Spreadsheet: de7c9d30-e0c4-4fa8-91c2-38afdff2be14
Sheet: Sheet1

Complete List of DVM-Leaver Probes | Unnamed: 1 | Unnamed: 2 | Unnamed: 3
Indicator | Description | Review Probes | On FDA template?
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Conduct a comprehensive district-level analysis of dropout rates and longitudinal trends for dropouts. | No
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Review longitudinal graduation data to determine the extent to which the decrease in dropout rates may be attributed to a corresponding increase in graduation rate. | Yes
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Analyze the factors that contributed to graduation rates not increasing proportionally to the decrease in dropout rates for the LEA/campus during the past two/three years. | No
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Analyze the factors that contributed to the decrease in dropout rates for the LEA/campus, including dropout preventinon programs implemented during the past two/three years. | Yes
 |  | Review documentation for students assigned non-dropout leaver codes (01, 03, 16, 24, 60, 66, 78, 81, 82, 83, 85, 86, 87, 88, 90) to ensure the documentation meets the standards established in the PEIMS Data Standards, Appendix D for the applicable year.
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Evaluate dropout records to ensure accurate reporting. | No
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Analyze the processes used to track and monitor LEA/campus dropouts. | No
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Conduct a district-level analysis related to the availability of comprehensive reporting documentation and procedures; determine the degree to which the procedural standards are available to all LEA staff and that the staff is following all standards. | Yes
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Evaluate both campus- and district-level systems for ensuring that the LEA/campus is following the district student withdrawal process and ensure that PEIMS data submissions reflect these findings. | Yes
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Determine strategies the LEA routinely implements to ensure that annual reviews and analyses of changes to the PEIMS Data Standards (including [NAME] D) and other data collection documents are conducted. | Yes
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Evaluate the availability of regular, ongoing training for staff members responsible for leaver/data collection and reporting. | Yes
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Evaluate the LEA’s comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are followed by all LEA staff.
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Review whether a lack of training opportunities has contributed to leaver/data reporting errors. | Yes
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Annually review, monitor, and adjust the data collection and reporting process to ensure consistency across campuses. | No
1 | Dropout Trend Analysis | Delineate the frequency and source of any reporting errors.
2 | Underreported Students | Delineate the frequency and source of any reporting errors. | yes
2 | Underreported Students | Examine the LEA No-Show policy to determing issues realted to underreported students. | No
2 | Underreported Students | Examine practices to ensure appropriate documentation is maintained in each student cumulative folder to validate each leaver code assigned. | Yes
2 | Underreported Students | Conduct a district-level analysis related to the availability of comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are available to all LEA staff. | No
2 | Underreported Students | Evaluate the LEA’s comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are followed by all LEA staff. | Yes
2 | Underreported Students | Analyze current staffing levels at the LEA/campus related to student withdrawals, leaver coding, PEIMS reporting and data quality. | No
2 | Underreported Students | Determine strategies the LEA routinely implements to ensure that annual reviews and analyses of changes to the PEIMS Data Standards (and other data collection documents) are conducted. | No
2 | Underreported Students | Evaluate the availability of regular, ongoing training for staff members responsible for leaver/data collection and reporting. | Yes
2 | Underreported Students | Analyze the processes used to incorporate PEIMS reporting issues into district and campus improvement efforts. | No
2 | Underreported Students | Review reporting timelines within the LEA to determine whether sufficient time is available for leaver/data quality checks and reviews. | Yes
2 | Underreported Students | Evaluate the LEA’s comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are followed by all LEA staff. | No
2 | Underreported Students | Annually review, monitor, and adjust the data collection and reporting process to ensure consistency across campuses. | No
2 | Underreported Students | Delineate the programmatic and/or systemic reasons for students who were underreported/inappropriately reported during the fall PEIMS submission. | No
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Delineate the frequency and source of any reporting errors. | Yes
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Examine practices to ensure appropriate documentation is maintained in each student cumulative folder to validate each leaver code assigned. | Yes
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Examine current withdrawal forms to determine if they adequately address documentation requirements under the PEIMS Data Standards. | Yes
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Conduct a district-level analysis related to the availability of comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are available to all LEA staff. | No
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Evaluate the LEA’s comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are followed by all LEA staff. | Yes
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Analyze current staffing levels at the LEA/campus related to student withdrawals, leaver coding, PEIMS reporting, and data quality. | No
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Determine strategies the LEA routinely implements to ensure that annual reviews and analyses of changes to the PEIMS Data Standards (and other data collection documents) are conducted. | No
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Evaluate the availability of regular, ongoing training for staff members responsible for leaver/data collection and reporting. | Yes
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Analyze the processes used to incorporate PEIMS reporting issues into district and campus improvement efforts. | No
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Evaluate the LEA’s comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are followed by all LEA staff. | No
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Review reporting timelines within the LEA to determine whether sufficient time is available for leaver/data quality checks and reviews. | Yes
3 | Use of Leaver Reason Codes by Districts with No Dropouts | Annually review, monitor, and adjust the data collection and reporting process to ensure consistency across campuses. | No
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Delineate the frequency and source of any reporting errors. | Yes
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Examine practices to ensure appropriate documentation is maintained in each student cumulative folder to validate each leaver code assigned. | Yes
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Examine current withdrawal forms to determine if they adequately address documentation requirements under the PEIMS Data Standards. | Yes
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Conduct a district-level analysis related to the availability of comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are available to all LEA staff. | No
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Evaluate the LEA’s comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are followed by all LEA staff. | Yes
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Analyze current staffing levels at the LEA/campus related to student withdrawals, leaver coding, PEIMS reporting, and data quality. | No
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Determine strategies the LEA routinely implements to ensure that annual reviews and analyses of changes to the PEIMS Data Standards (and other data collection documents) are conducted. | No
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Evaluate the availability of regular, ongoing training for staff members responsible for leaver/data collection and reporting. | Yes
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Analyze the processes used to incorporate PEIMS reporting issues into district and campus improvement efforts. | No
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Review reporting timelines within the LEA to determine whether sufficient time is available for leaver/data quality checks and reviews. | Yes
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Annually review, monitor, and adjust the data collection and reporting process to ensure consistency across campuses. | No
4 | Use of One or More Leaver Reason Codes | Evaluate the LEA’s comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are followed by all LEA staff. | No
5 | Use of Certain Dropout Reason Codes | Delineate the frequency and source of any reporting errors. | Yes
5 | Use of Certain Dropout Reason Codes | Examine practices to ensure appropriate documentation is maintained in each student cumulative folder to validate each leaver code assigned. | Yes
5 | Use of Certain Dropout Reason Codes | Evaluate the LEA’s comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are followed by all LEA staff | Yes
5 | Use of Certain Dropout Reason Codes | Evaluate the availability of regular, ongoing training for staff members responsible for leaver/data collection and reporting. | Yes
5 | Use of Certain Dropout Reason Codes | Review reporting timelines within the LEA to determine whether sufficient time is available for leaver/data quality checks and reviews. | No
5 | Use of Certain Dropout Reason Codes | Conduct a district-level analysis related to the availability of comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are available to all LEA staff. | No
6 | Missing PET Submission (August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012) | Conduct a district-level analysis of comprehensive reporting documentation/procedures and determine the degree to which procedural standards are available to all LEA staff. | No
6 | Missing PET Submission (August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012) | Evaluate the LEA’s comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are followed by all LEA staff. | No
6 | Missing PET Submission (August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012) | Evaluate campus- and district-level systems, procedures, and standards for ensuring compliance with reporting requirements outlined in the PEIMS Data Standards. | Yes
6 | Missing PET Submission (August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012) | Ensure that the LEA annually reviews, monitors, and adjusts the data collection and reporting process to incorporate changes to the PEIMS Data Standards (and other data collection documents) and ensure consistency across campuses. | Yes
6 | Missing PET Submission (August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012) | Determine the extent to which the LEA has clearly identified a person responsible for serving as the LEA’s primary PEIMS coordinator/supervisor, and the extent to which that person is trained in PET submission. | Yes
6 | Missing PET Submission (August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012) | Review reporting timelines within the LEA to determine whether sufficient time is available for data quality checks and reviews. | No
6 | Missing PET Submission (August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012) | Evaluate the availability of ongoing training for staff members responsible for data collection and reporting and review whether a lack of training opportunities has contributed to submission noncompliance. | Yes
6 | Missing PET Submission (August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012) | Examine how the LEA ensures the effectiveness of training. | No
6 | Missing PET Submission (August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012) | Examine practices to determine whether appropriate opportunities are provided for LEA PEIMS staff to coordinate and collaborate with other PEIMS staff members, both internal and external to the LEA. | Yes
6 | Missing PET Submission (August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012) | Analyze the processes used to incorporate PEIMS reporting issues into district and campus improvement efforts. | No
6 | Missing PET Submission (August 20, 2012 through September 21, 2012) | Examine the process by which the district ensures the review and appropriate follow-up to the weekly TEA-generated PET Delinquency Report. | Yes
7 | Missing PET Submission (August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012) | Conduct a district-level analysis of comprehensive reporting documentation/procedures and determine the degree to which procedural standards are available to all LEA staff. | No
7 | Missing PET Submission (August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012) | Evaluate the LEA’s comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are followed by all LEA staff. | No
7 | Missing PET Submission (August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012) | Evaluate campus- and district-level systems, procedures, and standards for ensuring compliance with reporting requirements outlined in the PEIMS Data Standards. | Yes
7 | Missing PET Submission (August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012) | Ensure that the LEA annually reviews, monitors, and adjusts the data collection and reporting process to incorporate changes to the PEIMS Data Standards (and other data collection documents) and ensure consistency across campuses. | Yes
7 | Missing PET Submission (August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012) | Determine the extent to which the LEA has clearly identified a person responsible for serving as the LEA’s primary PEIMS coordinator/supervisor, and the extent to which that person is trained in PET submission. | Yes
7 | Missing PET Submission (August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012) | Review reporting timelines within the LEA to determine whether sufficient time is available for data quality checks and reviews. | No
7 | Missing PET Submission (August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012) | Evaluate the availability of ongoing training for staff members responsible for data collection and reporting and review whether a lack of training opportunities has contributed to submission noncompliance. | Yes
7 | Missing PET Submission (August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012) | Examine how the LEA ensures the effectiveness of training. | No
7 | Missing PET Submission (August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012) | Examine practices to determine whether appropriate opportunities are provided for LEA PEIMS staff to coordinate and collaborate with other PEIMS staff members, both internal and external to the LEA. | Yes
7 | Missing PET Submission (August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012) | Analyze the processes used to incorporate PEIMS reporting issues into district and campus improvement efforts. | No
7 | Missing PET Submission (August 22, 2011 through June 30, 2012) | Examine the process by which the district ensures the review and appropriate follow-up to the weekly TEA-generated PET Delinquency Report. | Yes
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Evaluate dropout records to ensure accurate reporting. | No
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Analyze the processes used to track and monitor LEA/campus dropouts. | No
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Conduct a district-level analysis related to the availability of comprehensive reporting documentation and procedures; determine the degree to which the procedural standards are available to all LEA staff and that the staff is following all standards. | No
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Evaluate both campus- and district-level systems for ensuring that the LEA/campus is following the district student withdrawal process and ensure that PEIMS data submissions reflect these findings. | No
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Determine strategies the LEA routinely implements to ensure that annual reviews and analyses of changes to the PEIMS Data Standards (including [NAME] D) and other data collection documents are conducted. | No
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Evaluate the availability of regular, ongoing training for staff members responsible for leaver/data collection and reporting. | No
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Review whether a lack of training opportunities has contributed to leaver/data reporting errors. | No
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Annually review, monitor, and adjust the data collection and reporting process to ensure consistency across campuses. | No
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Evaluate recovery programs successes and failures in meeting the needs of continuers | Yes
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Evaluate career clusters and their utilization to prevent continuers from dropping out of school. | Yes
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Evaluate counseling programs geared to meet the needs of continuers | Yes
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Delineate the frequency and source of any reporting errors. | Yes
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Examine practices to ensure appropriate documentation is maintained in each student cumulative folder to validate each leaver code assigned. | Yes
8 | Continuing Students’ Dropout Rate | Add each continuing student dropout to their respective cohort to determine the adjusted dropout rate. | Yes