Q1 2014-2015 District Success Measures Quarterly … 2014-2015 District Success Measures Quarterly Report Updated Metrics: Page: 1.1C Annual Incremental Gain on Performance Objectives

Q1 2014-2015 District Success Measures Quarterly Report

Updated Metrics: Page:

1.1C Annual Incremental Gain on Performance Objectives 2

1.3E LEP Meeting AMAO 5

1.3F 9th Gr LEP graduating in 4 years 5

1.3G 9th Gr Sp Ed graduating in 4 years 5

1.3H Student group participation on state assessments 6

1.4B Students graduating on DHSP or with DLA 7

1.4G IB Program participation rate 9

1.4H Graduating class SAT>=National Average 9

1.4I Graduating class ACT>=National Average 9

1.4J College Ready graduates 10

1.6A Student Attendance 11

2.1E Demonstration Classrooms 13

2.2A Financial Accountability Rating 13

2.2B Self Sustaining funds 13

2.2C Student / Teacher Ratio 14

2.2D Student/ Staff Ratio 14

2.2E Student/ Admin Ratio 14

2.2F Four Months Operating Expenses Balance 14

3.2B Employee Attendance 16

3.2C Retention Rates 16

3.3B Staff Credentials 17

4.1A JPS Clinic Visits 19

5.2A Eligible Volunteers 22

District Success Measures Quarterly Report

Quarter 1 2014-2015 (data as of Nov 30, 2014)

1.1 Achieve Highest Academic Rating for District Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1

TargetActual Quarter Trend 5 yr Goal

Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. Level 2 STAAR to

final phase in

100% 61% 52% <80% 80-89% >90% Q4

B. Level 3 STAAR to

final phase in

25% 21% 20% <20% 20%-

25%

25% Q4

C. Annual incremental

gain on Perf Obj

100% 67.5% 61% <80% 80%-

90%

>90% Q1

Student Achievement

- Measure is to STAAR final performance standard which will be implemented in the 2021-

2022 school year.

- District priority subjects indicated in red text

- Current data is for 2013-14 which is year 0 of the new strategic plan. Year 1 of 2014-2015

has a year 1 target of 61%

- 8th grade students take either 8th grade math or Algebra 1. Algebra 1 is a Pre-AP course.

- Even though the district average for 7th grade reading was 86%, 3 of 5 campuses showed a

decrease in student achievement and the other 2 campuses only had an increase of 1%.

- Measure is to STAAR final performance standard (2021-2022 school year)

- Level 3 ranges are from 78% to 91% depending on subject area.

Due to the changes in the state assessments, all performance objectives not included in the

2012-2013 calculation are now included in the 2013-2014 calculation of percentage of

objectives met. Performance Objectives measure incremental gains over next 5 years and are

based on STAAR final performance standard which will be implemented in the 2021-2022

school year.

n/a - baseline population of metrics changed from prior year so trend will be captured going forward.

BiologyUS History

English 2English 1

8th Grade Science8th Grade Reading

6th Grade MathAlgebra 1

7th Grade Reading 5th Grade Reading6th Grade Reading

5th Grade Math5th Grade Science

3rd Grade Reading 7th Grade Math

7th Grade Writing4th Grade Writing

4th Grade Reading4th Grade Math

8th Grade Math8 Grade Social Studies

3rd Grade MathDistrict

30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

8th Grade Science8th Grade Reading

6th Grade Math7th Grade Reading 7th Grade Math

5th Grade MathBiology

5th Grade ReadingAlgebra 1

US History6th Grade Reading

4th Grade Reading8 Grade Social Studies

4th Grade Math3rd Grade Reading

5th Grade Science7th Grade Writing

3rd Grade MathEnglish 1

8th Grade MathEnglish 2

4th Grade WritingDistrict

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Master Quart Report_Q1 14-15.xlsx2/10/2015

2



Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

D. Meet or Exceed

Progress in Reading,

Math, and Writing

70% R-64%

M- 68.5

W- TBD

R- 62%

M- 68%

W-TBD

<65% 65-69% ≥70% Q4

E. Campus

implementation of RtI

100% tbd tbd tbd tbd tbd Q4

(2015)

new metric tbd tbd

F. Applicable

distinctions earned

100% 74% 68% <85% 85%-

89%

>90% Q4

G. Increase use of

instructional

technology

tbd tbd tbd tbd tbd tbd Q4

(2015)

new metric tbd tbd

Progress measured against year 1 goal

- This progress measure is calculated and communicated via on first citation of Texas

Academic Performance Report (TAPR). Writing progress has been based on English I and II

only. Writing progress not communicated on preliminary TAPR so result will be updated upon

final report in November.

1.1 Achieve Highest Academic Rating for District

66%

61%

44%

62%

68%

64%

68.5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Reading

Math

Writing

Goal 2013-2014 2012-2013


3



1.2 Reading on Grade Level by the End of 2nd Grade Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. Pre-K students

meeting EOY targets

100% 96%

88%

95%

85%

<85% 85%-

90%

>90% Q3

B. K-2 students meeting

EOY targets

100% 91%- D

94% - I

88% - T

89% - D

93% - I

85% -T

<85% 85%-

90%

>90% Q3

-End-of-year (EOY) targets for pre-kindergarten include student performance on kindergarten

readiness skills as measured by the Pre-kindergarten report card and Istation’s Indicators of

Progress (ISIP) which is an early reading assessment.

-Actuals are the year-end 2014 averages across K-2

- Overall trend is negative across DIBELS, IDEL and TRC from K-2 for 2014

- TRC performance in 2nd grade is most notable, however the primary driver of the

performance dip was a change in testing format to a more rigorous approach. Lower scores

were expected given the enhanced rigor.

Kindergarten Readiness

Reading Assessment

Goal

70%

80%

90%

100%

2012-2013 2013-2014

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

K- Dibels K- IDEL K- TRC 1st- Dibels 1st- IDEL 1st- TRC 2nd-Dibels

2nd- IDEL 2nd -TRC

2012 Beg

2012 Mid

2012 End

2013 Beg

2013 Mid

2013 End

2014 Beg

2014 Mid

2014 End

Linear (2014 End )


4



1.3 Meet Federal Accountability Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1

TargetActual Quarter 5 yr Goal

Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. CTE PBMAS <=1 90% 100%

B. BE/ESL PBMAS <= 1 88.5% 88%

C. NCLB PBMAS <= 1 90% 100%

D. Sp Ed PBMAS <= 1 89.2% 89%

E. LEP students meeting

Annual Measurable

Achievement

Objectives (AMAO)

100% 64.6%-E

71%- M

62% - E

70%- M

<90% 90%-

99%

100% Q1

F. 9th gr LEP students

graduating within 4

years

95% 90.1% 87.1% <90% 90%-

95%

≥95% Q1

G. 9th gr Sp Ed

graduating within 4

years

95% 90.5% 80.6% <90% 90%-

95%

≥95% Q1

-93% of all PBMAS indicators measured by a rating of 0, 1, 2, or 3 received a rating of 0 or 1.

CTE – Career and Technical Education

BE/ESL – Bilingual Education/English as a Second Language

NCLB – No Child Left Behind

Sp Ed – Special Education

TEA is making substantial changes to report which includes AMAO results and currently do

not have an ETA on when 2013-14 results will be available

-Data is reported one year in arrears.

-Class of 2013. Based on the 2009-2010 cohort.

-Shows the percent of students receiving their high school diploma on time (in four years) or

earlier.

-LEP: Area of immense concern. 12.9% of LEP students dropped-out in the Class of 2013 as

compared to 3.7% in the Class of 2012. Secondary Administration is in the process of studying

previous and current data patterns to determine the root cause of this issue and put

interventions in place.

-Special Education: 18.5% of students continued high school, while .9% dropped out of high

school.

> 90% <85% 85%-

90%

> 90% Q4

Goal

NCLBCTE

BE/ESL Sp Ed

85%

90%

95%

100%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

AMAO1: K-2

AMAO1: K-2 Standard

AMAO1: 3-12

AMAO1: 3-12 Standard

AMAO2: US res 1-4 yrs

AMAO2: US res 1-4 yrs Standard

AMAO2: US res 5+ yrs

AMAO2: US res 5+ yrs Standard

AMAO3: ELA Performance

AMAO3: ELA Perf Target

AMAO3: ELA Participation

AMAO3: ELA Part Target

AMAO3: Math Performance

AMAO3: Math Perf Target

AMAO3: Math Participation

AMAO3: Math Part Target

2011-2012 2012-2013

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

Class of 2010 Class of 2011 Class of 2012 Class of 2013

LEP Sp Ed All Students Goal


5



Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

H. Student group

participation on state

assessments

≥95% > 95% 100% <90% 90%-

94%

≥95% Q1

- Pacific Islander subgroup only less than 100% (98%)

1.3 Meet Federal Accountability

90% 95% 100%

Afr Am

Hisp

White

Am Ind

Asian

Pac Is

Two

Sp Ed

Eco D

ELL

2013-2014 2012-2013


6



1.4 College Ready Graduates

Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1

Target Actual Quarter5 yr Goal

Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. GT students at Level

3 STAAR

≥90% 72% 67% <85% 85%-

90%

≥90% Q4

B. Students graduating

on DHSP or with DLA

100% 95.2% 94% <95% 95%-

99%

100% Q1

C. Students Qualifying

through APQT scoring

>=3 in each content

area on AP exam

80% 56% 50% <75% 75%-

79%

≥80% Q4

- Range of scores 36% to 86%

- Decline in performance by approx 30% in Math 4 and Reading 8 from prior year

- Scores need to increase on average 6 points in year 1 (from average of 67% to 72%)

- Scores need to increase by 11 points for Math 4 and 7 points for Reading 8.

- 8th Grade Math students are reflected in 8th Grade Math and Algebra I. Algebra I is a pre-AP

class.

Advanced Placement Qualifying Test (APQT) is a locally designed assessment which serves as

a predictor of success of the actual AP test. The district covers the cost of the AP test for

students scoring >=3 on the APQT. The district is in the process of studying the decline of 3%

points from 2012-2013 to 2013-2014.

85%

90%

95%

100%

2010 2011 2012 2013

6th Grade Math8th Grade Reading

5th Grade Reading5th Grade Math

7th Grade Math7th Grade Reading

Algebra 18th Grade Science6th Grade Reading

5th Grade Science3rd Grade Reading Biology4th Grade Writing4th Grade Reading

7th Grade Writing3rd Grade Math

8 Grade Social StudiesEnglish 1

English 2US History

4th Grade Math8th Grade Math

District

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

48%

50%

52%

54%

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014


7



1.4 College Ready Graduates Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

D. The District’s AP

results will meet or

exceed the global

average for each AP

content area

100% 94% 92% <95% 95%-

99%

100% Q4

E. IB Students scoring

>=4 in each content

area on exam

≥90% 86% 85% <85% 85%-

89%

≥90% Q4

F. IB diploma rate >=

the world average

>=World

Average

83% 83% <73% 73%-

77%

78% Q4

-5 yr Target is meeting 100% of the global average. The global average is currently 59% and

the district scored 54% which is 92% of the global average goal. The global average will be

recalculated annually based on actual test results.

The world average for 2013-2014 was 78% and will be recalculated annually.

75%

80%

85%

90%

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

45%

50%

55%

60%

BELL TRINITY HEB

School Global Avg

70%

75%

80%

85%

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014


8



1.4 College Ready Graduates Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

G. IB program

participation rate

juniors >20% 16% 19.5% <15% 15%-

20%>20% Q1

seniors >15% 13.4% 16.4% <10% 10%-

15%>15% Q1

H. Graduating class

SAT>=Nat Avg SAT

100% 100% 100.3% <95% 95%-

99%

100% Q1

I. Graduating class

ACT>=Nat Avg ACT

100% 100% 104% <95% 95%-

99%

100% Q1

- 5 yr target of 100% is the % HEB Composite score of the National Average score.

- Full results reported at Oct 27 Board Meeting. National Average for 2013-2014 was 20.9 and

HEB Composite Average was 21.9 exceeding the national average (therefore, performance is

104% of the national average).

- 5 yr target is 100% of the students meeting that year's National Average

- Full results reported Oct 27 Board Meeting. National Average for 2013-2014 was total score

of 1497 and HEB total score was 1501 exceeding the national average (therefore,

performance is 100.3% of the national average).

- exceeded year 1 target with both juniors and seniors participation rate increasing from last

year.

96%

98%

100%

102%

104%

200

700

1200

1700

SAT Reading SAT Math SAT Writing Total SAT

% o

f N

atio

nal

A

vera

ge

SAT

Sco

re

2013-2014 Goal % Met

95%

100%

105%

110%

19.5

20.5

21.5

22.5

23.5

ACT English ACT Math ACT Reading ACT Science ACT Composite

% o

f N

atio

nal

A

vera

ge

AC

T Sc

ore

2013-2014 Goal % Met

20%

15%

15%

13%

19.5%

16.4%

juniors

seniors

2014-2015 2013-2014 Goal


9



Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

J. College-ready

graduates in English

Language Arts,

Mathematics, and Both

Subjects

≥90% E-83%

M-79%

B-72%

E- 78%

M - 84%

B- 72%

<85% 85%-

90%

≥90% Q1

-English Language Arts (ELA) performance decreased 4% from prior year. ELA is a priority

subject area for the district. Specific interventions have been developed and implemented.

-Math performance increased 9% from prior year exceeding Year 1 Target

-Combined performance increased 5% from prior year meeting Year 1 Target

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

ELA Math Both

2012 2011 Goal 2013


10



1.5 Career Readiness Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. CTE students pass

rate on cert / licensure

exams

100% 96% 95% <95% 95%-

99%

100% Q4

B. 9th Gr students with

documented

endorsement choice

and supporting class

schedule

100% tbd tbd tbd tbd tbd Q4 2015 new metric tbd tbd

C. 10th Gr students

with documented

personal graduation

plan supporting chosen

endorsement(s)

100% tbd tbd tbd tbd tbd Q4 2015 new metric tbd tbd

1.6 Increased Student Attendance Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. Student group

attendance rate

≥97% 97% 95.39% <92% 92%-

96%

≥97% Q1-Q3

-Actual is reported as of last completed 6 weeks.

- 3rd 6 week attendance trending lower than same time last year but consistently below 1st

and 2nd six weeks. Trends is common due to onset timing of flu season.

90%

92%

94%

96%

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14

95%

97%

99%

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

1st 6W 2nd 6W 3rd 6W


11



1.7 Increased Completion Rate (Gr 9-12) and Decreased Annual Dropout Rate (Gr 7-8) Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. 9th Gr students in

each student group

graduating from high

school in 4 years

≥95% 95% 96.7% <92% 92%-

95%

≥95% Q3

B. 7th and 8th Gr

student drop out rate

by student group

<2% 0% 0% >3% 2%-3% <2% Q3

- Data is reported one year in arrears

- Data is reported one year in arrears

90%

92%

94%

96%

98%

Class of 2010 Class of 2011 Class of 2012

0.0%

0.1%

0.2%

2011 (08-09) 2012 (09-10) 2013 (10-11) 2014 (11-12)


12



2.1 Continuous Improvement Approach to Performance Excellence Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1

Target

Actual Quarter Trend 5 yr Goal

Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. Employee use of CI 100% 92% 91% <95% 95%-

99%

100% Q3

B. Dept prof rate w/CI 100% 92% 91% <95% 95%-

99%

100% Q3

C. Campus prof rate

w/CI

100% 92% 91% <95% 95%-

99%

100% Q3

D. Class prof rate w/CI 100% 92% 91% <95% 95%-

99%

100% Q3

E. Demonstration

Classrooms

>25% n/a 23.39% <23% 23-25% >25% Q1 Trend

2.2 Efficient Use of District Resources Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. Highest Rating on

financial accountability

100% 100% 100% <98% 98%-

99%

100% Q1

B. Self sustaining non-

Gen Operating funds

100% 100% 100% <98% 98%-

99%

100% Q1

- In order to protect the district’s General Operating budget and its instructional focus, the

district’s 30+ non-General Operating funds are expected to be self-sustaining. Prior year

audit data is used to assess this success measure. 100% of the district’s non-General

Operating funds continue to be self-supporting and require no General Operating subsidy.

Effective and Efficient Operations

-The Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST) is the state’s financial accountability

measurement tool. The district receives a score on each of twenty financial management

indicators using prior year audit data. The district’s overall financial accountability rating is

then based on its composite score. HEB ISD continued its trend of receiving the maximum

points and a Superior Achievement rating. Graph is the year of the report and the report is

data from prior year audit (so actual results are two years in arrears)

Total number of Classrooms designated as Demonstration Classroom for 2012/2013/2014

= 23.39%

Teachers still in district with DC designation = 21.5%

The process is on hold for 2014-2015 as the District will be revisiting the process and

qualifiers for Demonstration Classroom status.

80% 82% 84% 86% 88% 90% 92% 94% 96% 98% 100%

2013-2014

2013-2014 Goal

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2008-2009

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

2013-2014


13




Target

Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

C. Student/ Teacher

>=16:1

16 16 16.8 <14 14-15 16 Q1


Target

Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

D. Student /

Staff>=8.5:1

8.5 8.5 8.9 <8.1 8.1-8.3 >8.4 Q1

E. Student/ Admin

>=215:1

215 215 224.2 <200 200-215 >215 Q1

F. 4 Mo Operating Exp 4 mo 4 mo 5.70 <3.8 3.8-4.0 4.00 Q1

- Because the majority of the district’s funding comes from local property taxes and

property tax payments typically occur in late December/early January, it is important that

the district maintain at least four months in reserves to meet its financial obligations until

the district begins receiving its tax revenue. Capital project initiatives during the last

several fiscal years have reduced the district’s reserves; however, these projects were

intentional, focused, and non-recurring initiatives and did not reduce the General

Operating Fund Balance below the required minimum.

The Student/Staff Ratio is calculated using Fall PEIMS Snapshot data. It represents the

total number of students divided by the total number of district employees on that date.

Because payroll costs represent 87%-88% of the district’s General Operating expenditures,

the Student/Staff Ratio is a key indicator of financial health. The historical trend illustrates

adherence to well-defined staffing formulas, staffing stability, and stable financial

conditions for the district. State budget cuts in 2011-2012 required higher ratios in order to

maintain financial stability. HEB ISD’s target ratio increased from 8:1 to 8.5:1 as a result.

The Student/Administrator Ratio is calculated using Fall PEIMS Snapshot data. It

represents the total number of students divided by the total number of administrators on

that date. Because payroll costs represent 87%-88% of the district’s General Operating

expenditures, the Student/Administrator Ratio is a key indicator of financial health. The

historical trend illustrates the district’s focus on instruction and its commitment to

controlling administrative costs. State budget cuts in 2011-2012 required higher ratios in

order to maintain financial stability. HEB ISD’s target ratio increased from 200:1 to 215:1

as a result.

-The Student/Teacher Ratio is calculated using Fall PEIMS Snapshot data. It represents the

total number of students divided by the total number of teachers on that date. Because

payroll costs represent 87%-88% of the district’s General Operating expenditures, the

Student/Teacher Ratio is a key indicator of financial health. The historical trend illustrates

adherence to well-defined staffing formulas, staffing stability, and stable financial

conditions for the district. State budget cuts in 2011-2012 required higher ratios in order to

maintain financial stability. HEB ISD’s target ratio increased from 15:1 to 16:1 as a result. 14.0

14.5

15.0

15.5

16.0

16.5

17.0

17.5

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

8.0

8.2

8.4

8.6

8.8

9.0

9.2

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

205

210

215

220

225

230

235

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

4.8

5.0

5.2

5.4

5.6

5.8

6.0

6.2

2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014


14



3.1 Build Cultural Proficiencies to Create an Inclusive Work Environment Measure 5 yr Target Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. HEB ISD employees

indicate they relate to

and interact effectively

with other employees

across cultures

≥90% tbd tbd ≤85% 86%-

89%

≥90% Q3 new metric tbd tbd

B. HEB ISD employees

indicate that other

employees effectively

relate to and interact

with them

≥90% tbd tbd ≤85% 86%-

89%


C. Employee

participation in PD to

gain an understanding

of one’s own culture,

other cultures, and

cross-cultural skills

100% tbd tbd ≤85% 86%-

89%


Quality Teaching, Administrative, and Support Staff


15



3.2 Increased Employee Engagement and Satisfaction Measure 5 yr Target Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. Employee rate of

engagement and

satisfaction on District

Employee Survey

≥95% 96% 96% ≤90% 91%-

94%

≥95% Q3

B. Employee

attendance rate

≥97% 97% 96.70% ≤91% 92%-

96%

≥97% Q1, Q2,

Q3

C. On-target, meet, or

exceed employee

retention rates

1. Non-teaching prof

2. Teachers

3. Para/ Aux

≥90%

PS/Adm

≥90% T

≥85%

P/Aux

1. ≥90%

2. ≥90%

3. ≥83%

1. 93.8%

2. 89.8%

3. 87.2%

1. ≤88%

2. ≤88%

3. ≤82%

1. 89%

2. 89%

3. 83%-

84%

1. .≥90%

2. ≥90%

3. ≥85%

Q1

D.Leadership positions

filled with quality

internal candidates,

when appropriate

≥95% tbd tbd ≤90% 91%-

94%


-Prior measures : Staff Satisfaction and Feeling Connected at Work

An inverse relationship occurred in 2012-2013 causing adjustment to the survey questions due

to the evaluation of an entire category in 2013-2014 as opposed to a single indicator.

- Attendance rate trending slightly above prior year.

- Data is a year in arrears.

- Status against 5 yr target is based on least performing metric (para/ aux retention); however,

para / aux retention rate increased from 82% to 87.2% showing improvement. Para / aux /

support reported as one aggregate for 2014

- Our goal is the retention of quality employees. In analyzing the 2013-2014 separation data,

the highest number of employees separated due to retirement. Retirements increased by 36%

over 2012-2013. In addition to retirements, career advancement, moving out of the DFW area,

staying home as a full-time parent or working only part-time, working closer to home, and

health issues were the other responses most often given. HEB ISD realizes job engagement and

satisfaction have a direct impact on employee retention, and as reflected in the District

Improvement Plan, campuses and departments utilize results from the annual HEB ISD

Employee Survey to identify focus areas.

92%

94%

96%

98%

100%

2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014

Staff Satisfaction Staff - Feeling Connected

95.0%

96.0%

97.0%

98.0%

99.0%

1st 6W 2nd 6W 3rd 6W 4th 6W 5th 6W 6th 6 W Yr Average

2013-2014 2014-2015

74% 76% 78% 80% 82% 84% 86% 88% 90% 92% 94% 96%

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Retention Rates

auxiliary support staff paraprofessional (+aux in 2014) teacher administrator


16



3.3 Quality Employee Performance Measure 5 yr Target Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. Allocated classroom

teacher positions filled

by the first day of new

teacher training

≥95% ≥95% 97% ≤92% 93%-

94%

≥95% Q4

B. Staff maintaining

fed/ state credentials

100% 100% 100% ≤98% 99% 100% Q1

C. Employee appraisals

aligned HEB ISD quality

employee criteria

100% 20% 20% ≤79% 80%-

99%

100% Q4

D. Employee appraisals

evaluating use of

systems approach to CI

100% 50% 17% ≤79% 80%-

99%

100% Q4

- Para/ Auxiliary employees criteria has been established and is in pilot.

- The remaining employee categories are: Admin/ Technical Support ; Professionals (Non-

Teachers); Teachers; Administrative.

- Evaluations, as redesigned, will include an overlay of the quality employee criteria which

includes a systems approach to continuous improvement. There will be other factors (e. job

descriptions, goal setting) included in the redesign, however, for the purpose of this Success

Measure, quality employee criteria will be the priority.

- Nurses evaluation is complete.

- Paraprofessional evaluation is in pilot for yr 2014-2015

- Auxilary evaluation will be completed in Year 1

- Remaining evaluations are planned for Teachers, Professionals (Campus Support professionals

and administrators, and District Support professionals and administrators), and Job Specific

roles (social workers, etc)

85%

90%

95%

100%

2011 2012 2013 2014

0%

25%

50%

0%

10%

20%

99.80%

99.85%

99.90%

99.95%

100.00%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014


17



3.4 Focused Professional Development Program Measure 5 yr Target Yr 1

Target

Actual Quarter Trend 5 yr. Goal

Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. PD plans aligned to

District goals,

applicable PD

Frameworks and state

standards/reqts

100% 100% 100% <91% 91%-

95%

≥96% Q4

B. District department

use of PD Framework to

improve employee

performance

100% 100% 100% <91% 91%-

95%

≥96% Q4

C. Staff use of PD

Framework to improve

performance

100% 100% 100% <91% 91%-

95%

≥96% Q4

D. Survey respondents

indicating positive

correlation between

District professional

development and

improved student

achievement

≥90% 95% 95% <85% 85%-

90%

≥90% Q4

E. Professional new

hires (district or

position) beginning

District job aligned

onboarding process

prior to assuming their

duties

100% tbd tbd <95% 95%-

99%

100% Q2 tbd tbd

- Current data for Q4 reflects that the plans were published and utilized. 2014-2015 will be a

baseline year to capture the rate of revision and utilization. Data is one year in arrears

- Year 1 progress based on end of year

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2011-2012

2012-2013

2013-2014

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2012

2013

2014

85%

90%

95%

100%

2010 2011 2012 2013

Beginning of Year Mid-Year End of Year


18



4.1 Safe, Orderly, and Healthy Learning Environments Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to Yr

1

4.1A. Clinic visit volume

within 5% of JPS school-

based health clinic

capacity (171 of

180/mo- days closed)

513 513 561 <500 500-513 ≥513 Q1

Q2

Q3

B. Eligible participants

served by identified

community outreach

partners

≥90% tbd tbd <80% 80%-

90%

≥90% Q4 2015

C. Students who feel

safe at school

≥95% 90% 89% <90% 90%-

94%

≥95% Q4

D. Parents who feel

their children are safe

at school

≥95% 95% 97% <90% 90%-

94%

≥95% Q4

- Based on annual student survey responses

tbd

-Based on annual parent survey responses

Safe, Healthy, and Nurturing Schools

Q1 2014-15: JPS has changed reporting methodology to capture only provider visits (i.e. not

nurse, lab draws, etc.) Therefore, counts are no longer comparative to prior quarters.

Metric definition has been revised to conform to change in count and to exclude the days

the clinic is closed per month.

new metric

tbd

80%

85%

90%

95%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

90%

95%

100%

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

200

450

700

950

Q1 Q2 Q3

2013-2014 2014-2015 Goal


19



4.1 Safe, Orderly, and Healthy Learning Environments Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to Yr

1

E. Employees who feel

safe in the work

environment

≥95% 95% 95% <90% 90%-

94%

≥95% Q4

F. K-12 Students

performing

satisfactorily on state

physical fitness

assessment

≥90% tbd tbd <85% 85%-

89%

≥90% Q2

G. Parents, staff, and

students agree

campuses have

discipline mgmt plan

that supports a safe and

orderly learning

environment

≥90% 87% P-96%

Sta-

85%

Stu-

81%

<85% 85%-

89%

≥90% Q4

Results anticipated from TEA in February 2015.

new metric

- Based on employee survey

- Year 1 progress measured from lowest score (students) to year 1 target

- Based on survey responses

tbdtbd

90%

95%

100%

2013 2014

70%

75%

80%

85%

90%

95%

100%

2013 2014

Parents Students Staff Goal


20



4.2 Focus on the Whole Child Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to Yr

1

A. Gr 7-12 students

participating in clubs,

organizations or

activities

≥80% 75% 74% <75% 75%-

79%

≥80% Q3

B. Varsity athletic teams

advancing to post

season competition

>60% tbd tbd tbd tbd tbd Q3 new metric tbd tbd

C. Students in varsity

band, choir or orchestra

earning a Division 1

rating at UIL Solo and

Ensemble assessments

100% tbd tbd tbd tbd tbd Q3 new metric - tbd tbd

65%

70%

75%

80%

2012-2013 2013-2014


21



5.1 Increased Stakeholder Satisfaction with HEB ISD Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. Survey respondents

rating District as

Excellent or Very Good.

>90% 89.2% 89% <88% 88%-

90%

>90% Q3

B. Passed District

elections

100% 100% n/a n/a none scheduled n/a n/a

5.2 Increased Stakeholder Engagement Measure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. Eligible volunteers >6000 6000 6437 <5000 5000-

5999

>6000 Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

B. Level of Adopters >250 250 400 <200 200-250 >250 Q4

C. Survey Participation

rate

>50% 26% 20% <45% 45%-

50%

>50% Q3

- Survey participation dropped 8% from prior year.

- 150 new adopters have been added since Q4 2013

Enduring Relationships with Stakeholders

n/a

- The database of volunteers also includes anyone visiting a school campus (possibly for

other purposes such as visiting the lunch room)

- In the 3Q of each year, volunteers generally increase

0.85

0.9

0.95

2012-2013 2013-2014

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

2012-2013 2013-2014

100

200

300

400

2012-2013 2013-2014

0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000

2011-2012

2012-2013

2013-2014

2014-2015

Q 4 Q 3 Q2 Q 1


22



5.3 Increased Customer Service SatisfactionMeasure 5 yr

Target

Yr 1

Target


Status

Progress to

Yr 1

A. Survey respondents

rating District as

Excellent or Very Good.

>90% 89.2% 89% <88% 88%-

90%

>90% Q3

0.85

0.9

0.95

2012-2013 2013-2014


23

Documents

Q1 2014-2015 District Success Measures Quarterly … 2014-2015 District Success Measures Quarterly Report Updated Metrics: Page: 1.1C Annual Incremental Gain on Performance Objectives