2009-10 Math
Grade Numerator Denominator Percentage
3 2090 2106 99.2
4 2004 2082 98.8
5 1675 1697 98.7
6 1314 1321 99.5
7 1256 1270 98.9
8 1082 1091 99.2
11 673 691 97.4

 

2009-10 Reading
Grade Numerator Denominator Percentage
3 2081 2105 98.9
4 2005 2028 98.9
5 1666 1694 98.3
6 1304 1319 98.9
7 1249 1268 98.5
8 1076 1089 98.8
11 670 691 97.0

State Report Card

2010 Original Status

2008-09 Math
Grade Numerator Denominator Percentage
3 2141 2160 99.1
4 1848 1862 99.2
5 1666 1674 99.5
6 1477 1496 98.7
7 1287 1292 99.6
8 1125 1141 98.6
11 772 779 99.1

 

2008-09 Reading
Grade Numerator Denominator Percentage
3 2130 2156 98.8
4 1836 1859 98.8
5 1646 1674 98.3
6 1475 1501 98.3
7 1270 1290 98.4
8 1122 1139 98.5
11 765 775 98.7

State Report Card

 

Indicator (c)(9)
Confirm that the State's annual State Report Card (under section 1111(h)(1) of the ESEA) contains the most recent available State reading and mathematics National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) results as required by 34 CFR 200.11(c).

State Report Card

 

Indicator (c)(10)
Provide, for the State, for each LEA in the State, for each high school in the State and, at each of these levels, by student subgroup (consistent with section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA), the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) of students who graduate from high school using a four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate as required by 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(i).

2011 Updated Status

The IDE recently published the NEA graduation rate consistent with section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA. The webpage which includes rates for all students and LEAs is http://www.iowa.gov/educate/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=530&Itemid=55. The DE is currently in the process of expanding and calculating the rates for subgroups as required by this indicator. The DE will publish the rates by LEA by student subgroup by May 1, 2011.

2010 Original Status

Overview of Data Element: Currently, the IDE has the ability to compute and report for each high school in the state and, at each of these levels, by student subgroup (consistent with section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA), the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) of students who graduate from high school using a four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate as required by 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(i).

Although the IDE has the ability to report a four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate as required by 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(i), it has not done so because of how this formula has been designed. The IDE strongly believes that districts and schools should be given credit for graduating all students, regardless of the length of time it takes for a student to complete a secondary education. By creating a four-year timeframe for graduating all students, the IDE believes it constructs the wrong incentive for schools and defines which students are the most important - those that can complete their secondary education within four years- while those students that take longer become expendable. The IDE recognizes that the changes to Title I regulations allow for an extended graduation formula, regardless, the four-year window is too prescriptive.

Currently, the IDE does report the National Governor's Association (NGA) graduation rate. The NGA guidance provides some leeway for student's with disabilities that can take longer than four years to graduate. The version of the NGA rate which the IDE reports provides an extended timeline for students with disabilities. However, the graduation rate required by 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(i). creates a 4-year prescribed timeframe.

Milestones:

  1. Finalizing the methodology for calculation - February 1, 2010
  2. Calculation of 4 -year cohort rate for the class of 2010 graduates. - March 1, 2011
  3. Reporting of these data September 30, 2011 in the State Report Card.

The IDE has completed the data collection and methodology and can report a 4-year cohort rate and will comply with this new requirement.

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles: The IDE does not foresee any problems in implementing and reporting this new graduation rate calculation.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE will implement and report using this graduation formula by the required deadline. This graduation rate calculation will be reported annually to the public.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the newly created SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is: http://www.iowa.gov/educate/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1917

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: The IDE does not need additional funds in order to implement this new requirement.

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE will be responsible for the development, execution, and oversight of indicator(c)(10).

 

Indicator (c)(11)
Provide, for the State, for each LEA in the State, for each high school in the State and, at each of these levels, by student subgroup (consistent with section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA), of the students who graduate from high school consistent with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(i), the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) who enroll in an institution of higher education (IHE) (as defined in section 101(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA)) within 16 months of receiving a regular high school diploma.

2012 Updated Status

C11 Indicator-Percent of Students Who Attend College within 16 mos, by District, 2012-2013

C11 Indicator-Percent of Students Who Attend College within 16 mos, by Building, 2012-2013

C11 Indicator-Percent of Students Who Attend College within 16 mos, by District, 2011-2012

C11 Indicator-Percent of Students Who Attend College within 16 mos, by Building, 2011-2012

C11 Indicator-Percent of Students Who Attend College within 16 mos, 2010-2011

C11 Indicator-Percent of Students Who Attend College within 16 mos, 2009-2010

C11 Indicator-Percent of Students Who Attend College within 16 mos, 2008-2009

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/11: The DE formed a post-secondary committee in order to address indicator(c)(11) from the SFSF Phase II application. This committee is comprised of representatives from the Iowa Board of Regents, Regent Universities, Community Colleges, Private Colleges, and Iowa Workforce Development. This committee has met regularly over the past year and has developed plan to meet this requirement. The first cohort Iowa is able to match are graduates from the class of 2009. The DE will contract with the National Student Clearinghouse in order to meet this requirement. Iowa will match these data in order to try to meet the September 30, 2011 deadline.

2010 Original Status

Overview of Data Element: The IDE does not collect or report, for each high school and by subgroup, the number and percentage of students that enroll in an institution of higher education within 16 months of receiving a regular high school diploma.

Milestones: The IDE has met multiple times with the Iowa Board of Regents and the public Regent universities regarding this and other indicators. Iowa will need to make some significant changes to its data systems in order to begin to collect these data and report them publicly. The obstacles outlined below are significant and need to be overcome before the IDE can meet this new requirement.

  1. Host monthly meeting with the Board of Regents, Regent Universities and IDE to discuss legal options in meeting these requirements (could include recommendations on necessary statutory changes) - May 2010
  2. Work with the National Student Clearinghouse - September 2010
  3. Develop the linking and collection capacity - February 2011
  4. Develop the loading capacity into statewide longitudinal data system - February 2011

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles: The only way to obtain this information is to utilize the National Student Clearinghouse student tracker system. However, the National Student Clearinghouse uses social security numbers as its primary identifier. In 2004, the IDE purged social security numbers as a required field from its collection. Approximately, forty percent (40%) of student social security numbers (SSN) are voluntarily reported to the IDE.

While there is no state or federal law that prohibits the DE from collecting SSNs of minor students, that does not mean that collecting SSNs is wise. Parents and guardians of minor students are aware of the dangers of identity theft and want schools and this agency to be sensitive to such dangers. Even though there is no law in place, the Social Security Administration, IRS, and dozens of for-profits ventures are taking pains to make the public aware of the dangers of identity theft. Below are a few examples.

From the Social Security Administration: http://search.ssa.gov/search?access=p&entqr=0&sort=date%3AD%3AL%3Ad1&output=xml_no_dtd&ie=UTF-8&btnG=GO&client=default_frontend&q=identity+theft&ud=1&oe=UTF-8&proxystylesheet=default_frontend&ip=165.206.168.251&proxyreload=1&start=10

From the IRS:
http://www.irs.gov/privacy/article/0,,id=186436,00.html

From dot-coms:
http://www.creditfyi.com/Identity-Theft/Preventing-Identity-Theft/Make-Your-Kids-Social-Security-Numbers-Top-Secret.htm
http://moneycafe.com/blog/2009/04/child-identity-theft/
http://www.idtheftcenter.org/artman2/publish/v_fact_sheets/Fact_Sheet_120.shtml

http://www.transunion.com/corporate/personal/fraudIdentityTheft/fraudPrevention/childIdTheft.page
http://www.whostolemyidentity.com/2007/04/child-identity-theft/

The above list provides a small sampling of available resources.

The National Student Clearinghouse has the capacity to capture a secondary student identifier. However, in order for the IDE to leverage this other identifier, all Institutions of Higher Education that accept an Iowa graduate would need to receive this identifier, input it into their data system, and in turn, report it to the National Student Clearinghouse. The possibility of all of these activities occurring in the prescribed timeline by September 30, 2011, is highly unlikely. While Iowa can create a solution that works for its in-state institutions, this indicator includes national implications. Use of Iowa's unique student identifier is not a solution for national issues, which are based on use of SSNs.

Other options to meet this requirement include: 1) begin to collect social security numbers from districts, which while legally possible, is not a direction the IDE would like to consider or; 2) report this indicator for students from districts that voluntarily provide social security numbers to the IDE. The first option is problematic for some districts, such as the Des Moines Community School District, because they have also systematically stopped collecting social security numbers due to privacy concerns. Des Moines is the largest LEA in the state and would need to revamp their collection capacity in order to meet this change in requirement. The second option is problematic because it would only include selective collecting and reporting and would only partially meet this new requirement. However, given these barriers, the latter option is likely the only one currently viable for the IDE. The IDE will develop the capacity to meet this requirement but will not build the reporting capacity at this time.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE plans to continue to work on this new requirement with the intent of completion by the deadline. If the logistics and obstacles can be overcome, the IDE will collect and report this information annually to the public.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the newly created SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is: http://www.iowa.gov/educate/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1917.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: The IDE currently does not have the funds, personnel or resources to implement this new requirement. Iowa is unique in that the Iowa Legislature appropriated the ARRA SFSF but chose not to reserve any of those funds for the IDE. In order for the IDE to meet this new requirement, it will need funding from the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA # 84.384). Without funding, the IDE will have difficulty meeting this new requirement.

Iowa's budget is in dire circumstances. This fiscal year, State agencies were ordered to make a ten percent (10%) across-the-board budget cut. At the IDE, these cuts require a reduction in the current workforce. Next fiscal year, the State is projected to have more than a $1 billion shortfall of a $6 billion budget.

Funding for this new requirement will have to be 100% federal funding. The costs of implementation will include personnel, an annual recurring subscription to the National Student Clearinghouse, ETL development for loading data into the SDLS and report development for dissemination of results to education stakeholders including the public. The estimated cost to implement this requirement is $320,000 for a three-year period. Part of these costs will include one time set-up fees to build this capacity. However, costs such as personnel time and subscription fees will be ongoing.

Additional Budget Expenses:
The below budget is included in the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA# 84.384). The ARRA grant covers 3 years of funding.
Post-secondary Data Analyst = $81,588 (salary plus fringe)
$75,000 Data Steward Expenses
Total = $319,764

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE, along with the Iowa Board of Regents and Regent universities, will have joint responsibility for the development, execution, and oversight of indicator (c)(11).

 

Indicator (c)(12)
Provide, for the State, for each LEA in the State, for each high school in the State and, at each of these levels, by student subgroup (consistent with section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II) of the ESEA), of the students who graduate from high school consistent with 34 CFR 200.19(b)(1)(i) who enroll in a public IHE (as defined in section 101(a) of the HEA) in the State within 16 months of receiving a regular high school diploma, the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) who complete at least one year's worth of college credit (applicable to a degree) within two years of enrollment in the IHE.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/2011: The IDE formed a post-secondary committee in order to address indicator(c)(12) from the SFSF Phase II application. This committee is comprised of representatives from the Iowa Board of Regents, Regent Universities, Community Colleges, Private Colleges, and Iowa Workforce Development. This committee has met regularly over the past year and has developed a plan to meet this requirement. The IDE will collect information from all public IHEs in Iowa. The first cohort Iowa is able to match are graduates from the class of 2009. However, given the timeline in the requirement, the DE will not be able to complete this requirement by September 30, 2011. The 16 month window of enrollment for the class of 2009 is roughly December 2010. Using this timeline, the DE estimates that December 2012 would be approximately 24 months after enrollment.

The Regent Universities will report to the DE information on enrollment annually in fall to the IDE for the prior school year. For example, in fall of 2013 the DE will collect data on students from the academic school year 2012-2013. Therefore, if the window of enrollment is approximately December 2012, the DE will complete this academic year collection in fall of 2013. The below timeline provide an illustration of this timeline. Once the data has been collected, matched and cleaned the DE will publish the report on its website.

icon Timeline for Indicator C12

2010 Original Status

Overview of Data Element: The IDE does not collect or report, for each high school and by subgroup the students who graduate from an Iowa high school and enroll in a public Institution of High Education (IHE) within 16 months of receiving a regular high school diploma, the number and percentage who complete one year's worth of college credit within two years of enrollment in the IHE.

As noted earlier in the Iowa clarification document. FERPA is a potential barrier to completing this requirement. However, the IDE will continue to work with the Iowa Board of Regents and the public Regent universities to find a solution that will ensure protections under FERPA regulations.

Milestones: The IDE has met multiple times with the Iowa Board of Regents and the public Regent universities regarding this and other indicators. The IDE, Board of Regents and the Regent universities have an agreement in principle to share and report this information assuming the legal barriers can be overcome. A data collection capacity will have to be built to share this information with the IDE on a systematic manner. Once the data is collected, an ETL process will need to be created to load it into Iowa's SLDS.

  1. Host monthly meeting with the Board of Regents, Regent Universities and IDE to discuss legal options in meeting these requirements (could include recommendations on necessary statutory changes) - May 2010
  2. Work with the National Student Clearinghouse - September 2010
  3. Develop the linking and collection capacity - February 2011
  4. Develop the loading capacity into statewide longitudinal data system - February 2011

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles: FERPA prevents re-disclosure of personally identifiable student information that is required in order for Iowa to meet this requirement. This legal barrier needs to be resolved in order for Iowa to complete this required data element. This may require additional action at the federal or state level to resolve.

In Iowa, the IDE has oversight for the K-12 system and community colleges. The Iowa Board of Regents oversees higher public education institutions. The Regent universities are separate agencies without direct oversight which complicates the legality of sharing information across multiple agencies. While some progress has been made in discussing the need to share, and while the assurances in the ARRA provide a potential mechanism, it is not clear that there are adequate incentives to build a SLDS with students across the educational spectrum.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE plans to continue work on this new requirement with the intent of completion by the deadline. If the logistics and obstacles can be overcome, the IDE will collect and report this information annually to the public.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the newly created SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is: http://www.iowa.gov/educate/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1917.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: The IDE does not currently have the funds, personnel or resources to complete this requirement. Iowa is unique in that the Iowa Legislature appropriated the ARRA SFSF but chose not to reserve any of those funds for the IDE. In order for the IDE to meet this new requirement, it will require funding from the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA # 84.384). Without these funds, the IDE will have difficulty meeting this new requirement.

Additional Budget Expenses:
The below budget is included in the ARRA SLDS grant (CFDA# 84.384). The ARRA grant covers 3 years of funding.
Data Warehouse ETL Engineer = $86,184 (salary plus fringe)
Data Warehouse BI Developer = $81,588 (salary plus fringe)
$75,000 Data Steward Expenses = $156,818
Equipment = $75,000
Three Year Total = $683,098

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE will be responsible for the development, execution and oversight of indicator (c)(12).

 

IV. Assurance (d): Supporting Struggling Schools

A State must collect and publicly report data and other information on the progress of certain groups of schools in the State on State assessments in reading/language arts and mathematics; on the extent to which reforms to improve student academic achievement are implemented in the persistently lowest-achieving schools in the State; and on the extent to which charter schools are operating in the State.

Indicator (d)(1)
Provide, for the State, the average statewide school gain in the "all students" category and the average statewide school gain for each student subgroup (as under section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v) of the ESEA) on the State assessments in reading/language arts and for the State and for each LEA in the State, the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that have made progress (as defined in this notice) on State assessments in reading/language arts in the last year.

SFSF Phase II Indicator D1 and D2 Summary ( 2010-03-07 11:33:19)

Title I Schools Gains in Math Details 07-08 to 08-09

 

Indicator (d)(2)
Provide, for the State, the average statewide school gain in the "all students" category and the average statewide school gain for each student subgroup (as under section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v) of the ESEA) on State assessments in mathematics and for the State and for each LEA in the State, the number and percentage (including numerator and denominator) of Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring that have made progress on State assessments in mathematics in the last year.

SFSF Phase II Indicator D1 and D2 Summary ( 2010-03-07 11:33:19)

Title I Schools Gains in Math Details 07-08 to 08-09

 

Descriptor (d)(1)
Provide the definition of "persistently lowest-achieving schools" (consistent with the requirements for defining this term set forth in the Definitions section of the NFR) that the State uses to identify such schools.

The IDE has an approved definition from the United States Department of Education of the Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools

Definition of Persistently Lowest-achieving Schools

 

Indicator (d)(3)
Provide, for the State, the number and identity of the schools that are Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring, that are identified as persistently lowest-achieving schools.

The IDE has an approved definition from the United States Department of Education of the Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools. The school on the below list have been notified.

  • Davenport Community School District: Frank L Smart Intermediate ( NCES #190858000464)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Edmunds Fine Arts Academy (NCES #190897000529)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Findley Elementary School (NCES #190897000531)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Harding Middle School (NCES #190897000540)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Hoyt Middle School (NCES #190897000545)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: North High School (NCES #190897000566)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Weeks Middle School (NCES #190897000584)
  • Dubuque Community School District: Prescott Elementary School (NCES #190948001456)
  • Sioux City Community School District: Everett Elementary School (NCES #192640001507)
  • Waterloo Community School District: Cunningham School (NCES #193048001719)
  • Waterloo Community School District: George Washington Carver Academy (NCES #193048001725)
  • Waterloo Community School District: Irving Elementary School (NCES #193048001724)
  • Waterloo Community School District: Lincoln Elementary School (NCES 193048001729)
Indicator (d)(4)

 

Provide, for the State, of the persistently lowest-achieving schools that are Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring, the number and identity of those schools that have been turned around, restarted, closed, or transformed (as defined in the NFR) in the last year.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/11: The below schools chose the transformation model.

  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Edmunds Fine Arts Academy (NCES #190897000529)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Hoyt Middle School (NCES #190897000545)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: North High School (NCES #190897000566)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Weeks Middle School (NCES #190897000584)
  • Waterloo Community School District: George Washington Carver Academy (NCES #1930480001725)
  • Waterloo Community School District: Lincoln Elementary School (NCES 193048001729)

2010 Original Status

None of the schools that have been identified as persistently lowest-achieving schools that are Title I schools in improvement, corrective action, or restructuring, have been turned around, restarted, closed, or transformed in the last year.

 

Indicator (d)(5)
Provide, for the State, the number and identity of the schools that are secondary schools that are eligible for but do not receive, Title I funds, that are identified as persistently lowest-achieving schools.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/2011:

  • Cedar Rapids Community School District: Metro High School (NCES #190654000259)
  • Cedar Rapids Community School District: Roosevelt Middle School (NCES #190654000258)
  • Cedar Rapids Community School District: Wilson Middle School (NCES #190654000267)
  • Colfax-Mingo Community School District: Colfax-Mingo Middle School (NCES #190000901976)
  • Columbus Community School District: Columbus Community Middle School (NCES #190798000398)
  • Council Bluffs Community School District: Thomas Jefferson High School (NCES #190822000435)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Callanan Middle School (NCES #190897000519)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: East High School (NCES #190897000528)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Hoover High School (NCES #190897000543)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Lincoln High School (NCES #190897000550)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: McCombs Middle School (NCES #190897000557)
  • Des Moines Independent Community School District: Meredith Middle School (NCES #190897000560)
  • Essex Community School District: Essex Junior-Senior High School (NCES #191104000683)
  • Harmony Community School District: Harmony Junior-Senior High School (NCES #191353000828)
  • Keokuk Community School District: Keokuk High School (NCES #191563000932)
  • Keokuk Community School District: Keokuk Middle School (NCES #191563000933)
  • Laurens-Marathon Community School District: Laurens-Marathon Middle School (NCES #191642000979)
  • Lewis Central Community School District: Lewis Central Middle School (NCES #191668000997)
  • Marshalltown Community School District: Marshalltown High School (NCES #191872001091)
  • Murray Community School District: Murray Junior-Senior High School (NCES #192010001181)
  • Olin Consolidated School District: Olin Junior-Senior High School (NCES #192172001297)
  • Orient-Macksburg Community School District: Orient-Macksburg Senior High School (NCES #192181001299)
  • Sioux City Community School District: West Middle School (NCES #192640001534)
  • South Tama County Community School District: South Tama County Middle School (NCES #192673001557)
  • Storm Lake Community School District: Storm Lake High School (NCES #192739001601)
  • Waterloo Community School District: Bunger Middle School (NCES #193048000586)
  • Waterloo Community School District: Central Middle School (NCES #193048002024)
  • Waterloo Community School District: East High School (NCES #193048001714)

2010 Original Status

The IDE has an approved definition from the United States Department of Education of the Persistently Lowest Achieving Schools. The school on the below list have been notified.

List of Persistently Low Achieving Schools, Tier 2

 

Indicator (d)(6)
Provide, for the State, of the persistently lowest-achieving schools that are secondary schools that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds, the number and identity of those schools that have been turned around, restarted, closed, or transformed in the last year.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/2011: No Tier II schools implemented one of the federal turn around models.

2010 Original Status

None of the schools that have been identified as persistently lowest-achieving schools that are secondary schools that are eligible for, but do not receive, Title I funds, have been turned around, restarted, closed, or transformed in the last year.

 

Indicator (d)(7)
Provide, for the State and, if applicable, for each LEA in the State, the number of charter schools that are currently permitted to operate under State law.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/2011: Iowa does not have a limit on the number of charter school that are permitted to operate under State law.

2010 Updated Status

The cap on Charter Schools has been lifted. Senate File 2033 was signed into law on January 19, 2010. The following website url will provide details regarding this legislation The cap on Charter Schools has been lifted. Senate File 2033 was signed into law on January 19, 2010. The following website url will provide details regarding this legislation The cap on Charter Schools has been lifted. Senate File 2033 was signed into law on January 19, 2010. The following website url will provide details regarding this legislation http://coolice.legis.state.ia.us/Cool-ICE/default.asp?Category=billinfo&Service=Billbook&menu=false&ga=83&hbill=SF2033.

 

Indicator (d)(8)
Confirm, for the State and for each LEA in the State that operates charter schools, the number of charter schools currently operating.

2011 Updated Status

2010 List of charter schools currently operating

 

2010 Original Status

Number of charter schools currently operating.

 

Indicator (d)(9)
Provide, for the State and for each LEA in the State that operates charter schools, the number and percentage of charter schools that have made progress on State assessments in reading/language arts in the last year.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/2011: The IDE will continue to work on this indicator and will complete it by the reporting deadline of September 30, 2011.

2010 Original Status

Overview of Data Element: The IDE collects testing data for all charter schools operated in the State.

Milestones: The IDE can build reports for all students in both reading/language arts and mathematics for all charter schools and the progress made on State assessments.. These reports will be posted on the IDE website.

Run analyses on Charter School Achievement data - September 1, 2010
Build reports on Charter School Achievement- October 1, 2010
Work with Iowa Testing programs and Charter School on analysis and public reporting - February 1, 2011
Release public reporting capacity - September 30, 2011

Date of Completion: September 30, 2011

Obstacles: The IDE does not foresee any obstacles to complete this new indicator.

Nature and Frequency: The IDE will build and publicly report on this indicator annually.

The IDE will post the current status of this indicator on the newly created SFSF Phase II web page in order to provide a single point of access for the public to view these indicators, descriptors, and data elements. This website will be updated annually with the IDE's current status. The website url is: http://www.iowa.gov/educate/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1917.

Amount of funds that the state is using or will use to develop and implement means, whether the funds are or will be federal, state or local: The IDE does not need any funding in order to complete this new requirement. No additional budget expenses required.

Describe agency responsible for development, execution and oversight: The IDE will be responsible for the development, execution, and oversight of indicators (d)(9) and (d)(10).

 

Indicator (d)(10)
Provide, for the State and for each LEA in the State that operates charter schools, the number and percentage of charter schools that have made progress on State assessments in mathematics in the last year.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/2011 See Indicator (d)(9).

2010 Original Status

See Indicator (d)(9).

 

Indicator (d)(11)
Provide, for the State and for each LEA in the State that operates charter schools, the number and identity of charter schools that have closed (including schools that were not reauthorized to operate) within each of the last five years.

2011 Updated Status

Update 2/24/2011:

 

Charter Closures

Closed

   

Sioux Central/Buffalo Ridge

at the end of 2007-2008

Davenport/Lincoln Elementary

at the end of 2008-2009

Hartley Melvin Sanborn/NW Iowa Charter School

at the end of 2008-2009

Howard Winneshiek / Elma Elementary

at the and of 2009-2010

{/slide}{slide=2010 Original Status}

icon Iowa Charter School Status

{/slide}

Indicator (d)(12)

 

Indicate, for each charter school that has closed (including a school that was not reauthorized to operate) within each of the last five years, whether the closure of the school was for financial, enrollment, academic, or other reasons.

All charters dropped were for other reasons.

Describe the processes the State employs to ensure that, consistent with 34 CFR 99.31(b), the required data and other information are not made publicly available in a manner that personally identifies students, where applicable.

The IDE has a policy to protect the privacy of education records required by FERPA. All data and reports that are released or posted by the IDE are first reviewed to ensure that they have been de-identified or small cells have been suppressed or combined to ensure personally identifiable information is not revealed.

Policy Description link: Statement Regarding the Public Release of Data: Cautions About Interpretation

 

Printed from the Iowa Department of Education website on July 04, 2015 at 7:53am.