Spreadsheet: 0f5f4045-7876-42e5-8d2e-9db7fbac4e69
Sheet: Sheet1

2010-2011 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 | Analyze the factors that contributed to the decrease in dropout rates for the LEA/campus, including dropout preventinon programs implemented during the past three years. | Yes
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 | 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
2 | Underreported Students | Delineate the frequency and source of any reporting errors. | yes
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 | 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 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver Codes | Delineate the frequency and source of any reporting errors. | Yes
3 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver Codes | Examine practices to ensure appropriate documentation is maintained in each student cumulative folder to validate each leaver code assigned. | Yes
3 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver Codes | Examine current withdrawal forms to determine if they adequately address documentation requirements under the PEIMS Data Standards. | Yes
3 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver 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
3 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver Codes | Evaluate the LEA’s comprehensive reporting procedures and determine the degree to which the procedural standards are followed by all LEA staff. | Yes
3 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver Codes | Analyze current staffing levels at the LEA/campus related to student withdrawals, leaver coding, PEIMS reporting, and data quality. | No
3 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver 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
3 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver Codes | Evaluate the availability of regular, ongoing training for staff members responsible for leaver/data collection and reporting. | Yes
3 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver Codes | Analyze the processes used to incorporate PEIMS reporting issues into district and campus improvement efforts. | No
3 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver Codes | Review reporting timelines within the LEA to determine whether sufficient time is available for leaver/data quality checks and reviews. | Yes
3 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver Codes | Annually review, monitor, and adjust the data collection and reporting process to ensure consistency across campuses. | No
3 | Zero Dropouts and High Use of Other Exit Leaver Codes | If no LEA reporting errors are identified during the internal review, delineate the programmatic and/or systemic reasons for student leavers under the identified leaver code(s). | No
4 | High Use of One or More Leaver Codes | Delineate the frequency and source of any reporting errors. | Yes
4 | High Use of One or More Leaver Codes | Examine practices to ensure appropriate documentation is maintained in each student cumulative folder to validate each leaver code assigned. | Yes
4 | High Use of One or More Leaver Codes | Examine current withdrawal forms to determine if they adequately address documentation requirements under the PEIMS Data Standards. | Yes
4 | High Use of One or More Leaver 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 | High Use of One or More Leaver 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 | High Use of One or More Leaver Codes | Analyze current staffing levels at the LEA/campus related to student withdrawals, leaver coding, PEIMS reporting, and data quality. | No
4 | High Use of One or More Leaver 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 | High Use of One or More Leaver Codes | Evaluate the availability of regular, ongoing training for staff members responsible for leaver/data collection and reporting. | Yes
4 | High Use of One or More Leaver Codes | Analyze the processes used to incorporate PEIMS reporting issues into district and campus improvement efforts. | No
4 | High Use of One or More Leaver Codes | Review reporting timelines within the LEA to determine whether sufficient time is available for leaver/data quality checks and reviews. | Yes
4 | High Use of One or More Leaver Codes | Annually review, monitor, and adjust the data collection and reporting process to ensure consistency across campuses. | No
4 | High Use of One or More Leaver Codes | If no LEA reporting errors are identified during the internal review, delineate the programmatic and/or systemic reasons for student leavers under the identified leaver code(s). | No
5 | Missing PET Submission (August 24, 2009 - September 18, 2009) | 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
5 | Missing PET Submission (August 24, 2009 - September 18, 2009) | Evaluate campus- and district-level systems, procedures, and standards for ensuring compliance with reporting requirements outlined in the PEIMS Data Standards. | Yes
5 | Missing PET Submission (August 24, 2009 - September 18, 2009) | 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
5 | Missing PET Submission (August 24, 2009 - September 18, 2009) | 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
5 | Missing PET Submission (August 24, 2009 - September 18, 2009) | Review reporting timelines within the LEA to determine whether sufficient time is available for data quality checks and reviews. | No
5 | Missing PET Submission (August 24, 2009 - September 18, 2009) | 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
5 | Missing PET Submission (August 24, 2009 - September 18, 2009) | Examine how the LEA ensures the effectiveness of training. | No
5 | Missing PET Submission (August 24, 2009 - September 18, 2009) | 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
5 | Missing PET Submission (August 24, 2009 - September 18, 2009) | Analyze the processes used to incorporate PEIMS reporting issues into district and campus improvement efforts. | No
5 | Missing PET Submission (August 24, 2009 - September 18, 2009) | Examine the process by which the district ensures the review and appropriate follow-up to the weekly TEA-generated PET Delinquency Report. | Yes
6 | Missing PET Submission (2008-2009 Reporting Year) | 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 (2008-2009 Reporting Year) | 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 (2008-2009 Reporting Year) | 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 (2008-2009 Reporting Year) | 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 (2008-2009 Reporting Year) | Review reporting timelines within the LEA to determine whether sufficient time is available for data quality checks and reviews. | No
6 | Missing PET Submission (2008-2009 Reporting Year) | 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 (2008-2009 Reporting Year) | Examine how the LEA ensures the effectiveness of training. | No
6 | Missing PET Submission (2008-2009 Reporting Year) | 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 (2008-2009 Reporting Year) | Analyze the processes used to incorporate PEIMS reporting issues into district and campus improvement efforts. | No
6 | Missing PET Submission (2008-2009 Reporting Year) | Examine the process by which the district ensures the review and appropriate follow-up to the weekly TEA-generated PET Delinquency Report. | Yes
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 | Review documentation for students assigned non-dropout leaver codes to ensure the documentation meets standards established in the PEIMS Data Standards, Appendix D for the applicable year. | Yes