Every Student Succeeds Act

1. Every Student Succeeds Act

2. Consultation Structure

3. ESSA Advisory Teams

4. Accountability Task Force • Describe how the SEA established its ambitious long-term goals and measurements of interim progress for academic achievement, graduation rates and achievement of English language proficiency. (with starting and long-term goal, by subgroup, data included). • Describe the measure(s) included in each of the (1) Academic Achievement, (2) Academic Progress, (3) Graduation Rate, (4) Progress in Achieving English Language Proficiency, and (5) School Quality or Student Success indicators and how those measures meet ESSA requirements for all students and separately for each subgroup of students used to meaningfully differentiate all public schools in the State. • The description must also include how the state will use the 95 percent participation rate in the statewide assessment in its accountability system. • Describe the methodology for the identification of Comprehensive (Priority) and Targeted (Focus) Schools. CONTACT: Dr. Scott Mantie at Scott.Mantie@doe.nh.gov

5. An Overview of an Elementary/Middle Model

6. An Overview of a High School Model

7. The Indicators in an Elementary/Middle Model PACE Determinations for Volunteer Schools iREADY/PSAT 8/9 Pilot for Volunteer Schools?

8. The Indicators in a High School Model PACE Determinations for Volunteer Schools

9. Comprehensive School Support and Improvement Advisory Team • Directive: To reflect, research and design a statewide system of support for the state’s Priority and Focus schools and all schools struggling to meet annual accountability benchmarks. • Guiding Principle: To provide all children significant opportunity to receive a fair, equitable, and high-quality education, and to close educational achievement gaps.’ • Tasks: • Describe the state’s process to ensure effective development and implementation of school improvement plans, including evidence-based interventions. • Describe the state’s system of performance management which must include information on the state’s review and approval of LEA plans for Title funds, collection and use of data, monitoring, continuous improvement, and technical assistance. • Describe how the state will work with all schools that do not meet annual benchmarks within the state’s accountability system? CONTACT: Christopher Motika at christopher.motika@doe.nh.gov

10. English Learner Advisory Team • Directive: To research and provide guidance to the New Hampshire Department of Education in regards to ESOL programs, ESOL teacher preparation and professional development, and the assessment process for English Language Learners. • Guiding Principle: To promote excellence and equity in the education of English Language Learners. • Tasks: Revising NHDOE’s ESOL guidance around the EL identification procedure, monitoring process and exiting criteria (specifically the Home Language Survey and its implementation) CONTACT Aaron Hughes at aaron.hughes@doe.nh.gov

11. Educator Equity and Support Advisory Team • Directive: To research and design the major components of the state accountability plan for the Every Student Succeeds Act, focusing on Title II, Educator Equity and Support. • Guiding Principle (DRAFT): All students deserve equitable access to high quality educators. High quality preparation and continuous professional learning are essential for supporting effective teachers. • Topics: Title IIA State Activities, Teacher Preparation, Teacher Certification, Local Education Agency Activities CONTACT Ashley Frame at ashley.frame@doe.nh.gov

12. Federal Fiscal Streams Advisory Team • Recruiting Members: • Superintendents • Business Administrators • Federal Fund Managers • Immediate Focus: Supplement vs. Supplant DRAFT Regulations (input – formal and informal) • Long-term Focus: Review all formula and competitive grants for changes in ESSA • Provide TA to school districts CONTACT: Caitlin Davis – caitlin.davis@doe.nh.gov

13. Overview of Proposed Regulation • LEAs must annually: • Publish their methodology for allocating state and local funds in a format and language parents and the public can understand, and • Demonstrate, at such time and in such form as the SEA may reasonably require, that the methodology it uses gives each Title I school all of the state and local funds it would otherwise receive if it were not a Title I school • LEAs have 4 options for demonstrating compliance with SNS PROPOSED REGULATIONS

14. Option 1: Weighted Per-Pupil • Distribute to schools “almost all of the state and local funds available to the LEA” through a per-pupil formula where students with educational disadvantage generate more money for their schools • Educational disadvantage includes (but is not limited to): • Poverty • English learner • Student with disability PROPOSED REGULATIONS

15. Option 2: Average Personnel and Non Personnel Costs • Distribute to schools “almost all of the state and local funds available to the LEA” through a consistent “resource formula” where each Title I school receives at least: • The average districtwide salary for each category of school personnel, multiplied by the number of school personnel in each category assigned to the school under the formula, plus • The average districtwide expenditure for non-personnel resources multiplied by the number of students in the school PROPOSED REGULATIONS

16. Option 3: State-Established Compliance Test • Distribute to schools “almost all of the state and local funds available to the LEA” in a manner chosen by the LEA that: • Is applied consistently districtwide, and • Meets a funds-based compliance test established by the SEA that: • Is as rigorous as Options 1 & 2 (meaning it results in substantially similar amounts of state and local funds for Title I schools as would Options 1 & 2), and • Has been approved through a federal peer review process • SEAs are not required to establish a test, and if they do, LEAs are not required to use it PROPOSED REGULATIONS

17. Option 4: Special Rule • An LEA can use any methodology to distribute state and local funds as long as it results in the LEA spending at least as much per pupil in Title I schools as the average amount spent per pupil in non-Title I schools as reported under Section 1111(h)(1)(C)(x) • Spending in Title I schools can vary up to 5% of average spending in non-Title I schools in a given year • An LEA can exclude any school with less than 100 students • An LEA can demonstrate compliance if it demonstrates that one or more non-Title I school gets extra money to serve a high proportion of students with disabilities, English learners, or students from low income families, which disproportionally affects the average spending in non-Title I schools PROPOSED REGULATIONS

18. SNS Timelines • By December 10, 2017 each LEA must: • Demonstrate to its SEA it has a methodology for meeting SNS it will use no later than the 2018-2019 school year, or • Submit a plan to its SEA for how it will fully implement a methodology for meeting SNS no later than the 2019-2020 school year • Before 2018-2019 or 2019-2020 LEAs can demonstrate compliance using one of the new options or NCLB rules DRAFT REGULATIONS

19. Early Childhood Advisory Team • Directive: To research and design state technical guidance focused on Early Childhood supports for schools and districts. • Guiding Principle: To advocate for public education availability starting at age 3. CONTACT Heather Gage at heather.gage@doe.nh.gov

20. ESSA State Plan DRAFT* Timeline* Subject to Change • The ESSA Consolidated Plan must be sent out for public comment for at least 30 days before submission. • The Governor has 30 days to sign-off on the ESSA Consolidated Plan. • The DRAFT regulations note that US ED intends to establish two deadlines for the submission of initial consolidated or individual State plans under the new Act: • March 6, and • July 3, 2017. • The U.S. Department of Education has 120 days (approx. 4 months) to approve the plan.

21. DRAFT Timeline Review* Subject to Change • DRAFT Regulations publically released on May 31, 2016, comment timeframe has concluded • September 16, 2016 – Vision survey posted w/ letter for LEAs • September 23, 2016 -- Local school board packet of information sent to LEAs • Sept – Jan, 2017: Individual advisory team meetings take place • Oct – Nov, 2016: Regional listening tour (i.e. areas of Keene, Hanover, Merrimack, Exeter; Gorham; Concord); advocacy organizations feedback sought • Nov – Dec, 2016: US ED timeframe for the posting of final ESSA Regulations • December 2017 – Certain State Plan proposed components are posted with survey

22. DRAFT Timeline Review* Subject to Change • January, 2017 – New administration commences • January 31, 2017 – All Advisory Teams build consensus on their proposals and team leads ensure that all plan requirements have been address completely based on Regulations • February 28, 2017 – All Advisory Team plans are due • March 1-19, 2017 – State plan is put together in one document for first draft • March 20, 2017 – Final State Plan draft is posted with survey for 30-day public comment requirement (possible 2ndlistening tour) • April 14, 2017 – Public comment session is completed and comments summarized • May 12, 2017 – Draft of State Plan is sent to the Governor for 30-day review • July 3, 2017 - Final State Plan is submitted