Centerpoint School District Annual Report to the Public INDICATORS 1. Achievement 2. Annual Accreditation Status 3. Retention 4. Discipline 5. Demographics 6. Choice 7. Economics INDICATOR #1 - Achievement IOWA TEST OF BASIC SKILLS (NRT) in K, 1, 2 ACT Aspire ACT TEST ADVANCED PLACEMENT: AP TEST ANNUAL MEASURABLE OBJECTIVE (Frozen) NRT NORM REFERENCED TEST These Scores are Compared Nationwide Centerpoint Primary will continue Norm Referenced testing In grades K, 1, and 2 (Iowa Test of Basic Skills paper based). Norm-Referenced Test Scores (National % of mean standard score) Grade Reading ComprehensionMath Problem Solving K No State Testing No State Testing No State Testing No State Testing CRT Criterion Referenced Test Scores are Compared Statewide 3 rd Grade Benchmark Literacy Subgroups Combined Population 83%96%78% Hispanic 75%95%67% Caucasian 84%97%77% Economically Disadvantaged 78%95%72% Students with Disabilities 40%80%27% Limited English 76%94%67% Male 75%97%58% Female 89%95%85% Math Subgroups Combined Population 99% 93% Hispanic 91%100% Caucasian 100%99%92% Economically Disadvantaged 98% 91% Students with Disabilities 80%100%81% Limited English 91%100% Male 97%100%88% Female 100%97% 4 th Grade Benchmark Literacy Subgroups Combined Population 86%89%92% Hispanic 67%85%84% Caucasian 88%90%94% Economically Disadvantaged 86%87%89% Students with Disabilities 40%67%80% Limited English 67%83%88% Male 86%83%97% Female 85%95%87% Math Subgroups Combined Population 85% 84% Hispanic 66%69%74% Caucasian 87%89%87% Economically Disadvantaged 83%81%82% Students with Disabilities 30%50%80% Limited English 66%67%76% Male 80%86%83% Female 88%84% 5 th Grade Benchmark Literacy Subgroups Combined Population 91%84%83% Hispanic 94%50% Caucasian 89%86%80% Economically Disadvantaged 88%78%67% Students with Disabilities 34%54%0% Limited English 94%40%54% Male 86%75%68% Female 94%91%80% Math Subgroups Combined Population 85%83%71% Hispanic 93%17%57% Caucasian 81%89%75% Economically Disadvantaged 80%79%69% Students with Disabilities 34%45%0% Limited English 93%20%61% Male 81%77%63% Female 88%87%80% 6 th Grade Benchmark Literacy Subgroups Combined Population 71%63%57% Hispanic 58%61%29% Caucasian 76%62% Economically Disadvantaged 64%57%47% Students with Disabilities 67%13%10% Limited English 54%59%33% Male 68%50%40% Female 75%77%71% Math Subgroups Combined Population 83%84%76% Hispanic 75%85%43% Caucasian 83%82%83% Economically Disadvantaged 80%81%69% Students with Disabilities 66%26%30% Limited English 72%83%50% Male 86%79%75% Female 78%88%79% 7 th Grade Benchmark Literacy Subgroups Combined Population 78%72%71% Hispanic 63%61%82% Caucasian 84%77%68% Economically Disadvantaged 75%71%65% Students with Disabilities 33%0%14% Limited English 63%67%82% Male 71%62%55% Female 85% 87% Math Subgroups Combined Population 85%75%70% Hispanic 92%85%91% Caucasian 87%78%65% Economically Disadvantaged 81%73%63% Students with Disabilities 33% 0% Limited English 91%83%91% Male 87%76%61% Female 83%76%79% 8 th Grade Benchmark Literacy Subgroups Combined Population 77%74%69% Hispanic 83%66%60% Caucasian 78%76%75% Economically Disadvantaged 66%70%66% Students with Disabilities 13%0% Limited English 83%60%53% Male 72%68%57% Female 84%94%85% Math Subgroups Combined Population 62%71%66% Hispanic 53%83%54% Caucasian 67%70%71% Economically Disadvantaged 54%64%62% Students with Disabilities 13%0% Limited English 17%80%47% Male 64%71%64% Female 59%70% Math = ALGEBRA I EOC Benchmark Algebra Subgroups Combined Population 87%78%89% Hispanic 70%58%85% Caucasian 92%81%94% Economically Disadvantaged 82%73%83% Students with Disabilities 50%33%0% Limited English 38%66%82% Male 85%79%88% Female 89%77%90% Geometry Subgroups Combined Population 79%81%91% Hispanic 83%75%76% Caucasian 76%84%94% Economically Disadvantaged 77%76%86% Students with Disabilities 50%84%0% Limited English 67%43%67% Male 76%74%93% Female 81%87%90% 11 th Grade Literacy EOC Benchmark Subgroups Combined Population 61% 70%65% Hispanic 60% 74% Caucasian 62% 72%61% Economically Disadvantaged 53% 69%49% Students with Disabilities 29% 20%14% Limited English 33% 20% Male 55% 57%48% Female 68% 84%82% Literacy Matrix Math Matrix Science Benchmark 5 th Grade Subgroups Combined Population 62%80%71%81% Hispanic 54%33%71%79% Caucasian 63%86%73%82% Economically Disadvantaged 54%73%67%70% Students with Disabilities 33%36%0%75% Limited English 54%40%69%78% Male 61%81%73%79% Female 65%80%69%83% Science Benchmark 7 th Grade Subgroups Combined Population 51%52%34%42% Hispanic 27%54%36%17% Caucasian 54%56%31%47% Economically Disadvantaged 38%55%23% 39% Students with Disabilities 25%0% 18% Limited English 0%50%36%17% Male 52%55%33%51% Female 48%50%33%36% Biology EOC Benchmark Subgroups Combined Population 37%48%57%65% Hispanic 38%60%30%53% Caucasian 37%47%64%70% Economically Disadvantaged 30%45%47%54% Students with Disabilities 17%11%0%50% Limited English 0%25%0%40% Male 37%42%58%59% Female 37%53%56%75% Arkansas PARCC High School Results 2015 Coming Soon: District and student PARCC scores and reports are scheduled to be released for grades 9 through 12 in November. Scores for grades 3 through 8 are expected to be Released at the November State Board of Education meeting. Arkansas PARCC High School Results 2015 Centerpoint ACT NEW ASSESSMENTS TO BEGIN IN SCHOOL YEAR Grades 3 thru 10 will all take the ACT Aspire assessment. Grade 11 will take the ACT. Fast Facts Vertically articulated, standards-based system of summative, interim, and classroom assessments Linked to ACT College Readiness Benchmarks and aligned with the Common Core State Standards Anchored by the capstone college readiness assessment, the ACT Multiple question types: constructed response, selected response, and technology- enhanced Subject areas: English, math, reading, science, and writing for grades 38 and early high school (grades 910) Modular administration of subjects and grades available Online delivery of assessments with traditional paper-and-pencil option ASSESSMENTS TO CONTINUE KINDERGARTEN: QUALLS (Readiness Assessment); also a norm ref test (Iowa Test of Basic Skills ) ELPA 2: given to English as a Second Language students HIGH SCHOOL: ACT, ADVANCED PLACEMENT PRIMARY IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS Pre-School Kindergarten Screening ACT Aspire Exemplar Practice Items 3 rd Grade Departmentalized STAR Reading & Accelerated Reader Web-based STAR Math & Accelerated Math Web-based K-3 Compass Learning Odyssey (launched Oct.15) Phonetic Connections grades 2and 3 Comprehensive Literacy Reading Data Wall Orton-Gillingham Strategies WRITING RTI DIBELS iPad Math in Focus and Engage NY Smart Board, increased # of iPads in each classroom New Keyboarding Software Literacy Instructional Facilitator Performance Based Report Card Common Core Development with APSRC, Dawson, HSU, and the ADE INTERMEDIATE IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS Math Engage NY STAR Reading & Accelerated Reader-Web-based STAR Math & Accelerated Math- Web-based Title I : Tutoring DIBELS Assessment WRITING; Write Steps, K-5 Nonfiction Writing RTI In School Intervention Orton-Gillingham Strategies Common Planning Time HP Streams in every classroom Compass Learning Odyssey New Keyboarding Software SmartBoard, iPads & Cart Literacy Instructional Facilitator Common Core Development with APSRC, Dawson, HSU and the ADE ACT Aspire with Exemplar Items Professional Development, Data Analysis, Horizontal and Vertical Curriculum Alignment, Technology training MIDDLE/HIGH SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT ACTIONS Grades 6 and 7 are 1 to 1 with HP Streams ACT Aspire Compass Learning Odyssey Edulastic Orton-Gillingham Strategies After School Tutoring Remediation/Activity Period Common Core State Standards Literacy Instructional Facilitator Carnegie Math APEX Credit Recovery Professional Development with Dawson, ADE, and APSRC, Data Analysis, Horizontal and Vertical Curriculum Alignment, Technology training, AP & Pre-AP training, AAIMS Special Education Inclusion Professional Learning Communities ** N = no students took test Score Score Score 5 Literature Lang. & Comp Calculus Statistics2-N-N-N0-N-N-N Art Biology Environ. Science U.S. Government1-N-N-N2-N-N-N0-N-N-N U.S. HistoryN-1-2-1N-2-0-0N ADVANCED PLACEMENT SCORES Fall 2015 Concurrent Credit at NPC 46 CHS Students English Comp. 1 English Comp. 2 Env. Science Oral Com. BiologyCol. Alg.Calculus No. of Students No. of credit hours/class Total hours awarded to CHS students/course Total hours taken by CHS students 280 Registration paid by CHS students $2300 NPC Total Cost for 280 hours $27,440 HSU Total Cost for 280 hours $57,960 2013 ESEA Accountability Report NCLB goal of 100 percent proficient was replaced with ambitious and achievable goal. Replaces previous AYP status Based on Annual Measurable Objective (AMO) Exemplary, Focus, and Priority Schools identified separately. SCHOOL OVERALL SCHOOL STATUS PERCENT TESTED STATUS LITERACY STATUS MATH STATUS GRADUATION STATUS PRIMARYACHIEVING INTERMEDIATENEEDS IMPROVEMENT ACHIEVING NEEDS IMPROVEMENT HIGH SCHOOLNEEDS IMPROVEMENT ACHIEVINGNEEDS IMPROVEMENT ARKANSAS AMO STATUS (currently in a holding pattern)) Professional Development 36 hours outside school-day are required for all teachers and administrators. A district/school plan is developed each year to meet the 36 hour requirement. PD can be in many forms such as; Job embedded, large group workshop, small group workshop, individual, ADE online, virtual online PD, Classroom walk- throughs that provide PD feedback to improve instruction, professional learning communities, etc. PD can be provided by local facilitators, consultants from agencies such as; Dawson COOP, APSRC, HSU, ADE, and state agencies. Required PD for administrators includes leadership training. PD is provided to assist teachers in meeting evaluation requirements of TESS- Teacher Excellence and Support System PD is designed, planned and scheduled to meet the instructional needs of the teachers in order to improve student performance Within the 36 required hours this year the state requires training in teen suicide, school safety, bullying, and ethics. INDICATOR #2 ACCREDITATION STATUS ACCREDITED Primary, Intermediate, High School ACCREDITED-CITEDNone ACCREDITED- PROBATIONARY None ATTENDANCE RATE96.34 % (2013)93.4% (2014) DROPOUT RATE1.31% (2013)1.32% (2014) GRADUATION RATE89.55% (2013)93.9% (2014) GRADE INFLATION RATE.73% (2013)0 (2014) COLLEGE REMEDIATION RATE 39.3% (2013)45.5% (2014) ENROLLMENT OCTOBER 1, 2015 TOTAL 961 Primary Kindergarten st nd rd Intermediate 4 th th Middle/ High th th th th th th th October 1, 2013 = 980 October 1, 2014 = 942 October 1, 2015 = 961 INDICATOR #3 RETENTION: GRADEK # of Students Retained # of Students Retained % of Students Retained %10%11%0% 1%0% % of Students Retained %10%0% 1% 0% Discipline Policies Distributed To Parents YES Discipline Training Provided to StaffYES Parent Involvement Plan AdoptedYES Expulsions30 Weapons Incidents62 Staff Assaults21 Student Assaults55 INDICATOR #4 DISCIPLINE INDICATOR #5 DEMOGRAPHICS Certified95.5% Requesting Certification Waivers 4.5% With Bachelors Degree 52.9% With Masters Degree 47.1% Racial Composition of Student Body SchoolAsian African American Hispanic Native American Pacific Islander CaucasianTotal Primary Intermediate High School Totals Percentage.62% 1.04% 18.21% 2.08%0%78.05%100% INDICATOR #6 SCHOOL CHOICE = STUDENTS OBTAINED THROUGH SCHOOL CHOICE 1 st year = 1.77% (17 Students) not 1 st year = 7.39% (71 Students) Total = 9.16% (88 students) INDICATOR #7 ECONOMIC DISTRICT TOTAL MILLS 38.6 (2014) 41 (2015) DISTRICT EXPENDITURE PER STUDENTS $8,772 ( ) DISTRICT AVERAGE TEACHER SALARY $39,303 ( ) School Lunch Program For Economically Disadvantaged Students FREE MEALS = 581 REDUCED MEALS = 108 TOTAL = 689 POVERTY RATE (ECON DIS) = FEDERAL AND STATE FUNDED PROGRAMS Federal Programs Title I Title I Teachers/Title I Paraprofessionals Lab Managers/Tutors Programs funded (whole or part): Renaissance Accelerated Reader/Accelerated Math Compass Learning Odyssey/Successmaker web-based remediation programs Training on Orton-Gillingham Strategies Literacy Libraries After School Tutoring New Computer Lab Parent Resource Center = Materials and Supplies Supplemental Professional Development Substitute Teachers for PD Homeless Funds Neglected and Delinquent Funds: Arkansas Sheriffs Youth Ranch Federal Programs Title II-A Literacy Instructional Facilitator Supplemental Professional Development Substitute Teachers for PD Federal Programs Title III/ELL Funds provide for ELL/ESL materials and supplies. 2 Bilingual Paraprofessionals ELLIS Software Program ESL Professional Development Federal Programs Carl Perkins Career and Technical Education Provides funding for workforce education Professional Development Supplemental materials and equipment Federal Programs Title VI State Technology Equipment Materials and Supplies State Programs NSLA Curriculum/Federal Programs Director Para-Professionals After-school Tutoring Summer School Program Materials and Supplies Technology Equipment Nurse Counselor Literacy Instructional Facilitator Professional Development New computer lab Professional Development State Professional Development Funds Provide: Dawson Education Service Cooperative Services Arkansas Public School Resource Center Services Subteach: for teachers attending supplemental professional development above the 60 required hours AP-Pre-AP PD Orton-Gillingham Strategies Services from HSU STEM Center Materials and supplies needed for professional development such as professional texts ALE ALTERNATIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT To improve services to struggling students, a high school leadership team researched programs that would provide needed credit recovery for these students. A) The APEX program was chosen; B) ALE state funds have been used to purchase; C) and the program has been implemented for these students. D) Compass Learning Odyssey CIPA Childrens Internet Protection Act Centerpoint School District is CIPA Compliant Internet Safety Policy and Technology Protection Measures Filters and/or blocks protect students from access to pictures that are obscene, pornographic, or otherwise harmful to minors. Students are educated about appropriate online behavior, including cyber bullying awareness and response and interacting with other individuals on social networking sites and in chat rooms. Online activities of minors are monitored Schools and Libraries subject to CIPA are required to adopt and implement a policy addressing Access by minors in appropriate matter on the Internet Safety and security of minors when using electronic mail, chat rooms, and other forms of directing electronic communications; Unauthorized disclosure, use, and dissemination of personal information regarding minors; Restricting minors access to materials harmful to them. Complete policies are on the district website and in student handbooks. District Enrollment942 Percent Special Education12.00% Special Education Child Count (as of 12/01/2014) 113 By Race American Indian/Alaska Native0 Asian 0 Black2 Hawaiian Native/Pacific Islander0 Hispanic19 White84 Two or More Races4 By Disability Mental Retardation7 Speech/Language Impairment45 Specific Learning Disability28 Autism 5 Emotional Disturbance 1 Other Health Impairment27 Other0 By Gender Male 75 Female38 Updated on May 11, 2015 SPECIAL EDUCATION DISTRICT PROFILE 2014/15 ARKANSAS SPECIAL EDUCATION DISTRICT ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORT 2013/14 School Year Publication Date: June 2014 Indicator 01: Graduation Rates (2012/13 school year) The four-year graduation rate follows a cohort, or a group of students, who begin as first-time 9th graders in a particular school year and who graduate with a regular high school diploma in four years or less. Percent of youth with IEPs dropping out of high school State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) 1.97%2.77%2.33%Y Indicator 02: Dropout Rates (2012/13 school year) n=25 Met Disability Subgroup "n" for Reporting Purposes (Y/N) State Target for % of Districts Meeting AMO for Disability Subgroup % of Districts Meeting AMO for Disability Subgroup Target Met by LEA (Y/N) OverallY17.16%1.59%N LiteracyY 9.92%N MathematicsY 3.17%N Participation Rate: # of CWD Tested # of CWD Enrolled in grades tested. State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) Participation Rate: Literacy 97.72%95.00%100.00%Y Participation Rate: Math 96.91%95.00%100.00%Y Percent of CWD Scoring Proficient or Above State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) Proficiency Rate: Literacy 32.26%31.27%30.19%N Proficiency Rate: Mathematics 40.56%40.13%44.00%Y Indicator 03: Assessment on Statewide Benchmark Exam (grades 3-8, 11) A) Annual Measurable Objectives Note: For a district to qualify as having a disability subgroup it must have a minimum of 25 (n=25) students with disabilities in a school building. B) Participation C) Performance Proficiency Indicator 03: Assessment on Statewide Benchmark Exam (grades 3-8, 11) Note: For a district to qualify as having a disability subgroup it must have a minimum of 25 (n=25) students with disabilities in a school building. B) Participation C) Performance Proficiency A) Annual Measurable Objectives Indicator 04: Out-of-School Suspensions and Expulsions (2012/13 school year ) Percent difference of CWD with out-of- school suspensions and expulsions totaling greater than 10 days in a school year as compared to the same data for general education students in the district. Allowable Difference LEA Difference Target Met by LEA (Y/N) < % ptsY A) Suspension/Expulsion Percent of districts that have: (a) a significant discrepancy, by race or ethnicity, in the rate of suspensions and expulsions of greater than 10 days in a school year for children with IEPs; and (b) policies, procedures or practices that contribute to the significant discrepancy and do not comply with requirements relating to the development and implementation of IEPs, the use of positive behavioral interventions and supports, and procedural safeguards. State Rate State Target Target Met by LEA (Y/N) 5.14%5.77%Y B) Suspension/Expulsion by Race and Ethnicity Indicator 05: School Age (5-21) Least Restrictive Environment Percent of CWD with IEPs receiving instruction in the regular class 80% or more of the day. State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) 52.90%53.97%50.00%N A) In the Regular Class 80% or more of the day B) In the Regular Class less than 40% of the day Percent of CWD with IEPs receiving instruction in the regular class less than 40% of the day. State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) 13.39%12.99%6.86%Y C) Other Settings outside the regular class Percent of CWD with IEPs served in public or private separate schools, residential placements, or homebound/hospital placements. State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA(Y/N) 2.37%2.55%1.96%Y Note for Indicator 5C: The LEA rate may be impacted by the number of residential facilities located within the LEA's boundaries and by placements made for non-educational reasons by parents, courts and entities other than the LEA. Percent of children (aged 3 through 5) with IEPs attending a regular early childhood program and receiving the majority of special education and related services in the regular early childhood program State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA(Y/N) 28.53%31.01%-1.00%N/A Percent of children (aged 3 through 5) with IEPs attending a separate special education class, separate school or residential facility State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA(Y/N) 28.56%29.80%-1.00%N/A Note: - - denotes not applicablePage 2 of 5 Separate special education class, separate school or residential facility Indicator 06: Early Childhood (3-5) Least Restrictive Environment Regular Early Childhood Program Positive Social - Emotional Skills (Including social relationships) Acquisition and Use of Knowledge and Skills (Including early language/ communication and early literacy) Use of Appropriate Behaviors to Meet Their Needs Percent of preschool CWD children who did not improve functioning. State Rate LEA Rate State Rate LEA Rate State Rate LEA Rate 2.60% 2.17% 1.77% Percent of preschool CWD who improved but whose functioning remained below same age peers. 7.07% 8.25% 5.56% Percent of preschool CWD who improved at a level nearer to same aged peers % 34.93% 19.80% Percent of preschool CWD who improved functioning to reach a level comparable to same age peers % 42.97% 39.80% Percent of preschool CWD children who maintain functioning at a level comparable to same aged peers % 11.68% 33.08% Indicator 07: Preschool (3-5) Outcomes Summary Statements A) Positive Social - Emotional Skills* B) Acquisition and Use of Knowledge and Skills ** C) Use of Appropriate Behaviors to Meet Their Needs Of those preschool children who entered the preschool program below age expectations in each Outcome, the percent who substantially increased their rate of growth by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited the program. State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) 86.76%89.16% N/A88.20%89.98% N/A89.05%90.71% N/A The percent of preschool children who were functioning within age expectations in each Outcome by the time they turned 6 years of age or exited %66.32% N/A54.65%57.17% N/A72.87%75.95% N/A Indicator 07: Preschool (3-5) Outcomes Note: * Indicates a zero response rate for the district. Percent of surveyed parents who reported school facilitated parent involvement as a means of improving services and results for children with disabilities. State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) Early Childhood (3-5) 90.02%89.94% N/ A School Age (5-21) 93.57%94.05%100.00%Y Note: The target for Indicator 09 is to have zero percent (0%) of districts identified as having disproportionate representation as a result of inappropriate identification in eligibility. Disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in special education and related services that is a result of inappropriate identification (e.g. monitoring data, review of policies, practices, and procedures under 618(d), etc.). State Rate State Target Target Met by LEA (Y/N) 0.00% Y Indicator 08: Parent Involvement Indicator 09: Disproportionality - Eligibility Note: The target for Indicator 10 is to have zero percent (0%) of districts identified as having disproportionate representation as a result of inappropriate identification in a disability category. Disproportionate representation of racial and ethnic groups in specific disability categories that is a result of inappropriate identification (e.g. monitoring data, review of policies, practices, and procedures under 618(d), etc.). State Rate State Target Target Met by LEA (Y/N) 0.00% Y Percent of children with parental consent to evaluate who are evaluated within the State established timeline of 60 days. State Rate State Target LEA (Y/N) LEA Rate Target Met by Overall (3-21) 99.62%100.00% Y Early Childhood (3-5) 99.77%100.00% N/ A School Age (5-21) 99.44%100.00% Y Note: - - denotes not applicablePage 4 of 5 Indicator 10: Disproportionality-Child with a Disability Indicator 11: Child Find Percent of children referred by Part C prior to age 3, who are found eligible for Part B, and who have an IEP developed and implemented by their third birthday. State Rate State Target by LEA LEA Rate Target Met (Y/N) 99.77%100.00% ____ N/ A Indicator 12: Early Childhood Transition Percent of youth with disabilities aged 16 and up with an IEP that includes coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services that will reasonably enable the student to meet the post- secondary goals. State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) 98.58%100.00% ____ N/A Indicator 13: Secondary Transition Note: Data for this Indicator is from the on-site monitoring of LEAs for the given year Percent of youth enrolled in higher education within one year of leaving high school. State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) 18.17%13.35% N/A Percent of youth enrolled in higher education or competitively employed within one year of leaving high school. State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) 52.19%49.04% N/ A Percent of youth enrolled in higher education or in some other postsecondary education or training program; or competitively employed or in some other employment within one year of leaving high school. State Rate State Target LEA Rate Target Met by LEA (Y/N) %59.36% N/A Indicator 14: Post-School Outcomes District submitted required data elements on or before due dates; made revisions within the allotted review periods. Accurate and Timely Data Submission State Target Target Met by LEA (Y/N) Overall (3-21)100.00%Y Early Childhood (3-5)100.00%N/A School Age (5-21)100.00%Y State Indicator: Reported Data-Timely and Accurate* *Data reviewed for timely and accurate submissions included all APSCN cycle data except for Special Education Employees - Cycle Questions, Comments, Suggestions Working together with families and community, Centerpoint School District will provide our students with quality educational experiences through high academic standards and an engaged staff, in a safe and inviting environment.