Guidance on Reviewing CSI PromptsResources for Reviewing and Approving Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) Plans through the Review and Approval of Comprehensive Support and Improvement Prompts in the Local Educational Agency Local Control and Accountability Plan.
With passage of the 2021 Budget Act, the California Legislature allocated $5 million of Every Student Succeeds Act, Section 1003 funds for CSI to county offices of education (COEs) for the purposes of review and approval of CSI plans through the CSI prompts in the local educational agency (LEA) Local Control and Accountability Plan (LCAP).Below is a framework or guidelines that the COE may use when approving CSI plans through the review and approval of CSI prompts in the LEA LCAP. The content below is not mandated or intended to serve as the only tool with which a COE evaluates LEA responses to the CSI prompts. The COE may use its own evaluation framework or guidelines.
Prompt 1: A list of the schools in the LEA that are eligible for CSI
When responding to Prompt 1, keep the following in mind:
- The requirement is to identify to educational partners those schools eligible to receive CSI.
- Use the common, readily identifiable name for each school.
- Use of identifiers, such as a County-District-School (CDS) code, which are not readily recognized by educational partners, does not meet the requirement.
Guiding Questions for the COE on Prompt 1
- Are the common, readily identifiable names used for each school?
- Are identifiers, such as CDS codes, avoided?
- Is the list complete and correct?
Prompt 2: A description of how the LEA has or will support its eligible schools in developing CSI plans
At a minimum, a thorough response would include a description of the LEA's process for developing CSI plans:
- Describe the LEA’s planning and support processes to schools, including the LEA’s improvement model, frameworks, requirements, and/or evidence-based strategies used to develop CSI plans.
- Include a discussion of the LEA's local context and its process for engaging educational partners and schools in evidence-based planning and decision-making.
- Describe educational partners that were included and how the LEA used their feedback to develop the CSI plan.
- Describe the LEA's needs assessment, including the type(s) of data and information that were examined and how these data informed development of the CSI plan.
- Include a brief description of how evidence-based interventions were identified and selected, including a discussion of the LEA's process to match the selected interventions with the identified needs and address the reasons, or root cause for eligibility.
- Describe the way(s) in which the LEA identified resource inequities and how resource inequities are being addressed through implementation of the CSI plan.
- Consider including a discussion of the types of resource inequities identified.
Guiding Questions for the COE on Prompt 2
- Did the LEA include details that illustrate how the CSI plan was developed using a needs assessment with educational partner engagement and informed by all State indicators?
- Did the LEA include explanations regarding how evidence-based interventions were identified and selected as well as how resource inequities were identified?
- Are the processes that LEAs used to support schools described with sufficient detail, including any improvement models, frameworks, and/or evidence-based strategies?
- Did the LEA discuss its local context and its process for engaging educational partners and schools in evidence-based planning and decision-making?
- Did the LEA describe its educational partners and how the LEA used their feedback to develop the CSI plan?
- Is the needs assessment described including the type(s) of data and information that were examined and how these data informed development of the CSI plan?
Prompt 3: A description of how the LEA will monitor and evaluate the plan to support student and school improvement
At a minimum, a thorough response would include a description of the LEA's process for continuous improvement:
- Describe the LEA’s process for monitoring and evaluating implementation of the CSI plan, including how the LEA is monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the selected evidence-based interventions to improve student and school outcomes. Include in the response the LEA’s process for adjusting or abandoning interventions/strategies/activities that do not demonstrate improved outcomes for students and the school.
- Describe the types of data and information the LEA is collecting and analyzing to inform ongoing decision-making.
- Include in the descriptions how the LEA is collaborating with educational partners to monitor and evaluate implementation and effectiveness of the CSI plan.
- Consider including a description of the supports, resources, services (e.g., webinar, guidebook, training, coaching, forums, etc.) the LEA is using to build school and educational partner capacity for continuous improvement.
Guiding Questions for the COE on Prompt 3
- Is there a detailed description of the LEA’s process for continuous improvement regarding how it will monitor and evaluate the effectiveness of evidence-based interventions? Does the LEA have a process for abandoning those interventions/strategies/activities that do not demonstrate improved outcomes for students and the school?
- Are types of data and information included that the LEA will collect and analyze to inform ongoing decision-making?
- Is there discussion included concerning how the LEA is working with educational partners and using their feedback in monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of the CSI plan?
- Is there a clear and sufficient amount of detail describing the supports, resources, and services that the LEA is using to build school and educational partner capacity for continuous improvement?
- If the responses to prompts 2 and 3 state only that support was provided or that monitoring will take place without a description of the actual support provided or a description of processes to monitor and evaluate is conclusory, the response would not be acceptable.