Survey on School Improvement Grants

U.S. Government Accountability Office

Selection of Schools

1.	Approximately how many local educational agencies (LEAs) with eligible Tier 1 and 2 schools applied for funds during the federal fiscal year 2009 (FY09) and FY10 cycles? (The FY09 cycle includes schools that received their first year of School Improvement Grant (SIG) funding during the 2010-2011 school year. The FY10 cycle includes schools that will receive their first year of SIG funding during the 2011-2012 school year. Check one per row.)

	(View responses)

		All	Most	Around half	Few	None	Don't know
	a. FY09 cycle (View responses)
	b. FY10 cycle (View responses)

2.	Approximately how many of the Tier 1, 2 and 3 schools for which LEAs applied for SIG during the FY09 and FY10 cycles received awards? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

FY09 Cycle

		All	Most	Around half	Few	None	Don't know
	a. Tier 1 schools (View responses)
	b. Tier 2 schools (View responses)
	c. Tier 3 schools (View responses)

FY10 Cycle

		All	Most	Around half	Few	None	Don't know
	d. Tier 1 schools (View responses)
	e. Tier 2 schools (View responses)
	f. Tier 3 schools (View responses)

3.	Did your agency develop an approved external provider list for the FY09 and/or FY10 cycles? (This includes approved provider lists for any type of service or external provider, including those that administer schools and those that provide professional development. Check one per row.)

	(View responses)

		Yes	No	Don't know
	a. FY09 cycle (View responses)
	b. FY10 cycle (View responses)

4.	Did your agency require LEAs to work with external providers for any of the four intervention models during the FY09 or FY10 cycles? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

FY09 Cycle

		Yes, for all LEAs adopting model	Yes, unless they received a waiver from state	No	Not applicable	Don't know
	a. Turnaround (View responses)
	b. Restart (View responses)
	c. Closure (View responses)
	d. Transformation (View responses)

FY10 Cycle

		Yes, for all LEAs adopting model	Yes, unless they received a waiver from state	No	Not applicable	Don't know
	e. Turnaround (View responses)
	f. Restart (View responses)
	g. Closure (View responses)
	h. Transformation (View responses)

5.	Are you satisfied with the performance to date of all, most, about half, a few or none of the external providers that schools in your state are using to implement their SIG plans?
	(Check one.)
		All (Skip to 7)
		Most
		Around half
		Few
		None
		No schools are using external providers (Skip to 7)
		Too early to tell/Don't know (Skip to 7)
	(View responses)

6.	(If "Most" to "None" to question 5) In the instances where your agency was not satisfied with one or more external providers' performance, were you dissatisfied for any of the following reasons? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		Yes	No	Don't know
	a. Services were of poor quality (View responses)
	b. Services were not timely (View responses)
	c. Provider did not provide all promised services (View responses)
	d. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

Implementing SIG

7.	How easy or difficult was it to complete the FY09 SIG application and approval process (including both the SEA and LEA application processes) early enough to allow schools to begin implementing their SIG plans at the start of the 2010 school year?
	(Check one.)
		Very easy
		Easy
		Neither easy nor difficult
		Difficult
		Very difficult
		Don't know
	(View responses)

8.	How many Tier 1 and Tier 2 schools for which LEAs were awarded FY09 cycle grants were able to begin implementing major aspects of their plan (e.g., extended day or new staff are hired and in place) by the start of the 2010-2011 school year?
	(Check one.)
		All (Skip to 10)
		Most
		Around half
		Few
		None
		Too early to tell/Don't know (Skip to 10)
	(View responses)

9.	(If "Most" to "None" to question 8) What were the top reasons that these schools were not able to begin implementing their SIG plans by the start of the 2010-2011 school year?

	(View responses)

10.	How satisfied or dissatisfied was your agency with the U.S. Department of Education's (ED) process for reviewing and approving state SIG applications in FY10?
	(Check one.)
		Very satisfied (Skip to 12)
		Satisfied (Skip to 12)
		Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied (Skip to 12)
		Dissatisfied
		Very Dissatisfied
		Don't know (Skip to 12)
	(View responses)

11.	(If "Dissatisfied" or "Very dissatisfied" to question 10) What were the main reasons that your agency was dissatisfied with the SEA application process in FY10?

	(View responses)

12.	Has ED's process for reviewing and approving FY10 SEA applications gotten better or worse compared to the process in FY09?
	(Check one.)
		Much better
		Better
		Neither better nor worse
		Worse
		Much worse
		Don't know
	(View responses)

13.	How many Tier 1 and Tier 2 schools for which LEAs were awarded FY10 cycle grants were able to or will likely be able to begin implementing major aspects of their plan (e.g., extended day or new staff are hired and in place) by the start of the 2011-2012 school year?
	(Check one.)
		All
		Most
		Around half
		Few
		None
		Too early to tell/Don't know
	(View responses)

14.	Did any FY09 SIG schools implement the turnaround model in your state?
	(Check one.)
		Yes
		No (Skip to 17)
		Don't know (Skip to 17)
	(View responses)

15.	(If "Yes" to question 14) How many of the FY09 SIG schools implementing the turnaround model in your state do you believe are operating very differently after the first year of SIG than they were before receiving the grant? (Please use your professional judgment to determine whether schools are "operating very differently" versus making minor changes that are unlikely to lead to student achievement gains.)
	(Check one.)
		All (Skip to 17)
		Most
		Around half
		Few
		None
		Too early to tell (Skip to 17)
		Don't know (Skip to 17)
	(View responses)

16.	(If "Most" to "None" to question 15) How many of these turnaround schools are not operating very differently for the following reasons? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		All	Most	Around half	Few	None	Too early to tell	Don't know/No basis to judge
	a. Used SIG funds to continue existing improvement efforts (View responses)
	b. Funds per school were not adequate to result in any or major-scale change (View responses)
	c. Program not fully implemented (View responses)
	d. Actions taken by the school or LEA were not extensive enough to result in the school operating very differently (View responses)
	e. External providers did not provide promised and/or adequate assistance (View responses)
	f. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

17.	Did any FY09 SIG schools implement the transformation model in your state?
	(Check one.)
		Yes
		No (Skip to 20)
		Don't know (Skip to 20)
	(View responses)

18.	(If "Yes" to question 17) How many of the FY09 SIG schools implementing the transformation model in your state do you believe are operating very differently after the first year of SIG than they were before receiving the grant? (Please use your professional judgment to determine whether schools are "operating very differently" versus making minor changes that are unlikely to lead to student achievement gains.)
	(Check one.)
		All (Skip to 20)
		Most
		Around half
		Few
		None
		Too early to tell (Skip to 20)
		Don't know (Skip to 20)
	(View responses)

19.	(If "Most" to "None" to question 18) How many of these transformation schools are not operating very differently for the following reasons? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		All	Most	Around half	Few	None	Too early to tell	Don't know/No basis to judge
	a. Used SIG funds to continue existing improvement efforts (View responses)
	b. Funds per school were not adequate to result in any or major-scale change (View responses)
	c. Program not fully implemented (View responses)
	d. Actions taken by the school or LEA were not extensive enough to result in the school operating very differently (View responses)
	e. External providers did not provide promised and/or adequate assistance (View responses)
	f. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

20.	Did any FY09 SIG schools implement the restart model in your state?
	(Check one.)
		Yes
		No (Skip to 25)
		Don't know (Skip to 25)
	(View responses)

21.	(If "Yes" to question 20) How many of the FY09 SIG schools implementing the restart model in your state do you believe are operating very differently after the first year of SIG than they were before receiving the grant? (Please use your professional judgment to determine whether schools are "operating very differently" versus making minor changes that are unlikely to lead to student achievement gains.)
	(Check one.)
		All (Skip to 23)
		Most
		Around half
		Few
		None
		Too early to tell (Skip to 23)
		Don't know (Skip to 23)
	(View responses)

22.	(If "Most" to "None" to question 21) How many of these restart schools are not operating very differently for the following reasons? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		All	Most	Around half	Few	None	Too early to tell	Don't know/No basis to judge
	a. Used SIG funds to continue existing improvement efforts (View responses)
	b. Funds per school were not adequate to result in any or major-scale change (View responses)
	c. Program not fully implemented (View responses)
	d. Actions taken by the school or LEA were not extensive enough to result in the school operating very differently (View responses)
	e. External providers/EMOs/CMOs did not provide promised and/or adequate assistance (View responses)
	f. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

23.	How many of the FY09 cycle SIG schools implementing the restart model are using the following types of organizations to manage their school? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		All	Most	Around half	Few	None	Don't know
	a. Previously established non-profit charter school operator or charter management organization (CMO) (View responses)
	b. Previously established for-profit education management organization (EMO) (View responses)
	c. New organization established to operate a specific SIG school as part of its SIG grant (View responses)
	d. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

24.	How many of the schools adopting the restart model were reopened as charter schools?

	(View responses)

	Number

	(View responses)

	Charter schools are not permitted in the state
	(Check all that apply.)

	(View responses)

	Don't know
	(Check all that apply.)

	(View responses)

25.	In your opinion, how likely or unlikely is it that the following actions by LEAs and schools to implement SIG will be sustainable after the end of the 3-year grant? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		Very likely	Likely	As likely as unlikely	Unlikely	Very unlikely	Not applicable	Don't know/Too early to tell
	a. Costs for extended day (View responses)
	b. Increased collection of student performance data (View responses)
	c. Efforts to change school culture (e.g., increasing parent/local community involvement, etc.) (View responses)
	d. Staff development (View responses)
	e. New technologies (View responses)
	f. New curriculum (View responses)
	g. New process for evaluating teachers (View responses)
	h. Incentives for staff recruitment or retention (e.g., performance pay or tuition reimbursement) (View responses)
	i. Salaries for newly created staff positions (View responses)
	j. Retention of effective principals and/or teachers recruited as part of SIG (View responses)

26.	Has your agency taken any of the following steps to increase the sustainability of school improvement initiatives after each schools' 3-year grant funds expire? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		Yes	No	Don't know
	a. Issued guidance about how to sustain the initiatives (View responses)
	b. Provided LEAs with resources about sustainability from the 21 federally-funded Comprehensive Centers (View responses)
	c. Provided LEAs with resources about sustainability from the Regional Education Laboratories (RELs) (View responses)
	d. Provided LEAs with resources about sustainability from the U.S. Department of Education (View responses)
	e. Planned that the state turnaround office or other capacity-building resources will be maintained after the School Improvement Grants expire (View responses)
	f. Worked one-on-one with the LEA staff to incorporate sustainability into their SIG plans (View responses)
	g. Hired contractors to work with LEAs or schools on sustainability (View responses)
	h. Facilitated information-sharing between LEAs on sustainability through state-sponsored webinars, conferences, or similar means (View responses)
	i. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

Funding

27.	Did your agency carry over FY09 cycle funds for any reason, including federal requirements that states not serving all Tier 1 schools carry over funds?
	(Check one.)
		Yes
		No (Skip to 30)
		Don't know (Skip to 30)
	(View responses)

28.	(If "Yes" to question 27) What percentage of FY09 cycle funds was carried over?
	(Check one.)
		1-25%
		26-50%
		51-75%
		76-100%
		Don't know
	(View responses)

29.	Did your agency carry over funds in the FY09 cycle for any of the following reasons? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		Yes	No	Don't know
	a. Chose not to award all funds due to insufficient number of high quality LEA applications (View responses)
	b. School award selection process was not completed in time to award all funds (View responses)
	c. LEAs were permitted to request additional funds in the following fiscal year, based on changing needs (View responses)
	d. State agency had limited capacity for oversight and technical assistance to LEA(s) (View responses)
	e. US Department of Education carryover requirements (View responses)
	f. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

30.	Will your agency carry over funds in the FY10 cycle for any reason?
	(Check one.)
		Yes
		No (Skip to 32)
		Don't know (Skip to 32)
	(View responses)

31.	(If "Yes" to question 30) Will your agency carry over funds in the FY10 cycle for any of the following reasons? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		Yes	No	Don't know
	a. Insufficient number of LEA applications that met the states' evaluation criteria to award all funds (View responses)
	b. School award selection process was not completed in time to award all funds (View responses)
	c. LEAs were permitted to request additional funds in the following fiscal year, based on changing needs (View responses)
	d. State agency had limited capacity for oversight and technical assistance to LEA(s) (View responses)
	e. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

32.	How many SIG LEAs in your state have changed how they allocate any non-SIG funds (e.g., Title I, Part A funds or state funds) because they are receiving SIG funds?
	(Check one.)
		All
		Most
		Around half
		Few
		None (Skip to 34)
		Too early to tell (Skip to 34)
		Don't know (Skip to 34)
	(View responses)

33.	(If "All" to "Few" to question 32) What are the two or three most common examples of how and why LEAs reallocated non-SIG funds, including the type of funds reallocated and how they were reallocated?

	(View responses)

State Support/Oversight

34.	Has your state altered state laws, regulations or policies regarding the following topics in response to the SIG program? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		Law changed	Agency policies or regulations changed	No Change	Don't know
	a. Changed labor management practices for teachers and/or school administrators (View responses)
	b. Increased authority of principals in SIG schools (View responses)
	c. Increased authority of LEAs with SIG schools (View responses)
	d. Created state turnaround office (View responses)
	e. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

35.	How many full-time equivalents (FTEs) are currently dedicated to supporting SIG implementation at the state level? (FTE can mean either one full-time staff member working on SIG implementation for the state agency, or several staff members who work on SIG part-time and add up to one full-time position. Please include in your calculations staff funded from any source and any contractors who conduct work for your state agency.)
	(Check one.)
		Less than one FTE
		1-4 FTEs
		5-9 FTEs
		10-14 FTEs
		More than 15 FTEs
		Don't know
	(View responses)

36.	What percentage of the salaries for these FTEs comes from SIG funds, rather than other state funding sources?
	(Check one.)
		0-19%
		20-39%
		40-59%
		60-79%
		80-100%
		Don't know
	(View responses)

37.	Is the current number of FTEs dedicated to supporting SIG at the state level larger than, about the same as, or smaller than the number of FTEs dedicated to this purpose when your agency first submitted its FY 09 cycle SEA application to ED?
	(Check one.)
		Larger
		About the same
		Smaller
		Don't know
	(View responses)

38.	Has your agency taken any of the following actions to support SIG design and implementation? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		Yes	No	Don't know
	a. Issued state guidance (View responses)
	b. Provided information on SIG through the state agency website (View responses)
	c. Responded to individual questions (View responses)
	d. Hosted conferences, teleconferences or webinars on SIG (View responses)
	e. Created a new turnaround office (View responses)
	f. Linked each SIG school or LEA with a designated state support person/team (View responses)
	g. Provided feedback on LEA applications (View responses)
	h. Held regular phone or in-person meetings with LEA staff (View responses)
	i. Provided resources about leading practices at the LEA and/or school level (View responses)
	j. Encouraged or brokered relationships between LEAs and universities (View responses)
	k. Helped select the intervention model (View responses)
	l. Tracked SIG school budgets and expenditures (View responses)
	m. Helped select a new principal, where applicable (View responses)
	n. Hired contractor to assist LEAs with application and implementation (View responses)
	o. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

39.	Does your agency's monitoring process include evaluating or reviewing any of the following? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		Yes	No	Don't know
	a. Compliance with federal requirements (View responses)
	b. Compliance with state requirements (View responses)
	c. Fiscal practices and procedures (View responses)
	d. External providers used by the SIG school or LEA (View responses)
	e. Leading indicator and/or annual target data (e.g., student/teacher attendance, number of minutes within school year, etc.) (View responses)
	f. Implementation of the models (View responses)
	g. Implementation of increased learning time requirements (View responses)
	h. Increased operational flexibility (View responses)
	i. Agency does not conduct formal monitoring (View responses)
	j. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

40.	Did your agency make decisions about renewing the FY09 grants using any of the following information? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		Yes	No	Don't know
	a. Progress on federal leading indicators (View responses)
	b. Achieving annual goals required by SIG (View responses)
	c. Fidelity of implementation of model requirements (View responses)
	d. School or LEA observations/interactions (View responses)
	e. Appropriate and/or timely use of funds (View responses)
	f. Compliance with other SIG requirements (View responses)
	g. Did not evaluate (View responses)
	h. Other criteria (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

41.	How many SIG schools served by LEAs with FY09 cycle SIG grants had their grants renewed for a second year of funding?
	(Check one.)
		All
		Most
		Around half
		Few
		None (Skip to 44)
		Renewal decisions not yet complete (Skip to 44)
		Don't know (Skip to 44)
	(View responses)

42.	(If "All" to "Few" to question 41) How many FY09 SIG schools for which LEAs received renewal grants did not meet their annual goals, but were renewed based on other criteria?
	(Check one.)
		All
		Most
		Around half
		Few
		None
		Renewal decisions not yet complete!
		Don't know
	(View responses)

43.	How many LEAs-if any-that had their grants renewed were required to make major changes to their SIG plans for schools, as a condition of renewal (such as starting or discontinuing a reform initiative)?
	(Check one.)
		All
		Most
		Around half
		Few
		None
		Don't know
	(View responses)

44.	How often has your agency or a representative of your agency visited each LEA receiving FY09 cycle SIG funds to provide technical assistance or monitor implementation since the SIG application process began? (If you have visited LEAs with differing frequency, please answer for the LEA you have visited least frequently.)
	(Check one.)
		Weekly
		At least once a month, but less than weekly
		Once every 2-6 months
		At least once, but less than every 6 months
		Have not visited each LEA
		Don't know
	(View responses)

Federal Department of Education Support/Oversight

45.	Overall, how helpful or unhelpful has your agency found ED's guidance/resources as of the FY10 cycle?
	(Check one.)
		Very helpful
		Helpful
		Neither helpful nor unhelpful
		Unhelpful
		Very unhelpful
		Don't know/No basis to judge
	(View responses)

46.	How helpful or unhelpful were the following resources from ED in implementing SIG-funded interventions as of the FY10 cycle? *(Check one per row.)*

	(View responses)

		Very helpful	Helpful	Neither helpful nor unhelpful	Unhelpful	Very unhelpful	Don't know/No basis to judge
	a. ED website (View responses)
	b. Guidance documents (View responses)
	c. One-on-one technical assistance (View responses)
	d. Newsletters or email updates (View responses)
	e. Webinars/teleconferences (View responses)
	f. Conferences (View responses)
	g. Monitoring visits (View responses)
	h. Guidance/support from the 21 ED-funded Comprehensive Centers such as the Center for Innovation and Improvement (CII) (View responses)
	i. Guidance/support from Regional Education Laboratories (RELs) (View responses)
	j. Communities of practice (View responses)
	k. ED implementation initiative (View responses)
	l. Other (Please specify.) (View responses)

If "Other," please specify.
(View responses)

47.	Overall, has ED provided too much, about the right amount or too little guidance on SIG as of the FY10 cycle?
	(Check one.)
		Too much
		About the right amount
		Too little
		Don't know/No basis to judge
	(View responses)

48.	Overall, do the SIG final requirements provide too much flexibility, about the right amount, or too little flexibility in terms of allowing your state to tailor SIG to its needs as of the FY10 cycle?
	(Check one.)
		Too much
		About right
		Too little
		Don't know/No basis to judge
	(View responses)

49.	Overall, has the guidance provided by ED during the FY10 cycle been timely enough for your needs?
	(Check one.)
		Yes
		No
		Don't know
	(View responses)

50.	What, if any, additional guidance/technical assistance from ED, the Regional Education Laboratories, or the Comprehensive Centers would be useful for your agency or the LEAS in your state?

	(View responses)

General Information

51.	What additional comments about your experience with SIG would you like to share, including any obstacles you have faced in implementing SIG?

	(View responses)

Background Information

52.	How many schools in your state implemented each of the four models during the FY09 cycle, regardless of whether or not the grants were renewed past the first year?

	(View responses)

	a. Transformation

	(View responses)

	b. Turnaround

	(View responses)

	c. Restart

	(View responses)

	d. Closure

	(View responses)

	Don't know
	(Check all that apply.)

	(View responses)

53.	How many schools in your state will implement each of the four models during the first year of the FY10 cycle?

	(View responses)

	a. Transformation

	(View responses)

	b. Turnaround

	(View responses)

	c. Restart

	(View responses)

	d. Closure

	(View responses)

	Don't know
	(Check all that apply.)

	(View responses)

54.	What was the number of students in your state at the beginning of the 2010-11 school year?

	(View responses)

55.	What was the number of students in your state who were enrolled in SIG schools at the beginning of the 2010-11 school year?

	(View responses)

56.	What is the name, title, telephone number, and e-mail address of the person who primarily completed this survey? We might contact this person if we have follow-up questions.

	(View responses)

	a. Name

	(View responses)

	b. Title

	(View responses)

	c. E-mail address

	(View responses)

	d. Phone number

	(View responses)

Completed

57.	Please check one of the options below. Clicking on "Completed" indicates that your answers are official and final. Your answers will not be used unless you have done this.
	(Check one.)
		Completed
		Not completed
	(View responses)

Thank You

	Thank you for your participation!

	(View responses)

	You may view and print your completed survey by clicking on the Summary link in the menu to the left.

	(View responses)

Questionnaire Programming Language - Version 6.1
U.S. Government Accountability Office

Survey on School Improvement Grants

U.S. Government Accountability Office

Selection of Schools

FY09 Cycle

FY10 Cycle

FY09 Cycle

FY10 Cycle

Implementing SIG

Funding

State Support/Oversight

Federal Department of Education Support/Oversight

General Information

Background Information

Completed

Thank You

Menu

Summary

Help

Navigate