Accessibility Tools
80% of our schools grow at least one performance band on their state report cards after one year.
Empowering school leaders nationwide — Join the movement today!
Unlock instructional excellence with expert coaching —Book a session now!
80% of our schools grow at least one performance band on their state report cards after one year.
Empowering school leaders nationwide — Join the movement today!
Unlock instructional excellence with expert coaching —Book a session now!
80% of our schools grow at least one performance band on their state report cards after one year.
Empowering school leaders nationwide — Join the movement today!
Unlock instructional excellence with expert coaching —Book a session now!
80% of our schools grow at least one performance band on their state report cards after one year.
Empowering school leaders nationwide — Join the movement today!
Unlock instructional excellence with expert coaching —Book a session now!
The Impact Team provided intensive professional learning in literacy for ILT members on pedagogical practices, unit planning, and weekly formative assessments. 2024-25 CMAS Results showed:
Over two years of working with eight schools in a school district in Colorado
| Impact Team District Cohort Schools | Interim 1 On Track Results ELA | 2023/2024 CMAS ELA | Plus/Minus On Track |
|---|---|---|---|
| School #1 | 49% | 32% | +17 |
| School #2 | 32% | 13% | +19 |
| School #3 | 41% | 19% | +22 |
| School #4 | 38% | 11% | +27 |
| School #5 | 67% | 60% | +7 |
| District Control Group Schools | Interim 1 On Track Results ELA | 2023/2024 CMAS ELA | Plus/Minus On Track |
|---|---|---|---|
| School #1 | 82% | 75% | +7 |
| School #2 | 80% | 75% | +4 |
| School #3 | 71% | 58% | +13 |
| School #4 | 75% | 82% | +7 |
| School #5 | 67% | 60% | +17 |
Below are selected examples of transformational engagements with schools and districts within and beyond Colorado.
Context: The Impact Team partnered with a Network within an urban school district. The network included a range of high-, average-, and low-performing schools. In close coordination with the principal supervisor, The Impact Team provided targeted, on-site support to six of the lowest-performing schools, while delivering instructional leadership professional learning to leadership teams across the entire Collaborative.
The six focal schools served high percentages of multilingual learners and students eligible for free and reduced lunch. Our work centered on strengthening instructional infrastructures; developing leadership capacity, establishing disciplined data cycles, and building coherent systems to accelerate student growth and stabilize performance trajectories.
Action: The Impact Team partnered with district and school leaders to build the instructional infrastructure necessary for sustained improvement. Working alongside principals and their Instructional Leadership Teams (ILTs), we strengthened leadership systems, embedded aligned coaching cycles, and developed teacher leaders’ capacity to use data routinely to inform planning and instruction.
Implementation was supported through clear benchmarks, defined monitoring structures, and consistent progress checks tied to student growth indicators. Principals received ongoing coaching and monthly professional learning focused on data analysis, strategic prioritization, and short-cycle action planning. This ensured that instructional adjustments were measurable, implementation fidelity was monitored, and leadership teams could track leading indicators of progress aligned to SPF outcomes.
Impact: The first chart below illustrates the results of the five schools that worked closely with The Impact Team, as described above. Their growth can be compared with the second chart, showing schools within the same network that did not receive onsite support but WERE part of our monthly professional learning support from The Impact Team.
| Impact Team District Cohort Schools | 2023/2024 CMAS ELA | District Interim Data On Track Results ELA | Progress Toward CMAS ELA Goals (plus/minus) |
|---|---|---|---|
| School #1 | 32% | 49% | +17 |
| School #2 | 13% | 32% | +19 |
| School #3 | 19% | 41% | +22 |
| School #4 | 11% | 38% | +27 |
| School #5 | 60% | 67% | +7 |
| Non-Cohort Schools (These schools participated in monthly professional learning with The Impact Team, but did not receive on-site coaching support) | 2023/2024 CMAS ELA | District Interim Data On Track Results ELA | Progress Toward CMAS ELA Goals plus/minus |
|---|---|---|---|
| School #1 | 75% | 82% | +7 |
| School #2 | 75% | 80% | +4 |
| School #3 | 58% | 71% | +13 |
| School #4 | 82% | 75% | +7 |
| School #5 | 60% | 67% | +7 |
Decrease % of students scoring Below Basic by 15% from Beginning of Year to Middle of Year
assessment and total reduction of 25% by End of Year
Two Middle Schools
After One Year With The Impact Team
Five Elementary Schools
After Two Years With The Impact Team
| School | 2022/23 SPF Rating (Before The Impact Team) |
2023/24 SPF Rating (After one year with the Impact Team) |
|---|---|---|
| Middle School 1 | Priority Improvement | Improvement |
| Middle School 2 | Priority Improvement | Improvement |
| School | 2022/23 SPF Rating | 2024/25 SPF Rating |
|---|---|---|
| Elementary School 1 | Improvement | Improvement |
| Elementary School 2 | Priority Improvement | Performance |
| Elementary School 3 | Improvement | Improvement |
| Elementary School 4 | Turnaround | Improvement |
| Elementary School 5 | Improvement | Performance |