DC Promise Neighborhood Initiative: Needs ... - Urban Institute

More documents

Recommendations

Info

DC Promise Neighborhoods Initiative: Needs Assessment and Segmentation AnalysisSummary of FindingsThe following summarizes the findings in the needs assessment for the DC Promise NeighborhoodInitiative during the planning year (fall 2010 through summer 2011). The findings are listed in order ofthe full needs assessment: the overall summary of the population and socioeconomic demographics ofthe footprint followed by the 10 goals required by the Department of Education for the PromiseNeighborhood planning grant. The segmentation analysis for each finding is provided as well.Summary of the socioeconomic demographics of the neighborhoods in DCPNI1. Approximately 5,700 people live in the DCPNI footprint as of 2010 Census, and almost one-thirdof the population is children under age 18 (much higher than the citywide average of 17percent).Segmentation analysis: A slightly larger number of young children live in the southern tract 96.02 (Mayfair,Paradise), which is not surprising given the many multifamily units in the Mayfair andParadise neighborhoods.2. Approximately half of the residents living in the DCPNI neighborhoods are poor. However, fourof the neighborhoods have particularly high rates of poverty, income subsidies such as TANF andSNAP, and live in subsidized housing.Segmentation analysis: The four neighborhoods include Kenilworth Courts, Kenilworth-Parkside ResidentManagement Corporation, Mayfair, and Paradise.3. The vast majority (90 percent) of households with children in the DCPNI neighborhoods aresingle female-headed households. The targeted neighborhoods, especially in the northerncensus tract of 96.01, also have some of the highest shares of teenage births, although Mayfairand Paradise have experienced above average shares of teenage births in the past as well.Segmentation analysis: Kenilworth Courts and Kenilworth-Parkside Resident Management Corporation4. The four schools located in the targeted communities partnering with the DC PromiseNeighborhood Initiative also have high-need populations. Virtually all of the students enrolled inthe schools qualify for free and reduced lunch and virtually all are minority students.Segmentation analysis: No segmentation analysis: target all schools in footprint.5. School-aged children living in the DCPNI neighborhoods attend many other schools beyond theirneighborhood schools. In SY2008–09, public school students in the footprint attended 149schools in total. Approximately half of the elementary school students living in the footprintattended Neval Thomas or Kenilworth Elementary Schools, 29 percent of the middle schoolstudents from the footprint attended Chavez Middle School–Parkside, and 15 percent attendedChavez High School–Parkside. While this number is extremely high, it is not unusual due to theextreme school choice (public charters and open enrollment policies in traditional DCPS schools)in Washington, DC.6
DC Promise Neighborhoods Initiative: Needs Assessment and Segmentation AnalysisSegmentation analysis: No segmentation analysis: target all families with children in footprint.Ready for Kindergarten6. Roughly half of the 0–4-year-olds are enrolled in early learning programs. There is a greatersupply of programs for older children ages 2 through 4 and an insufficient supply of programsfor infants and toddlers.Segmentation analysis: Infants and toddlers (those without sufficient programs) 3–4-year-olds (sufficient amount with public PK3 and PK4 plus room to grow)7. All of the existing early care home-based and center-based programs in the footprint have thelowest QSR rating (bronze), indicating a need for higher-quality programs. A citywide studysuggests that PK3 and PK4 classrooms are also lacking in quality.Segmentation analysis: No specific group affected—affects centers throughout the footprint.8. Children enrolled at Kenilworth Elementary and Neval Thomas Elementary have higherdevelopmental delays than their peers citywide. Both sets of students have more problems withliteracy and PK3 and PK4 students from the two schools were screened at twice the nationalrate expected for developmental delays. Students at Neval Thomas Elementary are particularlychallenged due to the high numbers of special education students.Segmentation analysis Special education students at both elementary schools Neval Thomas Elementary appears to have a greater share of special education students,fewer students meeting the expected benchmark on the DIBELs assessment, and a highershare of kindergarten students in need of intensive intervention compared to KenilworthElementary.Students Proficient in Core Subjects9. More than half of students from the two DCPNI elementary schools are not proficient in readingor math on the DCCAS test. More than half of the middle and high school students at ChavezSchools–Parkside are not proficient in reading and approximately half are proficient in math.These shares are even lower than the city’s already low citywide reading scores DCCAS averages.Segmentation analysis: This affects all students although special education students test at lower levels.10. School leaders (e.g., principals, coaches, lead teachers) across the four schools need to exhibitthe key behaviors and competencies necessary to promote and sustain school transformationSegmentation analysis: No specific group affected—this affects all schools.11. Teachers need training in best pedagogical practices for fostering critical thinking, impactingstudent achievement, and improving outcomes for students at each grade level from preschoolto 12th gradeSegmentation analysis:7
Page 1 and 2: DC Promise Neighborhood Initiative:
Page 3 and 4: DC Promise Neighborhoods Initiative
Page 5: DC Promise Neighborhoods Initiative
Page 25 and 26: Share of students with IEPsDC Promi
Page 56 and 57:
DC Promise Neighborhoods Initiative
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Reported crimes per 1,000 peopleRep
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81:
Page 82 and 83:
Page 84 and 85:
Page 86 and 87:
Page 88 and 89:
Page 90 and 91:
Page 92 and 93:
Page 94 and 95:
Page 96 and 97:
Page 98 and 99:
Page 100 and 101:
Page 102 and 103:
Page 104 and 105:
Page 106 and 107:
Page 108 and 109:
Page 110 and 111:
Page 112 and 113:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Page 118 and 119:
Page 120 and 121:
Page 122 and 123:
Page 124 and 125:
Page 126 and 127:
Page 128 and 129:
Page 130 and 131:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153:
Page 154 and 155:
Page 156 and 157:
Page 158 and 159:
Page 160 and 161:
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Page 166 and 167:
Page 168 and 169:
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182:
show all

DC Promise Neighborhood Initiative: Needs ... - Urban Institute

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?