During the first 2 years of its reform efforts, DCPS implemented several classroom-based initiatives to improve students’ basic skills in core subjects. For example, to improve students’ basic skills and standardized test scores in reading and math, DCPS introduced targeted interventions for students struggling in these subjects and provided additional instruction and practice to improve students’ responses to open-ended questions, including test questions. Table 1 provides a list of DCPS’s major initiatives to improve student outcomes, as well as descriptions and the status of these initiatives. DCPS is modifying its approach to implementing many of these initiatives as it moves forward. For example, the Chancellor recently acknowledged that DCPS, in its effort to remedy the range of issues that plagued the District’s public schools, may have launched too many initiatives at once and some schools may not have had the capacity to implement so many programs effectively. In particular, some schools were undergoing significant organizational changes that may have affected their ability to implement these new academic initiatives. To support such schools, DCPS is considering offering a choice of programs for schools and allowing the principals to determine which programs best suit their schools’ needs and capacity. DCPS does not yet know how successful these initiatives have been in improving student achievement. Our report notes that DCPS elementary and secondary students increased their reading and math scores between 8 and 11 percentage points on the 2008 state-wide test, but it is unclear whether these gains could be attributed to the current reform efforts or to prior efforts. Preliminary scores for the 2009 reading and math tests were announced on July 13, 2009. Elementary students made modest gains in reading (49 percent were proficient in reading, up from 46 percent in 2008) and more substantial gains in math (49 percent proficient in math, up from 40 percent in 2008). Preliminary scores for secondary students show that 41 percent are proficient in reading, up from 39 percent in 2008, and 40 percent are proficient in math, up from 36 percent in 2008. While DCPS officials told us that it is generally difficult to isolate and quantify the impact of any single program on student achievement, they plan in late summer 2009 to analyze student outcomes, including state-wide test scores, to assess the effectiveness of various initiatives. DCPS officials also noted that there were varying levels of teacher quality and knowledge of effective teaching practices, and that it was difficult to ensure the extent to which teachers implemented the programs effectively. While DCPS had not previously defined “effective” teaching, DCPS officials told us they will focus on practicing effective teaching, as opposed to implementing various disparate programs. By the beginning of the 2009-2010 school year, DCPS plans to implement a framework that is intended to help teachers understand what students are expected to learn for each subject, how to prepare lessons, and what effective teaching methods are to be used. DCPS also changed the way it allocated teachers across its schools for the 2008-2009 school year. This new staffing model was intended to provide all schools with a core of teachers including art, music, and physical education, as well as social workers. It was also intended to provide all schools with reading coaches who work with teachers to improve reading instruction. Prior to this change, DCPS allocated funding to schools using a weighted student formula, which distributed funds to schools on a per pupil basis, so that the greater the enrollment of a school, the greater the amount allocated to that school. The new staffing model was intended to ensure core staff at all schools regardless of enrollment. While DCPS allowed principals to request changes to the staffing model based on their school’s needs, it did not establish or communicate clear guidance or criteria on how such requests would be treated. Therefore, it is unclear whether similar requests were treated in a consistent manner. A more transparent process, one that publicly shared their rationale for such decisions, would have helped assure stakeholders, including the D.C. Council, that changes to staffing allocations were made consistently and fairly. The D.C. Council and several community groups have criticized the process for its lack of transparency and questioned the fairness of the decisions made. For example, one independent analysis concluded that under the staffing model some schools received less per pupil funding than others with similar student populations. DCPS revamped its approach for the staffing model for the 2009-2010 school year to address some of these challenges. For example, it established guidance about what changes it will allow principals to make to the staffing model and disseminated this guidance to school leaders at the beginning of the budgeting process. According to DCPS, the new guidance is expected to reduce the number of changes that principals request later in the process. In addition, as required by NCLBA, DCPS restructured 22 schools before the fall of 2008, after the schools failed to meet academic targets for 6 consecutive years. NCLBA specifies five options for restructuring a school, including replacing selected staff or contracting with another organization or company to run the school. DCPS revamped its process for determining the most appropriate restructuring option for the 13 schools that will be restructured in the 2009-2010 school year. Prior to implementing the first round of restructuring (for the 2008-2009 school year), DCPS officials told us there were insufficient school visits and inadequate training and guidance for teams assigned to evaluate which restructuring option was best suited for a given school. DCPS has addressed these issues by requiring two visits to each school, offering more training, and revising the form used to evaluate each school’s condition for the next round of restructuring. Restructuring underperforming schools will likely be an ongoing initiative for DCPS, as 89 of its 118 schools were in some form of school improvement status as of June 2009. Finally, DCPS and the state superintendent’s office are planning and developing new ways to use data to monitor student achievement and school performance. DCPS reported it has ongoing and planned initiatives to expand data access to principals and teachers, in part to monitor student and school performance. In particular, DCPS reported making improvements to its primary student data system so central office users can better monitor school performance. DCPS also plans to use monthly reports to enable school leaders to better monitor student progress, but DCPS officials told us they have delayed some of these efforts while they attempt to improve coordination among the various departments that were developing and disseminating information to school leaders. The state superintendent’s office also is developing a longitudinal database, called the Statewide Longitudinal Education Data Warehouse (SLED), intended to allow DCPS and other stakeholders to access a broad array of information, including standardized test scores of students and information on teachers. According to officials in the state superintendent’s office, they revised the project schedule to allow more time to assist the charter schools with updating their data systems. In February 2009, the initial release of student data provided a student identification number and information on student eligibility for free or reduced-price lunches and other student demographics for all students attending DCPS’s schools and the public charter schools. The state superintendent’s office plans for SLED to enable DCPS to link student and teacher data by February 2010. DCPS focused on a workforce replacement strategy to strengthen teacher and principal quality. After the 2007-2008 school year, about one-fifth of the teachers and one-third of the principals resigned, retired, or were terminated from DCPS. DCPS terminated about 350 teachers and an additional 400 teachers accepted financial incentives offered by DCPS to resign or retire in the spring of 2008. In addition, DCPS did not renew the contracts of 42 principals. To replace the teachers and principals who left the system, DCPS launched a nationwide recruitment effort for the 2008- 2009 school year and hired 566 teachers and 46 principals for the 2008- 2009 school year. DCPS did not have a new teacher contract in place due to ongoing negotiations with the Washington Teachers’ Union and DCPS officials told us a lack of contract may have hindered their efforts to attract top-quality teachers. Under the plan, which has been in negotiation with the Washington Teachers’ Union since November 2007, the Chancellor has stated that she wants to recruit and retain quality teachers by offering merit pay, which would reward teachers with higher salaries based, in part, on their students’ scores on standardized state tests. In addition, DCPS officials told us that the 2007-2008 and 2008-2009 teacher evaluation process did not allow them to assess whether the teacher workforce improved between these 2 school years. According to DCPS officials, this system does not measure teachers’ impact on student achievement—a key factor cited by DCPS officials in evaluating teacher effectiveness. DCPS plans to revise its teacher evaluation process to more directly link teacher performance to student achievement. To supplement school administrators’ observations of teachers, DCPS is also seeking to add classroom observations by 36 third-party observers, called master teachers, who would be knowledgeable about teaching the relevant subject matter and grade level. In addition, DCPS introduced professional development initiatives for teachers and principals, but late decisions about the program for teachers led to inconsistent implementation. For the 2008-2009 school year, DCPS hired about 150 teacher coaches to improve teachers’ skills in delivering reading and math instruction and boost student test scores. According to DCPS, teacher coaches assisted teachers with interpreting student test scores, planning lessons, and using their classroom time constructively. DCPS is planning for teacher coaches to work with teachers in all grades and subjects for the 2009-2010 school year. DCPS intended to staff about 170 teacher coaching positions; however, as DCPS began the 2008-2009 school year, about 20 percent of the coaching positions remained open (19 reading coach vacancies and 16 math coach vacancies) because of late hiring of teacher coaches. DCPS officials told us they made the decision to hire teacher coaches after their review of school restructuring plans in June 2008. The ratio of teachers to coaches was higher than it would have been had the positions been filled.