title i - 1003(a) round 2 - doe.nv. · pdf fileplease pay close attention to the following...

1

Request for Application FY18 Title I 1003(a) Round 2 Application

SEPARATE APPLICATION FOR A SUBGRANT UNDER THE EVERY STUDENT SUCCEEDS ACT OF 2015

ISSUED BY

Nevada Department of Education 700 E. 5th Street

Carson City, NV 89701

Grant Period: January, 2018- September 30, 2018 Applications Due: January 24, 2018 5:00(PST) Total Funds Available: ~$1.5 million Title I, 1003(a) Source of Funding: Federal

Restrictions/Conditions This grant application process is open to all Nevada public schools, district-sponsored charter schools, charter schools sponsored by the State Public Charter School Authority, and schools in the Achievement School District that appear on the eligible schools list in Appendix A.

Questions related to this funding should be addressed to:

Gabrielle Pingue, Title I Director and Federal Liaison Office of Student and School Supports Email: [email protected] Phone: 702-668-4309

2

Table of Contents Application Guidance ...................................................................................................... 4

Overview ...................................................................................................................... 4

Eligible Applicants ........................................................................................................ 4

State Priorities .............................................................................................................. 4

Timeline: .......................................................................................................................... 7

ESSA Evidence-Based Component: ............................................................................ 7

Evidence-Based Support Providers ............................................................................. 7

Additional Support ........................................................................................................ 8

Review Criteria ............................................................................................................. 8

Formatting .................................................................................................................... 8

Application Preparation ................................................................................................... 9

Cover page .................................................................................................................. 9

Application Narrative ..................................................................................................... 10

District Strategy .......................................................................................................... 10

School Strategy .......................................................................................................... 10

Collective Responsibility ............................................................................................ 10

ESSA Evidence Support Document .............................................................................. 12

Budget, Certification and Assurances ........................................................................... 14

Budget TA for grants .................................................................................................. 14

Certification ................................................................................................................ 14

Assurances ................................................................................................................ 14

Application Review Process ....................................................................................... 14

Appendix A – Eligible Schools ....................................................................................... 18

Elementary Schools ................................................................................................... 18

Middle Schools ........................................................................................................... 20

High Schools .............................................................................................................. 21

Appendix B - Previously 1003(a) Round 1 or SIG 1003(g) Funded Schools (Not Eligible for Round 2) .................................................................................................................. 22

3

Elementary Schools ................................................................................................... 22

Appendix C – ESSA Levels of Evidence ....................................................................... 27

Appendix D – Assistance on ESSA Evidence ............................................................... 28

Appendix E – School Improvement Program List .......................................................... 29

Appendix F – Technical Assistance .............................................................................. 31

Technical Assistance on 1003(a) ............................................................................... 31

Fiscal/Grants Technical Assistance ........................................................................... 31

4

Application Guidance

Overview ESSA amended the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA). Federal funds for school improvement are provided via the authority of ESEA. ESSA builds on ESEA’s legacy as a civil rights law and seeks to ensure that every child, regardless of race, income, background, or where they live, has the opportunity to obtain a high-quality education. ESSA made significant changes to ESEA and Title I for the first time since the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB). Section 1003(a) of Title I requires NDE to reserve seven percent of Title I, Part A funding for school improvement purposes, and section 1003(g)(6) outlines priorities:

(f) Priority - The State Education Agencies (SEA) will give priority to local educational agencies that: 1) Serve high numbers, or a high percentage of, elementary schools and secondary

schools implementing plans under paragraphs (1) and (2) of section 1111(d); 2) Demonstrate the greatest need for such funds, as determined by the State; and 3) Demonstrate the strongest commitment to using funds to enable the lowest-

performing schools to improve student achievement and student outcomes. -- 20 U.S.C. § 6303

Eligible Applicants This grant application process is open to all Nevada public schools, district-sponsored charter schools, charter schools sponsored by the State Public Charter School Authority, and Achievement District schools that appear on the eligible schools list on Appendix A. Appendix B lists the FY18 Round 1 1003(a) funded schools and SIG schools. These schools are not eligible for this round of funding.

State Priorities The Nevada Department of Education has identified three key school improvement strategies that will help the state reach its goal of becoming the fastest improving state in the nation. These state priorities center around school improvement strategies and are as follows:

• School leadership; • Data informed decision-making; and • Focus on lowest performing schools.

The Nevada Department of Education reserves the right to preference these funds to schools/districts that:

• Have the greatest needs (e.g., Comprehensive Support and Improvement schools);

5

• Identify and select ESSA evidence-based interventions, strategies, and activities that have a strong positive impact on school outcomes (including monitoring and evaluating school improvement); and

• Align their school improvement interventions, strategies, and activities to state priorities.

If funded, the LEA will be required to submit an evaluation or report with regard to the progress of the plan. NDE will provide a template after the funding has been awarded.

Accordingly, the Title I 1003(a) Round 2 competitive grant application for the 2017-2018 school year will prioritize planning within the above-mentioned state goals:

1. School Leadership 2. Data Informed decision-making 3. Focus on lowest performing schools.

6

Title I 1003(a) Round 2

School Leadership Development Data Driven Decision-Making

• Provide evidence-based professional development to support school and district leadership development

• Build the capacity of the education system through collaboration and knowledge sharing

• Create and sustain coherent and aligned systems of support and instructional practice that drive strong school outcomes

• Set high expectations that all students can succeed at high levels

• Build a strong, inclusive school culture

• Strengthen trust, collaboration and relationships with families and community

• Provide evidence-based professional development to strengthen school and district capacity to make data informed decisions that drive strong school outcomes and prepare students for success in college and career

• Use rigorous education data and research to identify and select strong evidence-based interventions, strategies, and activities that meet the needs of the school and community

• Accurately analyze education data to monitor and evaluate the impact and effectiveness of evidence-based interventions, strategies, and activities

• Share easy to understand data and provide transparency to families and educators

The Department intends to fund plans that align with the goals and priorities outlined in Nevada’s ESSA Plan and Strategic Plan, in order to significantly and rapidly improve underperforming schools.

7

Timeline: Date Activity December 21, 2017 Applications made available to all eligible applicants

January 8-12, 2018 NDE provides technical assistance on writing the application

January 24, 2018 Applications are due to the Nevada Department of Education by 5:00 p.m. (PST)

January 25- February 9, 2018

Applications are reviewed by expert review team

February 16, 2018 Names of awardees are announced by the Office of the Nevada State Superintendent of Public Instruction

September 30, 2018 Funds must be obligated (salaries must be expended by this date)

December 15, 2018 Final requests against this money must made no later than this date

ESSA Evidence-Based Component: As part of the application process, applicants are required to provide evidence to support each identified intervention, strategy or activity by completing the chart in the Narrative Section of this application. Please note, Title I, 1003(a) funding can only support interventions, strategies and activities that meet ESSA evidence Tiers 1, 2 and 3. Appendix C provides a table illustrating the four levels of ESSA-evidence (Tier 1, Strong; Tier 2, Moderate; Tier 3, Promising; and Tier 4, Rationale based on research). For each research study cited, applicants are required to identify which ESSA level of evidence has been met. A template is provided on pages 12-13. Appendix D provides a listing of resources available for verifying the ESSA-evidence level for each cited study.

Evidence-Based Support Providers To facilitate the identification and selection of evidence-based support providers focused on School Leadership Development and Data-informed Decision Making, NDE released an RFQ in early 2017, to identify those support providers that align with state priorities and meet ESSA evidence Tiers 1, 2 and 3. A list of those support providers is available in Appendix E. This list of support providers will be prioritized for funding considerations. Other support providers that meet the rigorous ESSA levels of Tier 1, 2 and 3 will be considered for funding after consideration for providers on the list. NDE will

8

release another RFQ in early 2018 to expand the current list of support providers that meet the ESSA evidence Tiers 1, 2 and 3.

Additional Support The Office of Student and School Supports (OSSS) is committed to setting up LEAs and schools for success to significantly and rapidly improve school and student outcomes. If your team has any questions or need further clarification please contact the NDE Title I Team (see Appendix F).

Review Criteria The review criteria for this grant can be found in the application rubric located in the Application Review Process section of this application (pages 14-17). An expert review team will review and score all applications according to this rubric. The review team will ultimately recommend: “total funding”, “partial funding”, or “no funding”. Final determinations will be made by NDE leadership based on recommendations from the review team.

Formatting All applications must be prepared in accordance with appropriate formatting. Formatting requirements must be met in order for an application to be considered for review. Please pay close attention to the following guidelines:

o Typed, single-spaced on 8 ½” x 11” white paper (without lines)

o Font-size is no less than 12 point

o Include all required items in the specified order

o May not exceed 7 pages for the District Strategy and Collective Responsibility

Sections and 1 page for each school narrative

o The Cover Sheet and ESSA Evidence Sheet are not included in this count

9

Application Preparation

Cover page District: Complete the following chart for each school the district is applying for. This sheet should be the first sheet of the application (add rows as needed).

School ESSA evidence level (Tier 1, 2, or 3) of interventions (list all that apply to each

item requested for funding)

Need of the school (high, moderate, low)

[Blank] [Blank] [Blank]








Technical Assistance will be provided for complete understanding of how the OSSS team will use this chart.

10

Application Narrative

District Strategy 1. What is your comprehensive and holistic district improvement plan to address

school improvement and equity gaps for the schools requesting these funds? How is the district coordinating school improvement efforts to address equity gaps that exist for the schools requesting these funds?

2. What is the rationale for identifying these schools? How will the district define success and what results are you expecting to see? These schools should be clearly aligned to the district strategy outlined above and directly related to the funding requested.

School Strategy 1. How does your school strategy for school improvement align to the district

strategy for school improvement (as outlined above)? How will your school define success and what results are you expecting to see?

Directions: For every school requesting funds, please identify the school and have the school leadership team complete a brief narrative describing alignment with the district strategy for school improvement. The brief narrative should be no longer than 1 page, single spaced, 12 pt. font for each school. The narrative should also include how these requested funds build upon other current funding streams (e.g., Victory, ZOOM, RBG3, etc.).

Collective Responsibility The highest performing education systems have systems-level coherence and alignment. Moreover, all stakeholders share responsibility for the success of the education system. Please complete the charts below for each role, keeping in mind where the district and schools are in the continuous improvement cycle. This helps to identify shared commitments and actions to improve student outcomes. Information may emphasize what each role will do to support the planning, implementation, and/or sustainability phases (focus your attention on the current phase your district is in). Brief narratives or bullet points are appropriate for this section.

11

Superintendent Planning Implementation Sustainability School leadership development

Data informed decisions

Focus on lowest performing schools

[Add other relevant focus points]

Associate Superintendent

Planning Implementation Sustainability

School leadership development




District Offices (SEL, Family Engagement, Special Ed, Equity, etc.)

Planning Implementation Sustainability

School leadership development




12

ESSA Evidence Support Document For each item requested for funding, please list under the object code and mark (X) which ESSA level of evidence it meets. Include the citation for the study in the last column.

NDE Budget Object Code

Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested

Evidence Level 1 - Strong

Evidence Level 2 - Moderate

Evidence Level 3- Promising

ESSA Evidence Citations (in APA or MLA format, or attach the study)

Example

1. Support provider-leadership (NAME) 2. Support provider-data (NAME)

1. $65,000 2. $30,000

2. x

1. x

1. (cite at least one rigorous study) 2. (cite at least one rigorous study)

320/330 Purchased services


Amount requested

Level 1 - Strong Level 2 - Moderate

Level 3 Promising


100/200 salaries Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


400 Purchased property Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


500 (other) Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


580 Travel Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


600 (other) Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


610 supplies Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


13

NDE Budget Object Code


Amount requested

Evidence Level 1 - Strong

Evidence Level 2 - Moderate

Evidence Level 3- Promising


640 Books/periodicals Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


641 Textbooks Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


650 supplies: info tech Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


651 Software Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


652 Information Tech Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


653 Web-based programs


Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


800 Dues/fees/miscellaneous


Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


700 Equipment Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


900 Other Description of Funds Requested

Amount requested


Level 3 Promising


14

Budget, Certification and Assurances A budget and budget narrative completed in ePAGE that indicates how the LEA will allocate school improvement funds for each identified school must be included in the application.

Budget TA for grants • Directions: Budget narratives should provide details so review teams can

understand exactly how the funding will be used • Example:

o Funding will be used to pay for 8 PD sessions at $1500 each with partner [name partner]. 7 PD sessions will be held at school site.

Certification Complete this section per directions in ePAGE.

Assurances Complete this section per directions in ePAGE.

Application Review Process The Nevada Department of Education review panel may include the following:

• K-12 School Improvement expert(s) • K-12 School Leadership expert(s) • Content area specialist(s) • Grants Analyst(s) • Special Education expert(s) • English Learner expert(s) • Additional NDE reviewers from outside the Office of Student and

School Supports • Regional and national experts from partner organizations

15

All applications will be prioritized and scored according to the following process:

1) All applications will be prioritized first by the level of ESSA evidence of the requested funded items.

2) All applications will be prioritized second based on the needs of the district/school for the allowable activities of the grant.

3) All applications will be scored by an expert review team and scored according to the included rubric. District/school interventions, activities and strategies that are in alignment with one or more NDE priorities will receive the strongest considerations. These priorities are: School Leadership, Data-driven Decision Making and Focus on Underperforming Schools.

4) All applications will be ranked ordered by each category and considered for funding beginning with the strongest applications first.

Application rubric score will determine the order of funding considerations within each grouping of A, B or C. Funding will be considered for all eligible applications until all funding is expended.

See diagram below. (Reminder: Title I 1003(a) funds can only be used on interventions, strategies, and activities that meet ESSA evidence levels Tiers 1, 2, or 3).

17

Examples:

1. An application with all requests for funding that meet ESSA evidence Tiers 2 (Moderate) & 3 (Promising), and is a high needs school, will be prioritized as “A1”. It will be scored and ranked for funding consideration in the first round.

2. An application with requests for funding that meets 66% of funding requests at ESSA evidence Tier 3 (Promising) and some Tier 4 (Demonstrates a Rationale) funding requests, and is a high needs school, will be prioritized as B1. It will be scored and ranked for funding consideration in the second round. Tier 4 will not be funded.

Application scoring rubric:

*Evidence-based policymaking will be an expectation of the Department in future applications.

18

Appendix A – Eligible Schools

Elementary Schools

District School Comprehensive Support and Improvement Designation

Clark Ann Lynch Elementary School

Bottom 5% Clark Bertha Ronzone Elementary

School

Bottom 5%

Clark

Cynthia Cunningham Elementary School

Low Performing*

Clark

Eva Wolfe Elementary School

Low Performing*

Clark Gene Ward Elementary School

Bottom 5% Clark

George E Harris Elementary School

Low Performing*

Clark

Hal Smith Elementary School

Bottom 5%

Clark Helen Herr Elementary School

Bottom 5%

Clark Howard E Hollingsworth

Elementary School

Low Performing*

Clark J. E. Manch Elementary

School

Bottom 5%

Clark

Jesse D Scott ES

Low Performing*

Clark John Tartan Elementary

School

Low Performing*

Clark Kermit R Booker Sr

Elementary School

Low Performing*

Clark Lucile Bruner Elementary

School

Low Performing*

Clark Mountain View Elementary

School

Low Performing*

Clark

Ollie Detwiler Elementary

Bottom 5%

19


Clark

Richard J Rundle Elementary School

Low Performing*

Clark Robert L Taylor Elementary School

Bottom 5%

Clark

Whitney Elementary School

Low Performing*

Clark

William G Bennett Elementary School

Bottom 5%

Elko Carlin Elementary School Low Performing*

Elko

Owyhee Elementary School (all NV & Idaho only)

Bottom 5%

Elko West Wendover Elementary School

Low Performing*

Humboldt

French Ford Middle School

Low Performing*

Humboldt

Sonoma Heights Elementary School

Low Performing*

Lincoln Caliente Elementary School Low Performing*

Lyon Silver Stage Elementary School

Low Performing*

Nye Tonopah Elementary School Low Performing*

SPCSA Nevada Connections Academy Low Performing*

SPCSA Nevada Virtual Academy Low Performing*

SPCSA Quest Academy Bottom 5%

Washoe

Bernice Mathews Elementary School

Low Performing*

Washoe Dorothy Lemelson STEM

Academy Elementary School

Bottom 5%

Washoe Echo Loder Elementary Bottom 5%

Washoe Glenn Duncan STEM Low Performing*

20


Washoe Libby C Booth Elementary School Low Performing*

Washoe Mariposa Dual Language

Academy Charter School

Bottom 5%

Washoe Veterans Memorial STEM

Academy

Low Performing*

White Pine Lund Elementary School Low Performing*

*In the bottom 14% of Elementary Schools, expected to be rated as 1-Star Schools

Middle Schools

District School

Comprehensive Support and Improvement Designation

Churchill Churchill County Middle

School

Low Performing*

Clark Carroll M Johnston Middle

School

Bottom 5%

Clark Duane D Keller Middle

School

Low Performing*

Clark

J D Smith Middle School

Low Performing*

Clark Marvin M Sedway Middle

School

Low Performing*

Clark Mike O’Callaghan Middle

School

Low Performing*

Elko Carlin Junior High School Bottom 5% Elko Owyhee Junior High School

(all NV & Idaho only)

Bottom 5%

Elko Wells Junior High School Low Performing* Elko West Wendover Junior High

School

Low Performing*

Nye Pathways Middle School

(Alternative)

Bottom 5%

Washoe Fred W Traner Middle School Low Performing* *In the bottom 15% of Middle Schools, expected to be rated as 1-Star Schools

21

High Schools


Churchill Churchill County High

School Graduation Rate below 67%

Clark Burk Horizon Southwest

Sunset HS Bottom 5%; Graduation Rate below 67%

Clark Cowan Sunset Southeast

HS Bottom 5%; Graduation Rate below 67%

Clark

Delta Academy Graduation Rate below

67% Clark Innovations International

Charter School of NV Graduation Rate below 67%

Clark Nevada Learning Academy

at CCSD Graduation Rate below 67%

Elko Owyhee High School (all NV

& Idaho only) Graduation Rate below 67%

Lincoln C O Bastian (Caliente Youth

Center) Bottom 5%; Graduation Rate below 67%

Nye

Tonopah High School Graduation Rate below

67% SPCSA Nevada Connections

Academy Graduation Rate below 67%

SPCSA

Silver State Charter School Graduation Rate below

67% Washoe I Can Do Anything Charter

High School Graduation Rate below 67%

Washoe

Washoe Inspire Academy Graduation Rate below

67%

22

Appendix B - Previously 1003(a) Round 1 or SIG 1003(g) Funded Schools (Not Eligible for Round 2)

Elementary Schools


Clark

Dean Petersen Elementary School

None

Clark

Doris M. Reed Elementary School

Bottom 5%

Clark Innovations Charter

Elementary School

None

Clark

Laura Dearing Elementary School None

Clark

William K. Moore Elementary School

Low Performing*

Clark

100 Academy of Excellence Elementary School

None

Clark CP Squires Elementary School None

Clark Robert Lunt Elementary School None

Clark Kay Carl Elementary School None

Clark Ruben Diaz Elementary School None

Clark Manuel Cortez Elementary School None

23


Clark Paradise Elementary School None

Elko Owyhee Elementary School Bottom 5%

Humboldt McDermitt Elementary School Bottom 5%

Nye Amargosa Valley Elementary School

None

Nye Floyd Elementary School None

Nye Hafen Elementary School None

Nye Round Mountain Elementary School

None

SPCSA Nevada Virtual Academy

(** SIG funded school-not eligible)

Low Performing*

Washoe Desert Heights Elementary School Low Performing*

Washoe

Natchez Elementary School

Bottom 5%

White Pine

McGill Elementary School

None

*In the bottom 14% of Elementary Schools, expected to be rated as 1-Star Schools

24

Middle Schools


Clark

Dell Robison Middle School

None

Clark J Harold Brinley Middle

School

Low Performing*

Clark

Jerome Mack Middle School

Bottom 5%

Clark Mario C & Joanne Monaco

Middle School

Low Performing*

Clark Innovations Charter Middle School

None

Clark 100 Academy of Excellence Middle

School

None

Clark Delta Academy Middle School

None

Clark Ed Von Tobel Middle School

None

Clark T Swainston Middle School

None

Clark Robert O Gibson Middle School

None

Clark

Dr. William (Bob) H Bailey Middle School (** SIG funded school-not eligible)

Low Performing*

Achievement School District

Democracy Prep at the Agassi Campus

None

Pershing Pershing Middle School

None

25


Washoe Otis E. Vaughn Middle School

Low Performing*

White Pine White Pine Middle School None

*In the bottom 15% of Middle Schools, expected to be rated as 1-Star Schools

High Schools


Carson City Pioneer High School (Alternative) None

Clark

Western High School

None

Clark Delta Academy High School

Bottom 5%; Graduation Rate below 67%

Clark Innovations International Charter School of NV


Clark Desert Pines High School Graduation Rate below 67%

Clark Chaparral High School

None

Clark Charles West Prep (Secondary)

None

Clark Valley High School


None

Clark Del Sol High School


None

Clark Eldorado High School


None

26


Elko

Carlin High School None

Elko West Wendover High School

None

Nye Pathways High School

None

SPCSA Beacon Academy of Nevada

Graduation Rate below 67%

Washoe enCompass Academy High School


Washoe Procter R Hug High School None

White Pine Steptoe Valley High School

Graduation Rate below 67%

27

Appendix C – ESSA Levels of Evidence [as required in the federal ESSA law and Nevada Statute AB7 (2017)]

Activities Level definition “Activities, programs, and interventions” noted demonstrate a statistically significant effect on improving student outcomes

LEVEL 1: STRONG EVIDENCE

Evidence cited is based on: at least 1 well-designed and well-implemented experimental study

LEVEL 2: MODERATE EVIDENCE

Evidence cited is based on: at least 1 well-designed and well-implemented quasi-experimental study

LEVEL 3: PROMISING EVIDENCE

Evidence cited is based on: at least 1 well-designed and well-implemented correlational study with statistical controls for selection bias

“Described programs, services, and/or curriculum” demonstrate a rationale that such activity, strategy, or intervention is likely to improve student outcomes

LEVEL 4: DEMONSTRATES A RATIONALE

Evidence cited is based on: high-quality research findings or positive evaluation, and includes ongoing efforts to examine the effects of such activity, strategy, or intervention

28

Appendix D – Assistance on ESSA Evidence The U.S. Department of Education issued non-regulatory guidance on Using Evidence to Strengthen Education Investments to help in school improvement planning.

Evidence for ESSA is a website developed by the Center for Research and Reform in Education at Johns Hopkins University School of Education to help educators identify programs and practices that meet the ESSA evidence standards.

The What Works Clearinghouse, developed by the Institute of Education Sciences (IES), is a user-friendly database organized by topic and content area to locate studies on specific intervention types to meet ESSA standards.

An LEA Guide for Identifying Evidence-Based Interventions for School Improvement, developed by the Florida Center for Reading Research (FCRR)

Best Evidence Encyclopedia, developed by the Center for Data-Driven Reform in Education at Johns Hopkins University School of Education (not categorized in ESSA evidence tiers)

CCSSO has a list of resources on ESSA evidence-based practices under the School Supports and Interventions section on its website, CCSSO Guide to ESSA.

Results First Clearinghouse Database, developed by the Pew Charitable Trusts (not categorized in ESSA evidence tiers; evaluates interventions as rated by eight national databases)

RAND report on school leadership interventions under ESSA (categorized in ESSA evidence tiers)

Using Evidence to Create Next Generation High Schools, developed by the U.S. Department of Education (not categorized in ESSA evidence tiers)

Roadmap to Evidence Based Reform for Low Graduation Rate High Schools, developed by the Every Student Graduates Center at Johns Hopkins University

https://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/essa/guidanceuseseinvestment.pdf



http://evidenceforessa.org/

https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/

http://fcrr.org/documents/essa/essa_guide_sea.pdf

http://fcrr.org/documents/essa/essa_guide_sea.pdf

http://www.bestevidence.org/

http://www.ccsso.org/ESSA



http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2014/09/results-first-clearinghouse-database

http://www.ccssoessaguide.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/down_rr-1550-1_12-5-2016.pdf

https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/high-school/using-evidence-create-next-gen-highschools.pdf

http://new.every1graduates.org/everyone-graduates-center-roadmap-to-evidence-based-reform-for-low-graduation-rate-high-schools/

http://new.every1graduates.org/everyone-graduates-center-roadmap-to-evidence-based-reform-for-low-graduation-rate-high-schools/

29

Appendix E – School Improvement Program List

Service Provider School Leadership

Development

Data Informed Decision- Making

Contact Email Address

Academy of Urban School Leadership (AUSL)

X X Tre Childress [email protected]

Achievement Network (ANet)

X X Janine Givens-Belsley

[email protected]

Blueprint Schools Network X Matthew Spengler

[email protected]

Community Training and Assistance Center, Inc. (CTAC)

X X William J. Slotnik

[email protected]

Criterion Educational LLC / National Institute for School Leadership (NISL)

X X Josh Tucker [email protected]

Pearson X X Karin Ekanger [email protected] New Classrooms Innovation Partners

X Theresa Poprac [email protected]

New Leaders X Claudia Alfaro [email protected] NYC Leadership Academy (NYCLA)

X Mary Jo Dunnington

[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]








30

Service Provider School Leadership

Development

Data Informed Decision- Making

Contact Email Address

Partners in School Innovation

X X Derek Mitchell [email protected]

School Empowerment

X Alexander Shub [email protected]

Social Policy Research

X Sukey Leshnick [email protected]

TNTP X Tim Hughes Dottie Smith

[email protected] [email protected]

University of Virginia Darden/Curry Partnership for Leaders

X X William Robinson

[email protected]








31

Appendix F – Technical Assistance

Please reach out to any of the following NDE OSSS Title I and/or Grants team members for more information about the application process.

Technical Assistance on 1003(a) Name Email Address Phone Number Gabby Pingue [email protected] (702) 668-4309 Kristina Côté [email protected]

(775) 687-9185

Karen Gordon [email protected] (775) 687-9258 Rhonda Hutchins [email protected]

(702) 668-4344

Colin Usher [email protected] (775) 687-2450

Fiscal/Grants Technical Assistance Name Email Address Phone Number Stefani Hogan [email protected] (775) 687-9177

title i - 1003(a) round 2 - doe.nv. · pdf fileplease pay close attention to the following...

Documents