LINCOLN COUNTY SCHOOLS BOARD OFFICE
10 MARLAND AVENUE
HAMLIN, WV 25523 WV 0
Technology Plan 2008-2010
E-rate funding years 2008-2010
Technology Plan
Technology Plan submitted: October 08, 2008
Page 1 of 23
Planning Committee
Name
Title
Bethann Joyce
Teacher, LCHS
Bill Linville
Director of Special Projects
Brian Crist
Director of Lincoln Primary Care Center
Bruce Tulley
Teacher, Midway Elementary
Cari Pauley
Teacher, LCHS
Carolyn Topping
Tech Contact - Harts
Cheryl Dingess
Speech Pathologist
Dana Smith
Director of Maintenance & Transportation
Dana Snyder
Principal, LCHS
Danny Dailey
County Technology Coordinator
Darlene Tackett
Middle School Teacher, Duval PK-8
David L. Roach
Representation
*Title IV *Administration
*Technology
*Technology
*Administration
Debbie Dingess
Principal, Harts Primary
*Technology
Doris Wilson
Tech Contact
*Technology
Doug Smith
Director of Special Education
Dr. Rudy Pauley
Marshall University Faculty
Dr. Stan Maynard Marshall University Faculty
Eddie Smith
Principal, Hamlin School
Elizabeth Lucas
Tech Contact -Harts Primary
*Technology
Esther Nelson
Teacher, LCHS
*Technology
Forrest Cummings Principal, West Hamlin Elementary
Greg Gosnay
Tech Contact - Yeager Career Center
*Technology
Jeff Midkiff
County Instructional Math Coach
*Title I
Jeff Huffman
Assistant Superintendent
*Title I
Jeff Huffman
Assistant Superintendent
*Title I
John Shimp
Assistant Principal, Lincoln County High
Jonathan Escue
Science Teacher, LCHS & AFT President
Justin Coburn
Student, LCHS
*Student
Kevin Prichard
Principal, Guyan Valley Middle School
*Technology
Leigh Childers
Director, 21st Century Grant
Mary Ann Patton
Tech Contact-Duval PK-8
*Technology
Melinda Stone Bills Business Owner
Olive Hager
Community
Ollie Hunting
Director of Attendance & WVEA President
Robin Stratton
Tech Contact - West Hamlin
Sandra Burton
Director of County DHHR
Tammy Adkins
Director of Family Resource Network
Describe how parents, community and other appropriate stakeholder members are involved in the development and/or revision of the
plan.
The Five Year Strategic Plan was developed through consultation with principals, teachers, parents, and community
members.
Parents and community members had opportunities to be involved in the planning process through the quarterly Parent
Advisory Council Meetings conducted at the county office. Additionally, parents were invovled at each school during the
plan development.
Principals were involved during the planning process as we discussed plans during monthly principal meetings.
Additionally, principals were involved as we reviewed data to determine academic areas to be addressed through
professional development and action steps. Principals were also involved in the development of budgets allocating funds to
address academic needs.
Teachers were involved at the school level as they met with administration and School Support Teams to determine needs
for their local school which impacts the plans for the school system.
Monitoring and Review
The county level curriculum team will serve as the primary monitoring and review group. This team is made up of the
superintendent, assistant superintendent, co-coordinators of federal programs, director of special projects
including assessment, special education director, and technology coordinator. The staff members from the federal programs
office also serve as coordinators of reading/language arts as well as mathematics.
The staff members from the federal programs office will have primary responsibility for monitoring the implementation of
professional development and action steps directly supported from that office. As mentioned before, these two staff
Page 2 of 23
members also have the responsibility of supervision of reading/language arts and mathematics respectively. Based on
that, it is natural that they serve as the primary monitors of these activities. The assistant superintendent is also actively
involved with the federal programs (Title I, Title II, and Title VI), so this staff member will also serve as a monitoring
agent for the implementation of activities related to and/or funded by the various programs. The special education director
is primarily responsible for the initiatives in the special education office and will serve as the primary monitor for such.
The staff member responsible for assessment works with the special education office, federal programs office, as well as the
assistant superintendent and assists with the utilization of data from WESTEST, Wrting Asssessment, etc. Additionally,
this staff member leads the development and implementation, with the assistance of the language arts and math
supervisors, of the benchmark assessments. The technolgy coordinator utilizes all avialable resources to provide technology
support to meet the goals of the school system and monitors such.
Unlike many county school systems, the staff members in this county office share multiple responsibilities and work closely
to implement the myriad of educational offerings as well as the support of such. This team meets frequently, a minimum of
one time per week, to discuss progress toward goals, objectives, action steps, and professional development offerings. All
of the staff members are directly involved in every aspect of the stategic plan and share the monitorng and supervision of
such. Additionally, these staff members participate in weekly classroom walkthroughs designed to monitor implementation
of lessons learned in the multiple professional development offerings. Following such classroom visits, the curriculum
team sits down with the building principal and addresses our observations as well as provide guidance as to what needs to be
addressed in order to meet the expectations as provided. The team also provides opportunities for buiding principals to
discuss what county office administrators can do to support them as well as the staff to achieve the student
achievement goals which have been noted and shared.
General discussions regarding progress and next steps take place during monthly principal meetings. At this time,
principals are afforded opportunities to share thoughts regarding progress being made toward the attainment of goals.
Principals are expected to have these discussions with their staff members during the staff meetings at each school.
The superintendent also meets monthly with teacher representatives from each school to discuss plans and activities.
This time is also used to update staff members as to progress made toward the goals in the county.
Page 3 of 23
Core Beliefs
1. Through continuous improvement, our school system will create the environment necessary for all students to achieve
excellence.
2. Quality teaching and high expectations are the most influential factors in student achievement.
3. Parents and the community are valued partners in our school system.
Mission Statement
To value and strive for excellence from students and staff.
Page 4 of 23
Data Analysis
Key Outcome Indicators: Briefly describe the conclusion reached after examining trend information and benchmark assessments. Then, summarize the overall
implications for the Five-Year Strategic Plan.
After reviewing the trend data for Lincoln County, the following is evident:
Gains have been made in elementary mathematics
Gains have been made in high school mathematics
Gains have been made in elementary reading/language arts
Gains have been made in middle school reading/language arts
No gains were realized in middle school mathematics
Lincoln County failed to make AYP in the following areas: middle school mathematics in the special education and low SES subgroups; middle school language
arts in all subgroups; elementary language arts in the special education subgroup
External Trend Data: Examine the trends in the community to determine external factors that affect student performance and broaden the committee's understanding of
the trends that affect how students should be prepared for the future.
A steady decline in enrollment has negatively impacted the funding available for professional positions in Lincoln County; however, with consolidation of the high
schools, additional course offerings are available for all secondary students.
According to the latest census, there is a pattern of slight population increase but with dramatic changes in the age level composition of the population. There is a
decrease in child-bearing ages and an increase in the population over 55 years of age.
A steady high percentage of students receiving or qualifying for free and/or reduced meals indicates a high level of poverty among families with school age children. This
high level of poverty (approximately 66%) negatively affects the knowledge (especially in the area of language development) that our children have obtained prior to
school enrollment.
Student Achievement Data: The core of the Five-Year Strategic Plan is the establishment of the strategic five-year goals. By Policy, these goals must focus on improved
student achievement. Thus, careful study of school system achievement trends is essential to broaden the committee's understanding. Items to review may include
WESTEST reports, writing assessment, end of course exams, ACT Plan ACT Explore, SAT and ACT.
During the 2003-2004 school year, there were seven elementary schools (K-6) in Lincoln County and four high schools (7-12). The State Assessment results for
that school year indicates that three of the seven elementary schools met AYP while two of the four high schools met AYP. Overall, the school system failed to
meet AYP in the in the area of mathematics (elementary special education, secondary special education, and elementary low ses), and in the area of
reading/language arts (elementary special education, secondary special education, elementary low ses, and secondary low ses).
For the 2003/2004 school year, the percentage of students scoring at 2.0 and above are as follows: State standard--70%; county 4th--84%, county 7th--81%, and county
10th--87%.
During the 2004-2005 school year, there were seven elementary schools (K-6) in Lincoln County and four high schools (7-12). The State Assessment results for
that school year indicates that six of the seven elementary schools met AYP while one of the four high schools met AYP. Overall, the school system failed to
meet AYP in the area of mathematics (secondary special education), and in the area of reading/language arts (elementary special education, secondary special
education, elementary low ses, and secondary low ses).
For the 2004/2005 school year (using the new 6 point rubric), the percentage of 4th grade students scoring at or above mastery was 69%. Also, for 2004/2005, 7th graders
scoring at or above mastery was 76% for descriptive, 63% for expository, 70% for narrative, and 68% for persuasion. For 2004/2005, 10th graders scoring at or above
mastery was 82% for descriptive , 83% for expository, 74% for narrative, and 74% for persuasive.
During the 2005-2006 school year, there were seven elementary schools (K-6) in Lincoln County and four high schools (7-12). The State Assessment results for
that school year indicates that all seven elementary schools met AYP while none of the four high schools met AYP. Overall, the school system failed to meet
AYP in the area of mathematics (elementary special education, secondary special education), and in the area of reading/language arts (elementary special
education, secondary special education, and secondary low ses). Additionally, none of our high schools met AYP---three due to assessment scores and one due to
not meeting the graduation requirement.
For the 2005-2006 school year, 75% of the fourth graders scored above mastery (state average 75%); 62% of the seventh graders scored above mastery (state average
75%); and in tenth grade 60% scored above mastery (state average 79%).
During the 2006-2007 school year, there were five elementary schools (two PK-8 configurations, three PK-5 configurations, and one PK-4 configuration), two
middle schools (5-8), and one high school (9-12). Due to consolidation, six "new" schools were created and were not held accountable for AYP purposes. Of
those schools that were held accountable only one failed to meet AYP in the area of reading/language arts (elementary special education and low ses).
For the 2006-2007 school year, the percentage of fourth grade students scoring proficient on the Writing Assessment dropped from 75% to 60% (State Average fell from
75% to 70%). The percentage of seventh grade students scoring proficient on the Writing Assessment fell from 62% to 56% (State Average increased from 75% to
76%). The percentage of tenth grade students scoring proficient on the Writing Assessment increased from 60% to 77% (State Average increased from 79% to 87%)
Page 5 of 23
•
For the 2007-2008 school year, three of four elementary schools met AYP, one of four middle schools met AYP, and Lincoln County High School
did not meet AYP. In the case of Lincoln County High School, academic standards were met which would have allowed the school to meet AYP, but the
graduation rate was too low.
Elementary Math Achievement (Benchmark 72.50%)
Grade 3: Students in the 3rd Grade (All Students) had 5.66% of the students scoring at the Novice Level, 23.77% of
the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 47.17% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level, 16.60% of
the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, and 6.79% of the students scoring at the Distinguished Level, and
a total of 70.57% of the students being Proficient. There is no real discrepancy found in the achievement levels
between the Male Subgorup and Female Subgroup in grade 3. The is a large descrepancy found at grade 3 is
comparing the Special Education Subgroup with the Non Special Education Subgroup. There were 56.45% of the
students scoring proficient in the Special Education Subgroup compared to 74.88% of students in the Non Special
Education Subgroup. Additionally, there is a large descrepancy found when comparing the Low SES Subgorup
with the Non Low SES Subgroup. 64.10% of the students in the Low SES Subfroup scored at the Proficient Level
while 88.57% of the students in the Non Low SES Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level.
Grade 4: Students in the 4th Grade (All Students) had 3.64% of the students scoring at the Novice Level, 26.55% of
the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 43.64% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level, 2.73% of the
students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, 5.45% of the students scoring at the Distinguished Level, and a total
of 69.82% of the students being Proficient. Like the 3rd Grade, the is no real discrepancy between the Male
Subgroup and the Female Subgroup. The largest descrepancy is found when comparing the Special Education
Subgroup to the Non Special Educaton Subgroup. 53.13% of the students in the Special Education Subgroup scored
at the Proficient Level compared to 74.88% of the students in the Non Special Education Subgroup.
Grade 5: Students in the 5th Grade (All Students) had 2.62% of the students score at the Novice Level, 2.60% of
the students score at the Partial Mastery Level, 51.31% of the students score at the Mastery Level, 18.35% of the
students at the Above Mastery Level, 7.12% of the students score at the Distinguished Level, and a total of 76.68%
of the students being Proficient. 78.76% of the females scored at the Proficient Level while 75.32% of the males
scored at the Proficient Level. This represents approximately a 3% gap which is a larger gap than found at grade 3
or grade 4. The gaps continue to widen when comparing the Special Education Subgroup to the Non Special
Education Subgroup and the Low SES Subgroup to the Non Low SES Subgroup. 51.85% of the students in the
Special Edcution Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 83.10% of the students in the Non Special
Education Subgroup. 72.50% of the students in the Low SES Subroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to
89.55% of the students in the Non Low SES Subgroup.
Middle School Math Achievement (Benchmark 70.00 Proficient)
Grade 6: Students in the 6th Grade (All Students) had 13.64% of the students score at the Novice Level, 25.00% of
the students score at the Partial Mastery Level, 45.83% of the students score at the Mastery Level, 13.64% of the
students score at the Above Mastery Level, 1.89% of the students score at the Distinguished Level, and a total of
61.36% of the students being Proficient. The gap widens when comparing Females and Males. 66.675 of the
students in the Female Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 57.14% of the students in the Male
Subgroup. 55.56% of the students in the Low SES Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 78.79% of
the students in the Non Low SES Subgroup. Additionally, there is a definite achievement gap when comparing the
students in the Special Education Subgroup to the students in the Non Special Education Subgroup. 34.43% of the
students in the Special Education Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 69.45% of the students in the
Non Special Education Subgroup.
Grade 7: Students in the 7th Grade (All Students) had 9.19% of the students scoring at the Novice Level, 26.84% of
the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 47.79% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level, 13.24% of
the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, 2.94% of the students scoring at the Distinguished Level, and a
total of 63.97% of the students being Proficient. The achievement gap continues to widen when comparing the
Female Subgroup and the Male Subgroup. 69.57% of the students in the Female Subgroup scored at the Proficient
Level compared to 58.21% of the students in the Male Subgroup. There remains a distinguished achievement gap
between the Low SES Subgroup and the Non Low SES Subgroup. 57.22% of the students in the Low SES
Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 78.22% of the students in the Non Low SES Subgroup. Again,
students in the Special Education Subgroup are performing at a lower level than students in the Non Special
Page 6 of 23
Education Subgroup. 35.09% of the students in the Special Education Subgroup are scoring at the Proficient Level
compared to 71.63% of the students in the Non Special Education Subgroup.
Grade 8: Students in the 8th Grade (All Students) had 5.32% of the students scoring at the Novice Level, 28.90% of
the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 40.68% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level, 17.11% of
the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, 7.98% of the students scoring at the Proficient Level, and a total of
65.78% of the students being Proficient. The gap in achievement when comparing the Female Subgroup to the Male
Subgroup is significantly lower in grade 8 as compared to grade 6 and grade 7. 67.38% of the students in the
Female Subgroup are scoring at the Proficient Level compared to 63.93% of the students in the Male Subgroup. The
achievement gap is also less at grade 8 when comparing students in the Low SES Subgroup with students in the Non
Low SES Subgroup. 64.09% of the students in the Low SES Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to
69.51% of the students in the Non Low SES Subgroup. However, there remains a significant achievement gap
when comparing students in the Special Education Subgroup to students in the Non Special Education Subgroup.
21.74% of the students in the Special Education Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 75.12% of the
students in the Non Special Education Subgroup.
High School Math Achievement (Benchmark 65.83%)
Grade 10: Students in the 10th Grade (All Students) had 11.24% of the students scoring at the Novice Level,
27.53% of the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 43.26% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level,
14.04% of the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, 3.93% of the students scoring at the Distinguished
Level, and a total of 61.24% of the students being Proficient. There is approximately a five percent achievement
gap when comparing the Female Subgroup to the Male Subgroup. 63.44% of Females are scoring at the Proficient
Level compared to 58.82% of the Male Subgroup. 54.35% of the students in the Low SES Subgroup are scoring at
the Proficient Level compared to 68.60% of the students in the Non Low SES Subgroup. The largest achievement
gap is between students in the Special Education Subgroup and students in the Non Special Education Subgroup.
20.00% of the students in the Special Education Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 67.97% of the
students in the Non Special Education Subgroup.
General Mathematics
There are no surprises in the fact that the achievement gap continues to grow when comparing the Low SES
Subgroup to the Non Low SES Subgroup as well as the Special Education Subgroup to the Non Special Education
Subgroup. In many instances, students in the Special Education Subgroup are also found to be in the Low SES
Subgroup. These concerns are being addressed through professional development offerings, scheduling changes, as
well as implementing specific programs in Algebra I and Geometry at the high school level. The Lincoln
County School System is also piloting a math program for students in grade 8 at Guyan Valley Middle School with
plans to expand to the other middle schools.
At the middle school level, a period of the day is dedicated, Flex Period, to address identified deficiencies. The
math department at each school has developed specific plans to address the needs of the grade level and divided the
students into groups for instruction. Additionally, all students in grades 6-8 are enrolled in an eighty minute math
class for the duration of the school year.
At the high school level, all incoming 9th grade students who did not take Algebra I in the 8th grade are enrolled in
an Algebra I course which is double blocked for instruction. This is Cognitive Algebra I Class that uses a computer
based program in addition to the traditional Algebra Text. This same approach is being implemented this year with
students enrolled in Geometry.
Special education students are being included in the general curriculum and co-teaching wth the special education
staff to the extent possible. However, sufficient funds are not available to implement this practice, co-teaching, at
the level which best meets the needs of all special education students. As funds are available, Lincoln County
will coninue to extend this instructional approach in our schools.
Elementary R/Language Arts Achievement (Benchmark 76.67%)
Grade 3: Students in the 3rd Grade (All Students) had 8.68% of the students scoring at the Novice Level, 21.51% of
the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 39.25% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level, 26.42% of
the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, and 4.15% of the students scoring at the Distinguished Level, and
Page 7 of 23
the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, and 4.15% of the students scoring at the Distinguished Level, and
a total of 69.81% of the students being Proficient. There is a noted discrepancy found in the achievement levels
between the Male Subgorup, 64.49% Proficient, and Female Subgroup, 75.59% Proficient, in grade 3. There is a
large discrepancy found at grade 3 when comparing the Special Education Subgroup with the Non Special Education
Subgroup. There were 40.32% of the students scoring proficient in the Special Education Subgroup compared to
78.82% of students in the Non Special Education Subgroup. Additionally, there is a large discrepancy found when
comparing the Low SES Subgorup with the Non Low SES Subgroup. 64.10% of the students in the Low SES
Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level while 85.71% of the students in the Non Low SES Subgroup scored at
the Proficient Level.
Grade 4: Students in the 4th Grade (All Students) had 8.36% of the students scoring at the Novice Level, 16.00% of
the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 51.64% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level, 18.55% of
the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, 5.45% of the students scoring at the Distinguished Level, and a
total of 75.64% of the students being Proficient. Though there remains a discrepancy between the Male Subgroup,
72.92% Proficient, and the Female Subgroup, 78.63% proficient, the gap is not as pronounced. The largest
discrepancy is found when comparing the Special Education Subgroup to the Non Special Educaton Subgroup.
53.13% of the students in the Special Education Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 82.46% of the
students in the Non Special Education Subgroup. The achievement gap between Low SES students and Non Low
SES students decreased as compared to grade 3.
Grade 5: Students in the 5th Grade (All Students) had 5.99% of the students scoring at the Novice Level, 21.72% of
the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 45.69% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level, 22.47% of
the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, 4.12% of the students scoring at the Distinguished Level, and a
total of 72.28% of the students being Proficient. The discrepancy between the Male Subgroup, 65.58%
Proficient, and the Female Subgroup, 81.42% proficient, is quite pronounced. The largest discrepancy is found
when comparing the Special Education Subgroup to the Non Special Educaton Subgroup. 37.04% of the students in
the Special Education Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 81.22% of the students in the Non
Special Education Subgroup. The achievement gap between Low SES students, 66.50% Proficient, and Non Low
SES students, 89.55% Proficient, is very evident.
Middle School R/Language Arts Achievement (Benchmark 79.17%)
Grade 6: Students in the 6th Grade (All Students) had 7.60% of the students scoring at the Novice Level, 25.10% of
the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 46.77% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level, 17.49% of
the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, 3.04% of the students scoring at the Distinguished Level, and a
total of 67.30% of the students being Proficient. The discrepancy between the Male Subgroup, 54.79%
Proficient, and the Female Subgroup, 82.91% proficient, is quite pronounced. The is a large discrepancy found
when comparing the Special Education Subgroup to the Non Special Educaton Subgroup. 35.00% of the students in
the Special Education Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 76.85% of the students in the Non
Special Education Subgroup. The achievement gap between Low SES students, 58.88% Proficient, and Non Low
SES students, 94.42% Proficient, is very evident.
Grade 7: Students in the 7th Grade (All Students) had 5.17% of the students scoring at the Novice Level, 27.31% of
the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 46.13% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level, 16.61% of
the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, 4.80% of the students scoring at the Distinguished Level, and a
total of 67.53% of the students being Proficient. The discrepancy between the Male Subgroup, 57.89%
Proficient, and the Female Subgroup, 76.81% Proficient, is as pronounced but remains a concern. There is a large
discrepancy found when comparing the Special Education Subgroup to the Non Special Educaton Subgroup.
31.58% of the students in the Special Education Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 77.10% of the
students in the Non Special Education Subgroup. The achievement gap between Low SES students, 59.89%
Proficient, and Non Low SES students, 84.52% Proficient, is very evident.
Grade 8: Students in the 8th Grade (All Students) had 2.28% of the students scoring at the Novice Level, 21.67% of
the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 45.25% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level, 20.53% of
the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, 10.27% of the students scoring at the Distinguished Level, and a
total of 76.05% of the students being Proficient. The discrepancy between the Male Subgroup, 63.93%
Proficient, and the Female Subgroup, 86.52% proficient, remains a concern. The is a large discrepancy found when
comparing the Special Education Subgroup to the Non Special Educaton Subgroup. 30.43% of the students in the
Page 8 of 23
comparing the Special Education Subgroup to the Non Special Educaton Subgroup. 30.43% of the students in the
Special Education Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 85.71% of the students in the Non Special
Education Subgroup. The achievement gap between Low SES students, 72.93% Proficient, and Non Low SES
students, 82.93% Proficient, is not as evident.
High School R/Language Arts (75.83%)
Grade 10: Students in the 10th Grade (All Students) had 6.18% of the students scoring at the Novice Level, 20.79%
of the students scoring at the Partial Mastery Level, 46.07% of the students scoring at the Mastery Level, 23.03% of
the students scoring at the Above Mastery Level, 3.93% of the students scoring at the Distinguished Level, and a
total of 73.03% of the students being Proficient. The discrepancy between the Male Subgroup, 64.71%
Proficient, and the Female Subgroup, 80.65% proficient, remains a concern. There is a large discrepancy found
when comparing the Special Education Subgroup to the Non Special Educaton Subgroup. 36.00% of the students in
the Special Education Subgroup scored at the Proficient Level compared to 79.08% of the students in the Non
Special Education Subgroup. The achievement gap between Low SES students, 69.57% Proficient, and Non Low
SES students, 76.74% Proficient, is not as evident.
General Reading/Language Arts
There remains achievement gaps when comparing the Male Subgroup to the Female Subgroup, the Low SES
Subgroup to the Non Low SES Subgroup, as well as the Special Education Subgroup to the Non Special Education
Subgroup.
At the elementary level, Excess Levy funds have been made available to each teacher in order to purhcase needed
materials to support reading instruction. Additionally, all elementary schools are now utilizing the DIBELS
assessment. This will provide additional data for staff members to use to guide and modify their instruction to meet
the needs of students.
At the middle school level, an additional period, Flex Period, has been established for the purpose of providing
remediation, acceleration, and previewing based on student needs. These needs are determined based on the data
from the WESTEST as well as Benchmark assessments.
At the secondary level, previewing is being implemented in order to provide additional support for students.
Additionally, 9th grade language arts classes are being double-blocked for the purpose of proividing additional time
and support for students to meet achievement goals.
A major need of Lincoln county Schools is to close the achievement gap that currently exists between students with
disabilities and their typically developing non-disabled peers. Students with disabilities’ reading scores as measured by the
West Virginia Measure of Accountability System scored 35.18% proficiency in reading and 39.63% proficiency in
math. This represents a significant achievement gap. In addition, the dropout rate and graduation rate for students with
disabilities is disproportionate when compared to typical peers. As measured by the West Virginia Continuous Improvement
Process, Lincoln county Schools also showed a decline in the number of students that exited our school system and are
employed, and/or are participating in some type of post secondary educational program. These were the needs identified by
the Lincoln county (CIMP) Continuous Improvement Needs Assessment as indicators not met or that need improvement.
These needs are directly addressed in this project application.
Other Student Outcomes: In this section of the data analysis, members review data about other student outcomes such as
attendance, discipline reports, college attendance rate, LEP and dropout rates. Analyzing this information and determining
the roots causes will broaden the committee’s understanding of the outcomes that have a direct impact on achievement.
· Attendance rate for 2007-2008 (elementary and middle schools): 95.5% / the attendance rate has increased two
consecutive years
· College attendance rate: the college going rate decreased from 48.8% in 2006 to 41.5% in 2007
· Dropout Rates: the dropout rate increased from 2006/2007 (5.8%) to 2007/2008 (8.2%)
· During the 2006-2007 school year there were 502 offences related to ATOD and Violence. 337 or 67% of the offences were
related to bulling and violence. 134 or 27% were related to tobacco. 31 offences or 6% were related to drugs or alcohol.
Page 9 of 23
· During the 2007-2008 school year there were 454 offences related to ATOD and Violence. 272 or 60% of the offences were related
to bulling and violence. 172 or 38% were related to tobacco. 9 offences or 1% were related to drugs or alcohol.
Analysis of Culture, Conditions and Practices: The data sources summarized in this section relate to monitoring reports,
questionnaires or observations completed by staff or external evaluators. These sources describe the overall culture,
conditions and practices that exist in the school system. Results of classroom walkthroughs, highly qualified teacher data for
the district and schools and the Digital Divide report should be part of this section.
Classroom walkthroughs conducted during the 2007/2008 school year reflected that instructional staff members are
beginning to transfer the skills gained in the myriad of professional development sessions to classroom instruction. It was
evident that better classroom preparation was taking place and lessons were delivered utilizing effective instructional
strategies.
Many of our middle school classes in the areas of math, science, and special education are being taught by teachers who do
not meet the federal definition of highly qualified.
Concerns expressed in the latest technology plan for the county were: Need to update several old computers and increase
technology integration instruction in the classroom. The digital divide report for 2007 reveals Lincoln County has 52% of
the computers upgraded to Windows XP or a higher operating system. This number translates to a student to computer ratio
of 4.08 for Window XP or better operating system.
Digital Divide Survey
Lincoln County has student to computer ratio of 4.54 which ranks it 42 in the state compared to other county. The county
will be working on getting the ratio down to 3.5 to one this year. We still have 462 windows 98 computers that need to be
replaced. The divide indicates that we need additional digital projection devices. The county will be addressing this as
funds become available. Additional Staff development is needed in the area of technology integration. We now have 21 %
of the staff receiving 5 hrs or less of training.
The OEPA Checklist should be one source of data to assess school or county needs as you prioritize your strategic issues. There are no negative consequences to checking “No” to a
high quality standard since the checklist is not used for changing accreditation or approval status or selection for on-site reviews.
OEPA Analysis
5.1.1
The Lincoln County School System met the participation rate requirements for the WESTEST. The lowest participation rate
is found in the Low SES Subgroup for MIddle Schools which was 99.5%.
The Lincoln County School System failed to meet AYP requirements in Student Achievement in the following areas:
Middle School Math in the Special Education Subgroup as well as the Low SES Subgroup; Middle School R/LA in the All
Subgroup, White Subgroup, Special Education Subgroup, and Low SES Subgroup; and Elementary School R/LA in the
Special Education Subgroup.
5.1.2
The Lincoln County School System met the participation rate requirements for the WESTEST. The lowest participation rate
is found in the Low SES Subgroup for MIddle Schools which was 99.5%.
5.1.3
All elementary and middle schools in Lincoln County exceeded the minimum requirement of 90% Average Daily
Attendance.
5.1.4
The student graduation rate at Lincoln County High School failed to meet the minimum requirement of 80%. The final
Page 10 of 23
tabulation of the Graduation Rate was slightly more than 79%. The staff and administration are working to address this
issue.
7.1.1
All course offerings in Lincoln County are based on the West Virginia Content Standards and Objectives. The course
offerings are based on the requirements of Policy 2510.
7.1.2
The county curriculum team believes that valuable progress has been made and continue to be made regarding high
expectatons. The members of the curriculum team believe that there is evidence of high expectations for the learning and
achieving of all students. There is evidence of reteaching for mastery, opportunities for enrichment, as well as acceleration.
7.1.6
There has been a great amount of emphasis placed on student writing and is one of the instructional practices reviewed as a
part of the walkthroughs which are conducted by the school adminstratioin as well as the county curriculum team at all
schools.
7.1.7
The Lincoln County School System has increased the availability of technology in the schools and continues to strive
toward meeting the technology needs which meet the needs of students.
7.1.8
Each classroom has adequate textbooks and instructional materials to meet the instructional needs of the school system.
Various finances are made available to instructional staff members to purchase needed instructional materials for their
individual classrooms. Additionally, textbook need surveys are conducted annually and purchases made to meet the needs
as identified by the instructional staff and administration of each school.
7.1.9
West Virginia Policy 2510 guides the elementary, middle, and secondary curriculum offerings of the Lincoln County School
System. This is inclusive of career exploration as well as selection of a career cluster to explore in grades 9 and 10.
7.1.10
All elective offerings in Lincoln County are based on West Virginia Board of Education approved Content Standards and
Objectives.
7.1.11
Students attending Lincoln County High School are provided guidance and advisement opportunities allowing them to
choose a career major prior to completion of grade 10. All 10th grade students are participating in programs such as Career
Cruising during the AA period at Lincoln County High School. All 10th grade students are also participating in
pre-vocational activities as part of their AA period. Addtionally, guidance counselors at Lincoln County High School meet
with 10th grade students to discuss the ACT Plan results and provide guidance based on those results.
7.1.12
The Special Education Director and a team of teachers as well as administrators worked diligently to develop resources
allowing instructional staff members to provide lessons and incorporate into lessons activities with an emphasis on
prevention, and zero tolerance for racial, sexual, religious/ethnic harassment or violence. Additionally, the Lincoln County
School System provides informative sessions with students regarding the harassment policy of Lincoln County.
7.1.13
The Lincoln County School System develops and submits a calendar to the West Virginia Department of Education
annually reflecting 180 instructional days. Teachers in elementary self-contained classrooms submit a copy of their daily
instructional time per subject to the principal for review and approval which reflects the total instructional time per day.
Principals submit copies of such to the superintendent or designee for review. The instructional day of each school is
reviewed by the county curriculum team annually. Additionally, the county curriculum team performs frequent school and
classroom walkthroughs. This allows the team to monitor instructional time as well. The primary focus of each
Page 11 of 23
instructional day is providing quality reseach-based classroom instruction for our students.
7.1.14
Each program offering in the technical and adult education area has an advisory council who work to keep the
programmatic offerings aligned with the local, state, and national needs. The staff and administration at Lincoln County
High School work to stay abreast to trends in the job markets in an attempt to meet the needs of students as they enter the
workforce. This is evident by the work being completed to develop a biodesiel program at Lincoln County High School.
7.2.1
The Lincoln County School System has developed and annually updates the Five Year Strategic Plan as required by the
West Virginia Department of Education and West Virginia Board of Education. This plan is reviewed by staff in the Title I
Office, Title II Office, as well as Title VI Office. Additionally, a representative from the West Virginia Department of
Education reviews the core plan to assure standards are being met. The Lincoln County School System utilizes available
data to revise the plan and make necessary changes throughout the school year. Revisions and changes are based on
progress toward meeting goals which have been established.
7.2.4
The Lincoln County School System annually utilizes all available data to make informed instructional decisions for the
students of the school system. County administrators analyze the data as quickly as it becomes available and makes
instructional decisions based on such. School administrators and teachers utilize their local data to make informed
instructional decision at each individual school. Throughout the school year, three benchmark assessments are coducted
which provide feedback to our instructional staff regarding mastery of CSO's in the areas of reading/language arts and
mathematics. Instructional staff members are provided opportunities to analyze the data of such and make revisions in the
instruction to meet the needs of students.
6.3.1
The Lincoln County School System annually develops and submits a plan to the West Virginia Department of Education for
approval regarding implementation of an alternative education program.
7.4.1
The Director of the Maintenance Department works directly with the school principals to be sure that all reports from
agencies such as the State Fire Marshal, the Health Department, the School Building Authority, and responsible divisions of
the West Virginia Department of Education are maintained. Additionally, the maintenance department works with each
school to rectify any noted deficiencies in such reports.
7.5.1
Periodic training sessions as well as written communication are provided parents to assist them with informaton and
techniques for helping students learn. The federal programs office and special education department share the costs of a
Parent Coordinator at the county level who assists in communications with parents and guardians. Additionally, some of
our schools have a Parent Coordinator housed at the school level to faciliate this type of communication.
7.5.2
The Lincoln County School System has developed a County Code of Conduct for Students based on the West Virginia
Code of Conduct and follows the West Virginia Code of Conduct for employees. As per State requirments
and County policy, the school system has systematic procedures which are followed regarding investigations of complaints
violating such.
7.5.3
The Lincoln County School System follows requirements of all relevant State policies regarding the WESTEST, Writing
Assessment, and APTA for students in impacted grade levels. This is monitored by an administrator at the county level as
well as principals at the school level.
7.6.1
The Lincoln County School System works to follow all hiring practices set forth in WV Code 18A-4-7a, 18A-4-8, and
18-2E-3a. Employees working with personnel utlize the services of an attorney to assist with questions that arise. The goal
Page 12 of 23
of the school system is to perform duties within the parameters of code and law. Obviously, there are times that mistakes
are made, but all efforts are made to rectify those as quickly as possible.
7.6.2
The Lincoln County School System strives to meet all requirements of licensure for professional employees
including staff involved with extra-curricular activities.
7.6.3
The Lincoln County School System has adopted and implemented policies and procedures aligned with all relevant codes
related to professional and service personnel evaluations. This is discussed and reviewed annually with principals at the
first Principals' Meeting of the school year and principals are to review with the staff at their respective schools.
7.6.4
As per code and policy, the Lincoln County School System strives to meet requirements for the beginning internship
program for beginning teachers and principals.
7.7.2
There have been policies developed and implemented at the county and school level regarding: disciplinary procedures,
grading and confidentiality of such, student due process rights and nondiscrimination, Student Code of Conduct, Racial,
Sexual, Religious/Ethnic Harassment, and Violence, tobacco use, substance abuse, and AIDS education.
7.8.1
The administration of the Lincoln County School System strives to demonstrate leadership through vision, school
culture and instruction, management and environment, community, and professionalism. This is also evidenced by frequent
team meetings at the county level where curriculum, instruction, and student achievement are the focus as well as the
frequent school and classroom walkthroughs conducted by the team to monitor the same.
8.1.1
The Lincoln County School System provides for curriculum offerings outlined by West Virginia Policy 2510. There are
instances that the required offerings are met via virtual courses offered through the West Virginia Department of Education
and Florida Virtual program offerings.
8.1.2
The Lincoln County School System frequently evaluates the cost effectiveness of the transportation system and monitors the
practices in order to provide students with efficient transportation sevices consistent with State laws and policies. Multiple
sessions have been held during the past few years with the transporation office of the WVDE to analyze and discuss
transportatioin costs and effectiveness.
8.1.3
The Lincoln County School System has worked to implement the West Virginia Board of Education approved CEFP. This
is leading the school system in the direction of operating fewer schools in a more cost effective manner while still meeting
the educational needs of the student population. Additionally, the Lincoln County School System is implementing practices
and procedures to address operating expenses of our current facilities. The school system currently has an Energy Manager
position with the duties to assist the adminstration in making cost effective decisions regarding the cost effectiveness of our
system.
8.1.4
The county administrators in the Lincoln County School System strive to provide quality support to the instructional staff
and school administration which will result in a quality and efficient education for the student poplulation. County level
administors in Lincoln County are responsible for mulitple tasks and work extremely hard to provide the leadership and
support necessary to meet the needs of staff and students.
8.1.5
While working within the constraints of available funds, the leadership team of the Lincoln County School System
continually monitor the utilization of staff with the goal of providing support, high quality curriculum, and instructional
Page 13 of 23
services to meet the myriad of needs for our student population.
8.1.6
The Lincoln County School System fully utilizes the services made available by the RESA II Office. Without the support
of the RESA II Office, our school system would be unable to provide many services at the same level of efficiency.
Prioritized Strategic Issues
Prioritized Strategic Issues: Mathematics
Achievement Gap evident between students in the Special Education Subgroup and students in the Non Special
Education Subgroup
Achievement Gap evident between students in the Low SES Subgroup and students in the Non Low SES Subgroup
Prioritized Strategic Issues: Reading/Language Arts
Achievement Gap evident between students in the Special Education Subgroup and students in the Non Special
Education Subgroup
Achievement Gap evident between students in the Low SES Subgroup and students in the Non Low SES
Subgroup
Achievement Gap evident between females and males at all grade levels
Page 14 of 23
The county will improve the integration of technology in order to improve students achievement. (Technology/21st Century)
1. County will improve the network infrastructure for student achievement and professional growth through upgrading all computers operating
systems to windows XP or above by 2010. Measure Digital Divide Survey Base 0.32 Target 100.00
School year 2005-2006 the precentage of computers with Windows XP or better was 38%
School year 2006-2007 the precentage of computers with Windows XP or better was 48%
School year 2007-2008 the precentage of computers with Windows XP or better was 51%
School year 2008-2009 the precentage of computers with Windows XP or better is expected to be 58%
Mode
Date
Topic
Audience
(Coaching, Learning Community,
or Trainer Led)
Aug - June
techSteps
K-8 Teachers
Trainer led, Webinar
Aug - Sept
webinar training
Administrators
Trainer led
Sept
Ewalk training
Administrators
Trainer led
Aug - June
Technolgy/21 century skills
Teachers
Coaching, Trainer led
Aug - June
TIS Training
TIS
Trainer Led
School Center Training
Technology contacts
Webinar
Technology Training through EETT grant
K-8
Teachers/Admininstrators
Technology Training through
EETT grant
K-8
Teachers/Admininstrators
Sept-Oct
Sept - Dec
Jan - May
Coaching, trainer lead,
Coaching, trainer lead,
TECH/01: Provide 21st century hardware and a stable, state of the art 21st century infrastructure for the
effective use of technology
Technology
Provide appropriate technology equipment, software telecommunications network and resources to support 21st
century instructional strategies and techniques
The county technology team will meet throughout the year to plan for hardware purchases, infrastructure upgrades,
etc.
Using TFS funding, the county will:
Replace computer labs at Duval PK-8, Hamlin PK-8, Lincoln County H.S.
Update/replace computers at Guyan Valley Middle
Purchase document camera's, smartboards, data projectors, etc to support 21 Century Instruction
Update/support/expand Odyssey in the schools
Purchase Key Boarding programs for PK-8 students
Purchase Computers for food service
TECH/02: Focus on 21st century technology tools and resources that improve achievement of all
students, with a special emphasis on high need and low SES students.
Technology
Page 15 of 23
Provide technology support for READ 180 Program at Duval PK-8 School
Continue to support the project R.I.D.E. Program (Responding to Individual Differences in Education)
Implement the use of software necessary for implementing 21st Century Technology Skills
Provide upgrades and support for eWalk classroom monitoring system for implementation by school administrators
Provide technology training on Thinkfinity, Bridges to Algebra, TechSteps, INTEL through EETT grant.
Provide technology training on Thinkfinity, Bridges to Algebra, TechSteps, Think .com TECH/03: Ensure that the use of telecommunications and internal connections in the schools will
enhance student learning.
Technology
Provide a robust communication (data and telephone) system to school system
Provide basic telephone service (POTS) - 70 lines with a max. of 95 in 20 buildings
Provide long distance telephone service (70 lines with a max. of 95 in 20 buildings)
Provide long distance, voice, data connections for all Lincoln County Schools.
Provide Cellular service to 5-10 special education buses and paging services for maintenance and Superintendent.
Provide cellular service to schools for safety and improved communication/collaboration - (Cellular services with a max of 20
county wide)
Provide paging services (10 Paging Services with a max of 20 county wide)
Purchase satellite cell phones for buses if funding is available.
Look into the possibilbity of adding a wide area network in the school year 2010 to meet future band width requirements.
Provide Satellite Cellular service for maintenance of network and support of educational software.
TECH/04: Provide increased access for students and teachers to 21st century tools and resources
Technology
County and school technology plans will be kept current and implemented
Provide nessary technology to aid in the preparation of county and school communicationitems, i.e. newsletters, brochures,
documents, etc.
Support Ed Tech Grant at Guyan Valley Middle School
EETT grant will provide document cameras, Writers, and laptops for teacher/students to use in the classroom
TFS, TI, and LC funds will be used to support teacher and student needs in the classroom. Updating Labs, providing data
projectors, providing laptops, etc.
TECH/05: Utilize innovative strategies for providing rigorous and specialized courses that may not be
available without the use of 21st century tools and resources
Technology
Schools will incorporate Virtual field trips in instruction
Incorporate Gotomeeting to provide administrator P.D. and communication
7th and 8th grade students will take Spanish 1A and 1B through a virtural classroom
TECH/06: Promote parental involvement and improved collaboration with community/home through the
user of 21st century tools and resources
Technology
To increase communication between parents and staff, all staff email accounts are made available to the public via the county
web site
Provide and support school and teacher webpages
Support use of School Messenger for parent contacts
TECH/07: Provide professional development for using the telecommunications network for training
teachers and administrators to improve the integration of 21st century tools and resources
Technology
Provide School Center Training to School Tech Contacts Provide Webinar(gotomeeting) training for county administrators
Provide training for all county administrators on the use of eWalk for monitoring classroom climate and instruction
Employee a full time Technology Integration Specialist(TIS) at Guyan Valley Middle through EETT Grant
Employee a full time Technology Integration Specialist(TIS) at West Hamlin through WVDE Grant
Maintain employment of a Technology Integration Specialist at Lincoln County High School TECH/08: Maintain and repair all 21st century tools and internal connections
Technology
For effective use of network resources, WSUS serers will be maintained in all schools for use in updating Windows
Page 16 of 23
For effective use of network resources, WSUS serers will be maintained in all schools for use in updating Windows
operating systems and Symantec anti-virus. Contract with local RESA for computer repair, support and upgrades. Provide maintenance necessary to utilize and sustain a telecommunications network for Lincoln County
TECH/09: To collaborate with adult literacy providers to provide 21st century skills for community
Technology
County will provide opportunties for parents and community members to utilize technology through training and instructional type
situations in the ABE program Provide maintenance and support of computer services for adult students in the Even Start and ABE (Adult Basic Education)
Program Page 17 of 23
NA
The county and school technology plans provide a description of how the county and schools plan to allocate adequate resources to provide students
with equitable access to 21st century technology tools, including instructional offerings and appropriate curriculum, assessment and technology
integration resources aligned to both the content and rigor of state content standards as well as to learning skills and technology tools. The plans
include the various technologies that enable and enhance the attainment of 21st century skills outcomes for all students. How we plan for technology
in our county and schools is based upon the validation from research-based evaluation findings from previous West Virginia-based evaluation projects.
In addition, through the technology planning process, the county and schools continue to study and include emerging technologies for application in a
twenty-first century learning environment. The purchase of technology through state contracts provides for uniformity in technological hardware and
software standards and procedures. State provided anti-virus protection software helps to ensure network security and integrity. Expanded bandwidth,
along with additional local, state and federal funding, provide increased ability for the county to ensure that the capabilities and capacities of the
technology infrastructure are adequate for acceptable performance of the technology being implemented in the public schools. As an additional benefit,
the county and schools enjoy the opportunity to purchase from state contracts that allow us to be able to take advantage of appropriate bulk purchasing
abilities and to purchase from competitively bid contracts.
An added benefit for our county and school data collection and reporting to the Department of Education and to the federal government is WVEIS, the
state-provided comprehensive statewide uniform integrated education management and information system. Also developed by WVEIS, the online
county and school’s technology plan’s structure allows flexibility to adjust the plan based on developing technology, federal and state requirements and
changing local school and county needs. The online county and school technology plans are developed in compliance with United States Department
of Education regulations and Federal Communications Commission requirements for federal E-rate discounts. The county and schools also continue to
seek applicable federal government funds, philanthropic funds, and other partnership funds (or any combination of these types of funds) to augment
state appropriations and encourage the pursuit of funding through grants, gifts and donations.
Some technology initiatives in schools and counties may not be adequately addressed in the goals/objective/strategy section of the technology planning
section. The county and school narrative allow planning teams to structure a framework/narrative description to describe how the county and schools
will allocate adequate resources to provide students and teachers to twenty-first century technology tools.
Page 18 of 23
Schools and counties should analyze digital divide survey reports as a needs assessment for technology planning.
Digital Divide
Summarize concerns from the analysis of the survey.
The main concerns expressed in the latest technology plan for the county were: need to update several old computers, supportingtechnology needs in new high school (opened in fall, 2006), and
the need to increase technology integration instruction in the classroom. Presently the schools in Lincoln County have 1672 computers and 784 of the computers are Windows 98 or below
according to the digital divide survey. This gives the county 64% of its computers that are in need of upgrading. .
Page 19 of 23
County E-Rate Compliance Questions
Acceptable Use Policy
Look at the information included in this section. Revise if any of the information listed is incorrect or needs to be updated.
1. Do you have an Acceptable Use Policy?
Yes
No
2. If yes, what is the last date of adoption/revision?
3. When was the public meeting held for CIPA Compliance?
06/25/2001 (mm/dd/yyyy)
4. Provide the URL to your acceptable use policy.
http://boe.linc.k12.wv.us/
Schools
Other
Buildings
Total
5. Please identify for E-Rate requirements the number of schools and other buildings in your
county that have Dial Up modem connections to the Internet?
0
0
0
6. Please identify for E-Rate requirements the number of schools and other buildings in your
county that have 56K frame relay connections to the Internet?
0
0
0
7. Please identify for E-Rate requirements the number of schools and other buildings in your
county that have T-1 frame relay connections to the Internet?
9
2
11
8. Please identify for E-Rate requirements the number of schools and other buildings in your
county that have ATM T-1 Internet connections?
0
0
0
9. Please identify for E-Rate requirements the number of schools and other buildings in your
county that have cable modem connections to the Internet?
0
0
0
10. Please identify for E-Rate requirements the number of schools and other buildings in your
county that have DSL connections to the Internet?
0
0
0
11. Please identify for E-Rate requirements the number of schools and other buildings in your
county that have 10 Mb connections to the Internet?
0
0
0
12. Please identify for E-Rate requirements the number of schools and other buildings in your
county that have 45 Mb connections to the Internet?
0
0
0
13. Please identify for E-Rate requirements the number of schools and other buildings in your
county that have 100 Mb connections to the Internet?
0
0
0
14. Please identify for E-Rate requirements the number of schools and other buildings in your
county that have 1 Gb connections to the Internet?
0
0
0
15. Please identify for E-Rate requirements the number of schools and other buildings in your
county that have more than 1 Gb connections to the Internet?
0
0
0
16. Please identify for E-Rate requirements any other configurations that may exist for schools
and other buildings connecting to the Internet?
(Please only answer this question if your school or other building connections
do not apply to any of the questions above.
This question allows for emerging technologies that may not be in place
when the survey was written.
Most counties should leave this question blank.)
Page 20 of 23
Technology Planning Budget
Funding Source
Hardware
Software
TFS - elementary
$45,000
$5,000
TFS-secondary
$50,000
$8,398
TI
$50,000
Local share
$15,000
$8,885
EETT
$24,930
$5,360
County/school
$45,000
$5,000
InfrastructureMaintenance
Prof.
Salaries
Development
Stipends Supplies Other
$8,398
TOTALS
$58,398
$58,398
$50,000
$23,885
$10,542
$71,747
$8,000
$350
$13,600
$134,529
$50,000
Grant/food service $27,000
$27,000
Title I
$0
SpEd
$0
Tech. Levy
$30,000
Microsoft
$42,000
settlement
County
Maintenance
Levy Maintenance
$15,000
County
$10,000
$5,000
$50,000
$42,000
$25,000
$10,000
$5,000
$40,000
$25,500
$25,500
$10,000
$0
Other
TOTALS
$328,930
$57,643
Funding Source
Year
E-rate funds
2009 Cellular
$25,000
$35,500
Annual
$23,940
Disc% Commit
$71,747
County Match
1,540.00
1,232.00
308.00
71,280.00
59,817.60
11,462.40
Internal Conn Maint
0.00
0.00
0.00
Internal Connections
346,810.80
291,998.84
54,811.96
0.00
0.00
0.00
744.00
624.96
119.04
3600.00
2880.00
720.00
54,800.00
44,758.00
10,042.00
Voice/Long Distance
0.00
0.00
0.00
WAN
0.00
0.00
0.00
Web Hosting
0.00
0.00
0.00
E-rate Totals
474,174.80
398,431.40
76,743.40
Data Lines
Internet Access
Long Distance
Paging
Voice
TFS/Elementary E-rate Application
2009 State Totals - TFS/Elementary
0.00
0.00
0.00
TFS/Secondary E-rate Application
2009 State Totals - TFS/Secondary
0.00
0.00
0.00
Funding Source
Year
E-rate funds
2008 Cellular
Annual
Data Lines
Internal Conn Maint
Disc% Commit
County Match
1,497.60
1,257.98
239.62
70,560.00
59,205.60
11,354.40
0.00
0.00
0.00
Page 21 of 23
$8,000
$5,350
$13,600
$569,710
Internal Connections
346,810.80
291,998.84
54,811.96
0.00
0.00
0.00
744.00
624.96
119.04
0.00
0.00
0.00
67,734.00
55,992.77
11,741.23
Voice/Long Distance
0.00
0.00
0.00
WAN
0.00
0.00
0.00
Web Hosting
0.00
0.00
0.00
E-rate Totals
487,346.40
409,080.15
78,266.25
Internet Access
Long Distance
Paging
Voice
TFS/Elementary E-rate Application
2008 State Totals - TFS/Elementary
0.00
0.00
0.00
TFS/Secondary E-rate Application
2008 State Totals - TFS/Secondary
0.00
0.00
0.00
Funding Source
Year
E-rate funds
2007 Bundled Voice/Long Distance
Annual
County Match
0.00
0.00
0.00
3,099.00
2,514.22
584.90
70,800.00
58,056.00
12,744.00
Internal Conn Maint
0.00
0.00
0.00
Internal Connections
0.00
0.00
0.00
Internet Access
0.00
0.00
0.00
Long Distance
0.00
0.00
0.00
Paging
0.00
0.00
0.00
Voice
50,464.00
41,236.17
9,228.63
WAN
0.00
0.00
0.00
Web Hosting
0.00
0.00
0.00
E-rate Totals
124,363.00
101,806.39
22,557.53
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Cellular
Data Lines
TFS/Elementary E-rate Application
Disc% Commit
2007 State Totals - Elemenary TFS
State Totals - TFS/Elementary
TFS/Secondary E-rate Application
2007 State Totals - TFS/Secondary
Funding Source
Year
E-rate funds
2006 Cellular
Annual
Disc% Commit
County Match
1,919.16
1,535.33
383.83
70,800.00
57,348.00
13,452.00
Internal Conn Maint
3,230.04
2,616.33
613.71
Internal Connections
0.00
0.00
0.00
Internet Access
0.00
0.00
0.00
1,137.00
920.97
216.03
0.00
0.00
0.00
Voice
70,126.92
56,276.04
13,850.88
WAN
0.00
0.00
0.00
Web Hosting
0.00
0.00
0.00
E-rate Totals
147,213.12
118,696.67
28,516.45
Data Lines
Long Distance
Paging
State Basic Skills E-rate
Page 22 of 23
State Basic Skills E-rate
Application
2006 State Totals - BS/CE
0.00
0.00
0.00
State SUCCESS E-rate Application
2006 State Totals - SUCCESS
0.00
0.00
0.00
Funding Source
Year
E-rate funds
2005 Cellular
Annual
Disc% Commit
County Match
2,131.32
1,705.06
426.26
58,467.00
47,188.95
11,278.05
Internal Conn Maint
2,266.67
1,790.67
476.00
Internal Connections
282,065.83
228,133.16
53,932.67
0.00
0.00
0.00
2,751.24
2,173.48
577.76
0.00
0.00
0.00
76,034.40
60,142.24
15,892.16
Web Hosting
0.00
0.00
0.00
E-rate Totals
424,849.79
341,133.56
83,716.23
Data Lines
Internet Access
Long Distance
Paging
Voice
State Basic Skills E-rate
Application
2005 State Totals - BS/CE
0.00
0.00
0.00
State SUCCESS E-rate Application
2005 State Totals - SUCCESS
0.00
0.00
0.00
Page 23 of 23