School LAND Trust Program - Learning and Nurturing Development with Trustland Dividends Logged in as:
Lincoln EL (Salt Lake District)

Logout


Return to Home Page

Submit or Edit
Plans & Councils
View Plans
& Councils
Funding Plan Approval Dates General
Information
Help

School LAND Trust Program

Name: Christine Whitaker District: Davis
Email: cwhitaker@dsdmail.net School: Lincoln EL
Position: Principal  

Academic Plan Proposal and Report for 2007-2008

1. During the 2007-2008 school year the School Community Council or Trust Lands Committee (for charter schools) met:
  4-6 times
2. School's identified most critical academic need(s) addressed in the plan:
Please check only the primary area(s). Improvement in some academic areas may improve all other academic areas, but if the goal is to improve reading (or technology), please only check that area.
 
Academic areas as identified in the plan Academic areas as implemented in the plan
Mathematics
Reading
Mathematics
Reading
3. Financial proposal and report
 
Available Funds Planned Expenditures
(entered by the school)
Actual Expenditures
(entered by the District Business Administrator)
Distribution for 2007 - 2008 $30800 $38374
Carry-over from 2006 - 2007 $5031 $17936
Total Available for expenditure in 2007-2008 $35831 $56310
Salaries and Employee Benefits (100 and 200) $0 $71
Professional Development and Technical Services (300) $0 $13000
Repairs and Maintenance (430) $0 $0
Other Purchased Services (Travel / Admission / Printing) (500) $4000 $4000
General Supplies (610, 630 and 733) $30000 $21399
Textbooks (641) $0 $2078
Library Books / Periodicals / Audiovisual (644, 645, 646) $0 $497
Software / Technology related Hardware / Other Equipment (670, 734, 739) $3360 $22933
Total Expenditures $37360 $63978
Remaining Funds (Carry-over to 2008 - 2009) $-1529 $-7668
3. a Description of expenditures in Other Purchased Services (Travel / Admission / Printing).
 
 
Our monies for Other Purchased Services were spent for admission for students to attend
math and science field trips. This gives students the experiences that build prior
knowledge.  This prior knowledge is a key component of literacy growth. These students
will benefit from these opportunities
to travel outside of their city of Layton to enjoy exposure to math and science
exhibits.

 
3. b Description of expenditures in General Supplies.
   
 
The monies in General Supplies were distributed as follows:  each teacher was given $30
per student to purchase supplies related to literacy and math instruction.  Some
examples
of what was purchased include:  levelled reading libraries, math manipulatives,
listening
centers,document cameras and projectors.  
3. c Explanation for the carry over to 2007-2008, if it was more than half of the available funds.
   
 
This text box is not applicable.
4. This is what the School Community Council or Trust Lands Committee planned to do and how they planned for the money to be spent.
 
With Trust Land funds we will  provide field trip money for each class.  Many of the
students we serve do not have access or the ability to discover the wonders around them. 
Teacher-guided field trips are often the only exposure these students have to the many
opportunites that our community and surrounding communities provide.  This benefits them
not only with the related math, reading, or science experience for content area reading,
but helps build prior knowledge which is so vital to reading comprehension.

The Trust Land money will also be used to match grants for technology.   We will be
providing computers to allow for more students to regularly access the ILS system which
has been proven through research to increase student achievement.

Technology, Math, and Reading classroom materials will also be purchased with the monies.
 This will help supplement the limited budgets that teachers receive from our school
budget.
4. a This is a report of what the school did and how the funds were spent to improve student academic performance.
   
 
Lincoln Elementary followed the plan established by the community council as described
above. Our Trust Lands funds have been primarily spent on Math/Reading materials for
teachers - this included such items as lassroom leveled reading libraries, math
manipulatives, take-home readers for students, and prereading activites for the
kindergarten students. We funded field trips focusing on Math and Science for students.
Additionally, monies were spent on technology - in the form of a matching grant for
technology (purchasing grade level technology carts and equipment) and training for our
computer prep specialist.

5. These are the committee's specific goals for student improvement entered in the plan.
 
Reading:  Comprehension - improve student achievement, as measured by end-of-level state
assessments in the Spring of 2007, an average of 3% schoolwide.
Mathematics:  Math Fact Mastery - improve student achievement, as measured by the
SuccessMaker math program, by an average of one year among students logging at least 10
hours in the program.
Mathematics: Subpopulation - improve student achievement within the Hispanic and
African-American subpopulations, as measured by the 2008 AYP report, an average of 5%
General-Academic:  Attendance - improve At-Risk student attendance by an average of 10%
within the lowest attending 25 students - as identified at the end of each of the first
three terms.
Non-Academic:  Communication with parents and the community - improve school to home
communication, as measured by a survey given Fall 2006 and again Winter 2007.
		
5. a This is a report of how the goals were achieved.
   
 
Goal:  Comprehension - Improve student achievement, as measured by end-of-level state
assessments in the Spring of 2008, an average of 3% schoolwide. Progress:  Moderate.  We
increased our Comprehension scores, schoolwide, by 1.5% overall. Goal:  Math Fact
Mastery
- improve student achievement, as measured by the SuccessMaker math program, by an
average
of one year among students logging at least 10 hours in the program. Progress:  Good. 
Our
average gain amongst students with at least 10 hours in the SuccessMaker program was .90
of a year.  We would also like to note that amongst students logging at least 14 hours
in
the program, the growth was 1.06 of a year on average. Goal:  Attendance - improve
At-Risk
student attendance by an average of 10% within the lowest attending 25 students - as
identified at the end of each of the first three terms. Progress:  Moderate.  The lowest
attending students showed an attendance improvement of 6%. Goal:  Subpopulation -
improve
student achievement within the Hispanic and African-American subpopulations, as measured
by the 2008 AYP report, an average of 5%. Progress:  Very good.  Our Hispanic and
African-American subpopulations saw gains of 14% in Language Arts and 14% in Mathematics
as measured by the 2008 AYP report.
6. The following is how the committee planned to measure/assess academic improvement.
 
Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS), 1-3 Stanford Diagnostic Reading Test (SDRT), State
Criterion Referenced Tests (CRTs), Direct Writing Assessment.
6. a This is a report on how academic improvement was measured/assessed.
   
 
Lincoln's subpopulations performed well on the 2008 assessements.  We have compiled the
number of students proficient/not proficient using the Davis Dashboard and listed
overall
performance using the AYP report.  Math: -Asian: 11 students proficient, 1 not
proficient.
 Overall 83% proficient, a 9% improvement over 2007. -African-American: 8 students
proficient, 6 not proficient.  Overall 36% proficient; a 5% improvement from 2007.
-Caucasian: 231 students proficient, 109 not proficient.  Overall 72% proficient, this
is
the same as 2007. -Hispanic: 43 students proficient, 43 not proficient.  Overall 59%
proficient, a 9% improvement from 2007. -Economically Disadvantaged: 99 students
proficient, 83 not proficient.  Overall 61% proficient, a 2% improvement over 2007.
-Limited English Proficiency: 7 students proficient, 21 not proficient.  Overall 57%
proficient, a 2% improvement over 2007. -Students with Disabilities: 17 students
proficient, 41 not proficient. 47% proficient, an 11% improvement over 2007.  Language
Arts: -Asian: 14 students proficient, 3 not proficient.  Overall 83% proficient, a 4%
improvement over 2007. -African-American: 8 students proficient, 5 not proficient.
Overall
64% proficient, a 10% improvement over 2007. -Caucasian: 253 students  proficient, 89
not
proficient.  Overall 79% proficient, a 2% point improvement over 2007. -Hispanic: 45
students proficient, 42 not proficient.  Overall 58% proficient, a 4% point improvement
over 2007. -Economically Disadvantaged: 106 students proficient, 69 not proficient. 
Overall 67% proficient, a 1% decline from 2007. -Limited English Proficiency: 4 students
proficient, 26 not proficient.  Overall 57% proficient, a 1% decline from 2007.
-Students
with Disabilities:  18 students proficient, 39 not proficient.  Overall 44% proficient,
a
10% improvement over 2007.  Science: -Asian:  4 students proficient, 2 not proficient. 
In
2007 only two students were tested and they were both proficient. -African-American:  4
students proficient, 1 not proficient.  In 2007 only two students were tested and they
were both proficient. -Caucasian: 84 students proficient, 35 not proficient.  In 2007 53
students were tested, 28 were proficient and 25 were not proficient.  -Hispanic: 12
students proficient, 25 not proficient.  In 2007 10 students were tested, 2 were
proficient and 8 were not proficient. -Economically Disadvantaged: 34 students
proficient,
37 not proficient.  In 2007 16 students were tested, 8 were proficient, 8 were not
proficient. -Limited English Proficiency:  4 students proficient, 8 not proficient.  In
2007 3 students were tested, none were proficient. -Students with Disabilities:  5
students proficient, 20 not proficient.  In 2007 8 students were tested, 2 were
proficient
and 6 were not proficient.
7. In the school plan, there was an opportunity to explain how additional funds, exceeding the estimated distribution, would be spent. The following is what was reported.
 
Our school could use additional technology equipment such as projectors, laptops, and
carts for individual teachers to check out and use in their classrooms.
7. a This is a description of how the additional funds were spent.
   
 
Our school did purchase a cart, document camera, projector and DVD/VCT for each grade
level.  This equipment not only aids teachers in instruction but also introduces more
technology into the classroom, giving the students more experience with technology. 
This
indirectly helps prepare them for on-line testing.  
8. This is how the plan relates to the School Improvement Plan.
 
The Trust Lands Plan and School Improvement Plan are created together as one plan. Trust
Lands is part of the School Improvement Plan.
9. The amount and source of additional funds, matching or grants, used to implement the plan.
 
9,200
Source:
RIF Grant $5,700; Community Fundraising/Donations $3,500
10. The school plan was advertised to the community in the following ways:

  Letters to State Senators, Representatives, Govenor, Attorney General, State Treasurer, and Congressional Delegation
School newsletter
11. Policy makers with whom the school has communicated about the program.
 
  • Governor: Jon Huntsman Jr.
  • Orrin Hatch
  • Rob Bishop
  • Dist. 14 -- Curtis Oda
  • Dist. 15 -- Douglas C. Aagard
  • Dist. 16 -- Keven S. Garn
  • Dist. 49 -- Greg J. Curtis

2008-2009 School Plan

1. Have you shown the new DVD, A Matter of Trust, to the council/committee?
  Yes
2. School's identified most critical need(s) addressed in this plan:
Please check only the primary area(s). Improvement in some academic areas may improve all other academic areas but if the goal is to improve reading or technology, only check that area.
 

Mathematics

Reading

3. Briefly describe the School LAND Trust Plan.
  Academic Goals:
Enter specific academic goal(s) Lincoln EL has set to improve student performance with School LAND Trust money, please do not include other funding sources.
 
Reading:  Comprehension - improve student achievement, as measured by end-of-level state assessments
in the Spring of 2007, an average of 3% schoolwide.	
Mathematics:  Math Fact Mastery - improve student achievement, as measured by the SuccessMaker math
program, by an average of one year among students logging at least 10 hours in the program.		
General:  Attendance - improve At-Risk student attendance by an average of 10% within the lowest
attending 25 students - as identified at the end of each of the first three terms.			
Mathematics:  Subpopulation - improve student achievement within the Hispanic and African-American
subpopulations, as measured by the 2008 AYP report, an average of 5%		
  Planned Steps:
Describe in detail the steps Lincoln EL will take to reach each goal. Describe specific actions (Hire a remediation reading teacher, purchase microscopes for AP Biology class, provide professional development to improve writing instruction) that will be taken to achieve the goal. In short, please provide a road map to success.
 
Our process for improving student learning at Lincoln Elementary is multifaceted.  We have used our
Title I funds to further enhance the reading and ELL assistance that the district gives us.  Our
students are identified as needing additional academic interventions using CRT, DIBELs, Iowa, QRI
and other assessments.  A comprehensive plan is developed for each of these students which may
include Tier I interventions with the classroom teacher/reading specialists or Tier II interventions
using our trained tutors and/or after-school tutoring.  Teachers are meeting quarterly to reassess
student progress and interventions to determine what further strategies may be needed for each
child.

Our TrustLands funds help support our goals by providing teachers with leveled reading materials,
document cameras and video projectors.  In August/September of 2008, teachers will submit grant
applications to the Community Council detailing which materials they will purchase and their link to
our school goals in Reading and Math.  As part of the grant application, teachers will: 1) identify
the greatest academic needs within their grade level based on the Spring CRT and DIBELS assessment
results; 2) identify 1-2 goals that address the identified academic needs; and 3) outline a plan of
action and the steps to be taken to reach these goal(s), including the data that will be gathered to
show progress towards the goal(s).  In April/May of 2009 teachers will submit a written summary
report to the school Community Council using data to detail the progress made towards the goal(s)
and the impact that the Trust Lands funded items have had on student achievement.
   
Encouraging student attendance continues to be a focus for Lincoln, it is the first and most
important step towards our goal of improving student achievement in math and reading.  We have
received district support towards hiring an attendance coordinator and have supplemented this
support with funding from Title I.  Our attendance coordinator works with teachers, families and the
administration to do everything possible to ensure that all our students are present at Lincoln for
the instruction and interventions that we have put in place to improve student achievement in our
goal areas.  School funds, including those from Community Council approved fundraisers, will be used
to support our attendance goal by providing incentives for student attendance.
  Measuring Progress toward goals:
Which beginning and ending measurements is Lincoln EL going to use to measure progress towards each goal? The same measurement (test scores, number of library books checked out, informal teaching assessment, etc) must be used so results can be compared. What is the target to be achieved?
 
Lincoln uses a number of measures to gather the data needed to evaluate student progress.  In
addition to the state CRT scores, we assess using DIBELS three times yearly for all students. 
Students receiving services from the Reading Specialists are assessed using the QRI, those receiving
Resource services are assessed weekly by the Special Education teachers.  Our ILS reports provide
information about gains in reading and/or math for those participating with their class or as part
of their Tier II intervention.  Finally, our classroom teachers are experienced in informal
assessments within their class on core standards.
  Plans for expenditures of increased distribution:
The 2008 - 2009 distribution is an estimate. If the actual distribution is more than the estimate, how will the school expand progress towards goals with an increased distribution? Please provide an adequate explanation of academic use so that it will not be necessary to go back to the school board for approval to expend an increased distribution.
 
If Lincoln Elementary receives additional funding, we will purchase a portable classroom sound
enhancement system to enhance communication and learning from teacher to student.
4. How does this plan relate to the school improvement/strategic plan?
 
The Trust Lands Plan and School Improvement Plan are created together as one plan. Trust Lands is
part of the School Improvement Plan.
5. Financial Proposal
 
ESTIMATED Carry Over from 2007-2008 (automatically entered from Progress Report) $11310
ESTIMATED Distribution in 2008-2009 $38909
Total ESTIMATED Available Funds 2008-2009 $50219
Salaries and Employee Benefits (100 and 200) $0
benefits $0
Professional Development and Technical Services (300) $0
Repairs and Maintenance (430) $0
Other Purchased Services (Travel / Admission / Printing) (500) $0
General Supplies (610, 630 and 733) $35000
Textbooks (641) $0
Library Books / Periodicals / Audiovisual (644, 645, 646) $0
Periodicals $0
Audiovisual $0
Software / Technology related Hardware / Other Equipment (670, 734, 739) $4000
Furniture $0
Technology Related Hardware and Other Equipment $0
ESTIMATED Total Spent in 2008-2009 (automatically calculated) $39000
ESTIMATED Carry Over to 2009-2010 (automatically calculated) $11219
  Please explain any planned expenditures in General Supplies.
Please include each general category with the associated dollar amounts.
 
Teachers will submit proposals to the Community Council for classroom supplies to support reading,
math, and technology in their classrooms.  Teachers will receive funding "per pupil" based on our
final Trust Lands allocation.  Items to be purchased will include classroom leveled reading
libraries, math manipulatives, video projectors, document cameras and take-home books for students. 
  If you plan to Carry Over more than one third of your distribution, please explain below.
 
This question is not applicable.
6. If Lincoln EL has used School LAND Trust funds to acquire matching grants or donations, please explain below.
  Amount:
  $0
  Sources:
 
A portion of the Trust Lands funds were used to secure a matching Technology grant from Davis
District.  These combined funds were then used to purchase document cameras and projectors for each
grade level.
7. How will the plan and results be publicized to your community? (Please check all that apply)
If you would like stickers or a stamp to identify School LAND Trust purchases such as books or computers, click here to request them or send an email to karen.rupp@schools.utah.gov.
 

Letters to State Senators, Representatives, Governor, Attorney General, State Treasurer, and Congressional Delegation

  Other: Please Explain.
 
The school U-PASS Report is published on the district website at http://www.davis.k12.ut.us/rad
8. In order for schools to receive School LAND Trust Program funds, councils (Trust Land Committees for Charter Schools) must follow the law and State Board Rule. You may view the State Board Rule for Charter Schools by clicking here School Community Council Law by clicking here and the School LAND Trust Program Law by clicking here. To assure that the law has been followed, answer the following questions by clicking Yes or No. All "No" answers require an explanation in the box provided below. NOTE for Charter Schools: Only the second question (the underlined portion) and the last question apply, though you may still need to provide a brief explanation for "No" answers to avoid getting an error message.
 
Notification was provided two weeks in advance of elections for the School Community Council. Yes
Parents were elected by parents or when there were unfilled positions, the parent members on the council appointed parent members to fill the positions. Yes
Employees were elected by employees or when there were unfilled positions, the employee members on the council appointed employee members to fill the positions. Yes
The public is welcome to attend meetings and notice is provided so they can participate, including posting an agenda on the door of the school beginning the day before each meeting. Minutes of all meetings are being kept. Yes
  Explain any 'No' answers.