Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Improvement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Crowley ISD holds in-depth study session on TEA targeted improvement plans for several campuses
Summary
District leaders gave a study-session briefing on Texas Education Agency targeted improvement plans, explaining categories (targeted, additional targeted, comprehensive), identifying named campuses under each category, the state review process, required needs assessments and exit criteria, and next steps for monitoring and benchmarks.
Crowley ISD trustees spent the bulk of their meeting in a study session on the district's 2025'26 Targeted Improvement Plans (TIPs), a state- and federally driven set of interventions for campus groups identified as underperforming.
Dr. Milner, who led the presentation, explained the three primary identification categories used in the Texas Education Agency accountability system: targeted support and improvement, additional targeted support and improvement, and comprehensive support and improvement. "Targeted improvement is targeted support and improvement," Dr. Milner said, and staff walked trustees through identification criteria, required root-cause analyses, measurable interim goals and the state's monitoring expectations.
Which campuses and groups: staff identified Bestrace Elementary School and Mary Harris Elementary School as receiving additional targeted support for specified demographic groups (for example, continuously enrolled or economically disadvantaged students) and named Jackie Carden Elementary School as a campus subject to comprehensive support because of low performance in domain 3 (closing-the-gaps measures). Crowley Middle School and H.F. Stevens were noted as having a state early-warning identification without a federal label; H.F. Stevens was flagged because of an instructional leadership grant requirement to submit a TIP.
State review and local steps: Dr. Milner described a yearlong process that began with diagnostic reviews, campus walks and data analysis in October and November, followed by adjustments in December and January. Staff reported recent spring walkthroughs with Region 11 and TEA and said the state had returned feedback on submitted plans in January with no required corrections. Superintendent Dr. Michael McFarland said the TEA visits function largely as coaching and that district internal reviews had already identified many of the same areas for improvement.
Exit criteria and monitoring: presenters explained that campuses identified for targeted support exit the improvement cycle when the identified group meets state targets; campuses with additional targeted support must both raise the underperforming group's performance and sustain it for a subsequent year; comprehensive campuses must raise overall ratings (for example, from D/F to at least a C) to exit. Staff said the TIPs will be embedded within each campus's campus improvement plan and that executive directors and principals will continue progress monitoring and reporting to TEA as required.
Next steps: trustees will receive campus-level detail and continue discussions in a forthcoming full-board meeting and in a planned March workshop, when spring benchmark results will be available for further planning and summer programming.
The session included extensive board questions about how the state and regional service centers conduct walkthroughs, what evidence is required, and how the district documents progress and sustains gains.
The board did not take a vote during the study session; staff said the item may return to the consent agenda at the end of the month for approval of the formal plans.
