REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
Proposals Due: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 by 4:00 p.m.
Webinar: Friday, March 18, 2011 9:00 – 11:00 a.m.
School Improvement Grant
2011
Pursuant to: Title I, Part A and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)
For program questions contact:
Precious Broadnax (broadnax_p@cde.state.co.us or 303-866-6788)
For fiscal/budget questions contact:
Elizabeth Conway (conway_e@cde.state.co.us or 303‐866‐6886)
For RFP specific questions contact:
Lynn Bamberry (bamberry_l@cde.state.co.us or 303-866-6813)
Issued by:
Colorado Department of Education
Office of Federal Program Administration
Competitive Grants and Awards
1560 Broadway, Suite 1450
Denver, CO 80202
School Improvement Grant
Request for Proposal
Proposals Due: Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Introduction
The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 requires that states allocate resources for
intensive and sustained support to schools designated as in need of
improvement.
Available
Funds
Funding available for a two-year cycle of the School Improvement grants
(beginning Fall 2011) is as follows:
 Phase 1 Planning: Up to $50,000
 Phase 2 Implementation: Up to $100,000
Eligibility
Schools identified for Title I School Improvement that are not receiving Tiered
Intervention Grant funding (1003g funding) are eligible for School Improvement
grants. To determine if your school will benefit most from this process, please
refer to Attachment A for the Conditions for Success checklist. For a list of
eligible schools see Attachment B.
Priority
Allowable Use
of Funds
Priority will be given as follows to:
 Schools that have not received a School Support Team visit in the last 4
years;
 Schools that have a School Performance Framework Plan rating of
Turnaround or Priority Improvement;
 Schools that are furthest along in Title I Improvement; and
 Schools that have been identified as ‘Potentially’ on Title I Improvement
for the 2011-2012 school year (see attachment C). Please note: If a
school that has been identified as ‘potentially’ on Title I Improvement and
is not placed on Improvement after AYP determinations have been made
(Fall 2011), the school will not be eligible to receive School Improvement
Grant funding.
Awarded funds shall only be used for the following purposes (attachment D):
Phase 1
 School Support team review conducted by state certified consultants (one
team leader and minimally 5 team members);
 Facilitated review of report findings and establishment of goals with all
staff;
 Development of a unified school improvement plan; and
 Planning for implementation.
Phase 2
 Expenditures that build the school’s capacity for carrying out
implementation of school improvement efforts;
 Expenditures that address the root causes of low student achievement;
 Expenditures that supplement school funding and do not supplant; and
 End-of-grant analysis to assess the impact of the improvement strategies
on student achievement.
2
Duration of
Grant
Grants are awarded upon the approval of the application, and funds are available
for a 2-year cycle. Phase 2 funds are released on the condition of the school
providing an approvable implementation plan based on the attached rubric.
Funds are contingent upon future congressional funding appropriations. Monies,
once awarded, must be expended by September 30 of each fiscal year.
Evaluation &
Reporting
Each school must submit a progress report (Attachment E) and an Annual
Financial Report to CDE on or before October 1 of each year following
completion of the program.
Review
Process
Applications will be reviewed by CDE staff to ensure they contain all required
components. Note: This is a competitive process – applicants must score at
least 18 of the total 26 points in phase 1 and 45 of the 68 possible points in
phase 2 to be approved for funding. There is no guarantee that submitting a
proposal will result in funding or funding at the requested level. Applicants will
be notified of award by Wednesday, May 11, 2011.
Submission Process and Deadline
The original plus 4 copies must be received at CDE by Wednesday, March 30, 2011 at 4:00 pm. In
addition to the 5 hard copies, both an electronic copy of the proposal narrative and a copy of the
electronic budget workbook must be submitted to: CompetetiveGrants@cde.state.co.us. Please email all required pieces of the narrative as one document with the Excel budget workbook. Faxes will
not be accepted. Incomplete or late proposals will not be considered.
Application materials and budget are available for download on the CDE Website at:
http://www.cde.state.co.us/FedPrograms/NCLB/tia.asp.
Proposals will be due by 4 p.m. on Wednesday, March 30, 2011 to:
Nicole Dake
Colorado Department of Education
Competitive Grants and Awards
1560 Broadway, Suite 1450
Denver, CO 80202
&
Submit electronic copies of the proposal narrative and electronic budget to:
CompetitiveGrants@cde.state.co.us
3
Application Format







The total narrative (Part II) of the application cannot exceed 5 pages.
All pages must be standard letter size, 8-1/2” x 11” using 12-point font and single-spaced.
Use 1-inch margins.
Number all pages.
The signature page must include original signatures of the lead organization/fiscal agent.
Successful applicants will be required to submit disclosure and assurance pages with original
signatures.
Staple the pages of the original and each copy of the proposal. Please do not use paperclips,
rubber bands, binders or report covers.
Required Elements
The format outlined below must be followed in order to assure consistent application of the
evaluation criteria. See evaluation rubric for specific selection criteria needed for Phase 1 (page 9)
and Phase 2 (page 11).
Phase 1--Planning
Part I:
Part II:
Part II:
Proposal Introduction (not scored)
Cover Page and Certification Form
Narrative (2 pages)
Element 1: Needs Assessment
Element 2: Budget Narrative
Electronic Budget (not included page limit)
Phase 2--Implementation
Part II:
Part III:
Part IV:
Narrative (5 pages)
Element 1: Implementation Plan
Element 2: Evaluation
Element 3: Budget Narrative
Unified School Improvement Plan (not included page limit)
Electronic Budget (not included page limit)
4
School Improvement Grant
2011
PART I: COVER PAGE (Complete and attach as the first page of proposal)
Name of Lead Local Education Agency
(LEA)/Organization:
Mailing Address:
Title I, Part A Authorized Representative:
Telephone:
E-mail:
Signature:
Program Contact Person:
Mailing Address:
Telephone:
E-mail:
Signature:
School Name:
Mailing Address:
Telephone:
E-mail:
Principal Signature:
Fiscal Manager:
Telephone:
E-mail:
Signature:
Grant Type: Indicate the type of grant for which you are applying
Phase I: School Planning Grant
Phase 2: School Implementation Grant
Region: Indicate the region(s) this proposal will directly impact
Metro
Pikes Peak
North Central
Southwest
Southeast
Phase 1
$
Northwest
Northeast
Phase 2
$
West Central
Total
$
Please note: If grant is approved, funding will not be awarded until all signatures are in place. Please
attempt to obtain all signatures before submitting the application.
5
Part IA: Certification and Assurance Form
School Improvement Grant
The Board President and Board- Appointed Authorized Representative must sign below to indicate
their approval of the contents of the application, and the receipt of program funds.
On
(date) , 2011,
the Board of
(district)
hereby applies for and, if awarded, accepts the federal program funds requested in this application.
In consideration of the receipt of these grant funds, the Board agrees that the General Assurances
form for all federal funds, the specific Assurances related to the Title I, Part A grant program, and the
terms therein are specifically incorporated by reference in this application. The Board also certifies
that all program and pertinent administrative requirements will be met. These include the Education
Department General Administrative Regulations (EDGAR), the Office of Management and Budget
Accounting Circulars, and the Department of Education’s General Education Provisions Act (GEPA)
requirement. In addition, the Board certifies that the district is in compliance with the requirements
of the federal Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA), and that no policy of the local educational
agency prevents or otherwise denies participation in constitutionally protected prayer in public
schools.
In addition, districts that accept Title I, Part A funding for the School Improvement Grant agree to the
following assurances:










The applicant commits to participation in a continuous improvement process.
Participate with CDE in problem resolution regarding the implementation of school support
procedures if necessary.
Fully participate in a partnership with CDE to direct, implement and monitor the Unified
School Improvement Plan.
Provide implementation and impact data pertaining to the Unified School Improvement plan’s
strategies and goals.
Participate in the end-of-grant impact analysis and evaluation plan to assess the impact of the
grant on student achievement.
A commitment to developing a Unified School Improvement Plan that demonstrates how the
school will increase overall student achievement;
A commitment to building leadership capacity to oversee and sustain the implementation of
the improvement efforts outlined in the Unified School Improvement Plan;
The applicant will provide the CDE with a progress report by October 1 of each year (see
Attachment E);
The applicant will assure that the school end of phase is not considering closure in the 201011, 2011-12 and 2012-13 school years;
The applicant will use funds in accordance with the approved grant proposal and provide CDE
with a fiscal accounting of the funds.
6





Assure that funds will be used to supplement and not supplant any money currently used to
provide services.
The grantee will maintain sole responsibility for the project even though subcontractors may
be used to perform certain services.
The applicant will not discriminate against anyone regarding race, gender, national origin,
color, disability, or age.
Comply with all relevant state and federal laws.
Any communication disseminated regarding this grant award must include the following
language: “This grant opportunity was made possible by grants from the U.S. Department of
Education.”
Funded projects will be required to maintain appropriate fiscal and program records. Fiscal audits of
funds under this program are to be conducted by the recipient agencies annually as a part of their
regular audit. Auditors should be aware of the Federal audit requirements contained in the Single
Audit Act of 1984.
IF ANY FINDINGS OF MISUSE OF FUNDS ARE DISCOVERED, PROJECT FUNDS MUST BE RETURNED TO
THE COLORADO DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. The Colorado Department of Education may
terminate a grant award upon thirty (30) days notice if it is deemed by CDE that the applicant is not
fulfilling the requirements of the funded program as specified in the approved project application, or
if the program is generating less than satisfactory results.
Name of School Board/BOCES President
Signature of School Board/BOCES President
Name of District Superintendent
Signature of District Superintendent
Name of District Title I Authorized
Representative
Signature of District Title I Authorized
Representative
Name of School Principal
Signature of School Principal
7
2011 School Improvement Grant
Evaluation Rubric
Phase 1--Planning
Element II:
Narrative
Element 1: Needs Assessment
Element 2: Budget Narrative
Total
/12
/14
/26
GENERAL COMMENTS: Please indicate support for scoring by including overall strengths and
weaknesses. These comments are used on feedback forms to applicants.
Strengths:


Weaknesses:


Required Changes:


Recommendation:
Funded_____
Not Funded____
Fund w/ Changes____
8
Phase 1--Planning
Request for Proposal Selection Criteria & Evaluation Rubric
Part I: Proposal Introduction
No Points
Cover Page and Certification
Complete the attached cover page and certifications and attach as the first two pages of the proposal.
Part II: Narrative
26 Points
The following criteria will be used by reviewers to evaluate the application as a whole. To receive this
grant, there must be alignment between the Unified Plan and the grant request.
In order for the application to be recommended for funding, it must receive at least 16 of the total
possible 24 points and all required parts must be addressed. An application that receives a score of 0
on any required parts within the narrative will not be funded.
Element 1: Needs Assessment
Inadequate
Minimal
Good
Excellent
(information
not provided)
(requires
additional
clarification)
(clear and
complete)
(concise and
thoroughly
developed)
a) Provide a brief history of the school and its overall need
for a School Support Team visit.
0
3
5
b) Describe the specific activities to be conducted with grant
funds (i.e., School Support Team visit, rollout, phase 2
plan development, community/stakeholder
meetings/communications).
0
3
5
Inadequate
Minimal
Good
Excellent
(information
not provided)
(requires
additional
clarification)
(clear and
complete)
(concise and
thoroughly
developed)
a) All expenditures contained in the electronic budget are
described in the budget narrative and connected to
project goals and activities. The costs of the proposed
project (as presented in the electronic budget and budget
narrative) are reasonable and the budget sufficient in
relation to the objectives, design, scope and sustainability
of project activities.
0
3
5
7
b) Demonstrate how the funds awarded under the program
will be used to supplement the level of funds available for
authorized programs and activities, and will not supplant
federal, state, local, or non-federal funds.
0
1
3
5
Element 2: Budget Narrative
7
7
Reviewer Comments:
Total Points
____/26
9
2011 School Improvement Grant
Evaluation Rubric
Phase 2--Implementation
Element II:
Narrative
Element 1: Implementation Plan
Element 2: Evaluation
Element 3: Budget Narrative
/24
/27
/17
Total
/68
GENERAL COMMENTS: Please indicate support for scoring by including overall strengths and
weaknesses. These comments are used on feedback forms to applicants.
Strengths:


Weaknesses:


Required Changes:


Recommendation:
Funded_____
Not Funded____
Fund w/ Changes____
10
Phase 2--Implementation
Request for Proposal Selection Criteria & Evaluation Rubric
Part II: Narrative
68 Points
The following criteria will be used by reviewers to evaluate the application as a whole. To receive this
grant, there must be alignment between the School Support Team visit, the Unified Improvement
Plan and the grant request. Write a narrative (in no more than five pages) that describes the
improvement efforts planned that focus on the prioritized needs and improvement strategies defined
in the Unified Improvement Plan. You are encouraged to cut and paste language from your Unified
Improvement Plan. Attach both the electronic budget form and the Unified Plan immediately following
the Narrative.
In order for the application to be recommended for funding, it must receive at least 45 of the total
possible 68 points and all required parts must be addressed. An application that receives a score of 0
on any required parts within the narrative will not be funded.
Element 1: Implementation Plan
Inadequate
Minimal
Good
Excellent
(information
not
provided)
(requires
additional
clarification)
(clear and
complete)
(concise and
thoroughly
developed)
a) Describe the research-based interventions and/or
strategies that will be implemented with the grant
funds to support the identified priority needs. Note:
Please use the root cause analysis process outlined in
the unified improvement planning template
(http://www.cde.state.co.us/PDSSP/index.htm).
0
3
5
7
b) Describe any professional development that will
occur in support of the proposed interventions and/or
strategies.
0
1
3
5
c) Describe how the entire educational community
(local school board, business community, parents and
school-level staff) will participate in the
implementation of grant activities.
0
1
3
5
d) Discuss how the grant activities will provide a
foundation for continuous improvement and support
the successful implementation of the unified
improvement plan.
0
3
5
7
Reviewer Comments:
TOTAL POINTS
__/24
11
Element 2: Evaluation
Inadequate
Minimal
Good
Excellent
(information
not
provided)
(requires
additional
clarification)
(clear and
complete)
(concise and
thoroughly
developed)
a) Describe how the implementation of the improvement
strategies will be assessed for impact, including both
measurable indicators of success and the appropriate
measurement tools.
0
3
5
7
b) Indicate the measurable outcome for each proposed
improvement strategy and the tool to be used in
evaluating its effectiveness.
0
3
5
7
0
3
5
7
0
1
3
5
c) Provide a clearly detailed timeline for implementing
the key strategies and activities to reach goals that
were set. Timeline identifies major implementation
activities, interim benchmarks and the date by which
they will be accomplished.
For Example:
Strategies
/Activities
Interim
Benchmarks
Timeline
Person(s)
Responsible
d) Provide clear and focused description of what methods
will be used to collect information (See Attachment F)
and how the strategies and activities will be evaluated
for effectiveness.
Reviewer Comments:
TOTAL POINTS
__/27
12
Inadequate
Minimal
Good
Excellent
(information
not provided)
(requires
additional
clarification)
(clear and
complete)
(concise and
thoroughly
developed)
a) All expenditures contained in the electronic budget are
described in the budget narrative and connected to
project goals and activities. The costs of the proposed
project (as presented in the electronic budget and budget
narrative) are reasonable and the budget sufficient in
relation to the objectives, design, scope and sustainability
of project activities.
0
3
5
7
b) Demonstrate how district/organization will align current
and future funding in support of improvement goals and
sustainability (e.g., specific funds identified, how existing
funds will be reallocated to sustain program and
professional development activities after federal funding
ends).
0
1
3
5
c) Demonstrate how the funds awarded under the program
will be used to supplement the level of funds available for
authorized programs and activities, and will not supplant
federal, state, local, or non-federal funds.
0
1
3
5
Element 3: Budget Narrative
Reviewer Comments:
TOTAL POINTS
___/17
13
Attachment A
Conditions for Success
Self-Check List
Schools that elect to participate in the School Improvement Grant process, beginning with a School
Support Team review, should consider the following questions. If the school can answer “Yes” to the
majority of these, there is a greater likelihood of success in the implementation of the school
improvement process.
 Are the school leadership and staff willing to work collaboratively?
Yes
No
 Is the school willing to work towards ensuring that all staff and
community have the opportunity to contribute their ideas about
improvement?
Yes
No
 Is the school willing to establish the structures that support
collaboration (i.e., specific times for teams to meet, timely
communication, etc.)?
Yes
No
 Is the school willing to develop a process for group decisionmaking?
Yes
No
 Is the school willing to use data as the primary source for decision
making?
Yes
No
 Is the school willing to sustain a commitment to the implementation
of a continuous improvement plan?
Yes
No
 Is the district willing to provide the resources (time, research,
personnel, etc.) to the school for its improvement initiatives?
Yes
No
 Is the school willing to make a commitment to change those
structures, practices, etc. that contribute to lack of progress?
Yes
No
14
Attachment B
Eligible Schools
District Name
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
School Name
Coronado Hills Elementary School
EMH
Level
School
Performance
Framework Plan
Type
Title IA
Improvement
Overall
SST Review and
Status 10-11
SI Grant
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI1
Cohort 1 (04-05)
SI1
SI2
Cohort 1 (04-05)
Cohort 1 (04-05)
Cohort 2 (05-06)
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
Federal Heights Elementary School
Malley Drive Elementary School
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
Mc Elwain Elementary School
Niver Creek Middle School
North Mor Elementary School
E
M
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
RI3
RI3
SI1
CA
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
North Star Elementary School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
Rocky Mountain Elementary School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI2
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
Adams County 14
Adams County 14
Thornton Elementary School
Thornton Middle School
Adams City Middle School
Central Elementary School
E
M
M
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
RI3
RI3
RI1
SI2
SI1
SI1
SI1
RI2
Adams County 14
Adams County 14
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Dupont Elementary School
Hanson Prek-8 School
Altura Elementary School
E
M
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Aurora West College Preparatory
Academy
M
Performance Plan
Cohort 1 (04-05)
Cohort 2 (05-06)
Cohort 1 (04-05)
15
Attachment B
District Name
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
School Name
Elkhart Elementary School
EMH
Level
School
Performance
Framework Plan
Type
Title IA
Improvement
Overall
SST Review and
Status 10-11
SI Grant
E
Improvement Plan
CA
SI2
SI2
RI1
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Fulton Elementary School
Kenton Elementary School
Lansing Elementary School
E
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Laredo Elementary School
Lyn Knoll Elementary School
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
CA
RP
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
North Middle School Health Sciences
and Technology
M
Improvement Plan
RI1
CA
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Paris Elementary School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Park Lane Elementary School
Peoria Elementary School
Sable Elementary School
Sixth Avenue Elementary School
Vaughn Elementary School
E
E
E
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
SI1
CA
CA
SI1
SI2
RP
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Wheeling Elementary School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Alamosa RE-11J
Ault-Highland RE-9
Evans Elementary School
Highland Elementary School
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
SI2
SI2
Boulder Valley RE 2
Columbine Elementary School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI2
Cohort 5 (08-09)
Boulder Valley RE 2
Emerald Elementary School
E
Performance Plan
SI1
Cohort 7 (10-11)
16
Attachment B
District Name
School Name
EMH
Level
School
Performance
Framework Plan
Type
Title IA
Improvement
Overall
SST Review and
Status 10-11
SI Grant
Boulder Valley RE 2
Pioneer Bilingual Elementary School
E
Performance Plan
SI2
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Boulder Valley RE 2
Boulder Valley RE 2
Canon City RE-1
Cherry Creek 5
Cherry Creek 5
Sanchez Elementary School
University Hill Elementary School
Skyline Elementary School
Cimarron Elementary School
Holly Hills Elementary School
E
E
E
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
SI1
RP
SI1
SI1
SI2
Cohort 7 (10-11)
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Cherry Creek 5
Cherry Creek 5
Cherry Creek 5
Independence Elementary School
Meadow Point Elementary School
Ponderosa Elementary School
E
E
E
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
SI1
SI2
SI1
Cherry Creek 5
Village East Community Elementary
School
E
Performance Plan
SI1
Cherry Creek 5
Village East Community Elementary
School
E
Performance Plan
SI1
Colorado School For The Deaf and
Blind
Colorado Springs 11
Colorado Springs 11
Colorado School For The Deaf and
Blind
Monroe Elementary School
Rogers Elementary School
M
E
E
Improvement Plan
Turnaround Plan
Performance Plan
SI2
SI2
SI1
Del Norte C-7
Delta County 50(J)
Denver County 1
Underwood Elementary School
Lincoln Elementary School
Abraham Lincoln High School
E
E
H
Priority
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
SI1
CA
RI3
Denver County 1
Ace Community Challenge Charter
School
H
Performance Plan
CA
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Cohort 2 (05-06)
17
Attachment B
District Name
School Name
EMH
Level
School
Performance
Framework Plan
Type
Title IA
Improvement
Overall
SST Review and
Status 10-11
SI Grant
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Amesse Elementary School
Archuleta Elementary School
Barnum Elementary School
Bruce Randolph School
Castro Elementary School
E
E
E
M
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Denver County 1
Centennial K-8 School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
RP
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Denver County 1
Charles M. Schenck (Cms) Community
School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
RI5
Cohort 4 (07-08)
RI4
SI1
RI3
RI2
RI4
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Cheltenham Elementary School
Cole Arts and Science Academy
Cole Arts and Science Academy
Colfax Elementary School
E
E
M
E
Turnaround Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
RI3
SI1
SI1
RP
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Colorado High School
Columbian Elementary School
Columbine Elementary School
Cowell Elementary School
Doull Elementary School
Eagleton Elementary School
Ellis Elementary School
H
E
E
E
E
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
SI2
RI1
SI1
RI4
RP
RI1
CA
Denver County 1
Escuela Tlatelolco School
H
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI2
Denver County 1
Fairmont K-8 School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
RI3
Cohort 2 (05-06),
RE-VISIT
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 2 (05-06)
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Cohort 3 (06-07),
RE-VISIT
Cohort 5 (08-09)
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Cohort 5 (08-09)
18
Attachment B
District Name
School Name
EMH
Level
School
Performance
Framework Plan
Type
Title IA
Improvement
Overall
SST Review and
Status 10-11
SI Grant
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Fairmont K-8 School
Fairview Elementary School
M
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Florence Crittenton High School
Ford Elementary School
Garden Place Elementary School
H
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Turnaround Plan
Performance Plan
CA
RI5
RI3
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Gilpin Elementary School
Godsman Elementary School
Goldrick Elementary School
Grant Middle School
M
E
E
M
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
SI1
RI2
RI3
RI1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Green Valley Elementary School
Greenwood Elementary School
Gust Elementary School
Harrington Elementary School
Howell K-8 School
Johnson Elementary School
Kaiser Elementary School
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
RP
SI1
RP
RI2
SI1
RP
SI1
Cohort 6 (09-10)
M
E
E
H
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
RI5
SI1
RI4
SI1
CA
Cohort 2 (05-06)
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Kepner Middle School
Kipp Sunshine Peak Academy
Knapp Elementary School
Manual High School
Marrama Elementary School
SI2
SI1
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Cohort 5 (08-09)
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Cohort 5 (08-09)
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Cohort 5 (08-09)
19
Attachment B
District Name
School Name
EMH
Level
School
Performance
Framework Plan
Type
Title IA
Improvement
Overall
SST Review and
Status 10-11
SI Grant
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Martin Luther King Middle College
Maxwell Elementary School
Mc Glone Elementary School
Mc Meen Elementary School
Merrill Middle School
Montclair Elementary School
Moore K-8 School
M
E
E
E
M
E
E
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Turnaround Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
RI2
SI1
CA
SI1
SI2
SI2
SI1
Cohort 5 (08-09)
Denver County 1
Munroe Elementary School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
RI3
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Northeast Academy Charter School
Oakland Elementary School
Pioneer Charter School
Place Bridge Academy
Place Bridge Academy
M
E
E
M
E
Turnaround Plan
Turnaround Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
SI2
RI1
CA
SI1
SI1
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Denver County 1
Prep Assessment Center
M
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Ridge View Academy Charter School
Schmitt Elementary School
H
E
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
CA
SI1
Denver County 1
Skinner Middle School
M
Priority
Improvement Plan
RI5
Denver County 1
Smiley Middle School
M
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI1
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
RI2
Denver County 1
Smith Elementary School
Cohort 2 (05-06)
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Cohort 2 (05-06)
20
Attachment B
District Name
Denver County 1
School Name
Stedman Elementary School
EMH
Level
School
Performance
Framework Plan
Type
Title IA
Improvement
Overall
SST Review and
Status 10-11
SI Grant
E
Performance Plan
CA
Cohort 5 (08-09)
RI4
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Denver County 1
Swansea Elementary School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Denver County 1
Trevista Ece-8 at Horace Mann
M
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Trevista Ece-8 at Horace Mann
Valdez Elementary School
Valverde Elementary School
E
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
SI1
RP
RI2
RI3
SI1
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Cohort 5 (08-09)
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
West High School
Whittier K-8 School
H
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Eagle County RE 50
Englewood 1
Falcon 49
Fort Morgan RE-3
Avon Elementary School
Cherrelyn Elementary School
Horizon Middle School
Columbine Elementary School
E
E
M
E
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
CA
SI1
SI1
SI1
FREMONT RE-2
Florence High School
H
Performance Plan
SI1
FREMONT RE-2
Fremont Middle School
M
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI2
Garfield 16
Garfield RE-2
Greeley 6
Bea Underwood Elementary School
Wamsley Elementary School
Centennial Elementary School
E
E
E
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
RP
SI1
SI1
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Cohort 7 (10-11)
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI2
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Greeley 6
Jackson Elementary School
RE-ALLOCATED
(05-06)
Cohort 6 (09-10)
21
Attachment B
District Name
Greeley 6
School Name
Madison Elementary School
EMH
Level
E
School
Performance
Framework Plan
Type
Improvement Plan
Title IA
Improvement
Overall
SST Review and
Status 10-11
SI Grant
SI1
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Greeley 6
Romero Elementary School
E
Improvement Plan
CA
Cohort 2 (05-06),
RE-VISIT
Gunnison Watershed RE1J
Gunnison Elementary School
E
Performance Plan
SI2
Cohort 1 (04-05)
Harrison 2
Monterey Elementary School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI1
RE-ALLOCATED
(05-06)
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
M
E
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Turnaround Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
SI1
SI1
SI1
RP
SI1
SI1
RI1
RI2
CA
SI1
SI1
RI2
Harrison 2
Ignacio 11 JT
Jefferson County R-1
Jefferson County R-1
Jefferson County R-1
Jefferson County R-1
Jefferson County R-1
Jefferson County R-1
Jefferson County R-1
Jefferson County R-1
Jefferson County R-1
Stratton Meadows Elementary School
Ignacio Intermediate School
Edgewater Elementary School
Eiber Elementary School
Foster Elementary School
Lumberg Elementary School
Molholm Elementary School
O'Connell Middle School
Pleasant View Elementary School
Slater Elementary School
Swanson Elementary School
Jefferson County R-1
Wheat Ridge Middle School
M
Priority
Improvement Plan
Keenesburg RE-3(J)
Hudson Elementary School
E
Performance Plan
SI2
Las Animas RE-1
Las Animas High School
H
Improvement Plan
SI1
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI1
Mapleton 1
Global Leadership Academy
Cohort 1 (04-05)
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Cohort 1 (04-05)
Cohort 1 (04-05)
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Cohort 2 (05-06)
22
Attachment B
District Name
School Name
EMH
Level
School
Performance
Framework Plan
Type
Title IA
Improvement
Overall
SST Review and
Status 10-11
SI Grant
Mapleton 1
Mapleton 1
Meadow Community School
Monterey Community School
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Mesa County Valley 51
Mesa County Valley 51
Mesa County Valley 51
Chatfield Elementary School
Dos Rios Elementary School
Dual Immersion Academy School
E
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
SI2
SI2
SI1
Mesa County Valley 51
Rocky Mountain Elementary School
E
Improvement Plan
SI2
SI1
SI2
Montezuma-Cortez RE-1
Kemper Elementary School
E
Turnaround Plan
RI2
Montezuma-Cortez RE-1
Montezuma-Cortez RE-1
Montrose County RE-1J
Montrose County RE-1J
Manaugh Elementary School
Mesa Elementary School
Johnson Elementary School
Olathe Elementary School
E
E
E
E
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
RI2
SI1
SI2
SI2
Platte Valley RE-7
Platte Valley Middle School
M
Improvement Plan
SI1
Poudre R-1
Poudre R-1
Pueblo City 60
Roaring Fork RE-1
Harris Bilingual Elementary School
Tavelli Elementary School
Spann Elementary School
Crystal River Elementary School
E
E
E
E
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Turnaround Plan
Improvement Plan
SI1
SI1
SI1
SI1
Roaring Fork RE-1
Roaring Fork RE-1
Glenwood Springs Elementary School
Sopris Elementary School
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
SI1
SI1
Cohort 1 (04-05),
Cohort 6(09-10)
Cohort 1 (04-05),
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 7 (10-11)
23
Attachment B
District Name
School Name
EMH
Level
School
Performance
Framework Plan
Type
Title IA
Improvement
Overall
SST Review and
Status 10-11
SI Grant
Sheridan 2
South Conejos RE-10
Sheridan Middle School
Antonito High School
M
H
Priority
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
South Routt RE 3
South Routt Elementary School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI1
St Vrain Valley RE 1J
Columbine Elementary School
E
Performance Plan
SI2
Cohort 5 (08-09)
RI2
SI1
Cohort 5 (08-09)
St Vrain Valley RE 1J
Indian Peaks Elementary School
E
Improvement Plan
SI1
CTAG PILOT
(SPRING 06)
St Vrain Valley RE 1J
Loma Linda Elementary School
E
Improvement Plan
SI1
RE-ALLOCATED
(05-06)
St Vrain Valley RE 1J
Northridge Elementary School
E
Improvement Plan
SI1
Cohort 7 (10-11)
St Vrain Valley RE 1J
Rocky Mountain Elementary School
E
Improvement Plan
SI1
Cohort 1 (04-05)
St Vrain Valley RE 1J
Spangler Elementary School
E
Turnaround Plan
SI2
RE-VISIT
Summit RE-1
Dillon Valley Elementary School
E
Performance Plan
SI2
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Summit RE-1
Thompson R-2J
Thompson R-2J
Trinidad 1
Valley RE-1
Silverthorne Elementary School
Monroe Elementary School
Winona Elementary School
Fisher's Peak Elementary School
Campbell Elementary School
E
E
E
E
E
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
SI1
SI1
CA
SI1
SI1
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Weld County S/D RE-8
Leo William Butler Elementary School
E
Performance Plan
SI1
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 5 (08-09)
24
Attachment B
District Name
School Name
EMH
Level
School
Performance
Framework Plan
Type
Title IA
Improvement
Overall
SST Review and
Status 10-11
SI Grant
Weld County S/D RE-8
Westminster 50
Westminster 50
Westminster 50
Twombly Elementary School
Clara E. Metz Elementary School
Fairview Elementary School
Francis M. Day Elementary School
E
E
E
E
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Turnaround Plan
Turnaround Plan
RI1
SI1
SI2
RP
Cohort 2 (05-06),
RE-VISIT
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 5 (08-09)
Cohort 4 (07-08)
Westminster 50
Westminster 50
Westminster 50
Harris Park Elementary School
Mesa Elementary School
Sherrelwood Elementary School
E
E
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Turnaround Plan
Turnaround Plan
SI2
SI2
SI1
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 7 (10-11)
RI1
Cohort 2 (05-06),
RE-VISIT, Cohort
7 (10-11)
Westminster 50
Skyline Vista Elementary School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
Westminster 50
Tennyson Knolls Elementary School
E
Improvement Plan
SI1
Westminster 50
Westminster Elementary School
E
Priority
Improvement Plan
SI2
Windsor RE-4
Mountain View Elementary School
E
Improvement Plan
SI1
Cohort 6 (09-10)
25
Attachment C
Potentially Eligible Schools*
Schools must be identified for Improvement for the 2011-2012 school year to receive School Improvement grant funding. If a school that
has been identified as ‘potentially’ on Title I Improvement and is not placed on Improvement after AYP determinations have been made
(Fall 2011), the school will not be eligible to receive School Improvement grant funding.
District Name
Academy 20
Academy 20
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
School Name
Frontier Elementary School
Pioneer Elementary School
Hillcrest Elementary School
EMH
Level
Title IA
School Performance Improvement
Framework Plan
Overall
Type
Status 10-11
E
E
E
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Adams 12 Five Star Schools
Adams County 14
Adams-Arapahoe 28J
Aguilar Reorganized 6
Stukey Elementary School
Alsup Elementary School
South Middle School
Aguilar Elementary School
E
E
M
E
Priority Improvement
Plan
Turnaround Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Aguilar Reorganized 6
Aguilar Junior-Senior High School
M
Priority Improvement
Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Aguilar Reorganized 6
Aguilar Junior-Senior High School
H
Priority Improvement
Plan
Boulder Valley RE 2
Brighton 27J
Brighton 27J
Brighton 27J
Burlington RE-6J
Centennial R-1
Centennial R-1
Creekside Elementary School at Martin
Park
Northeast Elementary School
Overland Trail Middle School
Vikan Middle School
Burlington Elementary School
Centennial Elementary School
Centennial Junior High School
E
E
M
M
E
E
M
Performance Plan
Turnaround Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
SST Review and
SI Grant
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Cohort 3 (06-07)
26
Attachment C
District Name
Charter School Institute
Charter School Institute
School Name
Goal Academy
High Point Academy
EMH
Level
Title IA
School Performance Improvement
Framework Plan
Overall
Type
Status 10-11
H
E
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Charter School Institute
Charter School Institute
Charter School Institute
Scholars To Leaders Academy
The Pinnacle Charter School High
The Pinnacle Charter School Middle
E
H
M
Priority Improvement
Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Colorado School For The Deaf
and Blind
Colorado Springs 11
Colorado School For The Deaf and Blind
Jack Swigert Aerospace Academy
H
M
Improvement Plan
Turnaround Plan
Potential
Potential
Colorado Springs 11
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Twain Elementary School
Academy of Urban Learning
Ashley Elementary School
Bryant Webster K-8 School
E
H
E
E
Priority Improvement
Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Centennial K-8 School
College View Elementary School
M
E
Priority Improvement
Plan
Improvement Plan
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Contemporary Learning Academy High
School
Force Elementary School
Henry World School Grades 6-8
Holm Elementary School
Howell K-8 School
Life Skills Center of Denver
P.S.1 Charter School
P.S.1 Charter School
Samuels Elementary School
H
E
M
E
M
H
M
H
E
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Turnaround Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Turnaround Plan
Turnaround Plan
Turnaround Plan
Performance Plan
SST Review and
SI Grant
Cohort 6 (09-10)
Cohort 3 (06-07)
Cohort 5 (08-09)
Cohort 4 (07-08)
27
Attachment C
Title IA
School Performance Improvement
Framework Plan
Overall
Type
Status 10-11
School Name
EMH
Level
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
Denver County 1
South High School
Southwest Early College Charter School
Wyatt-Edison Charter Elementary School
H
H
E
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Durango 9-R
Durango 9-R
Elizabeth C-1
Ellicott 22
Florida Mesa Elementary School
Needham Elementary School
Running Creek Elementary School
Ellicott Middle School
E
E
E
M
Priority Improvement
Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
District Name
Englewood 1
Fountain 8
Greeley 6
Wm E Bishop Elementary School
Aragon Elementary School
Dos Rios Elementary School
E
E
E
Priority Improvement
Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Greeley 6
Greeley 6
Gunnison Watershed RE1J
Franklin Middle School
John Evans Middle School
Marble Charter School
M
M
E
Priority Improvement
Plan
Turnaround Plan
Performance Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Harrison 2
Harrison 2
Holyoke RE-1J
Ignacio 11 JT
Jefferson County R-1
Jefferson County R-1
Jefferson County R-1
Jefferson County R-1
Johnstown-Milliken RE-5J
Lamar RE-2
Carmel Middle School
Pikes Peak Elementary School
Holyoke Junior High School
Ignacio Elementary School
Deane Elementary School
Lawrence Elementary School
Martensen Elementary School
Stevens Elementary School
Letford Elementary School
Lamar High School
M
E
M
E
E
E
E
E
E
H
Priority Improvement
Plan
Improvement Plan
Turnaround Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
SST Review and
SI Grant
28
Attachment C
District Name
School Name
EMH
Level
Title IA
School Performance Improvement
Framework Plan
Overall
Type
Status 10-11
Lamar RE-2
Lincoln Elementary School
E
Improvement Plan
Potential
Las Animas RE-1
Lewis-Palmer 38
Littleton 6
Mapleton 1
Mesa County Valley 51
Mesa County Valley 51
Mesa County Valley 51
Moffat 2
Las Animas Middle School
Palmer Lake Elementary School
Field Elementary School
Highland Montessori School
Fruitvale Elementary School
Nisley Elementary School
Taylor Elementary School
Moffat Senior High School
M
E
E
E
E
E
E
H
Priority Improvement
Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Turnaround Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Moffat County RE:No 1
Montrose County RE-1J
Park County RE-2
Poudre R-1
Poudre R-1
Sandrock Elementary
Passage Charter School
Lake George Charter School
Laurel Elementary School
Lincoln Middle School
E
H
E
E
M
Priority Improvement
Plan
Improvement Plan
Turnaround Plan
Improvement Plan
Improvement Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Pueblo City 60
Pueblo City 60
Pueblo City 60
Pueblo City 60
Bessemer Elementary School
Bessemer Elementary School
Irving Elementary School
Somerlid Elementary School
M
E
E
E
Priority Improvement
Plan
Turnaround Plan
Turnaround Plan
Improvement Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
M
M
H
Priority Improvement
Plan
Turnaround Plan
Improvement Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Pueblo City 60
Pueblo City 60
Salida R-32
W H Heaton Middle School
Youth & Family Academy Charter
Salida High School
SST Review and
SI Grant
RE-ALLOCATED
(05-06)
29
Attachment C
District Name
Sheridan 2
South Conejos RE-10
Thompson R-2J
Westminster 50
Westminster 50
Widefield 3
Widefield 3
Woodlin R-104
Woodlin R-104
Yuma 1
School Name
Sheridan High School
Antonito Junior High School
Truscott Elementary School
Josephine Hodgkins Elementary School
Sunset Ridge Elementary School
Martin Luther King Jr Elementary School
Venetucci Elementary School
Woodlin Elementary School
Woodlin Undivided High School
Yuma High School
EMH
Level
Title IA
School Performance Improvement
Framework Plan
Overall
Type
Status 10-11
H
M
E
E
E
E
E
Priority Improvement
Plan
Turnaround Plan
Performance Plan
Turnaround Plan
Performance Plan
Improvement Plan
Performance Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
Potential
E
M
H
Priority Improvement
Plan
Performance Plan
Performance Plan
Potential
Potential
Potential
SST Review and
SI Grant
30
Attachment D
Use of Funds
Use of Funds
Approximate Cost Breakdown
Consultant fees for a School Support Team
review by a CDE certified team or other CDE
approved service provider.
$40,000
Expenditures that build the school’s capacity for
improvement, tied to the findings in the School
Support Team review.
$90,000
Consultant fees for a CDE certified implementation
consultant or other CDE approved implementation
support services provider.
PERA costs (if applicable)
Expenditures associated with the end-of-grant
impact analysis.
$5,750
$710
$3,000
31
Attachment E
2011 SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT GRANT
END OF PHASE REPORT QUESTIONS
Each school district or consortium must submit an End of Phase report to CDE on or before
October 1, 2012 following completion of the program. Submit report via e-mail to Precious
Broadnax at broadnax_p@cde.state.co.us.
Provide feedback on the following five questions. In order to help CDE provide the best services,
please be as specific and candid as possible with your answers. The response should not be more
than 5 type-written pages.
1. Discuss how planned activities/strategies did or did not occur as planned.
2. Provide a description of your progress on each of your goals. Include a description of how the
grant activities supported those goals.
3. Discuss how this grant led to successes and how the school will continue to build on these
successes.
4. Discuss any pitfalls or lessons learned that you would share with another school doing the
same work.
5. Provide advice to CDE on how it can continue to support schools in its school improvement
efforts. Are there any other modifications that can be made to this grant to make it more
effective?
32
Attachment F
Methods to Collect Information
Method
Overall Purpose
Advantages

Questionnaires,
Surveys,
Checklists
Interviews
Documentation
Review
When need to quickly and/or
easily get lots of information
from people in a nonthreatening way





When want to fully
understand someone's
impressions or experiences, or
learn more about their
answers to questionnaires

When want impression of how
program operates without
interrupting the program; is
from review of applications,
finances, memos, minutes,
etc.






Can complete anonymously
Inexpensive to administer
Easy to compare and analyze
Administer to many people
Can get lots of data
Many sample questionnaires
already exist
Get full range and depth of
information
Develops relationship with
client
Can be flexible with client
Get comprehensive and
historical information
Doesn't interrupt program or
client's routine in program
Information already exists
Few biases about information
Challenges














Observation
To gather accurate
information about how a
program actually operates,
particularly about processes


View operations of a program
as they are actually occurring
Can adapt to events as they
occur



Focus Groups
Case Studies
Explore a topic in depth
through group discussion,
(e.g., about reactions to an
experience or suggestion,
understanding common
complaints) useful in
evaluation and marketing
To fully understand or depict
client's experiences in a
program, and conduct
comprehensive examination
through cross comparison of
cases





Quickly and reliably get
common impressions
Can be efficient way to get
much range and depth of
information in short time
Can convey key information
about programs
Fully depicts client's experience
in program input, process and
results
Powerful means to portray
program to outsiders





Might not get careful feedback
Wording can bias client's
responses
Are impersonal
In surveys, may need sampling
expert
Doesn't get full story
Can take much time
Can be hard to analyze and
compare
Can be costly
Interviewer can bias client's
responses
Often takes much time
Info may be incomplete
Need to be quite clear about
what looking for
Not flexible means to get data;
data restricted to what already
exists
Can be difficult to interpret
seen behaviors
Can be complex to categorize
observations
Can influence behaviors of
program participants
Can be expensive
Can be hard to analyze
responses
Need good facilitator for safety
and closure
Difficult to schedule 6-8 people
together
Usually quite time consuming
to collect, organize and
describe
Represents depth of
information, rather than
breadth
33