Massachusetts School and District Profiles

Francis M Leahy Elementary

Districts
Schools

2016

2016 Accountability Data - Francis M Leahy

Organization Information

District:

Lawrence (01490000)

School type:

Elementary School

School:

Francis M Leahy (01490040)

Grades served:

K,01,02,03,04,05

Region:

Commissioner's Districts

Title I status:

Title I School (SW)

Accountability and Assistance Level:

Level 1

Summary > 2016

2016 English Language Arts Proficiency Gap Narrowing About the Data
	0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100	Baseline CPI	2015 CPI	2016 CPI	CPI Change	2016 Target	6 Year Goal	CPI Percentile in School Type	N	PPI Points	Rating
All students		73.8	67.1	70.3	3.2	84.7	86.9	9	203	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		73.2	64.7	67.9	3.2	84.4	86.6	18	179	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		65.8	65.8	68.8	3.0	68.7	82.9	20	144	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		65.2	55.9	62.9	7.0	79.7	82.6	25	101	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		47.1	-	47.7	6.3	69.1	73.6	10	32	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		73.0	66.7	70.1	3.4	84.3	86.5	39	198	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-

Summary > 2016

2016 Mathematics Proficiency Gap Narrowing About the Data
	0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100	Baseline CPI	2015 CPI	2016 CPI	CPI Change	2016 Target	6 Year Goal	CPI Percentile in School Type	N	PPI Points	Rating
All students		70.7	76.0	80.3	4.3	82.9	85.4	28	203	50	Improved Below Target
High needs		70.1	74.5	78.6	4.1	82.6	85.1	62	179	50	Improved Below Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		74.7	74.7	78.8	4.1	76.8	87.4	61	144	100	Above Target
EL and Former EL		65.5	67.9	77.0	9.1	79.9	82.8	59	101	50	Improved Below Target
Students w/ disabilities		45.3	-	62.5	3.9	68.1	72.7	43	32	50	Improved Below Target
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	2	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		69.9	75.9	80.4	4.5	82.4	85.0	75	198	50	Improved Below Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	3	-	-

Summary > 2016

2016 Science Proficiency Gap Narrowing About the Data
	0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100	Baseline CPI	2015 CPI	2016 CPI	CPI Change	2016 Target	6 Year Goal	CPI Percentile in School Type	N	PPI Points	Rating
All students		67.6	75.3	55.2	-20.1	81.1	83.8	8	86	0	Declined
High needs		67.1	74.7	52.8	-21.9	80.8	83.6	15	72	0	Declined
Econ. Disadvantaged		74.6	74.6	53.0	-21.6	76.7	87.3	24	59	0	Declined
EL and Former EL		56.0	59.6	47.0	-12.6	74.3	78.0	28	42	0	Declined
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	12	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		65.7	75.3	55.6	-19.7	80.0	82.9	38	85	0	Declined
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	-	-	-	-	1	-	-

Summary > 2016

2016 English Language Arts Extra Credit About the Data
	Extra credit for increasing % Advanced (10% or more)				Extra credit for decreasing % Warning/Failing (10% or more)
	2015 % Advanced	2016 % Advanced	N	PPI Points	2015 % Warning/Failing	2016 % Warning/Failing	N	PPI Points
All students	5.2	1.5	203	0	22.2	20.2	203	0
High needs	4.9	1.1	179	0	24.8	22.9	179	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	5.0	1.4	144	0	23.3	20.1	144	25
EL and Former EL	1.0	0.0	101	0	31.6	28.7	101	0
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	0.0	32	0	48.6	37.5	32	25
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Hispanic/Latino	5.5	1.5	198	0	22.3	20.2	198	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-

Summary > 2016

2016 Mathematics Extra Credit About the Data
	Extra credit for increasing % Advanced (10% or more)				Extra credit for decreasing % Warning/Failing (10% or more)
	2015 % Advanced	2016 % Advanced	N	PPI Points	2015 % Warning/Failing	2016 % Warning/Failing	N	PPI Points
All students	17.5	20.2	203	25	12.7	10.8	203	25
High needs	16.6	20.1	179	25	13.2	11.7	179	25
Econ. Disadvantaged	17.3	20.8	144	25	14.0	10.4	144	25
EL and Former EL	11.2	13.9	101	25	18.4	11.9	101	25
Students w/ disabilities	0.0	9.4	32	25	20.0	31.3	32	0
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	2	-	-	-	2	-
Hispanic/Latino	17.8	20.2	198	25	12.8	10.6	198	25
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	3	-	-	-	3	-

Summary > 2016

2016 Science Extra Credit About the Data
	Extra credit for increasing % Advanced (10% or more)				Extra credit for decreasing % Warning/Failing (10% or more)
	2015 % Advanced	2016 % Advanced	N	PPI Points	2015 % Warning/Failing	2016 % Warning/Failing	N	PPI Points
All students	15.7	1.2	86	0	9.6	30.2	86	0
High needs	15.1	0.0	72	0	11.0	31.9	72	0
Econ. Disadvantaged	13.6	0.0	59	0	10.6	30.5	59	0
EL and Former EL	3.8	0.0	42	0	30.8	38.1	42	0
Students w/ disabilities	-	-	12	-	-	-	12	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	14.1	1.2	85	0	10.3	29.4	85	0
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	-	-	1	-	-	-	1	-

Summary > 2016

2016 English Language Arts Growth About the Data
	0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100	2015 SGP	2016 SGP	SGP Change	6 Year Goal	Met Safe Harbor?	N	PPI Points	Rating
All students		58.0	48.0	-10.0	51.0	Yes	129	75	On Target
High needs		59.0	50.0	-9.0	51.0	Yes	112	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		58.5	50.0	-8.5	51.0	Yes	91	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		62.0	50.5	-11.5	51.0	Yes	64	75	On Target
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	51.0	-	22	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		60.0	48.0	-12.0	51.0	Yes	127	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	51.0	-	2	-	-

Summary > 2016

2016 Mathematics Growth About the Data
	0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100	2015 SGP	2016 SGP	SGP Change	6 Year Goal	Met Safe Harbor?	N	PPI Points	Rating
All students		48.0	46.0	-2.0	51.0	Yes	129	75	On Target
High needs		48.0	47.0	-1.0	51.0	Yes	112	75	On Target
Econ. Disadvantaged		49.0	47.0	-2.0	51.0	Yes	91	75	On Target
EL and Former EL		48.0	53.5	5.5	51.0	Yes	64	75	On Target
Students w/ disabilities		-	-	-	51.0	-	22	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Asian		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino		48.0	46.0	-2.0	51.0	Yes	127	75	On Target
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.		-	-	-	51.0	-	-	-	-
White		-	-	-	51.0	-	2	-	-

Summary > 2016

2016 Extra credit for English language proficiency growth About the Data
	2016 SGPA	2016 Target	SGPA N Included	PPI Points
All students	73.0	60.0	131.00	25
High needs	73.0	60.0	131.00	25
EL and Former EL	73.0	60.0	131.00	25

Summary > 2016

2016 Assessment Participation About the Data
	English Language Arts				Mathematics				Science
	Enrolled	Assessed	%	Met Target (95%)	Enrolled	Assessed	%	Met Target (95%)	Enrolled	Assessed	%	Met Target (95%)
All students	245	245	100	Yes	249	248	100	Yes	97	97	100	Yes
High needs	217	217	100	Yes	221	221	100	Yes	83	83	100	Yes
Econ. Disadvantaged	169	169	100	Yes	170	170	100	Yes	65	65	100	Yes
EL and Former EL	128	128	100	Yes	132	132	100	Yes	49	49	100	Yes
Students w/ disabilities	37	37	100	Yes	38	38	100	Yes	14	-	-	-
Amer. Ind. or Alaska Nat.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Asian	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Afr. Amer./Black	3	-	-	-	3	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Hispanic/Latino	235	235	100	Yes	239	238	100	Yes	95	95	100	Yes
Multi-race, Non-Hisp./Lat.	1	-	-	-	1	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
Nat. Haw. or Pacif. Isl.	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-	-
White	6	-	-	-	6	-	-	-	2	-	-	-

NOTE: In 2016, assessment participation was calculated two ways: First, the 2016 participation rate for each subgroup in each subject area test was calculated. If the actual 2016 participation rate was lower than 95 percent for any group in any subject, that rate was compared to the average of the most recent two years of assessment participation data for that group and subject. The higher of the two resulting rates was factored into the assignment of the school or district's 2016 accountability and assistance level.