Transparent by design.

This is an executive reflection tool, not a validated district rating, certification, causal impact measure or financial forecast.

What the questions cover

Eight dimensions, three items each. Respond about current-school-year practices. Not sure is an explicit response, not a low rating.

1. Visibility: We can find one current list of the district’s active partnerships. We can see which schools each partnership serves. We can see what support each active partner has committed to provide.
2. Ownership & governance: Each active partnership has a named district or school owner. Staff know who can approve a new partnership. Partnership owners know when to bring a problem to district leadership.
3. Needs alignment: Schools have a regular way to identify the support they need. We connect new partnerships to a documented school or district priority. We review whether existing partnerships still address current needs.
4. Infrastructure: Partnership records are kept in a shared system that relevant staff can use. Staff follow a clear process for reviewing agreements before partnership work begins. Staff receive reminders when partnership commitments or agreements need review.
5. Partner development: We identify potential partners based on needs we have not yet met. Someone is responsible for following up with prospective partners. We review opportunities to deepen effective existing partnerships.
6. Coverage & equity: We compare partner support across schools against documented need. We seek input from schools receiving little partner support. We take action when high-need schools lack relevant partner support.
7. Measurement & impact: We agree on what success should look like before partnership activities begin. We record evidence of what partnerships deliver. Leaders use partnership results when deciding what to renew, change, or end.
8. Sustainability & scale: Partnership work can continue when a key staff member is absent or changes roles. Staff can find written guidance for their partnership responsibilities. Leadership reviews whether staff have enough capacity to manage partnership work.

Exactly how scores are calculated

Known answers 0, 1, 2, 3 and 4 map to 0, 25, 50, 75 and 100. Not sure is excluded from numeric calculations. Unanswered questions must be resolved before completion.

Each dimension needs at least two known answers. Its score is the mean of known item scores. The overall needs at least 20 known answers and all eight dimensions eligible. It is the equal-weight mean of unrounded dimension scores, rounded once to a whole number.

Response coverage = known responses ÷ 24 × 100. It is not evidence verification or statistical confidence. Below the threshold, the overall stage is “More information needed.”

Interpretive stages

How priorities are selected

Eligible dimensions are ordered from lowest unrounded score upward. If the overall is unavailable, dimensions with fewer than two known answers receive information-gathering actions first. Ties use the fixed dimension order above; the order is not a proven ranking of business value.

Scores below 51 prompt foundation actions; scores from 51 to below 86 prompt consistency improvements; 86 and above prompt verification and maintenance. Leadership should reorder suggested priorities using urgency, consequence and authority.

Limits and version history

Weights, coverage thresholds and stages are transparent design choices. They have not been empirically calibrated. The proposed completion-time target requires executive usability testing. The former six-pillar assessment and these results cannot be directly compared.

Instrument health-check-1.0; scoring equal-dimensions-1.0; recommendations actions-1.0. Historic reports retain their own version. No claim of statistical validation is made.