Child assessment
Three checkpoints a year across six areas of development, aggregated by age band and reported against the framework's central domains. Completion is shown before any outcome, because an aggregate is only defensible if its denominator is.
Can this data be aggregated?
Share of the children enrolled at each checkpoint whose teacher finalized it. An unfinalized checkpoint is not a low score; it is a missing record, and it silently shrinks the denominator of every figure downstream.
The aggregation basis
Children missing any of the three checkpoints are excluded from growth analysis but kept in single-point status reporting. Mixing the two inflates apparent growth, and it is the most common error in aggregation.
Share meeting or exceeding expectations
Spring against the published comparison
Above and below are read at 2 percentage points; anything closer is at the comparison. The comparison comes from the assessment publisher's national norming sample, which may not represent a Head Start-eligible population, so it is a reference point rather than a target.
Share meeting or exceeding expectations
Reported separately from the older band throughout. A single figure across both bands moves with the mix of ages in the program rather than with what children learned.
Spring against the published comparison
Spring results across three program years
The two earlier years are the figures as reported at the time; this year is computed from the current records. A program that keeps its own history can show a reviewer a trend rather than a snapshot, which is what turns a single low result into either a one-year dip or a pattern.
Developmental screening by domain
On schedule means developing as expected, monitor means closer attention is warranted, refer means specialist follow-up is recommended. Results describe the children screened; they are not benchmarked against an external comparison group. Where a child was screened more than once, the most recent result is used.
Social-emotional screening across three years
Screening volume rose from 404 to 304 across the three years. A rising monitor rate against rising volume may mean screening is reaching more children who benefit from follow-up rather than that outcomes declined, and the two readings need different responses.
Program average, fall against spring
Scores run from 1 to 7. Thresholds are 6.00 for Emotional Support and Classroom Organization and 2.50 for Instructional Support. The average of the two windows is what a renewal determination reads.
Classroom Organization by classroom
Colour marks the band against the 6.00 threshold. Centre and coaching cycles are on hover.
Classroom Organization is the most variable domain across classrooms and the one that most often needs targeted coaching. Instructional Support is the hardest to move and responds best to content-focused professional development.
Widely held expectations percentages are the share of children scored at meeting or exceeding in each area at each checkpoint, over the children with a finalized checkpoint at all three points. Growth is spring minus fall in percentage points. Comparison figures come from the assessment publisher's technical manual and adjust to each child's age. Screening results describe the children screened only. Observation scores come from certified observers and are not self-reported.