Small Group Needs Assessment and Budget

Mary Kent
4/6/16
EAD 510 Educational Finance
Grand Canyon University

2015. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Small Group Needs Assessment/Gap Analysis

Title I After-School Program
(See table below to assist with documentation.)

Step 1: Describe the desired outcome(s)

Key questions:

In this area, for what outcome(s) are we striving? (Outcomes should be specific and
measurable.)
The goal is to increase reading comprehension by a 10% increase as evidenced by the state
assessment (PARCC) by all tested grades (3-8) for all subgroups.

Things to consider:

Who needs to be involved/have input in identifying the desired outcomes?

All stakeholders (e.g. administration, teachers, staff, parents, and students) need to have
input in identifying this outcome.

Are the identified outcomes high priority items? Will their effect be worth the resources they
require to accomplish them?
The increase in reading comprehension is a high priority outcome, as reading with
understanding is necessary for success and mastery in all subjects and throughout life. The
resources will definitely be worthwhile to accomplish this goal.

Who are the final decision makers for this proposal, and at what point are they engaged?
The final decision makers are the administration, teachers, and staff, and they would be
engaged throughout the entire process.

Step 2: Describe the current situation

2015. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Key questions:

What are the current outcomes being achieved? How do these differ from the desired
outcomes?
The current outcomes being achieved on the state assessment (PARCC) is that students
overall in grades 3-8 are lacking in the skills of reading comprehension and vocabulary
acquisition which is resulting in low PARCC scores. This is also evidenced on district-based
assessments as well. These differ from the desired outcomes in that these low scores are not
passing scores for the PARCC assessment, which indicates academic achievement and
mastery is not occurring.

What is working well? Do these things contribute toward the desired outcomes? If not, is
their value worth their resources, or are modifications needed?
What is working well is the literacy framework that has been implemented which involves
best reading practices including guided reading, guided writing, and word study lessons.
Unfortunately, these practices have not always translated to passing PARCC test results.
Modifications are needed to ensure mastery of content for students.

What is not working? What outcomes do the problem areas achieve (sometimes
inadvertently)?
Guided reading is not always the only solution for at-risk readers, and incorporating other
intensive interventions is crucial for students success. Additionally, a lack of fidelity due to
time constraints with implementing these practices are lacking occasionally, and can be an
inadvertent problem area that needs to be addressed.

What is the current budget? Is this a beneficial resource, or a potential liability?

The current budget for the after-school program is $38,086 from Title I monies. This is a
beneficial resource as additional assistance and instruction is made available for students to
increase academic achievement.

What external influences are present that affects this area?

Currently, the district is experiencing a financial crisis in that the city is on the verge of
bankruptcy, and could potentially affect staffing to be reduced for the upcoming school year.

What changes are expected in the near future that could affect this area?
Changes in the near future are stated above.

Things to consider:

Who needs to be involved/have input in describing the current situation? What is the best way
to obtain their information?

2015. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

The individuals who should have input regarding the current situation would be
administration, teachers, and staff (e.g. literacy coaches). Data analysis would be the best
way to obtain the information needed.

What additional resources are available to help describe the current situation? (e.g., data,
documents, calendars)
Additional resources would include PARCC data for students for grades 3-8 in all subgroups,
district assessments (e.g. reading benchmarks, Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI) reports),
and attendance records for students involved in the after-school program.

Is there additional data that would be useful but is not available? Should this data be obtained
before proceeding?
Additional data that would be useful but is not currently available is a student and parent
satisfaction survey regarding the after-school program. This survey can certainly be
developed, administered, and analyzed.

Step 3: Plan to bridge the gap between the desired outcomes and the current outcomes by
proposing action steps that will move the current situation toward achieving the desired outcome(s).
Key questions:

What needs to be done to reach the desired outcomes?

An additional reading intervention can be implemented into the after-school program to
achieve reading comprehension mastery. Incorporating the System 44 software program that
is already in place during the school day into the after-school program will reach more
students.

Do the action plans require additional resources (people, training, equipment, space, funding,
etc.)? If so, how will they be obtained?
Additional resources will be needed in the form of staff training only, which can be done by
teachers who already implement the program. Since the district already has this computer
program in place, no additional funding or equipment is needed. Additionally, space is not a
concern as there are enough classrooms to accommodate the students and staff.

Do the action plans require changing attitudes? If so, how will that be addressed?
No changing attitudes would be required.

What will be the timeframes?

Beginning in August 2016, teacher training will occur for the use of the computer- based
program System 44. An initial assessment will be given to the students in September to
2015. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

identify at-risk students who qualify for this intervention. Throughout the remainder of the
year, ongoing evaluation of data will differentiate and drive instruction to fit the needs of the
students and will be reviewed between administration, staff, teachers, parents, and students.
Things to consider:

To whom should the proposal be presented for feedback?

The proposal should be presented to district level administration and to the parents by the
school administrators and teachers for any necessary feedback.

Step 4: Revise, finalize, and distribute the plan by writing the action steps, identifying persons
responsible for each action and timelines.
Key questions:

Who will be responsible for each action?

The particular individuals that would be responsible for certain actions would be the
building principal, the literacy coach, and the teachers.

What timeframes will be used?

The timeframes would be beginning in August 2016, and be ongoing throughout the
remainder of the 2016-2017 school year.

Things to consider (these considerations can be added to the plan as additional action steps, as
appropriate):

How should this plan be implemented? Who will be involved?

The plan will be implemented throughout the upcoming school year and involve all
stakeholders in the process.

What communication strategies will be used for which audiences?

The communication strategies for teachers and staff will include professional development
training workshops, as well as data analysis and meeting with the principal to evaluate the
success of the students. District-level administration strategies for communication would
include meetings and data analysis as well. The communication strategies for parents would
include notices sent home, informational sessions held at the school, and parent surveys.

Desired
Outcome

Current
Situation

Action Steps

2015. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

Persons
Responsible/
Timelines

Students will increase

their grade-level reading
comprehension score by
10% as evidenced by
the PARCC state
assessment in each
subgroup population.

Students are not

mastering reading
comprehension skills
and are in need of more
intensive reading
intervention.

1. Provide staff
training on
System 44
software.
2. Supply list of
eligible students
based on
Scholastic
Reading
Inventory (SRI)
scores.
3. Develop groups
of students for
two daily
sessions at 45
minutes each.
4. Monitor and
evaluate weekly
data on student
progress.

1. System 44 Lead
Teachers/
August 2016
2. Literacy
coach/Sept.
2016
3. Literacy coach,
Teachers/Sept.
2016-ongoing
4. Principal,
Literacy coach,
teachers/Weekly

The following paper is a needs assessment summary of the Title I after-school program
conducted in an urban school in Atlantic City, New Jersey. An overview of the program will be
discussed, along with current budget expenditures and revenue for the program. Additionally,
2015. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

budget implications will be addressed, as well as particular resources that will be necessary to
implement particular action steps to support student achievement. Also, an explanation of how
the plan will support permanent enhancements at the school will be discussed. Lastly, strategies
for pupil progress monitoring will be determined.
The Title I after-school program is open to all students from grades K-8 from October to
May. The program begins at 3 p.m. and ends at 4:30 p.m. During this time, teachers incorporate
curriculum standards into their instruction for the students in all subjects. Staff members are
encouraged to utilize project-based learning to enhance the lessons and mastery of the content.
The current budget expenditures and revenue for this year are shown in the table below:

Budgeted Items

Appropriated

Expended To Date

Balance

Teachers Stipend

$31,742

$20,665

$11,077

FICA (Teachers)

$2,428

$1,581

$847

Aides Stipend

$3,638

$1,559

$2,079

FICA (Aides)

$278

$119

$159

Since the budget does not allow for purchasing of supplies and materials, the teachers employed
in the Title I after-school program utilize their own supplies for instructional purposes. Monies
allocated are for staff salaries and benefits only.
Possible budget implications that may occur would involve the current financial crisis,
which may result in the city declaring bankruptcy in the near future. This can have dire
2015. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

consequences related to staffing reductions in force (RIFs) that are relative to both non-tenured
and tenured teachers. This may cause unexpected uses for Title I monies instead of funding the
after-school program. Also, student enrollment can be a concern as well. Keeping attendance
rates up is of the utmost importance; if the numbers dwindle this can cause the program to fail.
The main goal of the after-school program is to increase academic achievement for all
students. In this regard, an identified school-wide need is for the students to improve on their
reading comprehension skills. The desired outcome is for students in grades 3-8 to increase their
reading score by 10% on the state assessment (PARCC). Within the after-school program setting,
a strategy for this reading improvement will be to utilize the computer-based, adaptive remedial
reading software known as System 44 to target specific skills in need of improvement. This
affords an additional number of at-risk students to partake in the program, since the
recommended class size is no more than twelve students per group. No additional expenditures
will occur, as this program already exists during the regular school day. Resources that would be
needed to implement the program would only include staff training, which can be satisfied by
System 44 lead teachers, at no additional cost to the school. The supplemental materials can be
shared amongst the staff as well.
With this intervention in mind, a plan of action must be implemented to increase reading
comprehension for students. Initially, faculty training will be provided in August 2016, by the
System 44 lead teachers, and ongoing professional development throughout the year will
continue as well to ensure program mastery. Upon entering school in September 2016, the
students will take the Scholastic Reading Inventory (SRI) district-mandated assessment. A list of
eligible students for System 44 will be supplied to the teachers based on the SRI results by the
building literacy coach and evaluated with the building principal. Teachers, in conjunction with

2015. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

the literacy coach, will develop two student groups for daily lessons for 45 minutes each.
Additionally, weekly student progress reports will be generated and evaluated by the teachers to
allow for the data to drive their instruction based on the students identified needs. Monthly
meetings with the literacy coach and building principal will allow for feedback.
This plan of incorporating the System 44 reading program to increase reading
comprehension will support permanent enhancements at the school. Utilizing this particular
remedial reading software has proven results, and is centered on differentiation and data. The
students are able to learn in a small group setting targeting particular skills that have been
identified each lesson. Since the software is designed to be adaptive, the students progress at
his/her own pace and master skills by providing evidence of success at the conclusion of each
unit with a quiz. Weekly reports allow the teacher the opportunity to produce evidence of skills
taught and identified needs to fine tune instruction.
In order for the administration and teachers to ascertain student achievement and success,
formative and summative evaluations must be in place as evidence. Pupil progress monitoring
will occur first through the district SRI assessments, which are conducted three times per year.
Additionally, students enrolled in the System 44 program will have a weekly progress report for
formative evaluation purposes. As the summative evaluation, the end-of-year System 44 report,
along with the state PARCC assessment, will be utilized. After analyzing student achievement
data, reflection with all stakeholders must occur to determine the programs effectiveness, and if
any necessary revisions should take place.
In conclusion, the System 44 program addition into the Title I after-school program
would enable the reading comprehension needs of the student population to be satisfied. The
ability to incorporate this program would not cost any additional monies, and the only resource

2015. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.

would involve ongoing training by experienced lead teachers for the benefit of all students. In
this manner, data-driven instruction will allow teachers to fine tune their instruction. This
enhancement of instruction will target specific reading comprehension skills that are in need of
improvement, and the end result will be increased academic achievement and success for every
student.

2015. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.