Mary Alice Heuschel Deputy Superintendent

1
January Conference 2003
Reauthorized by the No Child Left Behind Act of
2001 - Public Law 107-110 (NCLB) . . . And the
Impact on Washington State
Mary Alice Heuschel
Deputy
Superintendent Bob Harmon

Assistant Superintendent

Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction
2
H.R. 1 No Child Left Behind Act

• Characteristics of Legislation that Align to
• Washingtons Education Reform
• Extension of standards-based educational reform
• Research-based, quality curriculum and
  instruction aligned withstate standards
• High quality teacher preparation, training, and
  opportunities for effective professional
  development
• Single statewide accountability system - SEA,
  LEA, schools
• All students achieving proficiency
  (reading/mathematics)within twelve years
• High quality assessments - knowledge and use of
  results
• Required data, reporting requirements
• Parental involvement rights - transparency
• Closing the achievement gap between minority/
  nonminorityand disadvantaged/advantaged peers

3
No Child Left Behind

• Organization of the Act
• Title 1 Improving the AcademicAchievement of
  the Disadvantaged
• Part A Basic Program Improving Basic School
  Programs
• Part B Reading First, Early Reading, Even
  Start Reading Skills Family Literacy Programs
  / School Libraries
• Part C Migratory Children
• Part D Neglected and Delinquent Children
• Part E National Assessment of Title I
• Part F Comprehensive School Reform
• Part G Advanced Placement Programs
• Part H School Dropout Prevention
• Part I General Provisions

4
No Child Left Behind

• Title II Preparing, Training, and Recruiting
• High-Quality Teachers and Principals
• Teacher and Principal Training and Recruiting
  High-Quality Teachers and Principals (Block
  Grant)
• Mathematics and Science Partnerships
• Innovation for Teacher Quality
• Troops-to-Teachers Program
• National Writing Project
• Teaching of Traditional American History
• Teacher Liability Protection
• Enhancing Education Through Technology

5

No Child Left Behind

• Title III Language Instruction for Limited
• English Proficient and Immigrant Students
• (Used to be Title VII Bilingual Program)
• English Language Acquisition, Language
  Enhancement, and Academic Achievement Act
• Improving Language Instruction Educational
  Program
• Emergency Immigrant Program
• Title IV 21st Century School
• Safe and Drug Free Schools
• 21st Century Community Learning Centers

6

No Child Left Behind

• Title V Promoting Informed Parental
• Choice and Innovative Programs
• (Used to be Title VI Innovative Programs)
• Innovative Programs
• Charter School Program
• Magnet Schools Assistance
• Fund for the Improvement of Education
• Smaller Learning Communities
• Gifted and Talented Students
• Physical Education
• Community Technology Centers
• Excellence in Economic Education
• Arts and Education

7
No Child Left Behind

• Title VI Flexibility and Accountability
• Improving Academic Achievement (Assessments)
• State and Local Flexibility
• Rural Education Initiative
• Title VII Indian, Native Hawaiian, and
• Alaska Native Education
• Indian Education
• Native Hawaiian Education
• Alaska Native Education

8
No Child Left Behind

• Title VIII Impact Aid
• Federal Property
• Military Installations
• Title IX General Provisions
• Flexibility
• Coordination and Consolidation of State/Local
  Plans
• Waivers
• Uniform Provisions (Private Schools, Home School,
  etc.)

9
No Child Left Behind

• Title X Education of Homeless
• Children and Youths
• SEAs shall ensure that each homeless youth
  has equal access to the same free, appropriate
  public education, including a public preschool
  education, as provided to other children and
  youths.
• LEAs must keep homeless students in their school
  of origin.
• (If moved to a shelter outside of school
  of origin, for example)
• States and LEAs must remove barriers to the
  enrollment and retention of children and youth in
  homeless situations.
• At a parents request, homeless students must be
  provided with transportation to and from their
  school or origin.
• Every district must designate a liaison for
  students in homeless situations.

10
Specific Details within the Titles
11
H.R. 1 No Child Left Behind Act

• Testing Criteria Requirements
• Be the same for all children
• Be aligned with state standards and provide
  coherent information about student attainment
• Performance Basic, Proficient, and Advanced
• Be valid, reliable, and consistent with technical
  standards
• Involve multiple measures of achievement
  including higher order thinking skills and
  understanding
• Provide reasonable adaptations and accommodations
  for childrenwith disabilities
• Annual English proficiency assessment for all LEP
  students
• NAEP Biennially/ grades 4 8 only/ 1000
  students per state/ reading and mathematics/ 90
  minute assessment/ Only if USDEpays cost of
  administration

12
H.R. 1 No Child Left Behind Act

• State Testing Requirements
• Beginning School Year 2002-2005
• Annual testing in one grade within three levels
  
• 3-5, 6-9 and 10-12 in reading and mathematics
• Beginning School Year 2002-2003
• Annual English proficiency assessment for all
  LEP students
• Beginning School Year 2002 - 2003
• Participation in NAEP required in grades 4 and 8
  in reading and mathematics
• Beginning School Year 2005 - 2006
• Annual testing in Grades 3-8 in reading and
  mathematics (and HS year 10th)
• Beginning School Year 2007 - 2008
• Annual testing in one grade within three levels,
  3-5, 6-9, and 10-12 in science
• Additional Indicators Required

13
Alternative Assessments

• States must measure all student performance
  against the states grade level standards
• Commercially Available Tests No Longer Permitted
• Special Education students are assessed using
• WASL
• WASL with Accomodations
• Portfolio Alternate Assessment
• Out-of-grade level testing prohibited
• 0.5 limitation allowed taking alternative
  assessments against an alternate set of standards
  (WA presently .2) This limitation removed from
  final regulations but pending

14
NCLB Adequate Yearly Progress Elements

• All students proficient within 12 years
• Separate, measurable goals in reading and
  mathematics. (State Uniform Bars)
• Must provide separate, measurable objectives/
  disaggregated data and goals for
• All Children
• Racial/Ethnic Groups
• Disadvantaged (Poverty)
• Disabled
• LEP
• School is making AYP if there is a 10 percent
  gain in each group reaching proficiency Safe
  Harbor

15
OTHER NCLB AYP ELEMENTS

• Must measure reading/language arts and
  mathematics separately.
• Must include at least one other indicator
• Graduation rates, for high schools
• 1 academic indicator, for elementary/middle
  schools
• 95 of students in each group must be tested.
• Determination of personally identifiable and
  statistically reliable number(s)
• Personally identifiable 10
• Statistical reliable 30 (Proposed)

16
EXISTING STATE A COMMISSION CRITERIA

• ELEMENTARY SCHOOL READING
• Improvement
• For the following three criteria, the school had
  a three-year average of fewer than 40 percent of
  students meeting the fourth grade WASL reading
  standard and
• 1. The school did not meet the state minimum
  Reading Improvement Goal by the end of the
  2000-01 school year.
• 2. The school did not make a .25 gain on the
  reading Learning Improvement Index from 1998 to
  2001.
• 3. Did not reduce the percentage of students in
  reading Level 1 by 25 percent from 1998 to 2001.
• Achievement
• 4. The school had a three-year average of less
  than 30 percent of students meeting the WASL
  reading standard.
• 5. The school had a three-year average below the
  35th percentile National Percentile Rank on the
  reading component of the third grade ITBS.
• ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MATHEMATICS
• Improvement
• For the following two criteria, the school had a
  three-year average of fewer than 25 percent of
  students meeting the WASL mathematics standard
  and
• 1. The school did not make a .25 gain on the
  mathematics Learning Improvement Index from 1998
  to 2001.
• 2. The school did not reduce the percentage of
  students in mathematics Level 1 by 25 percent
  from 1998 to 2001.
• Achievement
• 3. The school had a three-year average of less
  than 20 percent of students meeting the WASL
  mathematics standard.
• 4. The school had a three-year average below the
  35th percentile National Percentile Rank on the
  mathematics component of the third grade ITBS.
• Elementary schools that meet five or more of the
  above criteria will be judged not to have met
  AYP. Schools that meet all of the criteria in
  either subject area will be identified for
  improvement in that subject area.
• MIDDLE/JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL READING

17
EXISTING CRITERIA RECOMMENDATIONSReplac
e with Implement

• Three-year average of fewer than (specified)
  percent of students meeting the standard
• Did not meet the State Reading Improvement Goal
• Did not make a .25 gain on the reading and
  mathematics Learning Improvement Index
• The school had a three-year average below the
  35th percentile National Percentile Rank on the
  reading component of the third grade ITBS.

• The percent of students meeting the standard
  annually in reading and mathematics will meet or
  exceed the state uniform bar in each
  disaggregated group
• All students, all ethnic groups, low-income,
  special education, ELL
• in each grade assessed.

A Commission Meeting 1/13/03
18

• Other Indicator Elementary/Middle Schools
• Attendance
• Total unexcused absences / total days of
  enrollment (use BECCA data)
• Attendance needs to defined statewide to
  ensure consist reporting
• Recommendation Identify attendance through
  the reduction of unexcused absences as the only
  other indicator elementary andmiddle schools.
• Other Indicator High Schools
• Graduation Rate Threshold Set At 85
• For purposes of AYP (other than safe harbor)
  the calculation of the graduation rate will apply
  to the school building and district level, but
  not to the student subgroup level. School
  buildings and districts that achieve or exceed
  the threshold for the graduation rate, as well as
  those that are below the threshold but improve
  their graduation rate when compared to the
  previous year, will have met the other academic
  indicator for purposes of calculating AYP

A Commission Meeting 1/13/03
19
Other Indicator High Schools

• NCLB defines graduation rate as
• The percentage of students who graduate from
  secondary schools with a regular diploma in the
  standard number of years.
• Final regulations describe regular diploma as
• Not including an alternative degree that is not
  fully aligned with the States academic
  standards, such as a certificate or a GED.
• Calculation of the Graduation Rate
• Washington State will utilize an extended cohort
  analysis
• Cohort begins in Grade 9 Identify Expected
  Year of Graduation
• Graduation rate calculated after 4 years of high
  school
• Continuing students will continue to be reported
  after initial calculation

20
No Child Left Behind

• Adequate Yearly Progress
• Starting Point 2001-02 Assessment Data
• Defining AYP
• Rank all schools in the state by proficient
• Then, count up to reach the school at 20 of
  total enrollment
• The of students proficient in that school is
  the possible starting point
• ALSO
• Rank the proficient level of each demographic
  subgroup
• The of students proficient in the
  lowest-achieving group is the possible starting
  point
• Required to choose the higher of the two as the
  starting point

21
Choosing the Size (N) of Groups

• States must set an n for two purposes
• Protect personally identifiable information
• - WA has this established with an n of 10
• Reporting for statistical reliability
• - Subcommitee recommends n gt 30 for statistical
  reliability
• Received A Commission endorsement of AYP
  subcommittees recommendation to use 30 for ESEA
  reporting statistically reliable information.
• N of 30 is not so high that the potential
  benefits of disaggregated reporting is lost, but
  not so low that there is an unacceptably high
  probability that schools will receive sanctions
  as the result of random fluctuations for students
  in a low-frequency category. (CRESST, 2002)

22
Calculating State Uniform Bars

• State Uniform Bars for
• 4th Grade Reading and Mathematics
• 7th Grade Reading and Mathematics
• 10th Grade Reading and Mathematics
• State Uniform Bars Using 20th Percentile Schools
• 3-year average
• Different schools for each of
• 1999 2000
• 2000 2001
• 2001 2002

23
GRADE 4 STATE UNIFORM BARBASED ON 3-YEAR AVERAGE
20th PERCENTILE (2000-2002)

24
GRADE 7 STATE UNIFORM BARBASED ON 3-YEAR AVERAGE
20th PERCENTILE (2000-2002)

25
GRADE 10 STATE UNIFORM BARBASED ON 3-YEAR
AVERAGE 20th PERCENTILE (2000-2002)

26
No Child Left Behind

• Safe Harbor
• If students in a subgroup make a 10 percent
  reduction in the number of students not
  proficient, they are in a safe harbor and not
  considered as failing AYP.
• Example (Group A 100 students)
• Group A 60 percent not proficient
• 40 percent are proficient
• 10 percent of 60 gain
• 6 additional students in that group must meet
  proficiency
• However, ALL subgroups must meet safe harbor or
  better
• All Students Limited English Proficiency
• Racial/ethnic groups Students with disabilities
  Economically disadvantaged
• AND must meet other indicator

27
Net Effect of All Conditions465 Schools
Identified for School Improvement(Does not
Include Safe Harbor)
PROJECTED
(lt 3 of all students)
A school fails to meet AYP if any group of at
least 30 students (1) has less than 95 of its
students assessed or (2) has WASL results that
fall more than 2 standard errors below the state
goal (95 confidence level).
28
Net Effect of All Conditions on
Districts129 Districts Identified for School
Improvement(Does not Include Safe Harbor)
PROJECTED
A district fails to meet AYP if any group of at
least 30 students (1) has less than 95 of its
students assessed or (2) has WASL results that
fall more than 2 standard errors below the state
goal (95 confidence level).
Represents lt 1.3 of all students assessed.
Some districts do not enroll students in the test
grades.
29
The 37 Cells of School Improvement

30
Number of cells failing AYP
PROJECTED
31
Number of cells failing AYP
PROJECTED
32
PROJECTED
Number of cells failing AYP
33
PROJECTED
Number of cells failing AYP
34
AYP Results by Group Grade 4
35
AYP Results by Group Grade 7
36
AYP Results by Group Grade 10
37
Reason(s) for School Improvement Identification

• 37 Possible Cells Any cell / 2 years not making
  AYP School Improvement
• Identify reason(s) for school improvement
  identification (individual cells) prior to
  identification of school
• SAME cell 2 years not making AYP School
  Improvement

38
The 37 Cells of School Improvement
39
Making It
40
AYP TIMELINE
41
No Child Left Behind

• School Improvement Step Requirements
• Schools are identified as in need of school
  improvement after two consecutive years of not
  meeting Adequate Yearly Progress
• Schools that have not met achievement goals for
  two consecutive years
• must develop an improvement plan and receive
  technical assistance
• 10 of funding must be dedicated to professional
  development
• must notify parents of school improvement status
• must make public school choice available within
  district district paying transportation costs.
• Schools that have not met achievement goals for
  three consecutive years
• All components above required, plus
• must provide supplemental services approved by
  the SEA

42
No Child Left Behind

• School Improvement Step Requirements
• Schools that have not met achievement goals for
  four years
• must take corrective action. District action
  new staff or curriculum
• must continue
• development on improvement plan and receive
  technical assistance
• 10 of funding must be dedicated to professional
  development
• must notify parents of school improvement status
• must make public school choice available within
  district district paying transportation costs.
• supplemental services
• Schools that have not met achievement goals for
  five years
• required restructuring plan developed for take
  over state, contractor, charter school, new
  staff
• must continue supplemental services and public
  school choice.

43
Public School ChoiceFinal Regulation
Clarification

• LEA must give priority to the lowest achieving
  children from low-income families
• Determine family income on the same basis that
  the LEA uses to make allocations to schools
• Students assigned to a school by a juvenile court
  due to violent or criminal behavior, or
  disciplinary reasons sufficiently serious to
  justify placement in a particular learning
  environment, may be denied the choice option

44
No Child Left Behind

• Supplemental Services
• 
  Required after three years (and
  beyond)
• Eligible child low income
• Includes tutoring or other extra educational
  services
• Supplemental services approved by the SEA
• Annual notice to potential providers
  profit/nonprofit / religiously-affiliated
• Criteria established by the SEA
• SEA produces a list of approved
  programs/providers
• Parent selects / LEA contracts with provider
  performance goals set requires contact with
  childs teacher
• 20 cap of total LEA allocation for
  transportation AND supplemental services -
  5 transportation - 5 supplemental services
• Additional 10 either LEA choice

45
School Choice and Supplemental
Services Final Regulation
Clarification

• State class size reduction law does not supercede
  choice
• Prohibits lack of capacity to deny students
  transfer under public school choice, however,
  health and safety concerns may be taken into
  account
• Requires parents to have a choice of more than
  one school for transfer if available
• Requires parent preference to be taken into
  account
• Notice of supplemental educational services must
  be provided to parents with a list of approved
  service providers available within the LEA,
  including technology-based or distance-learning

46
Secretary Paige Response

• The ESEA does not permit an LEA to preclude
  choice options on the basis of capacity
  constraints. Rather, the statute requires an LEA
  to take measures to overcome issues such as
  overcrowding, class size limits, and health and
  safety concerns, that otherwise might prevent the
  LEA from complying with Title I public school
  choice requirements. This could mean, for
  example, adding classes and hiring additional
  teachers so that the LEA can offer choices to
  students while adhering to State-mandated class
  size limits.

47
No Child Left Behind

• Corrective Action
• Required after four years
  (and beyond)
• Must Choose One of the Following
• Replace relevant school staff
• New curriculum for all core content areas
• Significantly decrease management authority at
  the school
• Appoint an outside expert
• Extend the school day or year
• Restructure internal organization

48
No Child Left Behind

• Restructuring
• Required five years (and beyond)
• Must Choose One of the Following
• Reopen as a charter
• Replace all or most relevant school staff,
  including the principal
• Contract with private management
• State take over
• Any other major restructuring

49
No Child Left Behind

• LEA Improvement
• SEA identifies LEA in need of improvement after 2
  years of not making AYP
• Improvement plan required within 3 months
• 10 of allocated funding must be used for
  professional development
• Technical assistance required including
  corrective action
• Corrective Action
• SEA must choose one
• Deferring programmatic or reducing administrative
  funds
• New curriculum
• Restructuring or abolishing the LEA
• Replacing relevant LEA personnel
• Alternative governance
• State receivership/trustee
• Authorizing students to transfer to another LEA

50
Communication with Parents

• NCLB obligates LEAs to provide the parents of
  students enrolled in schools in the improvement
  process with information on
• What the identification means
• Why the school was identifies
• What the school, the LEA and the state are doing
  to help address the achievement problems that led
  to the identification
• Parents must be informed of their option to
  transfer their child to another eligible school,
  availability of transportation, supplemental
  services available, and how they can participate
  in the improvement process

51
School Report Cards

• In addition to the current state reporting, this
  fall schools must supplement school performance
  reports to also include
• Comparison of student achievement to district and
  state results
• Assessment data by all demographic subgroups
  (statistically significant, not personally
  identifiable WA 10)
• Whether the school has been identified for school
  improvement.
• OSPI has provided a school and district report
  card on-line as an option for schools and
  districts to use to meet this requirement. NCLB
  requires report cards to be widely disseminated
  at the beginning of each school year.

52
District (LEA) Report Cards

• In addition to the current state reporting, this
  fall districts must supplement district
  performance reports to also include
• Student achievement at each proficiency level
• Assessment data by all demographic subgroups
  (statistically significant, not personally
  identifiable WA 10)
• Comparison of student achievement to state
  results
• Numbers and names of schools in the district that
  are in school improvement
• Professional qualifications of the district
  teaching staff.
• Other Indicators - Elementary
• Graduation rates Secondary (standard
  number of years)
• Right to Know
• Districts must also separately notify parents
  that they can request specific information about
  individual teachers qualifications

53

• Annual State Report to the Secretary
• State report card including all school and
  district reported information
• An explanation of states accountability system.
• Information on State progress in developing all
  required academic assessments (2002-03)
• Performance of districts/ schools making AYP,
  including the number and names of schools
  identified for school improvement.
• Data on the acquisition of English proficiency by
  LEP (2002-03)
• Number and names of schools identified for school
  improvement, the reason for identification, and
  measures taken to address achievement problems
• Number of students and schools that participated
  in public school choice and supplemental services
• Information on quality of teachers and percent of
  classes taught by highly qualified (2002-03)

54
No Child Left Behind

• Highly Qualified Teachers
• All teachers teaching CORE Academic Subjects must
  be highly qualified by 2005-2006.
• CORE Academic Subjects means English, Reading,
  Language Arts, Mathematics, Science, Foreign
  Languages, Civics and Government, Economics,
  Arts, History, and Geography.
• Highly Qualified means
• Full State Certification or passed teacher
  licensing exam and hold a license to teach.
• Certification or licensure requirements has not
  been waived on an emergency, temporary, or
  provisional basis.

55
No Child Left Behind

• Highly Qualified Teachers
• Existing Teachers
• Bachelors Degree
• Full State Teaching Certification
• May demonstrate competency through the same
  avenue for new teachers, or
• Demonstrate competence in all academic subjects
  based on a Statehigh, objective uniform state
  standard of evaluation (specific criteria)
• New Teachers
• Bachelors Degree
• Elementary Pass a basic skills competency
  assessment as well as demonstrated competence in
  areas of reading, mathematics and writing and
  other areas of elementary curriculum
• Secondary Pass a basic skills competency
  assessment as well as demonstrated competence in
  academic subjects in which the teacher teaches
  (endorsements)
• Full State Teaching Certification

56
Alternate Certification Program Requirements

• To meet the highly qualified requirements, a
  participating teacher must
• Receive high-quality professional development
  that is sustained, intensive, and
  classroom-focused
• Participate in a program of intensive supervision
  that consists of structured guidance and regular
  ongoing support
• Assume functions as a teacher only for a
  specified period of time not to exceed three
  years
• Demonstrate satisfactory progress toward full
  certification

57
Special Education and LEP/ELL Teachers

• Special Education and LEP/ELL teachers that teach
  core academic subjects must meet the
  highly-qualified teacher requirements
• Special educators who do not directly instruct
  students on any core academic subject or who
  provide only consultation to highly qualified
  teachers of core academic subjects in adapting
  curricula, using behavioral supports and
  interventions, and selecting appropriate
  accommodations do not need to meet the same
  highly qualified subject-matter competency
  requirements that apply to teachers of core
  academic subjects under the NCLB Act.

58
Qualified Paraprofessionals

• Title I paraprofessional requirements
• a high school diploma or equivalent
• completed at least two years of college, OR
• obtained an associates (or higher) degree, OR
• successfully pass a state or local academic
  assessment of mathematics, reading, and writing.
• State or local assessment must measure rigorous
  standards of quality that demonstrates
• (a) knowledge of, and the ability to assist in
  instructing, reading, writing and mathematics OR
• (b) knowledge of, and the ability to assist in
  instructing, reading readiness, writing
  readiness, and mathematics readiness, as
  appropriate.

59
No Child Left Behind

• Qualified Paraprofessional Criteria
  Applies to
• Title I paraprofessionals assisting with student
  instruction, including those teaching in a
  program supported with Title I (Part A) funds
• Title I paraprofessionals hired after January 8,
  2002 must meet requirements upon hiring.
• Existing paraprofessionals must meet
  qualifications by January 8, 2006
• EXCEPTION paraprofessionals who serve primarily
  as translators, or whose duties consist solely of
  conducting parental involvement activities.

60
Status on Paraprofessional Assessment and
Training Opportunities

• Advisory task force consisting of stakeholder
  group representatives is working to investigate
  and identify options to meet the assessment
  requirement and related professional development.
• Assessment options (equitable criteria for all
  options)
• Paper/pencil assessment (commercial and local)
• Standard setting for commercially developed
  assessment is scheduled for March 2003
• Commercial assessment accessible late spring
• Portfolios
• Final recommendations by late spring regarding
  assessment options and criteria for professional
  development.

61
No Child Left Behind

• Parents Right to Know
• Requires LEAs to annually notify parents of
  their right to request information on the
  professional qualifications of their childs
  teachers.
• Licensing for grade level and subject
• Emergency or provisional status
• B.A. major and graduate degrees
• Paraprofessionals and qualifications
• Requires LEAs to notify parents if students have
  a teacher for 4 weeks that is not highly
  qualified.

62
No Child Left Behind

• LEA Progress on Improving
  Qualifications
• If the district has failed to make progress after
  two years
• the district must develop an improvement plan.
• the SEA must provide technical assistance to
  districts.
• If progress is not made after three consecutive
  years
• The state must work with the LEA to develop such
  a plan.
• Prohibit the use of Title I funds to fund
  additional paraprofessionals. (Exception for
  replacing existing paraprofessionals)
• LEA must enter into an agreement with the SEA on
  the use of funds provided directly to a school or
  schools for the teachers and principals for
  professional development activities.

63
Preliminary State Plan Detailed State Plan

• State Plan Submitted - Fully Approved and Fully
  Funded (July 15,2002) with NO Provisions
• State Accountability System due January 31, 2003
• State Detailed Plan due May 31, 2003

64
No Child Left Behind

• Key State Activities
• Challenging Content Standards
  Mathematics, Reading/Language Arts, Science
• Development for Implementation of Required
  Assessments
• Timeline for Setting Academic Achievement
  Standards
• Mathematics,
  Reading/Language Arts, Science
• Washington States Accountability Plan AYP
  Starting Point Definition and Measures
  (January 31, 2003 / May 31, 2003)
• AYP Intermediate Goals/ Timeline/ Annual
  Objectives
• Graduation and Target rate / Other Academic
  Indicator

65
(No Transcript)
66
h