23-24 LEAD Guidebook.v5.030624

LEAD Guidebook v5
2023-2024
Leader Effectiveness and Development System (LEAD)
52
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 6 March 2024 (v5)

This page left intentionally blank.
Table of Contents
Principal Effectiveness Overview 3

Results Matter 3
Support 4
Support - Results Diagram 5
LEAD Definitions 6
Effectiveness Areas 7
Leader Effectiveness and Development System 9
Effectiveness Components 9
Student Achievement 10
Special Education Performance 14
Quality of Instruction 16
School Action Plan 18
Congruence Metric 20
Effectiveness Level 21
Target Distribution 22
Compensation 24
Additional Information 26
Contacts 26
Appendices 27
Appendix A: Student Achievement Metrics 27
Appendix B: **Early Childhood Campuses 31
Appendix C: **Multi-Level Grade Band Campuses 32
Appendix D: Emergent Bilingual Metrics 35
Appendix E: ***Transitional Campuses 36
Appendix F: Day-to-Day Coaching Rubric 37
Appendix G: Compliance Rubric
Appendix H Spot Observation Form Sample 39
Appendix I: Action Plan Degree of Difficulty 41
Appendix J: 2024-2025 Executive Leader Rubric 46
Appendix K: 2024-2025 System Assessment Rubric 51
Appendix I: 2024-2025 Sample Culture and Climate Survey
Measuring Principal Effectiveness
Principal Evaluation System
Mike Miles
2
LEAD Guidebook v5
Measuring Principal Effectiveness
Principals are the key to reform. While effective teachers are prerequisite, a competent staff is not
sufficient for a district trying to transform. Without effective principals, any large system will
find it next to impossible to develop capacity and place a high-quality teacher in front of every
child. In order to turn around, a struggling school needs an effective principal to coach teachers,
provide useful instructional feedback, monitor the system for continuous improvement, and build a
culture of excellence.
Being a principal in a district challenged by poverty is one of the most demanding jobs in the
nation. And there may be no more important work for any group of people in society at this time.
The urgency of the work requires a high level of responsibility and accountability for results.
This means that districts should invest heavily in the recruitment of first-rate principals and
develop their capacity to transform schools. The urgency of the work also requires districts to
accurately assess principal effectiveness, emulating those who get results and removing those
who, over time, are deemed ineffective.
The stakes for our students are high

and failure is not an option. Districts
should be serious about this, and
principals should know this going in.
Any district that does not want to
introduce real accountability in the
system (for superintendents, principals,
and teachers) will continue to work
sub-optimally and will be unable to
transform.
As different principals will experience

different levels of success (or failure),
the evaluation of principals should be
similarly differentiated. HISD’s
evaluation system for principals hopes to accurately measure a principal’s effectiveness and
compensate appropriately.
Results matter
Broadly, principals also need to demonstrate leadership and vision, and they must be prepared to
make tough decisions. These attributes will be assessed, using the principal’s evaluation rubric.
Operationally, a school leader’s main purpose is to improve the quality of instruction and raise
student achievement. At the end of the day, it is increased student proficiency that matters most
and encapsulates all of the performance measurements of an effective principal
3
LEAD Guidebook v5
To accurately assess principal effectiveness, we will have to clearly describe what success looks like,
monitoring the system consistently and regularly, coach principals on-the-job and provide the support
principals need to become effective instructional leaders.
HISD’s evaluation of principals will rely on a combination of performance measurements and student
achievement results. This document outlines each metric and the varying levels of success.
Support
A rigorous evaluation system will only take
root (and will only be fair) if there is a great
deal of support for those being
evaluated. Indeed, the difference between a
culture of accountability and a culture of fear
is the support provided for people to attain
rigorous, but achievable goals. If principals
are the key lever for reform, then the entire
system should be designed to support
principals in improving instruction and helping
principals coach and develop their teachers. (See the Support-Results Diagram on page 5.)
Thus, no aspect of the evaluation system for principals will be implemented without significant
efforts to build the skill and capacity of our principals to be successful. Professional
development will include job-embedded coaching that will help make our principals among the
best in the nation.
4
LEAD Guidebook v5
Support Results Diagram

LEAD Guidebook v5
LEAD Definitions
The following definitions will be useful in understanding this document:
• Leader Effectiveness and Development System (LEAD system): the District’s name for the new
evaluation system.
• Metrics: performance measurements or measurable outcomes used to assess principal

effectiveness. There are three types of metrics used in the LEAD plan:
o Performance metrics – those measurable indicators that describe how well a principal
does his/her job. They focus on leadership, developing staff, and improving the quality
of instruction. Forty percent of a principal’s annual evaluation is based on performance
metrics.
o Student achievement metrics – student achievement results related to proficiency
levels, academic growth, and student performance on state and nationally normed
assessments.
o Progress-monitoring metrics – performance measurements that are assessed during the
year and that are aligned with the other metrics. These metrics provide feedback to
principals and help them gauge their progress.
• Annual evaluation rating: the overall assessment of a principal’s effectiveness based on the
principal’s performance and achievement metrics for one year. A principal receives an
evaluation rating annually. It is possible for an annual evaluation rating to be lower than the
overall effectiveness level.
• Overall effectiveness level: the effectiveness level on the LEAD scale to which a principal will
be assigned based on the average of the last two annual evaluation ratings.1 There are six
effectiveness levels:
Progressing I Progressing II Proficient I Proficient II Exemplary I Exemplary II

51 - 57 58 - 65 66 - 73 74 - 81 82 - 89 90 - 100
For HISD’s LEAD plan, the levels denote varying degrees of effectiveness. The goal for
“progressing” principals is to reach proficiency.
• Compensation level: the effectiveness level at which a principal is paid. The compensation
level will usually match the overall effectiveness level. However, if a principal’s effectiveness
level declines, he may be compensated at a higher level since his effectiveness must decline two
years in a row before his compensation is decreased by one level.
• Principal performance rubric: the evaluation instrument that outlines principal performance
standards. The rubric accounts for 10% of a principal’s evaluation rating.2
1
If the principal is in his first year with the District or of this evaluation system, the effectiveness level will be based on just
one annual evaluation rating.
2
LEAD is the evaluation system for Principals and Assistant Principals. Principal references include Assistant Principal.
6
LEAD Guidebook v5
Effectiveness Areas
The purpose of the LEAD system is to improve principal effectiveness in raising student
achievement and improving the quality of instruction. The evaluation system must assess the
principal’s ability to grow and maintain teacher effectiveness which narrows opportunity gaps and
prepare students for a Year 2035 workplace and world. The information derived from the evaluation
system will be used to align professional development, principal compensation, recruitment and
retention.
We will use the following four areas to assess principal effectiveness:
• Student achievement outcomes. We will use data from district, state, or national assessments
such as STAAR, DIBELS, NWEA or district-level assessments.
• Principal performance. Principal performance includes an assessment of the school’s quality

of instruction as assessed by an independent review of the instruction in a school. The
performance score also includes the Principal’s score on the Executive Leadership Rubric
(Appendix H) and on the School Systems Review (Appendix I).
For the 2023-2024 school year, the principal will not be scored on the Executive Leadership Rubric
nor the School Systems Review. Instead, those possible points will be added to Quality of
Instruction and to SPED compliance.
• School climate and culture survey. We will use a district-developed climate and culture
survey that will be administered twice a year.
For the 2023-2024 school year, this metric will be replaced by a special education metric. Ten
percent (10%) of a principal’s evaluation will be tied to improvement in the NWEA MAP
assessment scores of the school’s students with special needs. See details on page 17.
• School action plan. This performance metric is based on the school’s accomplishment of
specific and measurable goals in the School Action Plan.
The remainder of this document addresses the 2023-2024 components and evaluation system.
7
LEAD Guidebook v5
The following graph describes the effectiveness areas for the 2023-2024 school year:
Special
Education
20% Student
Achievement
35%
Action Plan
15%
Quality of
Instruction
30%
The following graph describes the percentage breakdown of the effectiveness areas for the 2023- 2024 SY:
SPED Compliance Rubric MOY Student

10% Achievement
8%
EOY Student
SPED EOY Achievement
Achievement
10%
12%
State
Action Plan Accountability
15% 10%
Quality of
Instruction Closing the Gap
30% 5%
Exceptions:
*Early Childhood Campuses: Refer to Appendix B

**Multi-Level Grade-Band Campuses: Refer to Appendix C
***Transitional Campuses: Refer to Appendix E
8
LEAD Guidebook v5
Lead Effectiveness Components

During the 2023-2024 school year all principals and assistant principals will be evaluated using the
LEAD system. This will ensure campus leadership teams implement processes and strategies aligned to
common goals and metrics, calibrate on high quality instruction, and align coaching conversations to
improve student achievement across the campus. In this guidebook, all references to “principal” will also
be the evaluation for campus assistant principals.
The 2023-2024 School Year, the principal’s annual evaluation rating consists of four components:
• School-Wide Student Achievement (35%)

• Quality of Instruction (30%)
• Special Education (20%)
• School Action Plan (15%)
Each component contains multiple measures of effectiveness. The component measures are
summarized in the table below and are described in more detail in subsequent pages.
Component Measure Possible
Points
Student achievement growth in the first semester in reading, math and
8
science as measured by the NWEA MAP assessments taken in the
MOY
School-Wide Student achievement annual growth as measured by the NWEA MAP 12
Student assessments taken at the EOY
Achievement 10
(35%) The school’s overall state accountability score
The school’s “closing the gap” score as measured by the STAAR 5

exam and calculated by the State
Quality of Composite of the spot observations, day-to-day coaching, and

30
Instruction (30%) general, informal observations of the quality of instruction in a
school
Special Education Achievement as measured by the NWEA 10
Special Education MAP assessment in reading, math and science
(20%)
10
Special Education Compliance as measured by the HISD SPED rubric
School Action Plan

Goals and measurable indicators of success. All teachers will 15
(15%) also receive the same school action plan score as the principal
100
Total Points
9
LEAD Guidebook v5
School-Wide Student Achievement (35%)

The Student Achievement Area comprises of four components:
1. A student achievement growth score will be calculated in the first semester

in the following subject areas: reading, math and science. Student scores
will be measured by comparing the NWEA MAP beginning of year (BOY)
scores to their middle of year (MOY) scores.
2. Student achievement annual growth score will be calculated at the end of
the second semester in reading, math and science. Students will be
measured by comparing the NWEA MAP beginning of year (BOY) score
to the end of the year (EOY) score.
3. The school’s overall state accountability score will be measured from
the results provided by the Texas Education Agency, TEA.
4. The school’s “closing the gap” score will be measured by the STAAR
exam and calculated by the state.
Each of the four components in the student achievement area are indicated in the
graph below:
MOY Student Growth

8% EOY Student
Growth
12%
State
10% Accountability
5%
Closing the
Gap
10
LEAD Guidebook v5
The following table breaks down each of the four identified measures of the Student Achievement score.
More specific metric details and examples can be found in Appendix A.
Student Achievement Objectives

• The MOY measure will be calculated by comparing the MOY and
BOY scores of the NWEA MAP results. 1
• HISD will use the NWEA MAP assessments in reading, math and science
Student Achievement: to determine academic growth.
MOY • 8% of the principal’s evaluation rating is based on the mid- year academic
growth of the school’s students. Elementary schools: 5% is NWEA MAP
Growth and 3% is DIBELS/Lectura
• K-1: DIBELS/Lectura Growth 3%
• 2-8: NWEA MAP growth in Reading, Math and Science 5%
• NES/NES A: K-4 DIBELS & 2-8 NWEA MAP
• High School: STAAR EOC Interim English I, English II, Algebra I
• HISD will use the NWEA MAP assessments in reading, math and science
to determine academic growth.
Student Achievement: • 12% of the principal’s evaluation rating is based on the end- of-year
EOY academic growth of the school’s students.
• 2-8: NWEA MAP growth in Reading, Math and Science
• High School: STAAR EOC Meets Percentage: English I, English
II, Algebra & CCMR
• 10% of a principal’s Student Achievement

• Texas Education Agency calculates an “overall rating” (A through F) and
“overall score” for accountability. TEA uses performance on the state
School’s overall STAAR exams to calculate these scores.
Accountability score • Elementary and Middle schools: Take the higher of the state
accountability overall score or the NWEA percentile growth score.
• High schools: Take the higher of the state accountability overall score or
the TSI percentage growth score.
• 5% of a principal’s Student Achievement

• Texas Education Agency calculates a “closing the gap” score for its
accountability framework. TEA uses performance on the state STAAR
School’s Closing the exams to calculate these scores.
Gap Score • HISD will use the school’s closing the gap score from the TEA for this
component.
1
Comparing a student’s MOY result with their previous EOY results prevent “sandbagging” at the beginning of the year
11
LEAD Guidebook v5
School-Wide Student Achievement Metrics

Examples of MOY and EOY data can be found in Appendix A
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
→ MIDDLE OF YEAR (MOY) STUDENT ACHEIVEMENT OBJECTIVES (8 PTS)
MOY Student achievement objective – DIBELS Elementary School
X = School’s DIBELS data -- % of students in grades K through 1 above or well above typical
growth in the first semester
0 pts. 2 pts. 4 pts. 6 pts. 8 pts.
X < 21 21 ≤ X < 31 31 ≤ X < 46 46 ≤ X < 68 X ≥ 68
MOY Data: NWEA cut points based on current HISD MOY performance data
MOY Student achievement objective –NWEA Elementary School
X = School’s NWEA MOY data -- % of students who scored at least .60 annual growth in the
first half of the year
X < 45 45 ≤ X < 50 50 ≤ X < 56 56 ≤ X < 61 X ≥ 61
MOY Data: DIBELS cut points based on current HISD MOY performance data
→ END OF YEAR (EOY) STUDENT ACHEIVEMENT OBJECTIVES (12 PTS)
EOY Student achievement objective – NWEA Elementary School
X = School’s NWEA EOY data -- % of students in grades 2 through 8 who scored at least 1.40
times second semester expected growth (MOY to EOY).
X < 50 50 ≤ X < 55 55 ≤ X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 X ≥ 70
→ STATE ACCOUNTABILITY (10 PTS)

Take the higher of the state accountability score or the NWEA percentile growth score.
School-wide state accountability objective - Elementary School
X = School’s academic growth score (from State Accountability Metrics)
X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 70 ≤ X < 80 80 ≤ X < 90 X ≥ 90
School-wide achievement objective - NWEA Percentile growth-Elementary school

X = NWEA percentile average annual growth for reading and math for grades 2 through 8
X<3 3 ≤X<4 4 ≤X<5 5 ≤X<6 X≥6
→ CLOSE THE GAP (5 PTS)
Closing the gap score - Elementary School
X = Closing the gap score from the State accountability rating system
1 pt. 2 pts. 3 pts. 4 pts. 5 pts.
X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 70 ≤ X < 80 80 ≤ X < 90 X ≥ 90
12
LEAD Guidebook v5
MIDDLE SCHOOL

MOY Student achievement objective – NWEA Middle School
X < 45 45 ≤ X < 50 50 ≤ X < 56 56 ≤ X < 61 X ≥ 61

EOY Student achievement objective –NWEA Middle School
X < 50 50 ≤ X < 55 55 ≤ X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 X ≥ 70

Take the higher of the state accountability score or the NWEA percentile growth score.
School-wide state accountability objective - Middle School
X = School’s academic growth score (from State Accountability Metrics)
X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 70 ≤ X < 80 80 ≤ X < 90 X ≥ 90
School-wide achievement objective - NWEA Percentile growth-Middle School

X = NWEA percentile average annual growth for reading and math for grades 3 through 8
X<3 3 ≤X<4 4 ≤X<5 5 ≤X<6 X≥6

Closing the gap score - Middle School
X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 70 ≤ X < 80 80 ≤ X < 90 X ≥ 90
13
LEAD Guidebook v5
HIGH SCHOOL

MOY Student achievement objective – STAAR EOC Interim High School
X = School’s % of students predicted to be Meets Grade Level on STAAR EOC Interim assessments
for English I, English II, and Algebra I compared with % of students performing at Meets Grade Level
on 2023 STAAR EOC
X < -2 -2 ≤ X < 4 4 ≤ X < 16 16 ≤ X < 20 X ≥ 20
MOY Data: STAAR INTERIM EOC cut points based on current HISD MOY performance data
EOY Student achievement objective – STAAR EOC High School
X = School’s % of students predicted to be Meets Grade Level on the STAAR EOC assessments for
English I, English II, and Algebra I compared with % of students performing at Meets Grade Level on
2023 STAAR EOC
X<2 2≤X<3 3 ≤X<4 4 ≤X<5 X≥5
EOY Student achievement objective – CCMR High School

X = percent increase of students with CCMR points as compared to August 2023
X<2 2≤X<3 3 ≤X<4 4 ≤X<5 X≥5

For high school take the higher of the state accountability score or the TSI percentage growth score.
School-wide state accountability objective - High School
X = School academic growth score (from State Accountability Metrics)
X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 70 ≤ X < 80 80 ≤ X < 90 X ≥ 90
Growth in TSI percentage - High School

X = Growth in TSI percentage growth
X<2 2 ≤X<3 3 ≤X<4 4 ≤X<5 X≥5

Closing the gap score – High School
X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 70 ≤ X < 80 80 ≤ X < 90 X ≥ 90
14
LEAD Guidebook v5
Quality of Instruction (30%)

The Quality of Instruction area focuses on the following:
1. The quality of instruction is one of the most important factors in raising student
achievement and thus for teacher and principal effectiveness.
2. This metric measures a composite of the spot observations, day-to-day
coaching, and general informal observations of the quality of instruction in
a school.
The metrics for the Quality of Instruction component is indicated in the graph below:
IRT SPOT
Observations
75%
30% Day-to-Day
Coaching
25%
The total points out of 30 is calculated as follows:
Total Quality of Instruction Points = 30 (𝐗𝐗 𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏

+ 𝐘𝐘 𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒
)
15
LEAD Guidebook v5
The following is the Quality of Instruction area description:

Principal Performance
• 30% of the principal’s evaluation rating accounts for quality of
instruction.
• A principal will receive up to 100 points for the quality of
instruction (and then that score is converted to the equivalent out
of 30 points).
o Spot Observations – composite of 75 points
 Observations of teacher instruction conducted by
an Independent Review Team (IRT).
 The team will make 3 unannounced visits to the
school and conduct at least 8 spot observations
during each visit (a minimum of 24). [A draft spot
observation form can be found at Appendix H]
o The Executive Director of the feeder pattern will assign up
Quality of Instruction to an additional 25 points to Principals based on the day-to-
day coaching and general, informal observations of the
quality of instruction in a school.
o Assistant Principals will receive an independent score up
to 25 points from the Principal for Quality of Instruction
based on their day-to-day coaching of teachers. All other
measures will be scored the same as the campus principal.
• Inflation Prevention
o Executive Director may only award 40% of the
schools 20 to 25 points out of 25.
o Executive Director may only award an additional 40% of
the schools 14 to 19 points.
o For a truly exceptional feeder pattern, the Executive
Director may seek a waiver of this distribution from the
Division Superintendent.
The team will average all of the team’s spot observations conducted during the year and divide that average
by 15 then multiply by 75 (Score X).
The IRT score out of 75 points is calculated as follows:
(X) = 75(𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂 𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰 𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐 𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑

𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐 𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎𝒎 𝒗𝒗𝒗𝒗𝒗𝒗𝒗𝒗𝒗𝒗
)
Then the Executive Director of the feeder pattern will assign up to an additional 25 points (Score Y) based
on the day-to-day coaching and general, informal observations of the quality of instruction in a school.
The Day-to-Day Coaching score out of 25 points is calculated as follows:

(Y) = Day-to-Day Coaching
16
LEAD Guidebook v5
Special Education (20%)

The Special Education performance area is comprised of two components
(Appendix F):
1. Student achievement annual growth score for students receiving Special

Education services will be calculated at the end of the school year in the
following subject areas: reading, math and science. Students will be measured
by comparing the NWEA MAP beginning of year (BOY) score to the end of
the year (EOY) score.
• Special Education Unit support teams will assist campuses in
determining students who may not be eligible for the NWEA MAP
assessments.
2. The school’s special education compliance score will be measured by the
HISD Special Education Compliance Rubric and evaluated by unit level
special education teams and Executive Directors.
Each of the metrics in the Special Education component are indicated in the graph
below:
EOY Student Growth
Compliance
10% Rubric
10%
17
LEAD Guidebook v5
The following is the Special Education performance area description:
Special Education Performance

• 10% of the principal’s evaluation rating is based on the
end-of-year academic growth of the school’s students with
special needs.
• HISD will use the NWEA MAP assessments in reading,
Special Education math and science to determine academic growth.
Achievement • A growth score is derived by comparing a student’s BOY
results with his/her end-of-year results from the EOY results.
• 10% of the principal’s evaluation rating will be based on

the Special Education Compliance Rubric (Appendix G)
• The rubric will include the following measures:
1. The degree to which ARD meetings are
Special Education accomplished on time
Compliance 2. The quality of the IEPs
3. Quarterly progress monitoring of student IEPs.
4. Observations for Quality Instruction
SPED Compliance and Achievement Metric

A principal will receive up to 10 points for the improvement in academic achievement for their special
needs students.
The score will be tied to NWEA data for elementary and middle school principals.
SPED achievement objective – Elementary and Middle Schools

X = NWEA composite average annual growth for students with special needs in reading,
math and science in grades 3 through 8
X < .8 .8 ≤ X < 1.0 1.0 ≤ X < 1.2 1.2 ≤ X < 1.4 X ≥ 1.4
The score will be tied to STAAR assessments for English I, English II, and Algebra I for high
school principals.
SPED achievement objective – High School

X = growth of STAAR meets percentage for students with special needs as a composite
average for English I, English II, and Algebra I.
X<2 2≤X<3 3 ≤X<4 4 ≤X<5 X≥5
A principal will also receive up to 10 points for SPED compliance indicators. This will be scored
using the rubric at Appendix G.
18
LEAD Guidebook v5
Action Plan (15%)

The School Action Plan area centers on the following (Appendix I):
1. The School Action Plan has aligned goals and measurable indicators of
success developed using the campus needs assessment and conducting a
root cause analysis.
2. All teachers will also receive the same school action plan score as the principal.
This will ensure a system-wide process in which all staff are working toward
the same goals.
3. Success on the Action Plan will be evaluated by the Executive Director
and/or a team from outside of the school.
The metrics for the Action Plan component is indicated in the graph below:
15% Division Superintendents will

oversee the scoring of the
action plans. The Executive
Director of the feeder pattern
will use the following
guidelines to assess each of six
indicators on the Action Plan.
School Action Plan
Indicator Points (up to 15 pts. each)

1
2
3
4
5
6
Start points 10
Subtotal
Degree of difficulty coefficient
Total pts. = coefficient x subtotal
Evaluation score = (Total pts. x 15) ÷ 100
19
LEAD Guidebook v5

Indicator Indicator Indicator
Indicator less between 70% between 80% between 90% Indicator 100%
than 70% and 80% and 90% and 100% accomplished
accomplished accomplished accomplished accomplished
The following is the School Action Plan area description:
School Action Plan

• 15% of a principal’s evaluation rating is aligned to goals and
measurable indicators of success.
• Principals will create a school action plan every year by May 1st.
For the 2023-2024 school year, School Action Plans will be
due September 8.
• All teachers will receive the same school action plan score as the
principal.
• Success on the Action Plan will be evaluated by the Executive
Director and/or a team from outside of the school.
• The Executive Director will assess the degree of
accomplishment of the six most important “indicators of
success” for the school’s Action Plan. These indicators are
specific and measurable metrics.
o The School Action Plan will receive up to 100 points (and
School Action then be converted to 15 points for the evaluation rating).
o Each indicator will receive up to 15 points for
Plan accomplishment/implementation. [Each Action Plan
will start with a score of 10.]
• The Executive Director will also apply a “degree of
difficulty coefficient” to the Action Plan as a whole.
o A rigorous Action Plan (one in which the goals are very
challenging) will have its score multiplied by 1.2
o The average Action Plan will be multiplied by 1.0
o An Action Plan that is not very rigorous will be
multiplied by .8
• Inflation Prevention
o An Executive Director may only award 40% of the
schools a score greater than or equal to 85 out of 100.
o An Executive Director may only award an additional
40% of the schools a score between 70 and 85.
o For a truly exceptional feeder pattern, the Executive
Director may seek a waiver of this distribution by the
Division Superintendent.
20
LEAD Guidebook v5
Congruence Metric
After calculating the evaluation rating for a principal using the component scores (Student
Achievement, Special Education Performance, Quality of Instruction, and School Action Plan), the
congruence value is calculated to determine the principal’s final proficiency level. The congruence
value score is derived by comparing the average teacher evaluation rating in a school with the
school’s student achievement score.
This metric assumes that there is a correlation between teacher effectiveness and student
achievement. This helps ensure that the principal will evaluate teachers accurately and avoid
inflating scores or evaluating too harshly. The congruence value is added to or subtracted from the
principal’s evaluation rating based on how congruent the average effectiveness rating is to
the school’s achievement score.
Average Teacher Evaluation Rating

Unsatisfactory Progressing I Progressing II Proficient I Proficient II Exemplary I Exemplary II
Improvement Developing Proficient Accomplished Distinguished
Needed
10-24 25-50 51-74 75-98 99-122 121-146 147-170
-1 0
2
Unsatisfactory Progressing I Progressing II Proficient I Proficient II Exemplary I Exemplary II
3.5 - 6.6 6.7 - 10.5 10.5 - 15.0 15.1 - 20.2 20.3 - 25.1 25.2 - 30.0 30.1 - 35
School Student Achievement Score
The congruence metric is derived by taking the absolute value of the difference between the
average teacher evaluation rating and the school’s student achievement score (from the principal’s
evaluation). The diagram above shows average teacher evaluation ratings and achievement scores
for three different schools. The absolute values of the three congruence measurements are 1, 0,
and 2. The goal would be to get as close to “0” as possible. The chart below can then be used to
determine the number of points added to or subtracted from the principal’s evaluation rating.
Congruence value
Congruence metric
(amount added or subtracted)
0 +5
1 +2
2 -4
3 -6
4 or higher -8
21
LEAD Guidebook v5
Effectiveness Levels
Principals will receive an evaluation rating every year. The evaluation rating is the sum of the
component scores to include:
• School-Wide Student Achievement (35%)
• Quality of Instruction (30%)
• Special Education (20%)
• School Action Plan (15%)
• Congruence Value (-8 to +5 pts)
• A principal may earn up to 100 points (and an additional bonus of 5 points for congruence)
Progressing I Progressing II Proficient I Proficient II Exemplary I Exemplary II

51 - 57 58 - 65 66 - 73 74 - 81 82 - 89 90 - 100
Principals will remain at their current effectiveness level until they receive two consecutive
evaluation rating scores that average to a higher score moving them into a higher effectiveness
level. Beginning in the 2025-2026 school year, if a principal’s average rating score falls below the
current effectiveness level for two consecutive years, the principal may be moved to the next lower
level3.
Principals who have an evaluation rating and are moved to a school to help the school improve, may
keep the evaluation rating they earned at the previous school for two additional years.
3
Nothing in this document prohibits the District from removing a principal per policy and law, or grants property rights beyond what is
provided for in State law.
22
LEAD Guidebook v5
Target Distribution
As with the teacher evaluation system, LEAD effectiveness levels will be subject to a target
distribution. However, unlike the teacher system, we anticipate most of the principals being
proficient. However, proficiency will not be a given, and principals will have to earn that
designation.
The evaluation system must give very similar chances of success for all principals regardless of
the school that they lead. The system would not be fair if only high school principals could
become distinguished or if principals of small schools could not hope to reach a distinguished
effectiveness level.
Additionally, the evaluation system would not serve the purpose of determining principal
effectiveness or principal development if over time all principals received a distinguished
evaluation rating or if there were little to no differentiation between ratings.
Just as with the teacher evaluation

system, the method of linking cut-
points to a “target distribution” is an The method of linking cut-points to a “target
elegant solution to this problem of distribution” is an elegant solution to this problem of ensuring
ensuring equal rigor across the equal rigor across the system.
system. The first step is to establish
a target distribution of the principal
effectiveness levels.
Our premise is that a high percentage of proficient or distinguished principals should be correlated
to significant improvements in student achievement across the District. While we hope to have more
than 80 percent of the principals at the proficient level or higher someday, current student
achievement data suggest that the percentage of proficient and distinguished principals is lower.
The target distribution below reflects where leaders hope principal proficiency levels will be by the
end of the 2023-2024 school year. A principal would have to earn an Exemplary I effectiveness
level for at least one year before earning an Exemplary II effectiveness level regardless of the
evaluation rating. So, no principal will have an effectiveness level of Exemplary II at the end of the
2023-2024 school year.
23
LEAD Guidebook v5
Principal Target Distribution

40%
22% High School

20%
Middle
10% Elementary
5%
3%
Prog I Prog II Prof I Prof II Exemp. I Exemp. II
Note that the District anticipates 68% of the principals will receive a Proficient I or higher
effectiveness level at the end of the 2023-2024 school year. Also, every category of school principal
– elementary, middle, and high – has the same target distribution. For example, 40% of the
elementary principals will receive an effectiveness level of Proficient I. This is the same percentage
for middle school and high school principals.
After establishing the target distribution, the district will then set the cut-points for each evaluation
component so that the actual distribution of principal scores will approximate the target distribution.
The district may adjust the initial cut-points after each evaluation cycle. Cut- point adjustment is
necessary to ensure the evaluation of principals remains rigorous and fair.
Cut-point adjustment will also ensure that no evaluation component is “too easy” or “too hard”
relative to the other factors of being an effective principal. This process is key to making the entire
evaluation system more fair, accurate, and valid.
While we believe that most principals will grow in their effectiveness over time and that the target
distribution outlined above will accurately reflect principal proficiency within the next couple of
years, it is possible that the current group of principals is not as proficient and, as a result, may
receive a higher percentage of Progressing scores at the end of the 2023-2024 school year.
24
LEAD Guidebook v5
Compensation
The principalship is one of the hardest jobs in all of education. It should be compensated well. At the
same time, we will differentiate principal compensation, paying more for those whose school
demonstrate higher levels of instructional quality and achieve greater student academic growth.
The 2024-2025 Houston ISD Compensation Plan outlines base salary compensation that will begin in
the beginning of the 2024-2025 school year. It will be tied to a principal’s evaluation rating received
at the end of the 2023-2024 school year.
If you have questions about the Compensation Plan, please reach out to the Human Resources
Compensation Department at compensationdept@houstonisd.org.
HISD Compensation manual can be found at: https://www.houstonisd.org/Page/69109
25
LEAD Guidebook v5
Additional Information
• For the 2023-2024 school year Principals and APs will be compensated based on the
salary schedule agreed upon by the previous administration. School leaders new to the
District will be placed on the salary schedule using the same methodology as was used
previously, except for those leading NES schools.
• Principals receiving an Unsatisfactory rating at the end of the 2023-2024 school year will not
have their contract renewed.
• A principal’s effectiveness level will be based on an average of the last two evaluation
ratings. For the 2024-2025 school year, compensation will be tied to the effectiveness level
associated with the one evaluation rating derived during the 2023-2024 school year.
• Not counting the 2023-2024 school year and after two years in a row of less than expected
performance (a lower evaluation rating), or an evaluation rating in one year that would drop
the principal two effectiveness levels, a principal may be moved to the next lower level.
• For the first three years of this evaluation system, novice principals (who have never held a
principalship) and novice assistant principals will be placed at the “Novice” level. After
three years of implementation of this system, novice principals and assistant principals will
be placed at the Progressing II level.
• Experienced principals new to the district will be placed at either the Progressing II level or
the Proficient I level as determined by the Executive Director and Senior Executive Director
of the Unit.
• PreK/Early Childhood Centers will be considered elementary schools.
• K-6 schools will be considered elementary schools.
• K-8 schools will be considered middle schools.
• 6-12 schools will be considered high schools.
• Assistant principals will be rated using the Leader Effectiveness and Development
System (LEAD). Assistant Principals will receive an independent score for Quality of
Instruction based on their day-to-day coaching of teachers. All other measures will be
scored the same as the campus principal.
• Executive Directors of Feeders will appraise Principals.
• Principals will appraise all Assistant Principals.
Contacts
Questions regarding LEAD can be sent to PrincipalEval@houstonisd.org
26
LEAD Guidebook v5
Appendix A: Student Achievement Metrics
HISD Assessment Calendar: https://www.houstonisd.org/Page/2#calendar1/20230826/month
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
MIDDLE OF YEAR (MOY) STUDENT ACHEIVEMENT OBJECTIVES (8 PTS)

MOY Student achievement objective – DIBELS Elementary School
X = School’s DIBELS data -- % of students in grades K through 1 above or well above typical
growth in the first semester
X ≥ 68
X < 21 21 ≤ X < 31 31 ≤ X < 46 46 ≤ X < 68
Metric parameters:
• Composite level above/well above or well above typical growth at MOY
• Data Set: Total number of assessments taken
• Individual-Level Score English: If Composite Level is above or well above typical = 1point
• Individual-Level Score Spanish: If Composite Level is above or well above typical = 1point
NOTE: Only ONE point is given for either Spanish or English Assessment (refer to EB Metrics in Appendix D)
Metric Calculation:
1 The DIBELS/Lectura component score is calculated by first calculating the points earned for each student in
reading for each language (English, Spanish):
2 The Individual score is then rolled-up to the campus level:
Campus-Level Score = Sum of Points Earned = % Students above or well above typical
Sum of Possible Points Earned* growth at MOY
*Possible Points Earned is based on total number of assessments taken
MOY Student achievement objective –NWEA Elementary School

X < 45 45 ≤ X < 50 50 ≤ X < 56 56 ≤ X < 61 X ≥ 61
MOY Data: DIBELS cut points based on current HISD MOY performance data
Metric parameters:
• One point is given for each individual assessment results that are 0.6 above or well above typical growth
at MOY in:
• Math (including Algebra I for 7th and 8th graders not STAAR Interim Algebra I)
• Reading
• Science
• Data Set: Total number of assessments taken*
Individual-Level Score Reading: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.6 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth = 1 point
Individual-Level Score Math: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.6 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth= 1 point
Individual-Level Score Science: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.6 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth= 1 point
27
LEAD Guidebook v5
Metric Calculation:
STEP 1 -First calculate the points earned for each student for each subject assessment (Reading, Math, Science)
STEP 2 - The Individual score is then rolled-up to the campus level:

Sum Possible Points Earned* growth at MOY
*Possible Points Earned is based on total number of assessments taken
END OF YEAR (EOY) STUDENT ACHEIVEMENT OBJECTIVES (12 PTS)

EOY Student achievement objective – NWEA Elementary School
X < 50 50 ≤ X < 55 55 ≤ X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 X ≥ 70
28
LEAD Guidebook v5
MIDDLE SCHOOL

on 2023 STAAR EOC
X < -2 -2 ≤ X < 4 4 ≤ X < 16 16 ≤ X < 20 X ≥ 20
Metric parameters:
• One point is given for each individual assessment results that are 0.6 above or well above typical growth
at MOY in:
• Math (including Algebra I for 7th and 8th graders not STAAR Interim Algebra I)
• Reading
• Science
• Data Set: Total number of assessments taken*
Individual-Level Score Reading: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.6 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth = 1 point
Individual-Level Score Math: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.6 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth= 1 point
Individual-Level Score Science: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.6 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth= 1 point
Metric Calculation:
STEP 1 -First calculate the points earned for each student for each subject assessment (Reading, Math, Science)
STEP 2 - The Individual score is then rolled-up to the campus level:

Sum Possible Points Earned* growth at MOY
* Possible Points Earned is based on total number of assessments taken

EOY Student achievement objective – NWEA Middle School
X < 50 50 ≤ X < 55 55 ≤ X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 X ≥ 70
29
LEAD Guidebook v5
HIGH SCHOOL

on 2023 STAAR EOC
X < -2 -2 ≤ X < 4 4 ≤ X < 16 16 ≤ X < 20 X ≥ 20
Metric parameters:
• % of students who are predicted to be meets on STAAR Interim compared to
• % of students who achieved meets in Spring or Summer 2023 assessment
Data Set: All tests taken

Individual-Level Score English I: If student is predicted Meets grade level = 1 point
Individual-Level Score English II: If student is predicted Meets grade = 1 point
Individual-Level Score Algebra I: If student is predicted Meets grade = 1 point
Metric Calculation:
STEP 1 - % Current: Sum of tests that are predicted to score meet on 2024 Interim STAAR x100
Sum of Total Test taken
STEP 2 - % Past: Sum of tests that were at meets on 2023 Spring or Summer STAAR assessment x100
Sum of Total Test taken
STEP 3 - Campus (%) difference: Current - Past = X% difference

EOY Student achievement objective – STAAR High School
X = % of students predicted to be Meets Grade Level on the STAAR EOC assessments for
English I, English II, and Algebra I compared with % of students performing at Meets Grade Level on
2023 STAAR EOC
X<2 2≤X<3 3 ≤X<4 4 ≤X<5 X≥5
EOY Student achievement objective – CCMR High School

X = percent increase of students with CCMR points as compared to August 2023
X<2 2≤X<3 3 ≤X<4 4 ≤X<5 X≥5
30
LEAD Guidebook v5
Appendix B: Early Childhood Campuses
Early Childhood Centers will be evaluated with the metrics indicated below.
SPED EOY CIRCLE Growth MOY CIRCLE Growth

10% 15%
Special
Education
20% SPED Compliance
Rubric
Student 10% EOY CIRCLE
Achievement Growth
35% 20%
Action Plan
15%
Action Plan
Quality of 15%
Instruction
30%
Quality of Instruction
30%
• Student Achievement (35%): Accounts for 35% of the principal score.

o MOY growth using CIRCLE accounts for 15% of the student achievement
component.
 ECC campuses with Kindergarten or 1st Grade students will receive a data
calculation of both CIRCLE and DIBELS that is proportionate to the
number of assessments taken for each.
o EOY growth using CIRCLE accounts for 20% of the student achievement component
 ECC campuses with Kindergarten or 1st Grade students will receive a data
calculation of both CIRCLE and DIBELS that is proportionate to the
number of assessments taken for each.
• Quality of Instruction (30%): The quality of instruction is one of the most important factors in raising
student achievement and thus for teacher and principal effectiveness. As such, the principal will be
evaluated on the following two components:
o A principal will receive up to 100 points for the quality of instruction (and then that score is
converted to the equivalent out of 30 points).
o Spot Observations – composite of 75 points
 Observations of teacher instruction conducted by an independent review team from the
feeder pattern.
 The team will make 3 unannounced visits to the school and conduct at least 8 spot
observations during each visit (a minimum of 24).
o The Executive Director of the feeder pattern will assign the Principal up to an additional 25
points based on the day-to-day coaching and general, informal observations of the quality of
instruction in a school.
o Assistant Principals will receive an independent score up to 25 points from the school Principal
for Quality of Instruction based on their day-to-day coaching of teachers. All other measures
will be scored the same as the campus principal.
• Special Education (20%): Includes student achievement and compliance
o Compliance Rubric will account for 10% of the Special Education component.
o Students identified with special education needs will be measured on EOY growth from
CIRCLE and will account for 10% of the Special Education component.
• School Action Plan (15%): The School Action Plan has aligned goals and measurable indicators of
31
LEAD Guidebook v5
success. It is worth 15% of a principal’s evaluation rating.
MOY Student achievement (15 pts.) [ECC Campus only with no Kindergarten or 1st]
MOY Student achievement objective- Early Childhood Campus

X = % of students whose total score reached HISD total score in the first semester on CIRCLE
subsets: (Letter Names, Letter Sounds, Counting Sets)
3 pts. 6 pts. 9 pts. 12 pts. 15pts.
X ≥ 88
X < 59 59 ≤ X < 70 70 ≤ X < 82 82 ≤ X < 88
MOY Data: CIRCLE cut points based on current HISD MOY performance data
Metric Parameters:
• Sum of Letter Names ≥ 25
• Letter Sounds ≥ 15
• Counting Sets ≥ 4
• Data population: PreK 4 students
Metric Calculation:
Campus-Level Points: Sum of Points Earned x 100 = % Students above cut points at MOY
Total # of students tested x 3
Note: Denominator multiplier is 3 for campus composite because there are 3 subset tests per student. If a student
did not complete one of the three assessments, they receive a 0 for the missed tests, however, the multiplier is
still 3.
EOY Student achievement (20 pts.) [ECC Campus only]
EOY Student achievement objective – Early Childhood

% of students whose total score reached HISD total score in the first semester on CIRCLE
subsets: (Letter Names, Letter Sounds, Counting Sets)
X < 50 50 ≤ X < 55 55 ≤ X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 X ≥ 70
32
LEAD Guidebook v5
Appendix C: Multi-Level Grade Band campuses
The following campuses listed below span across multi-grade bands. As such the
calculations for these campuses will be based on a portion of the students assessed.
Grades Campuses Assessments Measured Calculation Update
Taught
ECC, K Bellfort ECC Mistral ECC CIRCLE, DIBLES 5% CIRCLE, 3% DIBELS
ECC, K, 1st Fonwood ECC MLK ECC
Halpin ECC Neff ECC
Laurenzo ECC
EE – 8th Arabic Immersion Mandarin Immersion DIBELS, MAP Proportion of assessed for
Baker Montessori Pilgrim Academy each assessment
Briarmeadow Reagan ED CR
Garden Oaks Rice School
Gregory-Lincoln Wharton
6th – 12th Leland YMPCA Sharpstown Intl MAP, STAAR Interim Proportion of assessed for
Long Academy YWCPA each assessment
EE – 12th Community Services Rogers T H DIBELS, MAP STAAR Interim Proportion of assessed for
each assessment
ECC with Kindergarten and/or 1st grade Campuses

Assessments Measured: CIRCLE and DIBELS
Metric Parameters: CIRCLE will account for 9% of the MOY points and DIBELS will account for 6% of the
MOY points.
Metric Calculation:
STEP 1: Calculate the overall score for CIRCLE using the metrics found in Appendix B.
STEP2: Also, calculate the overall score for DIBELS found in Appendix A.
The overall scores will then determine the Point Values (PV) for each metric based on the cut-point scale1.
STEP 3: CIRCLE PV (9) + DIBELS PV (6) = Total Points Earned

15 15
(CIRCLE cut-point scale found in Appendix B; DIBELS cut-point scale found in Appendix A)
EE – 8 Grade (Any combination of K-1 up to 8th grade)

Assessments Measured: DIBELS and NWEA
Metric Parameters: Total point value will be calculated as a proportion of all assessments tested.
Metric Calculation:
STEP 1: Calculate the overall score for DIBELS using the metrics found in Appendix A.
STEP 2: Calculate the overall score for NWEA found in Appendix A.

The overall scores will then determine the Point Values (PV) for each metric based on the cut-point scale2
STEP 3: DIBELS PV (# of DIBELS tests) + NWEA PV (# of NWEA tests) = Total Points Earned
Total tests combined Total tests combined
33
LEAD Guidebook v5
6th – 12th Grade Campuses

Assessments Measured: NWEA and STAAR Interim
Metric Parameters: NWEA and STAAR Interim will be calculated as a proportion of each assessment in
relation to number of tests taken.
Metric Calculation:
STEP 1: Calculate the overall score for NWEA using the metrics found in Appendix A.
STEP 2: Calculate the overall score for STAAR Interim found in Appendix A.
The overall scores will then determine the Point Values (PV) for each metric based on the cut-point scale2.
STEP 2: NWEA PV (# of NWEA tests) + STAAR Interim PV (# of STAAR Interim tests) = Total Points Earned
Total tests combined Total tests combined
K -12th Campuses
Assessments Measured: DIBELS, NWEA, STAAR
Metric Parameters: DIBELS, NWEA, STAAR will be calculated as a proportion of each assessment in relation
to number of tests taken.
Metric Calculation:
STEP 1: Calculate the overall score for DIBELS using the metrics found in Appendix A.
STEP 2: Calculate the overall score for NWEA found in Appendix A.
STEP 3: Calculate the overall score for STAAR Interim found in Appendix A.
The overall scores will then determine the point values for each metric based on the cut-point scale2.
STEP 2: DIBELS PV (# of DIBELS tests) + NWEA PV (# of NWEA tests) + (# of STAAR Interim tests) = Total Points Earned
Total tests combined Total tests combined Total tests combined
34
LEAD Guidebook v5
Appendix D: Transitional Campuses
Identified campuses with no Student Achievement data: EL DAEP, Secondary DAEP, Harper DAEP, On-
Time Grad, Community Services
Defined as campuses who have students temporarily placed but remain assigned to their home campus.
As a result, these campuses do not have student achievement tied to them. As such, the following
adjustments to the principal and assistant principal evaluations will be as follows:
• Quality of Instruction (50%): The quality of instruction is the most heavily weighted single
component because it is the most important factor in raising student achievement and thus for
teacher and principal effectiveness. For students who have a temporary campus assignment, the
quality of instruction is essential to the continued growth of the student’s academic
achievement. As such, the principal will be evaluated on the following two components:
o Quality of Instruction Unannounced Observations will account for 35% of Quality of
Instruction component.
o Day-to-day coaching will account for 15% of Quality of Instruction component.
• Special Education (20%): While a student is at a temporary placement, implementation of

IEPs is required to continue to support the students’ educational needs, as such, the principal
will be evaluated on:
o Compliance Rubric will account for 20% of the Special Education component.
• School Action Plan (30%): The School Action Plan has aligned goals and measurable
indicators of success. It is worth 30% of a principal’s evaluation rating.
Special Education
(20%) Special
Education
20% Unannounced
Observations
35%
Quality of
Action Plan Instruction (50%)
30%
Action Plan
(30%) Day to Day
Coaching
15%
35
LEAD Guidebook v5
Appendix E: Emergent Bilingual Metrics
Outlined below is guidance for EB students who test in two languages.

Provided Guidance for
Grades Assessment Language of BOY Assessment Guidance for MOY/ EOY
for EB Students
Based upon the goal of the English
Language Proficiency standards to grow
K-2 mClass DIBELS/Lectura English and Spanish all emergent bilingual students to
be English language proficient, HISD will
use students’ English results for
appraisal purposes.
Exception Group: K-2 students and/or

Newcomers (0-3 years in US Schools) and
2-8 NWEA MAP Reading English and Spanish beginning composite proficiency on
TELPAS will have adjusted methodology
to account for the time required to become
English language proficient. Exact
calculation of adjusted methodology will
depend on assessment.
EB: MOY
• NWEA MAP Non-Exception – Achievement objective calculated for English test, goal
remains same
• NWEA MAP Exception - Achievement objective calculated for English test only, but goal is
halved (0.3)
• Metric Calculation:
• STEP 1 -First calculate the points earned for each student for each subject assessment
(Reading, Math, Science)
• Individual-Level Score Reading: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.3 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth = 1 point

• Individual-Level Score Math: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.3 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth= 1 point
• Individual-Level Score Science: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.3 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth= 1 point
• NOTE: Only ONE point is given for either Spanish or English Assessment (refer to EB Metrics
in Appendix D)
• STEP 2 - The Individual score is then rolled-up to the campus level:

• Campus-Level Score = Sum of Points Earned = % Students above or well
above typical
• Sum Possible Points Earned* growth at MOY
• *Possible Points Earned is based on participation status for all student groups OR should we
say Possible Points Earned is based on total number of assessments taken
• DIBELS Non-Exception - Achievement objective calculated for English test, goal remains
same
• DIBELS Exception – The rules outlined below will be calculated for students who fall
within the exception.
36
LEAD Guidebook v5
- If "At Benchmark" or "Above Benchmark" in both languages in MOY: 1 point

- If your composite level increases from BOY to MOY in one language, but stays
the same or increases in the other language: 1 point
- If your composite level increases from BOY to MOY in one language, but
decreases in the other language: 0.5 point
- Regression or remaining the same from BOY to MOY in both language: 0
points
Metric Calculation:
The Individual score is then rolled-up to the campus
level:
Sum of Possible Points Earned growth at MOY
*Possible Points Earned is based on participation status for all student groups OR should we say Possible Points
Earned is based on total number of assessments taken
EB: EOY
EOY Student achievement objective – Emergent Bilingual
X = Individual teacher’s NWEA BOY to MOY data – % of students who scored at least .60
annual growth in the first semester (end of the third grading period)
X < 50 50 ≤ X < 55 55 ≤ X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 X ≥ 70
• NWEA MAP Non-Exception – Achievement objective calculated for English test, goal
remains same
• NWEA MAP Exception - Achievement objective calculated for English test only, but goal is
halved (0.3)
• Metric Calculation:
• STEP 1 -First calculate the points earned for each student for each subject assessment
(Reading, Math, Science)
• Individual-Level Score Reading: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.3 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth = 1 point

• Individual-Level Score Math: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.3 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth= 1 point
• Individual-Level Score Science: If FallToWinterObservedGrowth ≥ 0.3 * TypicalFallToSpringGrowth= 1 point
• NOTE: Only ONE point is given for either Spanish or English Assessment (refer to EB Metrics
in Appendix D)
• STEP 2 - The Individual score is then rolled-up to the campus level:

• Campus-Level Score = Sum of Points Earned = % Students above or well
above typical
• Sum Possible Points growth at MOY
Earned*
• *Possible Points Earned is based on participation status for all student groups OR should we
say Possible Points Earned is based on total number of assessments taken
37
LEAD Guidebook v5
EOY Student achievement objective – Emergent Bilingual

X = Individual teacher’s DIBELS/Lectura data – % of students above or well above typical
growth in the year
X < 50 50 ≤ X < 55 55 ≤ X < 60 60 ≤ X < 70 X ≥ 70
• DIBELS Non-Exception - Achievement objective calculated for English test, goal remains
same
• DIBELS Exception – The rules outlined below will be calculated for students who fall
within the exception.
- If "At Benchmark" or "Above Benchmark" in both languages in MOY: 1 point

- If your composite level increases from BOY to MOY in one language, but stays
the same or increases in the other language: 1 point
- If your composite level increases from BOY to MOY in one language, but
decreases in the other language: 0.5 point
- Regression or remaining the same from BOY to MOY in both language: 0
points
Metric Calculation:
The Individual score is then rolled-up to the campus
level: Sum of Points Earned = % Students above or well above typical
Campus-Level Score = Sum of Possible Points Earned growth at MOY
*Possible Points Earned is based on participation status for all student groups OR should we say Possible Points
Earned is based on total number of assessments taken
38
LEAD Guidebook v5
39
LEAD Guidebook v5
Appendix G: SPED Compliance Rubric

A principal will also receive up to 10 points for SPED compliance indicators. This will be scored using the following rubric:
Principal Evaluation SPED Rubric

Unsatisfactory (1 pt.) Basic (2 pts.) Progressing (3 pts.) Proficient (4 pts.) Exemplary (5 pts.)
Admin. Ensures and adheres to
Campus does not have an Admin. ensures the Admin. Ensures the campus the campus ARD calendar and
Campus has an ARD
ARD calendar or does not campus has an ARD has an ARD calendar and meets 100% of all ARD
calendar and meets at least
ARD Timelines meet at least 70% of all calendar and meets at meets at least 90% of all timelines. Admin. is present
70% of all ARD timelines.
and Participation ARD timelines. Admin is least 80% of all ARD ARD timelines. Admin. is during ARDS and provides input
Admin is not aware of the
not aware of the ARDs timelines. Admin. only present and provides useful for student success with a
ARDs and does not attend.
and does not attend. attends some ARDs. input during the ARD. working knowledge of the
student.
Admin. Is not aware if staff Admin. ensures IEPs are Admin. ensures IEPs are written
Staff does not have Staff are provided the
are provided the relevant written effectively. Staff effectively. Staff are provided
relevant portions of the relevant portions of the
portions of the IEP. are provided the relevant the relevant portions of the IEP
IEP for assigned students. IEP. Admin. ensures
Admin. ensures portions of the IEP. Admin. and receive training on the
Quality IEPs Accommodations and accommodations and
accommodations and ensures accommodations portions. Admin. ensures
modifications are not modifications are
modifications are and modifications are accommodations and
documented in Power documented in Power
documented in Power documented in Power modifications are documented
School. School.
School. School. in Power School.
Admin. inconsistently Admin. provides at least Admin. ensures students
provides students with 75% of students with with IEPs receive
Admin does not provide Admin. ensures all students with
Progress IEPs progress reports and IEPs progress reports. progress reports;
students with IEPs IEPs receive progress reports in
Monitoring progress monitoring is not Progress monitoring is however, distribution is
progress reports. alignment with the grading cycle.
in alignment not in alignment with the not in alignment with the
with the grading cycle. grading cycle. grading cycle.
Admin. provides effective Admin. provides effective on-
Admin. does not conduct Admin. conducts spot Admin. conducts
on- the-job feedback to the-job coaching and feedback to
quality spot observations observations on each special quality spot
Observations for SPED teachers. They SPED teachers. They conduct
or does not conduct spot education teacher at least observations on each
Quality conduct quality spot quality spot observations on
observations on each monthly. The spot special education
Instruction observations on each each special education teacher
special education teacher observations are of average teacher at least
special education teacher at at least
at least monthly. quality. monthly.
least monthly. monthly.
= Total points earned
𝑻𝑻𝑻𝑻𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕𝒕 𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷𝑷 𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆𝒆
Special Education Compliance Rubric Metric: = Rubric Score
𝟐𝟐
40
LEAD Guidebook v5
Appendix H: Spot Observation Form
41
LEAD Guidebook v5
42
LEAD Guidebook v5
Appendix I: Action Plan Degree of Difficulty

Action Plan “Degree of Difficulty”
Degree of Difficulty Coefficients are multipliers applied to school Action Plans as defined by the Leader Effectiveness
And Development (LEAD) evaluation system. Success on the Action Plan will be evaluated by the Executive Director
and/or a team from outside of the school based on the degree of accomplishment of the six most important indicators
of success for the school’s Action Plan. These indicators are specific and measurable metrics.
Executive Directors will provide principals with feedback on school Action Plans and will determine if goals were met and
assess the overall rigor of the school Action Plan. This rigor determination is a multiplier for the Action Plan.
Coefficient Mul�pliers
Rigorous: Mul�plied by 1.2
Average: Mul�plied by 1.0
Non-Rigorous: Mul�plied by .8
The guidance below is a non-exhaustive list of considerations. All calculations rely on an appraiser’s professional judgment.
Rigorous plans are mul�plied by 1.2

The Ac�on Plan…
• has challenging goals that push students toward the most complex mastery. Prac�cally, this means that leaders are
striving for significantly above historic growth and se�ng a high bar for mastery (e.g., Meets vs. Approaches).
• is clear, specific, and well-defined, ensuring there is no room for misinterpreta�on.
• is measurable, with well-defined and precise criteria for success.
• is aligned to the needs of the campus’s student popula�on, as per the needs assessment.
• is focused more on student-level change than adult-level change, although both are necessary. Adult-level changes are
directly connected to student outcomes.
• emphasizes parent, community and staff contribu�ons that are connected to student outcomes.
• links and leverages resources to maximize student supports.
• is aligned with HISD’s Mission, Vision and Core Values.
Average plans are mul�plied by 1.0
The Ac�on Plan…
• has achievable goals that push students towards expected growth. Prac�cally, this means that leaders are striving for
slightly above historic growth.
• is mostly clear but could use more specificity in some minor instances.
• is measurable, with some unclear criteria for success in areas.
• is mostly aligned to the needs of the campus’s student popula�on, as per the needs assessment.
• is somewhat focused on student-level change, but mostly adult-level change. Adult-level changes are mostly connected
to student outcomes.
• somewhat emphasizes parent, community and staff contribu�ons to campus that are connected to student success.
• somewhat links and leverages resources to maximize student supports.
• is mostly aligned with HISD’s Mission, Vision and Core Values.
Non-Rigorous goals are mul�plied by 0.8
The Ac�on Plan…
• has goals that do not sufficiently challenge student progress and growth. Prac�cally, this means that leaders are striving
for at or below historic growth.
• is unclear and allows for misinterpreta�on.
• is somewhat measurable, with limited criteria for success that are not well-defined.
• Is adult task and ac�vity-oriented without clear alignment to the needs of the campus’s student popula�on.
• does not emphasize parent, community and staff contribu�ons to campus.
• does not sufficiently link and leverage resources to maximize student supports.
• is not aligned with HISD’s Mission, Vision and Core Values.
43
LEAD Guidebook v5
Example indicators: Note that plans must be reviewed with the needs assessment and historical and current contexts of the
campuses in mind. Evaluating the examples below without context is an imperfect exercise and intended to only provide non-
exhaustive examples.
Rigorous plans are mul�plied by 1.2

Ra�onale: Indicators of Success clearly iden�fies specific measures and outcomes and includes measures that would result
in above average growth (vs. historic growth). The indicators iden�fy community and staff contribu�ons that directly impact
student achievement.
Examples:
1. By May 2024, the percent of students at the Meets level on Reading STAAR will increase from 40% to 60%.
2. By May 2024, 82% of students in grades 3 through 5 will show 1.4 �mes expected annual growth on the
NWEA assessment in reading.
3. By May 2024, 88% of students in grades 3 through 5 will show above expected annual growth on the
NWEA assessment in math.
4. During walkthrough observa�ons, students will have mul�ple opportuni�es to communicate with peers
(MRS) in 85% of classroom observa�ons by January 2024.
5. By May 2024, 95% of lessons will have evidence of providing differen�ated instruc�onal needs for
students, as measured by the walkthrough form and lesson material ar�facts.
6. By May 2024, 90% or more of family stakeholders will agree or strongly that they have been provided with
resources and training to support their students’ learning at home.
Average plans are mul�plied by 1.0

Ra�onale: Indicators of Success mostly align to the campus popula�on and needs assessment. The goals push students
toward slightly above average growth (vs. historic growth).
* Placement of these examples into 0.8, 1.0, or 1.2 depends on needs assessment or current state of teacher capacity.
Examples:
1. By May 2024, 70% of students in grades 3-5 will meet expected growth on NWEA MAP assessment in
reading.
2. By May 2024, the percent of special educa�on students at Meets level on STAAR will increase from 30% to
35%, as compared to growth from 26% to 30% last year.
3. During the 2023-2024 school year, 75% of lessons are aligned to the rigor of state standards, as evidenced
by the Walkthrough App data.*
4. By May of 2024, average student atendance will improve from 93% to 96%.
5. By May 2024, 75% of teachers will score above 10 on daily walkthroughs, as measured by the walkthrough
app.*
6. By May 2024, 90% or more of community stakeholders will express sa�sfac�on on the campus-created
survey indica�ng the school’s efforts to support school-community engagement.
Non-Rigorous goals are mul�plied by 0.8

Ra�onale: Indicators of Success do not challenge student progress (vs. historic growth). Indicators are task oriented and do
not align with the needs of the student popula�on.
Examples:
1. Teachers will implement the math curriculum with fidelity and provide support to struggling students.
2. Teachers will implement the Science of Reading with fidelity and provide materials through professional
development and PLCs.
3. Teachers will effec�vely implement mul�ple response strategies during lessons 85% of the �me.
4. Admin will meet the goal of more than 6 walkthroughs per week at least 80% of the �me.
5. By the end of the year, at least 75% of teachers will be able to cra� a TEKS-aligned exemplar student
response.
6. The campus will meet the special educa�on compliance rubric outcomes by holding ARDs on �me,
monitoring IEP progress, and wri�ng high quality IEPs.
44
LEAD Guidebook v5
Appendix J: 2024-2025 Executive Leadership Rubric
2024-2025 Executive Leadership Rubric
Mike Miles
17 July 2018
45
LEAD Guidebook v5
Reinforces district culture and philosophy

Ineffective Partially Effective Effective Highly Effective
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
The leader takes steps to understand The leader takes steps to understand The leader takes steps to understand The leader takes steps to understand
the District philosophy and culture. the District philosophy and culture. the District philosophy and culture. the District philosophy and culture.
However, the leader displays beliefs The leader attempts to make sense The leader makes sense of District When necessary, he argues
or values that run counter to the of District beliefs and actions for beliefs and actions for staff. He persuasively to change or modify
District’s. The leader does little to staff, however some staff members relies on the District or others to the District philosophy to better
make sense of District beliefs and adhere to the former culture. The assess the level of staff support for align with District goals. The leader
actions for staff. He relies on the leader relies on the District or others and adherence to the beliefs and makes sense of District beliefs and
District or others to assess the level to assess the level of staff support philosophy of the District. With actions for staff. He assesses the
of staff support for and adherence to for and adherence to the beliefs and input from staff, the leader level of staff support for and
the beliefs and philosophy of the philosophy of the District. With establishes Core Beliefs in his adherence to the beliefs and
District. Core Beliefs are not input from staff, the leader creates department that complement or philosophy of the District. With
established or are not emphasized. Core Beliefs in his department that reinforce District philosophy. He input from staff, the leader
Some actions of the staff are complement or reinforce District purposefully and frequently establishes Core Beliefs in his
inconsistent with the District philosophy. These beliefs are not reinforces Core Beliefs in multiple department that complement or
philosophy. reinforced, and they are not ways and in different venues. reinforce District philosophy;
reflected in staff actions. Some Actions of the staff are consistent purposefully and frequently
actions of the staff are inconsistent with the District philosophy. reinforces Core Beliefs in multiple
with the District philosophy. ways and in different venues;
conducts exercises or activities to
expand understanding of them;
shares examples of staff actions that
exemplify the Beliefs; tracks staff
understanding and adherence to
Core Beliefs. Actions of the staff
are consistent with the District
philosophy.
46
LEAD Guidebook v5
Makes effective decisions

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
The leader attempts to make The leader attempts to make The leader makes decisions that are The leader makes decisions that are in
decisions that are in the best interest decisions that are in the best interest in the best interest of the District the best interest of the District and
of the Department. Her decisions, of the Department. Some decisions, and advance district goals. Her advance district goals. Her decisions
however, have a negative impact on however, have a negative impact on decisions effectively solve problems effectively solve problems or positively
impact the work of the department or
the department’s or district’s work. the department’s or district’s work. or positively impact the work of the
District. The leader understands how
The leader does not consider the Sometimes, the leader does not department or District. She decisions impact both her department
impact of her decisions on the rest consider the impact of her decisions understands how decisions impact and the work of others in the
of the organization. She pushes on the rest of the organization. She both her department and the work of organization. She understands the
decisions to other leaders, thereby understands the decision-making others in the organization. She decision-making structure and knows
avoiding accountability or structure and knows which decisions understands the decision-making which decisions are hers to make and
responsibility. The leader avoids are hers to make and which structure and knows which decisions which decisions belong to others. The
making the tough decisions or decisions belong to others. The are hers to make and which leader makes the decisions that are hers
makes decisions that are leader sometimes pushes decisions decisions belong to others. The to make and accepts responsibility for
inconsistent with the District’s to other leaders, thereby avoiding leader makes the decisions that are those decisions. At the same time, she
distributes decision-making authority or
philosophy or beliefs. accountability or responsibility. The hers to make and accepts
arrives at other decisions through
leader sometimes avoids making the responsibility for those decisions. consensus depending on the situation
tough decisions or makes decisions Decisions are made in a timely and leadership capacity of her team (D1
that are inconsistent with the manner. The leader is able to make – D5 decision-making). Decisions are
District’s philosophy or beliefs. the tough decisions to accomplish made in a timely manner. The leader is
the department’s and District’s able to make the tough decisions to
mission. Decisions reinforce the accomplish the department’s and
District’s philosophy and beliefs and District’s mission. Decisions reinforce
demonstrate consistency of word the District’s philosophy and beliefs and
and deed. demonstrate consistency of word and
deed. The leader’s decisions
appropriately balance short term and
long-term benefits and costs.
47
LEAD Guidebook v5
Leads change
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Overall, the leader is tied to the The leader looks for ways to The leader continually looks for The leader is not satisfied with the
status quo and is generally resistant improve the department. He is ways to improve the department. status quo. He challenges the way
to change. When implementing new receptive to new ideas but is slow He is receptive to new ideas and things have always been done,
initiatives or directives from the to implement change. When change. He is a responsible change seeking more effective ways to
District, the leader relies on district implementing new initiatives or agent, building acceptance to accomplish goals and improve the
communications and rationale. The directives from the District, the changes in proper stages. He department. He trains staff on
leader has difficulty making sense of leader relies on district articulates sound rationale for change theory and uses a change
change for the staff. He does not communications and rationale. He change and implements change in model. He explains the rationale for
build a case for change and does not has difficulty implementing change ways that minimize resistance and change and makes sense of changes.
implement change in a way that in a way that minimizes resistance garners support. He trains staff on He effects change in ways that
minimizes resistance and garners and garners support. The leader change theory and uses a change secure staff cooperation and
support. The leader is not tries to be supportive of change but model. Communications are clear advance the goals of the department.
comfortable with ambiguity and is has difficulty making sense of and well-timed, actions are The staff views change and
discouraged by things out of his change for the staff. The leader is transparent. When faced with continuous improvement as
control. not comfortable with ambiguity and partial information, the leader necessary elements of dynamic
is discouraged by things out of his reserves judgment, and helps others organizations. Communications are
control. reserve judgment. The leader is clear and well-timed, actions are
comfortable with ambiguity, is transparent. The leader expands
adaptable, and not discouraged by access to information and provides
things out of his control. opportunity for input and feedback.
He seeks out the voices of the loyal
opposition. When faced with
partial information, he reserves
judgment, and helps others reserve
judgment. The leader is comfortable
with ambiguity, is adaptable, and
not discouraged by things out of his
control.
48
LEAD Guidebook v5
Maximizes human potential

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
The work environment is stressful, The leader creates an environment The leader creates an environment The leader creates an environment
or people work in a climate of fear. in which workers are able to have in which workers are able to exert in which workers are able to exert
Employees feel that they have very some control over work events. influence and have reasonable influence and have reasonable
little control over work events. The However, the leader follows a strict control over work events. He control over work events. He puts
leader follows a strict hierarchy of hierarchy of decision-making and provides clear direction and sets the right people in the right places in
decision-making and establishes establishes very narrow operational parameters, but staff members have the organization. He provides
very narrow operational parameters parameters for staff. The leader wide latitude to accomplish opportunities for growth and sets
for staff. The leader over-relies on over-relies on directives versus operational objectives. He provides expectations to maximize
directives versus collaborative collaborative decision-making. He opportunities for growth and sets effectiveness. Staff members
decision-making. There are few provides some opportunities for expectations to maximize challenge themselves, are not afraid
opportunities for growth. The growth, but only to a smaller subset effectiveness. The leader takes to take risks, and take advantage of
leader creates an “us versus them” of staff members. He demonstrates deliberate actions to motivate the growth opportunities. The leader
mentality among staff members. personal conviction toward the staff and rallies them to reach shared continually motivates the staff to
The leader does not inspire people success of students and employees aspirations. He demonstrates reach higher goals and is able to
to do their best work. of the organization. He celebrates personal conviction toward the secure the staff’s commitment.
successes of the department but success of students and employees Staff members feel supported and
does not inspire people to do their of the organization. He shows challenged and strive to do their best
best work. enthusiasm for what the department work. He models the way and
is doing – he is an advocate. The demonstrates personal conviction
leader recognizes others for good toward the success of the employees
performance and leadership. and the Department. He shows
enthusiasm for what the department
is doing – he is an advocate. The
leader helps people realize their
best.
hopes and moves them away from
their worst fears.
49
LEAD Guidebook v5
Works well as part of a high-functioning team

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
The leader understands the The leader understands the The leader understands the The leader understands the
operational expectations and goals operational expectations and goals operational expectations and goals operational expectations and goals
of the other departments. However, of the other departments. While she of the other departments. She of the other departments. She is a
she is unwilling to see an issue from may appreciate the perspective of attempts to understand the student of systems thinking. She
the perspective of another leader. other leaders, she does not work perspective of the other leaders takes active steps to grow her
She has to be told or persuaded to collaboratively to help the other within the organization. The leader perspective regarding the work of
work collaboratively with other departments. The leader meets with works well with other leaders and the other departments and the
leaders and other departments and other leaders, but rarely authors collaborates to solve inter- District’s systems. The leader
does not volunteer inter- inter-departmental or system-wide departmental or system-wide works well with other leaders and
departmental or system-wide solutions to problems. The leader problems. The leader builds strong, collaborates to solve inter-
solutions to problems. The leader builds relations with other leaders in professional relations with other departmental or system-wide
does not try to build relations with the organization. In team meetings, leaders in the organization. In team problems. She establishes and/or
other leaders in the organization. In the leader is passionate about her meetings, the leader is persuasive, participates in processes to resolve
team meetings, the leader is position, but rarely entertains others’ but dispassionately entertains issues that intersect more than one
passionate about her position, but interests and ideas, and is unwilling others’ interests and ideas, and is department. The leader builds
rarely entertains others’ interests to change her position. The leader willing to change her position if strong, professional relations with
and ideas, and is unwilling to has positive relations with Board doing so will benefit the goals of the other leaders in the organization. In
change her position. The leader has members. However, he is not District. The leader understands the team meetings, the leader is
poor relations with Board members. politically savvy and does not political climate and operates persuasive, but dispassionately
He is not politically savvy and does consider the political climate when effectively in it. He cultivates entertains others’ interests and ideas,
not consider the political climate taking action. positive relations with School Board and is willing to change her position
when taking action. members and external stakeholders. if doing so will benefit the goals of
the District. The leader understands
the political climate and operates
effectively in it. He cultivates
positive relations with and builds
support for the District’s mission
among School Board members and
external stakeholders.
50
LEAD Guidebook v5
Leadership scoring
Executive Leadership Points
Reinforces District culture and philosophy
Makes effective decisions
Leads change
Maximizes human potential
Works as part of a high-functioning team
Subtotal
Partially
Ineffective Effective Highly Effective Exemplary
Effective
0 - 12 13 - 21 22 - 27 28 – 31 32 - 35
Comments:
51
LEAD Guidebook v5
Appendix K: 2024-2025 System Assessment Rubric

System Assessment Rubric – Leadership
Weak Proficient Strong
L M H L M H L M H
The leadership team in the school is identified A “guiding coalition” of teachers and other staff A “guiding coalition” of teachers and other staff
only by title or position – there does not seem to members support school transformation or members support school transformation or
be a coalition of people leading or supporting progress. Leadership skills and campus-specific progress. Leadership skills and campus-specific
transformation or progress. Leadership skills behaviors for leaders have been identified; many behaviors for leaders have been identified; many
and campus-specific behaviors for leaders have of these specific traits and behaviors are included of these specific traits and behaviors are included
been identified; many of these specific traits and in the assistant principal, counselor, instructional in the assistant principal, counselor, instructional
behaviors are included in the assistant principal, coach, and teacher evaluation systems. The coach, and teacher evaluation systems. The
counselor, instructional coach, and teacher principal is purposeful in training and coaching principal is purposeful in training and coaching
evaluation systems. However, assessment of school staff on leadership. At the same time, school staff on leadership. This training is
leadership capacity is done perfunctorily. There poor leadership among people in leadership differentiated based on capacity and position. At
is very little training or coaching on leadership positions is addressed without delay. The the same time, poor leadership among people in
traits or characteristics. The principal provides principal provides opportunities for staff leadership positions is addressed without delay.
few opportunities for staff members to assume members to assume “leadership positions.” He Staff members believe there are ample
leadership positions or is not intentional about encourages staff member initiative and supports opportunities to assume “leadership positions” or
providing opportunities that will help individuals attempts to expand individual leadership to demonstrate leadership. The campus leaders
grow capacity or expand leadership density in capacity or leadership density in the school. The encourage staff member initiative and support
the school. principal allocates resources specifically for the attempts to expand individual leadership
growth of leadership density in the school. capacity or leadership density in the school. At
the same time, the principal is intentional about
finding specific growth opportunities for
budding leaders. The principal allocates
resources specifically for the growth of
leadership density in the school. He collaborates
effectively with District departments, especially
School Leadership, to support broader attempts
to expand leadership density and align resources.
46
LEAD Guidebook v5
System Assessment Rubric – Staff Capacity

L M H L M H L M H
Accurate, rigorous evaluations show that less than Accurate, rigorous evaluations show that between Accurate, rigorous evaluations show that over 75% of
50% of the staff are proficient or exemplary. Staff 50% and 75% of the staff are proficient or exemplary. the staff are proficient or exemplary. Staff members
members struggle to teach the aligned curriculum. Staff members are confident and teach the aligned are confident and teach the aligned curriculum. They
Teachers seem to be tied to old lesson plans, the curriculum. They are given wide latitude on how to are given wide latitude on how to teach. Teachers are
textbook, or pet strategies, and do not use a variety of teach. Teachers are knowledgeable in their specific knowledgeable in their specific content areas and are
materials and strategies to teach. Lessons are content areas and are also students of education, also students of education, expanding their knowledge
relevant, but lack rigor and do not focus on concepts, expanding their knowledge and staying abreast of and staying abreast of changes in the profession.
critical thinking, or analysis. Teachers struggle to changes in the profession. Teachers are not tied to Teachers leverage district-approved resources and
incorporate technology into lessons. Teachers expect any resource or textbook, using a variety of materials supplement or adapt them to meet the individual
students to grow academically and to graduate. and strategies to teach. Lessons are generally needs of students. They challenge and stretch student
Teachers are isolated and rarely collaborate with rigorous, and teachers attempt to focus on concepts, thinking, focusing on concepts, critical thinking, and
colleagues to share best practices and improve their critical thinking, and analysis instead of analysis instead of straightforward facts and
instruction. Teachers avoid getting feedback and straightforward facts and objectives. Lessons are objectives. Lessons are relevant and teachers use
avoid rigorous evaluations. Teachers struggle to use relevant and teachers use strategies to engage all strategies to engage all students. They ensure
data to improve instruction and do not accept students. They incorporate technology into lessons. students have opportunities to demonstrate what they
accountability for student academic growth. Teachers expect students to grow academically and to have learned. To the extent possible, teachers
graduate. Teachers work in professional learning differentiate instruction and personalize learning.
communities and collaborate with colleagues to share They incorporate technology into lessons. Teachers
best practices and improve their instruction. Teachers have high expectations and prepare students for
seek feedback and support fair, accurate, and rigorous college or the workplace. They work in professional
evaluations. Teachers use data to improve instruction learning communities and collaborate with colleagues
and accept accountability for student academic to share best practices and improve their instruction.
growth. Teachers understand the need for change and They continually revise and adapt their teaching to
continuous improvement. Leaders seek teacher input meet contemporary needs. Teachers seek feedback
and participation, and teachers feel some ownership and support fair, accurate, and rigorous evaluations.
over the vision of the school and the success of the They use data to improve instruction and accept
school. accountability for student academic growth.
Teachers embrace change as part of a continuous
improvement model. They take the initiative to solve
problems and think of ways to improve the school.
Leaders seek teacher input and participation, and
teachers feel ownership over the vision and the
success of the school. Teachers also
support and mentor new teachers and take
responsibility for creating a high-performance culture.
47 48
LEAD Guidebook v5
System Assessment Rubric -- Culture

L M H L M H L M H
Leaders may have developed a vision; Leaders have clearly articulated a vision for Teachers and leaders develop a vision for the
however, the staff does not act upon that the school. Teachers generally share that school and act upon that vision. The vision
vision. There is very little congruence vision and can describe what success looks is aligned with that of the district and
between the stated or written priorities and like. There is a focused improvement/action community. There is a focused action plan
what the staff believes the priorities should plan that is aligned with the mission and that with measurable goals that are also
be. Leaders’ plan to meet building goals has measurable goals that are also prioritized. Teachers have input into the
does not address differences in beliefs or prioritized. Leaders are intentional about action plan and take concrete steps to help
priorities among the staff. Teachers, lacking ensuring everyone on the staff understands implement the plan. There is great
direction or agreement on the direction, act the school’s priorities and teachers can name congruence between what the top priorities
in disconnected ways. There is no the top priorities. The plan is followed. The of the school are and what teachers believe
identifiable and positive school culture that school’s culture supports the vision and they should be. The vision, goals, and plan
would support a unified vision. goals. The students in the school and the are revisited regularly and often. When
community members identify the culture of conflicts arise, the priorities are followed.
the building as one with high expectations The behavior of the staff continually
for all students. reinforces the school’s philosophy. Teacher
leaders establish high expectations for staff
and students and ensure new teachers and
others understand and act upon the school’s
philosophy. The students in the school and
the community members identify the culture
of the building as one with high expectations
for all students.
48
LEAD Guidebook v5
System Assessment Rubric -- Processes

L M H L M H L M H
Curriculum, assessment, and instruction are Teachers receive training on key practices Staff development is closely aligned with
not aligned or there is not a process to such as curriculum alignment, use of data, building goals and priorities. There is
tighten the alignment. Staff development is differentiated instruction, time on task, or careful and purposeful integration of the
often ad hoc or bears only a loose direct instruction. There is a process to align processes to define the curriculum, develop
relationship to the building action plan. curricula: teachers have explicit lists of what aligned assessments, and strengthen
Administrators overly rely on the latest students have to know and be able to do, and classroom instruction. There is a process in
program or initiative instead of practices to assessments are closely tied to these learning place to collect evidence of student progress
solve identified weaknesses. Building objectives. There is a process in place to and proficiency. Teachers work
leaders and teachers collect data of student collect data/evidence of student progress and collaboratively and use achievement data to
progress, but the data is not used to improve proficiency. Teachers use achievement data improve instruction. All students have
instruction. Special education is seen as a to improve instruction. All students have access to a rigorous curriculum and
separate program and not all students have access to core proficiencies and a rigorous instruction is differentiated or personalized
access to a rigorous curriculum. There is no curriculum. Teachers and administrators take to meet the needs of both struggling and
process to develop good habits of mind concrete steps to develop good habits of advanced students. Students have
among students. mind among students. Building leaders opportunities to extend time and learning
develop practices to expand parental beyond the school day. Teachers meet
involvement. regularly in professional learning
communities to share best practices, monitor
student progress, and design interventions.
The staff takes concrete steps to develop
good habits of mind among students and
leadership density among the staff. The
school develops practices to engage the
community and expand parental
involvement.
49
LEAD Guidebook v5
System Assessment Rubric -- Implementation

L M H L M H L M H
The quality of instruction is inconsistent and/or The school gets results. The quality of The school gets results. Good quality instruction
poor. The range of instructional strategies is instruction is proficient and improving. is pervasive. Teachers consistently draw on an
narrow, and the strategies are not the most Teachers use a wide range of instructional extensive repertoire of instructional strategies
appropriate or effective. The staff fails to strategies matched to the appropriate level of that challenge all students to think critically. The
implement the school’s action plan. rigor and relevance. The staff effectively carries staff effectively carries out the school’s action
Administrators monitor instruction, but feedback out the school’s action plan. Administrators plan. Key building actions are frequently
is vague, or teachers do not adjust instruction monitor instruction frequently and provide clear checked against the goals for consistency. The
based on feedback. Administrators evaluate feedback on instruction. Teachers act upon the staff holds itself accountable. Administrators
teachers regularly; however, evaluations provide feedback they receive. Teachers are evaluated monitor instruction frequently and provide clear
little useful information to improve classroom regularly, and evaluations are conducted with a feedback on instruction. Teachers welcome
instruction. Poor performing teachers are not rubric that outlines specifically what great observations and feedback. Spot observations
held accountable. Staff development is not tied teaching looks like. Administrators collect data include specific feedback tied to the building
to data about teacher areas for improvement. on teacher performance. These data help plan priorities and staff development goals. Teachers
staff development and strengthen teacher are evaluated regularly, and evaluations are
performance. Teachers adjust instruction based conducted with a rubric that outlines specifically
on new training and data. what great teaching looks like. All teachers
develop a specific improvement plan
collaboratively with the administrators and work
to fulfill the goals of that plan. Administrators
collect data on teacher performance. Poor
performing teachers are remediated. Use and
effectiveness of key practices are measured.
Data on achievement is collected and analyzed
by building leaders. This data helps plan staff
development and strengthen teacher
performance. The building leadership is
intentional about collecting and acting upon
relevant feedback from parents and the
community.
50
LEAD Guidebook v5
Appendix L: 2024-2025 Sample Culture and Climate Survey

HISD Staff Survey -- May 2021
School:
Strongly Strongly Total No. of % Agree and

School’s Beliefs and Priorities Disagree Neutral Agree
Disagree Agree responses Strongly Agree
My actions support the District's Core Beliefs.

The District's Core Beliefs will lead to success.
The key actions my school is working on this year are
focused on what is best for students.
I understand my role in implementing the school's key
actions.
I have the support I need from school leadership to
do my job well.
My school leadership helps me understand recent
changes in the school’s focus.
My school's priorities are very much aligned with what
I think the priorities should be.
Overall, my school is headed in the right direction.
Overall, the District is headed in the right direction.

Positive Culture and Environment Disagree
Disagree Neutral Agree
Agree responses Strongly Agree
I would recommend this school to others to work
here.
I usually look forward to working each day at this
school.
I believe I work in an environment of support and
respect.
Discipline is enforced consistently and effectively at
my school.
Unruly students are not permitted to disrupt the
learning environment.
The school I work in is clean, safe and free of
physical hazards.
I am satisfied with the recognition I receive for doing
a good job.
Morale is generally good at my school.

I believe that our school is doing a good job keeping
staff and students safe during the COVID-19
pandemic.
I believe that my school is doing right by families and
our community be serving our students in-person
during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Culture of Feedback and Support Disagree
My school leadership helps me improve the quality of
my instruction.
The instructional feedback I get helps me improve the
quality of my instruction.
I have sufficient opportunities and encouragement to
develop my leadership potential.
The PD sessions at my school and at the District
level help me improve instruction.
My team experiences with colleagues (e.g., grade-
level teams, PLCs) help me improve instruction.
My school has an effective instructional leadership
team.
51
LEAD Guidebook v5

Quality of Instruction Disagree
The quality of my instruction is good.
We use data to improve instruction in my school.

The LSAE model will help us significantly narrow
achievement gaps.
Student habits of success are improving.
Students are learning how to learn.

I consistently use the "HISD Ready" instructional
practices
What are the top three factors that influence

Top Second Third
your morale? (check only one box for each Total
Factor Factor Factor
column)
Workplace environment and school culture
Feeling appreciated and respected
Student progress and success
Student behavior or discipline
Your relationship with colleagues
Workload, working hours and schedule
Your relationship with your immediate supervisor
The degree to which you feel successful
Salary and money issues
52
This page left intentionally blank.

23-24 LEAD Guidebook.v5.030624

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

23-24 LEAD Guidebook.v5.030624

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

LEAD Guidebook v5

Leader Effectiveness and Development System (LEAD)

HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT 6 March 2024 (v5)

Principal Effectiveness Overview 3

Measuring Principal Effectiveness

The stakes for our students are high

As different principals will experience

Support Results Diagram

• Metrics: performance measurements or measurable outcomes used to assess principal

Progressing I Progressing II Proficient I Proficient II Exemplary I Exemplary II

We will use the following four areas to assess principal effectiveness:

• Principal performance. Principal performance includes an assessment of the school’s quality

SPED Compliance Rubric MOY Student

*Early Childhood Campuses: Refer to Appendix B

Lead Effectiveness Components

• School-Wide Student Achievement (35%)

The school’s “closing the gap” score as measured by the STAAR 5

Quality of Composite of the spot observations, day-to-day coaching, and

School Action Plan

School-Wide Student Achievement (35%)

1. A student achievement growth score will be calculated in the first semester

MOY Student Growth

Student Achievement Objectives

• 10% of a principal’s Student Achievement

• 5% of a principal’s Student Achievement

School-Wide Student Achievement Metrics

→ STATE ACCOUNTABILITY (10 PTS)

School-wide achievement objective - NWEA Percentile growth-Elementary school

→ MIDDLE OF YEAR (MOY) STUDENT ACHEIVEMENT OBJECTIVES (8 PTS)

→ END OF YEAR (EOY) STUDENT ACHEIVEMENT OBJECTIVES (12 PTS)

→ STATE ACCOUNTABILITY (10 PTS)

School-wide achievement objective - NWEA Percentile growth-Middle School

→ CLOSE THE GAP (5 PTS)

→ MIDDLE OF YEAR (MOY) STUDENT ACHEIVEMENT OBJECTIVES (8 PTS)

EOY Student achievement objective – CCMR High School

→ STATE ACCOUNTABILITY (10 PTS)

Growth in TSI percentage - High School

→ CLOSE THE GAP (5 PTS)

Quality of Instruction (30%)

The total points out of 30 is calculated as follows:

Total Quality of Instruction Points = 30 (𝐗𝐗 𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝐒𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏

The following is the Quality of Instruction area description:

The IRT score out of 75 points is calculated as follows:

(X) = 75(𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂 𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰𝑰 𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐𝒐 𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑𝒑

The Day-to-Day Coaching score out of 25 points is calculated as follows:

Special Education (20%)

1. Student achievement annual growth score for students receiving Special

EOY Student Growth

The following is the Special Education performance area description:

Special Education Performance

• 10% of the principal’s evaluation rating will be based on

SPED Compliance and Achievement Metric

SPED achievement objective – Elementary and Middle Schools

SPED achievement objective – High School

Action Plan (15%)

15% Division Superintendents will

School Action Plan

Indicator Points (up to 15 pts. each)

6 pts. 8 pts. 10 pts. 12 pts. 15 pts.

School Action Plan

Average Teacher Evaluation Rating

Unsatisfactory Progressing I Progressing II Proficient I Proficient II Exemplary I Exemplary II

Progressing I Progressing II Proficient I Proficient II Exemplary I Exemplary II

Just as with the teacher evaluation