In alignment with the goals and priorities of Prince George's County Public Schools (PGCPS), the School Performance Plan (SPP) allows for a transparent and collaborative school improvement process with a focus on student achievement.
The School Performance Plan was developed this school year as the continuation of the detailed work and planning completed in the previous school year. The SPP focuses schools on engaging in disciplined inquiry cycles through the use of Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA). Through the successful utilization of PDSA, schools are able to impact student achievement and teacher practice by taking a scientific approach to school improvement.
| SCHOOL PROFILE | ||
| School Name: CORA L RICE ELEMENTARY |
School Year: 2026 Area: Area-1 |
Local Education Agency: Prince Georges County Public Schools Supervisor Name: Dalton, Andrew M. |
| State School No.: 1347 |
Supervisor Email: Andrew.Dalton@pgcps.org |
School Type: 04. Elementary School Title I: Yes |
| Grades Served: 0PK, 05 |
Community School: Yes |
Principal Name: Kia Payne State Identification: CSI:No, TSI/ATSI:Yes |
| Principal Email: Kia.Payne@pgcps.org |
||
| School Address: 950 NALLEY Rd, LANDOVER,MD - , LANDOVER MD 20785 |
||
| School Vision: A culturally responsive school that develops distinguished learners to become critical thinkers and innovative leaders who communicate effectively, advocate for themselves and others, and inspire positive global change. |
||
| School Mission: Cora L. Rice Elementary School cultivates the success of the whole child through a transformative educational experience anchored by excellence in equity. |
||
| SMART Goals | ||
| A targeted aspiration that serves as the focal point for collective improvement efforts Specific; Measurable; Achievable; Realistic; Timebound |
||
| Math- By June 2026, 100% of K–5 math teachers will utilize and analyze assessment data from the curriculum embedded assessments to form small groups and move student achievement towards 80% proficiency. | RELA/ELA-By June 2026, all K–5 reading teachers will deliver daily small-group instruction driven by progress-monitoring data, with the goal that at least 80% of students in intervention meet their growth targets. | Not Selected- |
| Problem of Practice | ||
| One problem the school has chosen to address that will assist them in moving toward the overarching Smart Goal | ||
| K-5 math educators are not utilizing or analyzing the curriculum embedded assessment data to form small groups or progress monitor. As a result, educators are missing the opportunity to target instruction and move student achievement towards 80% proficiency. | K–5 teachers are not delivering consistent small-group reading instruction that is explicitly driven by progress-monitoring data. Groups are not always formed by specific skill deficits (phonological awareness, phonics/decoding, fluency, vocabulary, comprehension), progress-monitoring is inconsistent, and regrouping does not reliably occur on a two- week cadence. As a result, too few intervention students are meeting growth targets. |
|
| Change Idea | ||
| A specific, actionable idea or technique that school teams will use to address the SMART Goal | ||
| Cora L.Rice ES will utilize a common interim math assessment schedule aligned to the CFPG calendar with a 5-day turnaround: assess, score/enter data, analyze in PLC, form/update small groups, re-teach/extend, and progress monitor. | Install a schoolwide data group, teach, check, regroup cycle: weekly progress-monitoring for intervention students, bi-weekly regrouping based on those data, and protected daily small-group minutes in every classroom schedule. | |
| Target | ||
| The AIM set to determine if the implementation of the change idea was successful | ||
| By January 2026: 60% fidelity to all three steps. By June 2026: 100% fidelity to all three steps above, every CIM window. |
By January 2026: 70% fidelity to all three indicators across all grade levels. By April 2026: 85% fidelity to all three indicators across all grade levels. By June 2026: 100% fidelity to all three indicators across all grade levels. |
|
| By January 2026: 65% of students meet the next-cycle learning target or growth target. By April 2026: 80% of students meet the next-cycle learning target or growth target. By June 2026: 100% of students will mee the next-cycle learning target or growth target |
By January 2026: 65% of students will meet bi-weekly growth targets and are on-track for annual growth. By April 2026: 80% of students will meet bi-weekly growth targets and are on-track for annual growth. By June 2026: 100% of intervention students meet or exceed their growth targets. |
|
| Targeted Support and Improvement (TSI) / Additional Targeted Support and Improvement (ATSI) | ||
| This section is for state-identified schools only. | ||
| Identified Group(s) | Evidence-Based Strategy (EBS) | EBS Target |
| Black or African American:Economically Disadvantaged:Hispanic or Latino of any race:Multilingual Learners:Students with Disabilities | **READING** 1. Structured Literacy: explicit, systematic instruction in phonological awareness and phonics in small groups (K–3), with cumulative review and decoding practice. 2. Teach comprehension strategies explicitly (e.g., monitoring, questioning, summarizing, graphic organizers) with guided practice on grade-level text. 3. Fluency building with repeated/assisted reading and feedback for students below benchmark. 4. Universal screening and frequent progress monitoring to trigger targeted intervention (RTI/MTSS) and regrouping. **MATH** 1. Math tutoring (during the school day; daily 1:1–1:4; tightly aligned to CFPG). 2. Explicit, systematic instruction with worked examples and visual representations (e.g., number lines, strip diagrams), plus cumulative practice. 3. Universal screening and frequent progress monitoring to trigger targeted intervention (RTI/MTSS) and regrouping. |
**READING** 1\. Structured Literacy · Daily small-group decoding routine delivered 4–5 days/week, 20–25 minutes; lesson components visible (phoneme work ¿ decoding ¿ cumulative review). · Walkthrough rating at or above "Proficient" in 90% of visits by January 2026; 100% by June 2026. · K–1: 80% of intervention students meet/exceed growth goals on PSF/NWF by June 2026 (=65% by January 2026). · Grade 2–3: 80% meet/exceed growth on NWF/ORF accuracy and decoding checks; weekly decodable checks at =90% accuracy by June 2026. · DIBELS PM (PSF, NWF, ORF), decoding checklists, fidelity look-for tool, and small-group plans. 2\. Explicit Comprehension Strategy Instruction · Explicit taught strategies at least 3 times/week in small groups · 80% of plans and PLC artifacts include the targeted strategy and text implemented by January 2026; 100% by June 2026. · 80% of intervention students score =80% on bi-weekly comprehension assessments tied to the taught strategy by June 2026 (=65% by January 2026). 3\. Fluency Building · Below-benchmark readers receive 2–3 fluency sessions/week; teacher feedback to students documented. · 80% PM completion for identified students by January 2026; 100% by June 2026. · 80% of identified students meet or exceed weekly growth expectations in ORF cwpm with =95% accuracy and prosody rubric =3/4 by June 2026. · ORF progress-monitoring graphs, accuracy/prosody rubrics, session logs. 4\. Universal Screening and Frequent Progress Monitoring · 100% completion of fall/winter/spring screening windows; =95% on-time PM entries for intervention students; regrouping documented every 2 weeks. · 80% of intervention students demonstrate positive response to intervention (on-track ROI/growth slope) by June 2026; decrease students "well below benchmark" by =25% from fall to spring. · Screening exports, PM dashboard (time-stamped), PLC regrouping artifacts, placement/exit records. **MATH** 1\. Math Tutoring · Tutoring delivered 4–5 sessions/week; attendance =85%; lessons aligned to current priority standards; data entered within 48 hours. · 80% of tutored students meet or exceed growth targets on CIM/priority-standard probes by June 2026 (= 65% by January 2026). · Tutored cohort reduces "below proficiency" rate by =20 percentage points from baseline to June 2026. · Tutoring rosters/attendance, session plans, weekly probes/exit tickets, CIM subscores, live dashboard. 2\. Explicit, Systematic Instruction · I-Do/We-Do/You-Do structure evident in 90% of observed small-group lessons; worked examples and visual models (number lines, strip diagrams) present in artifacts and walkthroughs. · 80% of targeted students score =80% on representation/word-problem exit tickets tied to the taught model by June 2026 (=65% by January 2026). · Misconception/error type frequency on priority standards decreases by =50% between consecutive CIMs. · Lesson plans, walkthrough rubric, exit tickets by standard, item-analysis error codes across CIMs. 3\. Universal Screening and Frequent Progress Monitoring · 100% on-time administration of screeners/CIMs; weekly mastery checks for small groups; data submitted within 48 hours; regrouping logged every 2 weeks. · 80% of intervention students meet growth targets on priority standards by June 2026; schoolwide proportion "below benchmark" drops by =25% from fall to spring. · Screener/CIM exports, mastery-check tracker, PLC regrouping logs, dashboard submission timestamps. |
