Overview of MCAS Results and Adequate Yearly Progress Determinations 2006 Brockton School Committee...
-
Upload
jeffry-gardner -
Category
Documents
-
view
219 -
download
1
Transcript of Overview of MCAS Results and Adequate Yearly Progress Determinations 2006 Brockton School Committee...
Overview of MCAS ResultsOverview of MCAS Resultsandand
Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress DeterminationsDeterminations
20062006
Overview of MCAS ResultsOverview of MCAS Resultsandand
Adequate Yearly Progress Adequate Yearly Progress DeterminationsDeterminations
20062006
Brockton School CommitteeNovember 21, 2006
Overview of 2006 MCAS results
• Grades and subjects tested • State and district gains since 1998• Other longer-term gains• District and state performance levels• Passing and proficiency rate comparisons• Recent improvements in subgroup
performance
2
3
MCAS Tested Areas 1998-2006
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006MCAS
SubjectGrade
t t t t t t Reading
t Math
t t t t t t t t t ELA
t t t t t t t t t Math
t t t Sci&Tech
t ELA
t Math
t t t t Sci&Tech
t ELA
t t t t t t Math
t t t t t t ELA
t Math
t t t t t ELA
t t t t t t t t t Math
t t t History
t t t t t t t Sci&Tech
t t t t t t t t t ELA
t t t t t t t t t Math
t t t Sci&Tech9 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 16
7
8
10
3
4
5
6
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006MCAS
SubjectGrade
t t t t t t Reading
t Math
t t t t t t t t t ELA
t t t t t t t t t Math
t t t Sci&Tech
t ELA
t Math
t t t t Sci&Tech
t ELA
t t t t t t Math
t t t t t t ELA
t Math
t t t t t ELA
t t t t t t t t t Math
t t t History
t t t t t t t Sci&Tech
t t t t t t t t t ELA
t t t t t t t t t Math
t t t Sci&Tech9 10 10 10 8 10 10 10 16
7
8
10
3
4
5
6
4
* No other MCAS exam has been given annually to the same grades since 1998.
40%85% 34% 77% Grade 4 Math
40%71% 31% 58% Grade 8 Math
67%88% 24% 48% Grade 10 Math
69%93% 38% 72% Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 MCAS*
* No other MCAS exam has been given annually to the same grades since 1998.
40%85% 34% 77% Grade 4 Math
40%71% 31% 58% Grade 8 Math
67%88% 24% 48% Grade 10 Math
69%93% 38% 72% Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 MCAS*
27%78% 17% 61% Grade 4 Math
17%44% 14% 31% Grade 8 Math
49%77%7%24% Grade 10 Math
66%91%22%56%Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 BROCKTONMCAS
27%78% 17% 61% Grade 4 Math
17%44% 14% 31% Grade 8 Math
49%77%7%24% Grade 10 Math
66%91%22%56%Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 BROCKTONMCAS
COMPARING MCAS GAINS
STATE BROCKTON
Pass Pass
Grade 10 ELA 21% 35%
Grade 10 Math 40% 53%
Grade 8 Math 13% 13%
Grade 4 Math 8% 17%
Grade 4 ELA 3% 9%
The passing rate on the state's assessment test for first time test takers has risen from less than 50 percent in 1998 to 84 percent in 2006. And the percentage of 10th graders scoring at least Proficient on the English and Math exams has risen from 38 percent in 2001 to 59 percent in 2006.
October 30, 2006 DOE news release announcing Commissioner’s retirement
5
* No other MCAS exam has been given annually to the same grades since 1998.
40%85% 34% 77% Grade 4 Math
40%71% 31% 58% Grade 8 Math
67%88% 24% 48% Grade 10 Math
69%93% 38% 72% Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 MCAS*
* No other MCAS exam has been given annually to the same grades since 1998.
40%85% 34% 77% Grade 4 Math
40%71% 31% 58% Grade 8 Math
67%88% 24% 48% Grade 10 Math
69%93% 38% 72% Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 MCAS*
27%78% 17% 61% Grade 4 Math
17%44% 14% 31% Grade 8 Math
49%77%7%24% Grade 10 Math
66%91%22%56%Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 BROCKTONMCAS
27%78% 17% 61% Grade 4 Math
17%44% 14% 31% Grade 8 Math
49%77%7%24% Grade 10 Math
66%91%22%56%Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 BROCKTONMCAS
COMPARING MCAS GAINS
STATE BROCKTON
Adv/Prof Adv/Prof
Grade 10 ELA 31% 44%
Grade 10 Math 43% 42%
Grade 8 Math 9% 3%
Grade 4 Math 6% 10%
Grade 4 ELA 30% 24%
The passing rate on the state's assessment test for first time test takers has risen from less than 50 percent in 1998 to 84 percent in 2006. And the percentage of 10th graders scoring at least Proficient on the English and Math exams has risen from 38 percent in 2001 to 59 percent in 2006.
October 30, 2006 DOE news release announcing Commissioner’s retirement
6
* No other MCAS exam has been given annually to the same grades since 1998.
40%85% 34% 77% Grade 4 Math
40%71% 31% 58% Grade 8 Math
67%88% 24% 48% Grade 10 Math
69%93% 38% 72% Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 MCAS*
* No other MCAS exam has been given annually to the same grades since 1998.
40%85% 34% 77% Grade 4 Math
40%71% 31% 58% Grade 8 Math
67%88% 24% 48% Grade 10 Math
69%93% 38% 72% Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 MCAS*
27%78% 17% 61% Grade 4 Math
17%44% 14% 31% Grade 8 Math
49%77%7%24% Grade 10 Math
66%91%22%56%Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 BROCKTONMCAS
27%78% 17% 61% Grade 4 Math
17%44% 14% 31% Grade 8 Math
49%77%7%24% Grade 10 Math
66%91%22%56%Grade 10 ELA
Proficientor Advanced
Passing Proficientor Advanced
Passing
20061998 BROCKTONMCAS
COMPARING MCAS GAINS
STATE BROCKTON
Pass Adv/Prof Pass Adv/Prof
Grade 10 ELA 21% 31% 35% 44%
Grade 10 Math 40% 43% 53% 42%
Grade 8 Math 13% 9% 13% 3%
Grade 4 Math 8% 6% 17% 10%
Grade 4 ELA 3% 30% 9% 24%
The passing rate on the state's assessment test for first time test takers has risen from less than 50 percent in 1998 to 84 percent in 2006. And the percentage of 10th graders scoring at least Proficient on the English and Math exams has risen from 38 percent in 2001 to 59 percent in 2006.
October 30, 2006 DOE news release announcing Commissioner’s retirement
44
42
16
3
9
6
24
10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Gr 10 ELA (1998-06)
Gr 10 Math (1998-06)
Gr 8 ELA (1998-01, 2006)
Gr 8 Math (1998-06)
Gr 7 ELA (2001-06)
Gr 6 Math (2002-06)
Gr 4 ELA (1998-06)
Gr 4 Math (1998-06)
DISTRICT ADVANCED/PROFICIENT CPIGAIN BY GRADE LEVEL OVER TIME
7
8
BPS MA BPS MA BPS MA BPS MA
Reading 8 18 34 40 46 34 11 8 1,105
Math* 2 4 41 48 36 32 22 16 1,106
ELA 3 8 27 42 50 39 20 12 1,216
Math 9 15 18 25 51 45 22 15 1,220
ELA* 5 15 36 44 44 31 15 9 1,165
Math* 9 17 21 26 37 34 32 23 1,164
Sc&Tec 4 17 21 33 50 39 25 11 1,165
ELA* 4 10 45 54 41 28 10 8 1,207
Math 9 17 26 29 32 29 33 25 1,207
ELA 4 10 36 55 40 26 21 9 1,305
Math* 3 12 15 28 35 33 47 28 1,292
ELA* 2 12 47 62 33 19 18 7 1,354
Math 3 12 14 28 28 31 56 29 1,342
Sc&Tec 0 4 8 28 38 43 54 25 1,347
ELA 20 16 46 53 25 24 9 7 1,035
Math 25 40 24 27 28 21 23 12 1,035
Data Last Updated on October 18, 2006
10
8
MCAS TESTS OF SPRING 2006PERCENT AT EACH PERFORMANCE LEVEL
4
5
6
7
Grade
3
TestedAdvanced
SubjectProficient
Needs toImprove
WarningFailing
BPS MA BPS MAReading 42 58 89 92
Math 43 52 78 84ELA 30 50 80 88Math 27 40 78 85ELA 41 59 85 91Math 30 43 68 77ELA 49 64 90 92Math 35 46 67 75ELA 40 65 79 91Math 18 40 53 72ELA 49 74 82 93Math 17 40 44 71ELA 66 69 91 93Math 49 67 77 88
3
4
10
5
6
7
8
Grade SubjectAdv/Prof Passing
MCAS 2006 DISTRICT AND STATE RESULTS
9
%
BPS MA differ. BPS MAReading 42 58 -16 89 92
Math 43 52 -9 78 84ELA 30 50 -20 80 88Math 27 40 -13 78 85ELA 41 59 -18 85 91Math 30 43 -13 68 77ELA 49 64 -15 90 92Math 35 46 -11 67 75ELA 40 65 -25 79 91Math 18 40 -22 53 72ELA 49 74 -25 82 93Math 17 40 -23 44 71ELA 66 69 -3 91 93Math 49 67 -18 77 88
Grade SubjectAdv/Prof Passing
3
4
10
5
6
7
8
MCAS 2006 DISTRICT AND STATE RESULTS
10
% %
BPS MA differ. BPS MA differ.Reading 42 58 -16 89 92 -3
Math 43 52 -9 78 84 -6ELA 30 50 -20 80 88 -8Math 27 40 -13 78 85 -7ELA 41 59 -18 85 91 -6Math 30 43 -13 68 77 -9ELA 49 64 -15 90 92 -2Math 35 46 -11 67 75 -8ELA 40 65 -25 79 91 -12Math 18 40 -22 53 72 -19ELA 49 74 -25 82 93 -11Math 17 40 -23 44 71 -27ELA 66 69 -3 91 93 -2Math 49 67 -18 77 88 -11
3
4
10
5
6
7
8
Grade SubjectAdv/Prof Passing
MCAS 2006 DISTRICT AND STATE RESULTS
11
91
82 80
9085
80
88
77
45
53
67 67
78 79
49
40
49
41 42
30
66
49
17 18
3530
27
43
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Gr 10ELA
Gr 8ELA
Gr 7ELA
Gr 6ELA
Gr 5ELA
Gr 4ELA
Gr 3ELA
Gr 10Math
Gr 8Math
Gr 7Math
Gr 6Math
Gr 5Math
Gr 4Math
Gr 3Math
2006 MCAS RATES FOR PASSING AND ADVANCED/PROFICIENT BY GRADE LEVEL
(DARKER BLUE/GOLD BARS = ADVANCED/PROFICIENT)
12
74.5
54.3 56.1
70.3 71.1
82.0 80.8
68.5
87.785.1
64.860.9
83.6
70.666.3
71.3
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Agg LEP SPED Low Inc Black Asian Hisp White
1.3
0.4
4.1
2.2
1.1
1.9
2.9
-0.7
1.3
0.6
0.60.4
-0.2-0.1
0.40.8
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Agg LEP SPED Low Inc Black Asian Hisp White
State & Brockton Cycle IV CPIfor English Language Arts
State & Brockton Cycle IV CPIGains in English Language Arts
13
59.6
44.141.9
54.6 53.7
77.9
68.4
53.7
77.6
81.8
54.6
50.5
72.8
56.3
52.1
51.3
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
Agg LEP SPED Low Inc Black Asian Hisp White
2.7
5.5
4.54.2
3.5
4.9
3.3
4.23.63.3
2.42.2
1.8
3.5 3.6
2.9
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Agg LEP SPED Low Inc Black Asian Hisp White
State & Brockton Cycle IV CPIfor Mathematics
State & Brockton Cycle IV CPIGains in Mathematics
14
Adequate Yearly Progress
• Composite Proficiency Index (CPI)• Grade level CPI - 2006• State and large urban CPI - 2006• District and state CPI over time• AYP calculation and status• Consequences and context statewide• Beyond 2006
15
16
BPS MA BPS MA BPS MA BPS MA
Reading 8 18 34 40 46 34 11 8 1,105 76.6
Math 2 4 41 48 36 32 22 16 1,106 72.4
ELA 3 8 27 42 50 39 20 12 1,216 68.2
Math 9 15 18 25 51 45 22 15 1,220 64.4
ELA 5 15 36 44 44 31 15 9 1,165 74.4
Math 9 17 21 26 37 34 32 23 1,164 62.4
ELA 4 10 45 54 41 28 10 8 1,207 78.9
Math 9 17 26 29 32 29 33 25 1,207 63.2
ELA 4 10 36 55 40 26 21 9 1,305 71.6
Math 3 12 15 28 35 33 47 28 1,292 50.9
ELA 2 12 47 62 33 19 18 7 1,354 74.0
Math 3 12 14 28 28 31 56 29 1,342 46.1
ELA 20 16 46 53 25 24 9 7 1,035 84.0
Math 25 40 24 27 28 21 23 12 1,035 72.0
3
CPITestedAdvanced
SubjectProficient
Needs toImprove
WarningFailing
Last DOE update October 18, 2006
10
8
MCAS Tests of Spring 2006Percent at Each Performance Level with CPI calculations
4
5
6
7
Grade
CPI=Composite Performance Index
TABLE 1 MCAS Scaled Score
Points
200 – 208 Failing/Warning – Low 0
210 – 218 Failing/Warning – High 25
220 – 228 Needs Improvement – Low 50
230 – 238 Needs Improvement – High 75
240 – 280 Proficient/Advanced 100
17
TABLE 2 - Students taking Standard MCAS tests
100 students
Performance LevelTotal
Points
5 Failing – Low 0 0
5 Failing – High 25 125
20 Needs Improvement - Low 50 1000
40 Needs Improvement –
High75 3000
25 Proficient 100 2500
5 Advanced 100 500
Total Points Awarded 7,125
Total # of Students Tested 100
CPI (Total Points divided by Total Students)
IndexPoints
71.3
72
46
51
636264
727472
79
68
7477
8483
79
84 85 85
8887
78
7370 71
67
66
83
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Gr 3R
Gr 5ELA
Gr 7ELA
Gr10
ELA
Gr 3Math
Gr 5Math
Gr 7Math
Gr 10Math
2006 STATE/DISTRICT CPI BY GRADE LEVELBARS = BROCKTON, LINE = STATE CPI
18
83.4
75.274.573.572.469.869.568.868.3
63.9
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
Law
ren
ce
Sp
ring
field
Bo
sto
n
Lo
well
Wo
rceste
r
New
Bed
ford
Fall R
iver
BR
OC
KT
ON
Lyn
n
ST
AT
E2006 ELA CPI FOR LARGE URBAN DISTRICTS
19
73.3
61.859.6
58.258.058.054.454.0
48.447.0
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
Lawrence
Springfield
Lowell
Fall River
New
Bedford
Worcester
Boston
BR
OC
KTO
N
Lynn
STA
TE2006 MATHEMATICS CPI FOR LARGE URBAN DISTRICTS
20
68.0 67.8
73.275.0 74.4 74.7
81.283.2 84.2 83.7 83.4
79.6
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
8.7
11.6
STATE 5-YEAR GAIN = 3.8
BROCKTON 5-YEAR GAIN = 6.7
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
SIX-YEAR DISTRICT AND STATE CPI COMPARISONFOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS
21
51.6 50.6
55.657.1
58.760.6
65.0 65.4
69.471.4 72.4 73.2
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
13.4
12.6
SIX-YEAR DISTRICT AND STATE CPI COMPARISONFOR MATHEMATICS
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
STATE 5-YEAR GAIN = 8.2
BROCKTON 5-YEAR GAIN = 9.0
22
How is AYP calculated?
Requirement A + (Either B or C) + D = AYP
A Participation Rate: 95% or greater in MCAS or MCAS-Alt
B. Performance: 80.5 or greater CPI in ELA 68.7 or greater CPI in math Either
B or C C. Improvement: Meet or exceed Cycle IV Target for district, schools, and student groups
D
Performance or Improvement on Additional Indicators –
1-8: 92% or higher attendance rate, or 1% improvement over 2005
High School: 70% or higher Competency Determination (CD)
(100 – Cycle III CPI) / 5
23
Sample 2006 district AYP history table
Sample District – Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) History 2003 2004 2005 2006
Accountability Status
Aggregate - - - Yes Grades 3-5
All Subgroups - - - No
Aggregate - - - Yes Grades 6-8
All Subgroups - - - No
Aggregate - - - Yes Grades 9-12
All Subgroups - - - Yes
No Status
Aggregate Yes Yes Yes Yes
ELA
All Grades Combined All subgroups Yes Yes No No
Aggregate - - - Yes Grades 3-5
All Subgroups - - - No
Aggregate - - - Yes Grades 6-8
All Subgroups - - - No
Aggregate - - - Yes Grades 9-12
All Subgroups - - - No
Identified for Improvement -
Subgroups
Aggregate Yes Yes Yes Yes
MATH
All Grades Combined All subgroups No Yes No No
24
Old method
2001-2005
Old method
New method
2006-
New method
When schools do not make AYP fortwo consecutive years
Schools that do not make AYP for two consecutive years in either subject for any group are identified for improvement.
– Schools identified for improvement are required to develop a plan for improving student performance.
– Title I schools identified for improvement are also required to offer
school choice in first year of improvement status;
supplemental services in second year, if fail to make AYP after first year.
25
Statewide
382 schools identified for improve-ment
206 in the aggregate
176 for subgroups
Brockton schools identified for improvement
School ELA Mathematics
Arnone Improvement – Aggregate Improvement - Subgroups
Belmont Improvement - Aggregate Improvement - Aggregate
Brookfield Improvement - Aggregate Improvement - Subgroups
Kennedy Improvement - Aggregate Improvement - Aggregate
Franklin Improvement - Aggregate Improvement - Aggregate
Hancock Improvement - Aggregate Improvement - Subgroups
Huntington Improvement - Aggregate Improvement - Aggregate
Angelo Improvement - Aggregate
Raymond Improvement - Subgroups Improvement - Subgroups
Whitman Improvement - Aggregate
Downey Improvement - Aggregate
Plouffe Improvement - Subgroups Improvement - Aggregate
26
Schools in corrective action status
Schools identified for improvement that do not make AYP for two additional years are identified for corrective action.
Districts with schools in corrective action are required to -– Institute new curriculum relevant to school’s
low performance and provide professional development to support its implementation;
– Extend length of school year or school day; – Replace school staff deemed relevant to
school not making adequate progress; – Significantly decrease management
authority at the school; – Restructure internal organization of the
school; or– Appoint one or more outside experts to
advise school in its improvement efforts.
27
Statewide
188 schools in corrective action
49 in the aggregate
139 for subgroups
Brockton schools identified forcorrective action
School ELA Mathematics
East Junior High Subgroups Aggregate
North Junior High Subgroups Aggregate
South Junior High Aggregate Aggregate
West Junior High Aggregate
Russell Alternative Aggregate
Brockton High Subgroups Subgroups
28
Schools in restructuring status
Schools in corrective action that do not make AYP in 2006 are identified for restructuring.
Districts with schools in restructuring status are required -– Reconstitute the school by replacing school staff relevant to the
school’s inability to make adequate progress; – Enter into contract with an entity with a demonstrated record of
effectiveness to operate the school as a public school; – Turn operation of the school over to State educational agency, if the
State agrees; – Re-open the school as a public charter school; or– Implement “any other major restructuring of the school's
governance arrangement that makes fundamental reforms, such as significant changes in the school's staffing and governance, to improve student academic achievement in the school and that has substantial promise of enabling the school to make adequate yearly progress.…”
29
Statewide 59 schools in 20 districts are in restructuring status
Schools identified for restructuring
59 SCHOOLS IDENTIFIED FOR RESTRUCTURINGBoston 13 North Adams 1
Cambridge 1 Randolph 1
Chicopee 1 Southbridge 1
Fall River 6 Springfield 7
Fitchburg 1 Westfield 1
Greenfield 1 Worcester 8
Holbrook 1 Benjamin Banneker Charter 1
Holyoke 5 Lawrence Family Dev Chart 1Lawrence 3 New Leadership HMCS 1Lowell 1 Gill-Montague 1New Bedford 4 59
30
Districts identified for improvement or corrective action
Districts that do not make AYP for two consecutive years in either subject for any group, at all grade-spans, are identified for improvement.
Districts identified for improvement year 2 that do not make AYP in 2006 at all grade-spans are identified for corrective action.
For districts in corrective action, the State has options to – Defer programmatic funds or reduce administrative funds; Institute new curriculum relevant to districts’ low performance and provide
professional development to support its implementation; Replace district personnel relevant to inability of district to make adequate progress; Remove individual schools from the jurisdiction of the district and arrange for their
public governance and supervision; Appoint a receiver or trustee to administer the affairs of the district in place of the
superintendent and school board; or Abolish or restructure the district.
31
Statewide 26 districts are in corrective action (9 aggregate and 17 for subgroups), 104 districts identified for improvement
9 in the Aggregate 17 for Subgroups
Chicopee Amherst
Fall River Boston
Lawrence Brockton
Lowell Everett
Lynn Gloucester
New Bedford Haverhill
Pittsfield Holyoke
Southbridge Leominster
Springfield Malden
Medford
Methuen
Peabody
Plymouth
Salem
Somerville
Westfield
Worcester
Districts in corrective action status
32
Cycle IV status of districts and schools statewide
Of the 234 public school districts, 130 or 56% districts have been negatively identified –
By subject area– ELA(23), Math (55)– ELA and Math (52)
Aggregate - Corrective Action (9)
Subgroups – – Corrective Action (17)
Improvement (104)
Of the 1772 public schools, 629 or 35% have been negatively identified –
• Aggregate (314)– Restructuring (59)– Corrective Action (49)– Improvement (206)
• Subgroups (315)– Corrective Action (139)– Improvement (176)
33
Brockton Public Schools' Performance vs State Targets for ELA and Mathematics
70.7
75.6
80.5
85.4
90.2
95.1
53.0
60.8
68.7
76.5
84.3
92.2
100.0
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Cycle II Cycle III Cycle IV Cycle V Cycle VI Cycle VII Cycle VIII
ELA-targets
Math-targets
34
Brockton Public Schools' Performance vs State Targets for ELA and Mathematics
74.6
95.1
90.2
85.4
80.5
75.6
70.774.1
74.473.2
67.9
100.0
92.2
84.3
76.5
68.7
60.8
53.059.6
58.656.3
55.6
51.1
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
Cycle II Cycle III Cycle IV Cycle V Cycle VI Cycle VII Cycle VIII
ELA-targets
BPS
Math-targets
BPS
Projected path in ELA
Projected path in Math
`
35
ENDEND
36Office of Accountability, Planning and TechnologyOffice of Accountability, Planning and Technology