Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Accountability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District staff outlines CSI/TSI designations as trustees press for funding clarity
Summary
District presenters summarized Indiana CSI/TSI school designations, required improvement plans and state supports; trustees pressed for timelines, grant availability and whether a proposed funding restructuring tied to a Mazzi contract would affect Title I services.
The School City of Hammond received an overview of Indiana’s school accountability labels on Sept. 3, as district staff described how Comprehensive Support and Improvement (CSI) and Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI) designations are assigned and what schools must do to exit those classifications.
The presentation, given by a district staff presenter, explained that CSI applies to Title I schools in the bottom 5% or those with a graduation rate of 67% or lower, while TSI applies when a student group persistently underperforms. The presenter said schools are identified on a four‑year cycle and must submit a comprehensive needs assessment and a school improvement plan that includes a theory of action, measurable goals and progress monitoring to meet exit criteria.
Board members pressed for local detail. Trustee Blake King said the board needed to know how long individual schools had been designated as CSI or TSI and urged the information be made public, saying, “They’re not functioning. They’re not doing—we’re not educating our kids.” The presenter said some schools trace back to the 2018–19 identification and that the district will provide the requested timeline and the school improvement plans to trustees; the presenter set an October target for plan submission and recommended end‑of‑year board presentations of progress.
Trustees also sought clarity about grant support and whether the district had applied for School Improvement Grants (SIG). The presenter said the IDOE had not confirmed a current SIG for the district and that the district has previously applied for grants for affected schools.
A focal point of the Q&A was a proposal discussed in the district presentation to restructure how Title I funds are used. A staff member explained the rationale as returning more district dollars to School City of Hammond students by redirecting fewer funds to parochial and private schools, citing a contract arrangement discussed with an external partner. Trustees questioned whether that approach would alter services or reduce access to programs that currently rely on Title I funding. The presenter and staff clarified that the district remains a Title I district and that program continuity for students is a priority; they said the proposal was intended to keep more dollars in district programs while noting state rules govern federal disbursement.
The board directed staff to post the data and vendor information shared by the IDOE to board documents and to bring back more detailed fiscal analyses and the vendor name. The district also said it will ensure principals form school teams, use the IDOE templates, and provide quarterly updates to the district team.
The board did not take any formal action on the presentation at the work session. The superintendent and staff said they would return with more detailed timelines, the identity of the vendor producing consolidated data reports and any grant opportunities.
