1. Race to the Top Application State Board of Education Meeting January 6, 2010 January 6, 2010

2. Overview of Race to the Top $4.35B competitive grant to encourage and reward states implementing comprehensive reforms across four key areas: $4.35B competitive grant to encourage and reward states implementing comprehensive reforms across four key areas: Adopting standards and assessments that prepare students to succeed in college and the workplace; Building data systems that measure student success and inform teachers and principals about how they can improve instruction; Recruiting, rewarding, and retaining effective teachers and principals; and Turning around our lowest-achieving schools. With an overarching goal of: Driving substantial gains in student achievement Improving high school graduation and college enrollment Narrowing achievement gaps

3. Dates/Deadlines Application Dates Phase 1: January 19, 2010 Phase 2: June 1, 2010 Award Dates Phase 1: April 2010 Phase 2: September 2010 Potential Award: $175M to be spent over 4 year CSDE Plan: Phase 1 Application Submission Requested Award - $175M

4. Fund Distribution Distribution of Funds: 50% of Funds to “Participating” Districts, based 50% of Funds to “Participating” Districts, based on the LEAs relative share of Title I, Part A regular - and ARRA allocations for 2009 regular - and ARRA allocations for 2009 50% of Funds to State Activities, Non-Title I 50% of Funds to State Activities, Non-Title I “Participating” Districts, Support for “Involved” Districts, and Additional Support for “Collaborating” Districts

5. Who are the “Participating” Districts? Participating Districts: Participating Districts: LEAs that choose to work with the State to implement all or significant portions of the State’s Race to the Top reform plan. LEAs that choose to work with the State to implement all or significant portions of the State’s Race to the Top reform plan. Each participating LEA that receives funding under Title I, Part A, will receive a share of the 50 percent of a State’s grant award based on the LEA’s relative share of the title I, Part A. Each participating LEA that receives funding under Title I, Part A, will receive a share of the 50 percent of a State’s grant award based on the LEA’s relative share of the title I, Part A. Any participating LEA that does not receive funding under Title I, Part A (as well as one that does) may receive funding from the State’s other 50 percent of the grant award, in accordance with the State’s plan. Any participating LEA that does not receive funding under Title I, Part A (as well as one that does) may receive funding from the State’s other 50 percent of the grant award, in accordance with the State’s plan.

6. Who are the “Involved” Districts? Involved Districts: Involved Districts: LEAs that choose to work with the State to implement those specific portions of the State’s plan that necessitate full or nearly-full statewide implementation (e.g., Common Standards and Assessments). LEAs that choose to work with the State to implement those specific portions of the State’s plan that necessitate full or nearly-full statewide implementation (e.g., Common Standards and Assessments). Involved districts do not receive a share of the 50 percent of the State’s grant award that it must subgrant to Title 1 LEAs. Involved districts do not receive a share of the 50 percent of the State’s grant award that it must subgrant to Title 1 LEAs. States may provide other funding to involve LEAs under the State’s Race to the Top grant, in a manner consistent with the State application. States may provide other funding to involve LEAs under the State’s Race to the Top grant, in a manner consistent with the State application.

7. Who are the State Defined “Collaborating” Districts? Collaborating Districts: The following districts are eligible to become collaborating districts, contingent to them signing on as a participating district:  all priority districts;  all districts whose superintendents are members of the Connecticut Association of Urban Superintendents (CAUS); and  those districts that are currently in their 4 th and 5 th year of district improvement, for not meeting the AYP provisions of NCLB.

8. Potential Collaborating Districts Ansonia, Bloomfield, Bridgeport, Bristol, CTHSS, Danbury, East Hartford, Hartford, Hamden, Manchester, Meriden, Middletown, New Britain, New Haven, New London, Norwalk, Stamford, Waterbury, West Haven, Windham Ansonia, Bloomfield, Bridgeport, Bristol, CTHSS, Danbury, East Hartford, Hartford, Hamden, Manchester, Meriden, Middletown, New Britain, New Haven, New London, Norwalk, Stamford, Waterbury, West Haven, Windham

9. CSDE RTTT Application Plan Discuss CSDE and LEA Role in Plan Implementation Discuss CSDE and LEA Role in Plan Implementation Standards and Assessments Standards and Assessments Data Systems to Support Instruction Data Systems to Support Instruction Great Teachers and Leaders Great Teachers and Leaders Turning Around the Lowest-Achieving Schools Turning Around the Lowest-Achieving Schools Review State Reform Plan Elements (handout) Review State Reform Plan Elements (handout) Review LEA Memorandum of Understanding (handout) Review LEA Memorandum of Understanding (handout) Discuss potential funding and capacity building Discuss potential funding and capacity building

10. Budget Example “Participating” Districts $87.5M* Year 1 (2010-2011)$21.875M Year 2 (2011-2012) $21.875M Year 3 (2012-2013) $21.875M Year 4 (2013-2014) $21.875M State Activities, “Involved” and Non-Title I Districts $87.5M ** “Involved” Districts: $2M Non-Title I “Participating” Districts$6M State Supported Collaborating Districts: $40M Statewide Activities:$29.5M Other$10M * See Title I Allocation Table for Four-Year Period ** See Other 50% Funding Example

11. Other 50% Funding Example “Involved” District: $2-4M Common Standards and Assessments Common Standards and Assessments CALI Training CALI Training Secondary School Reform: Student Success Plans, Capstone Projects Secondary School Reform: Student Success Plans, Capstone Projects English Language Learning PD English Language Learning PD Non-Title I “Participating” District: $6-8M District Staffing and Support for State Reform Plan District Staffing and Support for State Reform Plan Collaborating Districts: $40M District Staffing and Support for State Reform Plan and Scale-Up Project(s) District Staffing and Support for State Reform Plan and Scale-Up Project(s) State Activities: $25-27.5M SDE Staffing SDE Staffing Statewide and RESC-Sponsored Professional Development Statewide and RESC-Sponsored Professional Development Institute for the Teaching of English Language Learners Institute for the Teaching of English Language Learners STEM Leader Regional Teacher Exchange STEM Leader Regional Teacher Exchange Teacher-in-Residence Master Teacher Program Teacher-in-Residence Master Teacher Program Drop-Out Prevention Drop-Out Prevention AP Course Expansion AP Course Expansion Other Other

12. Race to the Top Questions and Discussion