Educators face a dilemma of staying up-to-date with evidence-based practices while dealing with superficial ideas. Continuous improvement methods can help in testing new ideas but if seen as add-ons, they may not yield sustained improvement. This brief describes the CORE Districts’ five-driver model that deepens educators’ ownership and sustains improvement over time.

The CORE districts studied characteristics, outcomes, and transitions of students with disabilities (SWDs). Specific learning disability was the most common type. Males, African Americans, English learners, and foster youth were overrepresented. Chronic absence was higher for SWDs with multiple disabilities. Most SWDs entered special education in K-4 and exited in grades 8-12. These results help identify who may need targeted support.

Effective data use is crucial for continuous improvement, but there is confusion about how it differs from data use for other purposes. This report explains what data are most useful for continuous improvement and presents a case study of how the CORE data collaborative uses a multiple-measures approach to support decision-making.

The shift towards multiple-measure dashboard accountability has potential for promoting more meaningful learning, but also comes with challenges. Lessons learned from research on CORE Districts show that a shift to flexibility and capacity building efforts has challenges. Oakland Unified School District's approach suggests that districts have agency to modify mindsets by modeling inquiry, openness, and flexibility, giving stakeholders space and authority to manage accountability and improvement.

California's Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) aims to improve educational equity by providing additional funds to districts with disadvantaged students. Districts are required to engage with their communities and develop Local Control Accountability Plans (LCAPs) to identify priorities and allocate funds. However, there are concerns about the quality of LCAPs, lack of stakeholder involvement, and limited transparency. To improve the effectiveness of LCFF, districts must ensure meaningful stakeholder engagement and use data to guide decision-making.

California and the US are undergoing a cultural shift in school accountability policies towards locally-determined measures of school performance. Lessons can be learned from the CORE districts, which developed an innovative accountability system, emphasizing support over sanctions, and utilizing multiple measures of school quality. The CORE districts' measurement system and collaboration hold promise for improving local systems, but efforts to build capacity remain a work in progress.

ESSA allows states to design accountability systems and measures to meet new college and career readiness goals. With the lack of adequate measures, states will need to develop new measures and structures. The CORE Districts in CA, with its innovative accountability system and waivers from No Child Left Behind, is a model for other states. Reports from CORE-PACE highlight the impact of decisions such as subgroup sizes and test score growth on identifying low-performing schools. States can use the district waiver provision to help develop and refine their accountability systems under ESSA.

This report examines the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) and how schools can be identified for support and improvement using a multiple measures framework. The authors find that different academic indicators measure different aspects of school performance and suggest that states should be allowed to use multiple measures instead of a summative rating. They also find that non-academic indicators are not given enough weight and suggest a clarification in federal policy.