Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Receivership Continuous Improvement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
RCSD updates board committee on continuous improvement, progress monitoring and receivership schools
Summary
Executive Director Daniel Hurley outlined RCSD’s continuous improvement process, progress monitoring with NYSED, and the status of receivership schools; Hurley said accountability designations were static this year because New York State is in a reimagine phase that returns a growth metric to designations, and he described demonstrable improvement‑
Daniel Hurley, RCSD Executive Director of School Innovation, briefed the ESA Equity and Student Achievement committee June 10, 2025 on continuous improvement, progress monitoring and the district’s receivership schools.
Hurley told the committee the state paused usual accountability movement after the pandemic and is now in a "reimagine" phase; because the growth metric is being reintroduced, he said district school accountability designations did not change this past year and will largely remain static for the coming school year as the state phases in new metrics. "There has not been movement within these designations this past year," Hurley said, and added the growth metric will reappear in future calculations.
Hurley described the district’s use of the NYSED SEP template and the Data Wise continuous improvement process to identify learning‑center problems, problems of practice and research‑based key strategies. He said progress monitoring uses multiple data sources (testing, iReady, common assessments, student work and interviews) and that schools produce early‑implementation benchmarks, midyear benchmarks and end‑of‑year targets.
Hurley reviewed the state’s demonstrable improvement indicators for receivership schools and displayed a summary of how RCSD receivership schools performed in 2023–24. He noted that meeting 67% of demonstrable improvement indicators constitutes demonstrable improvement; he also cautioned that meeting those indicators does not guarantee exiting receivership because exit requires meeting state criteria at a designated review point (next opportunity June 30, 2026).
Board members raised questions about the number of schools with state‑determined designations. President Simmons and others pressed Hurley to clarify the difference among CSI (Comprehensive Support and Improvement), TSI (Targeted Support and Improvement) and LSI (Local Support and Improvement, the former “good standing” category). Hurley explained CSI typically means the "all students" subgroup ranks among the bottom in the state; TSI indicates one or more subgroups have low rankings; ATSI reflects longer‑term subgroup struggles; and LSI denotes schools that still require state‑determined local needs action but are not in CSI/TSI status.
Several commissioners expressed urgency about improving student outcomes in receivership and other schools. Commissioner Elliott expressed frustration about persistent low outcomes and asked whether the district was leveraging effective school leadership practices from schools that had exited receivership. Hurley and Superintendent Dr. Strickland said state‑district collaboration has increased, and Strickland emphasized that some receivership principals’ expectations and practices have driven notable gains in student outcomes, even while schools remain under heightened oversight.
Hurley described receivership monitoring (virtual performance reviews, two required on‑site visits and additional visits as needed) and said East Lower’s reporting is currently handled by the Education Partner Organization (EPO) rather than the district. He listed current receivership schools (School 16, 208, 33, Monroe, Edison and East Lower) and said the district will continue progress monitoring with NYSED. He also urged continued attention to chronic absenteeism as a factor that influences accountability results.
The committee thanked Hurley; there was no formal action taken during the presentation.
