Schools will exit comprehensive and targeted support status in three-year cycles.


Schools can also be granted a fourth year if they are making considerable progress – but it is unclear what constitutes “considerable progress.”


Schools in targeted support status can exit their improvement status in two years if the specific group of students is no longer in the bottom 5 percent overall. Since these schools are compared with each other, it is entirely possible that an identified school could exit an identified status less because of its improvements and more because another school underperformed.


D.C. does not provide a clear picture of the school-improvement continuum for schools.


The plan also does not articulate clear consequences or interventions for schools that remain in the comprehensive support category for longer than six years. D.C. does not provide a clear framework for how schools must identify key issues in student performance, why a strategy or approach will work, and what kinds of support or resources will be required. Unhelpfully, the plan explicitly states that school closure would not be a state-initiated option, even after many years of underperformance.




Nevada puts in place rigorous exit criteria that make it difficult for a school to exit comprehensive or targeted improvement status without demonstrating significant improvement over time.



Choose a state to see their plans for exiting improvement status: