Accountability Stakeholder Groups

The Colorado State Board of Education (State Board) is responsible for entering into accreditation contracts with local school boards and directing local school boards regarding the types of plans the district’s schools implement.

Local school boards are responsible for accrediting their schools and for overseeing the academic programs offered by their schools to meet or exceed state and local performance expectations for levels of attainment on the state’s four key Performance Indicators (achievement, growth, closing gaps, and postsecondary/workforce readiness). Local school boards also are responsible for creating, adopting and implementing a Performance, Improvement, Priority Improvement, or Turnaround plan, whichever is required by the Department, and ensuring that their schools create, adopt and implement the type of plan required by the State Board.

District Accountability Committees are responsible for making recommendations to their local school boards concerning priorities for spending district and federal funds, making recommendations concerning the preparation of the district’s Performance, Improvement, Priority Improvement, or Turnaround plan (whichever is applicable), and cooperatively determining other areas and issues to address and make recommendations upon. The Educator Evaluation and Support Bill of 2010 (S.B. 10-191) also authorized District Accountability Committees to provide input and recommendations to principals, on an advisory basis, concerning the development and use of assessment tools to measure and evaluate student academic growth as it relates to teacher evaluations.

District leaders are responsible for overseeing the academic programs offered by their district’s schools to meet or exceed state and local performance expectations for levels of attainment on the state’s four key Performance Indicators. They play a key role in the creation, adoption, and implementation of their district’s Performance, Improvement, Priority Improvement or Turnaround plan, whichever is required by the State Board, as well as in reviewing their schools’ Performance, Improvement, Priority Improvement or Turnaround plans. They also have a key role in recommending to the school board the accreditation category of each district school.

School leaders are responsible for overseeing the academic programs offered by their school to meet or exceed state and local performance expectations for levels of attainment on the state’s four key Performance Indicators. They also play a key role in the creation, adoption, and implementation of a school’s Performance, Improvement, Priority Improvement or Turnaround plan, whichever is required by the State Board.

School Accountability Committees are responsible for making recommendations to their principal concerning priorities for spending school funds, making recommendations concerning the preparation of the school’s Performance, Improvement, Priority Improvement, or Turnaround plan (whichever is applicable), and meeting at least quarterly to discuss implementation of the school’s plan and other progress pertinent to the school’s accreditation contract with the local school board. The Educator Evaluation and Support Bill of 2010 (S.B. 10-191) also authorized School Accountability Committees to provide input and recommendations to District Accountability Committees and district administration concerning principal development plans and principal evaluations.

The Technical Advisory Panel for Longitudinal Growth (TAP)  was created to provide direction regarding the development of the Colorado Growth Model.  Following model development, the TAP was repurposed to provide technical feedback to CDE regarding both the growth model and state accountability system.  The TAP has been an important source of feedback to CDE since 2009 and still meets regularly each year. For more information on the Technical Advisory Panel, visit the TAP page.

The Accountability Work Group (AWG) was first convened in 2014 to gather input for improving the state accountability performance framework reports.  It was later reconstituted to provide feedback related to the development of the Colorado ESSA plan. The AWG meets less frequently then the TAP but is called upon as needed to support different aspects of work related to federal and state accountability. For more information on the Accountability Work Group, visit the AWG page.