School Info

School Name Blanche Ely HS (0361) School Grade (2025 - 2026) C
Title 1 School No School Improvement (SI) No
School of Excellence No ESSA School No
RAISE
Reading Achievement Initiative for Scholastic Excellence 		No    
SAC Documentation/SAC Upload Center

School Budget Signature Page

School Budget Signature Page

 

File Name File Uploaded By Upload Date
Budget-Signature-Page-2026-2027.pdfJenny Thelwell6/4/2026

High Quality Instruction

Early Warning Indicators

Using the data below, describe all intervention strategies employed by the school to improve the academic performance of students identified by the early warning system.

Level 1 on ELA and Math Statewide Assessments
Students entering the year at Level 1 based on 2025–2026 statewide ELA and mathematics assessments require an intentional instructional response that accelerates growth while maintaining access to rigorous, grade-level learning. For students in Grades 9–10, the priority is to strengthen core instruction and accelerate movement from their current starting points toward proficiency. For Grades 11–12 who have not met the ELA graduation assessment requirement, the priority includes intentional intervention and targeted support to increase success across multiple testing cycles and pathways to an approved concordant score.

Strategic Approach for Improvement. 
Blanche Ely High School is implementing a differentiated, data-driven system of instructional support for Level 1 students in ELA and mathematics that maintains grade-level rigor while varying the intensity, scaffolding, grouping, and type of support based on demonstrated student need.
For ELA and mathematics core courses, instructional improvement will center on the school's seven high-impact Tier 1 instructional areas, with three primary areas of emphasis:
• Standards-Aligned Rigor: Plan and deliver instruction aligned to grade-level standards, achievement level descriptors, and applicable assessment limits. Scaffolds will provide students access to rigorous learning without reducing the cognitive demand of the standard.
• Teacher-Directed Small-Group Scaffolding: Use flexible, needs-based groups to provide explicit instruction, modeling, guided practice, feedback, and targeted scaffolding connected to grade-level learning.
• Data-Driven Intervention and Acceleration: Use formative assessment and progress-monitoring evidence to identify learning gaps, establish and adjust student groups, provide targeted remediation or acceleration, and determine next instructional steps.
For Grades 11–12 students who have not met the ELA graduation assessment requirement, intentional intervention will provide targeted instructional support designed to increase success across multiple testing cycles and concordant-score opportunities. Student-level evidence will identify priority skill gaps, inform targeted groupings and push-in/small-group instruction, and determine adjustments following each testing cycle to strengthen readiness for subsequent opportunities.

Building Instructional Capacity
In addition to the aforementioned, teachers will strengthen intentional planning and instructional practice through guided collaborative planning, job-embedded professional learning, classroom observation and feedback, and differentiated support based on evidence of teacher practice and student-learning outcomes.  Instructional coaches will use the coaching cycle to connect planning, implementation, evidence of student learning, reflection, and instructional adjustment. Support will be differentiated and may include co-planning, modeling, co-teaching, observation and feedback, and direct small-group push-in support, strengthening teacher capacity while providing timely instructional assistance to students.

Monitoring for Impact
Implementation and impact will be monitored through PM1, PM2, intermittent common formative assessments leading to PM3, classroom evidence, and student-level progress monitoring. In ELA and mathematics, evidence will be used to determine whether Level 1 students are closing identified learning gaps, demonstrating measurable growth, and progressing toward proficiency. For Grades 11–12 students who have not met the ELA graduation requirement, monitoring will additionally include performance across multiple testing cycles, progress toward concordant-score benchmarks, and attainment of the graduation requirement.  Results will drive timely adjustments to instruction, student grouping, intervention intensity, coaching, and direct instructional support throughout the year.
 
COURSE FAILURE ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS AND MATHEMATICS
ELA course failures decreased from 404 in 2024–2025 to 239 in 2025–2026, a 40.8% reduction. Math course failure decreased from 299 in 2024-2025 to 41 in 2025-2026, a reduction of 86%.  Despite this progress, school discovery processes identified opportunities to strengthen the systems supporting successful course completion. Teacher feedback identifies non-completion and non-submission of work as contributing factors, while student feedback identifies concerns with timely grading and feedback. These findings highlight the need to strengthen how student learning is monitored during instruction, ensure graded work provides meaningful evidence of standards mastery, provide timely feedback students can act upon, and activate support before academic concerns result in course failure.

Strategy for Improvement
Implement a proactive ELA course-success system connecting standards-aligned learning evidence, active progress monitoring, timely feedback and grading, student accountability, family communication, and coordinated intervention.
• Instructional Monitoring and Accountability. Teachers will actively monitor student engagement, understanding, completion of essential learning, and evidence of mastery throughout the instructional process. Students not demonstrating expected progress will receive timely conferencing, reteaching, scaffolding, small-group support, and structured opportunities to address unfinished or unmet learning expectations.
• Meaningful Evidence and Timely Feedback. Collaborative planning will strengthen alignment between graded work, standards, and intended learning outcomes so that grades provide meaningful evidence of student learning. Teachers will provide actionable feedback and maintain gradebook entries within established expectations, allowing students, families, and support personnel to respond to current information.
• Early Intervention and Family Communication. Patterns of missing essential work, declining performance, or insufficient evidence of mastery will trigger early intervention and parent/guardian communication. Communication will identify the concern, actions needed for improvement, available supports, and follow-up needed to monitor progress.
• Coordinated Student Support. Counseling, ESE, ELL, instructional support, and administrative teams will provide differentiated assistance based on student need. For students with disabilities and English language learners, monitoring will include implementation of appropriate accommodations, language supports, scaffolds, and required services. Progress monitring will also indicate and move to action the referal of students to the CPS/MTSS process for further discoveries and support interventions as needed. 
• Study Hall as an Academic Support. Scheduled study hall will be intentionally leveraged for students at risk of course failure to receive assistance with essential outstanding work, identified learning gaps, and current core-course expectations. Coordination with core teachers will help prioritize the learning most critical to successful course completion.

Monitoring for Impact
Course-success data will be reviewed throughout each marking period using course grades, gradebook currency, essential missing work, student-learning evidence, attendance, intervention participation, family communication, and response to support. Monitoring will move beyond identifying who is failing to determining why a student is not yet successful, what support has been provided, and whether that support is producing improvement. Findings will drive timely adjustments to instruction, intervention, family communication, study hall assistance, and other student supports.

Early Warning

Assigned Focus 1 - Attendance
Goal: By June 2027, reduce the percentage of students absent 10% or more school days from 38.75% (613 of 1,582 students) to 37.75% or lower.
Interventions: Review FOCUS/Early Warning attendance data routinely; identify students moving into chronic or severe chronic absenteeism; use positive parent outreach, Attendance Success Plans and contracts when appropriate; conduct student/parent conferences; refer students with persistent patterns to CPS/MTSS; assign personalized adult check-ins; connect families to counseling, social work, health, transportation, housing, food, and other supports; and recognize good and improved attendance.
Progress Monitoring: FOCUS attendance reports, Early Warning System data, parent-contact documentation, attendance plans/contracts, CPS/MTSS records, and quarterly chronic-absence reviews.
Assigned Focus 2 - Mathematics Course Failure
Baseline: 41 students failed a mathematics course in 2025-2026. The school will prioritize students demonstrating multiple risk indicators and use a Strategic Focus Group approach for students requiring the most immediate academic support.
Interventions: Conduct PLC-based review of course grades, common assessments, FAST data and classroom evidence; identify prerequisite-skill gaps; provide targeted small-group instruction, tutoring and reteaching; monitor assignment completion and assessment performance; use common formative assessments to adjust instruction; engage families when students are not responding; and refer students requiring additional support to CPS/MTSS for individualized problem solving.
Progress Monitoring: Quarterly grades, common assessments, FAST progress monitoring, intervention logs, tutoring participation, PLC data-review documentation, and EOY course-completion data.
Responsible Staff: Horatio Major, Jr. - Intern Principal/MTSS Administrator; Mathematics Department Leadership and Teachers; Andrea Smith - MTSS Coordinator; School Counselors; School Social Workers; Behavior Specialists; ESE support staff; and CPS/MTSS team members as appropriate.

 

School Report Card

FLDOE: Edudata

Areas of Focus (Formerly Goals, Strategies and Activities)

Area of Focus: Science

Measurable Outcome (SMART Goal) Professional Development Budget Monitoring Results
(End of Year)
By May of 2027, 68% of Biology students, as assessed by the 2027 End of Course Exam, will score a level 3 or higher based on baseline data from last year's EOY accountability science score of 65%. Collabroation with Literacy coach, as well as, district personelle to assist with training and PD needs to support the curriculum implementation. N/A The majority of the monitoring will be done through the monitoring of CFA and BSA data. In addition,

Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies
Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 1 Direct instruction of morphology strategies to assist students withthe acquistion and use of tier 3 vocabulaty words, as opposed to direct instructions of the vocabulary words themselves, as there are an abundance of words. Standards-focused instructional planning and decision-making: Strengthening teacher understanding of the depth of understanding of rigor and intended student outcomes of standards and using the Achievement Level Descriptors, adopted curriculum resources, student work, and formative and summative evidence to make intentional instructional decisions. 2. Guided Collaborative Planning facilitation and instructional leadership: Building the capacity of administrators, the Science department leadership, and teacher leaders to facilitate standards- and evidence-focused collaborative planning, support productive instructional decision-making, and maintain alignment.
Person(s) Responsible Ms. Letizia, Ms. Corbitt, Mr. Edwards
Deadline 5/30/2027
Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 2 Specific small group remediation which will target groups of student. Strengthening the planning and implementation of targeted small groups for intervention, acceleration, and enrichment and effectively utilizing academic coach and ESE/ELL push-in support.
Person(s) Responsible Ms. Letizia, Ms. Corbitt, Mr. Edwards
Deadline 5/30/2027
Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 3 Using CFA and BSA data, students will be pulled for small group remediation or reteaching sessions. These sessions will target specific skills, as well as, standards.
Person(s) Responsible Ms. Letizia, Ms. Corbitt, Mr. Edwards
Deadline 5/30/2027

Mid-Year Reflection

Area of Focus: Math

Measurable Outcome (SMART Goal) Professional Development Budget Monitoring Results
(End of Year)
By May of 2027, 42% of 9th-10th graders, as assessed by FAST PM 3 in 2027, will score a level 3 or higher based on baseline data from last year's PM 3: 9th grade 52% of students scored a 1 or 2; 10th grade 52% scored a 1 or 2. Professional development will focus on improving the quality and consistency of mathematics instruction. Topics will include: 1. Florida B.E.S.T. Mathematics Standards and benchmark alignment. 2. High-impact mathematics instructional practices. 3. Mathematical discourse and reasoning. 4. Effective questioning and checks for understanding. 5. Differentiation and small-group mathematics instruction. 6. Using formative assessment data to plan instruction. 7. Addressing prerequisite skills and unfinished learning. 8. Increasing student engagement with rigorous, multi-step tasks. 9. Effective intervention and progress monitoring. Professional development will be provided through PLCs, coaching cycles, lesson modeling, collaborative planning, and targeted faculty training based on walkthrough and student-performance data. N/A The Mathematics Area of Focus will be monitored through a continuous Assess- Analyze- Plan- Implement Monitor\, Adjust cycle. The leadership team will: • Review FAST and district mathematics assessment data at each available assessment window. • Review common formative assessment data every 3–4 weeks. • Monitor student progress through intervention progress-monitoring assessments. • Conduct regular classroom walkthroughs to determine implementation of standards-aligned mathematics instruction. • Review PLC data and lesson-planning evidence weekly. • Monitor tutoring participation and student outcomes. • Disaggregate mathematics data by grade level and applicable student groups to identify achievement gaps. • Adjust instructional strategies, intervention groups, and professional-development support when students are not demonstrating adequate growth. Mathematics proficiency will increase from 39% to at least 42% by May 2027, with evidence of increased student growth across grade levels and student groups.

Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies
Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 1 Implement standards-aligned, high-impact mathematics instruction with an emphasis on explicit instruction, mathematical reasoning, problem solving, and daily formative assessment. Teachers will unpack priority B.E.S.T. Mathematics benchmarks, model problem-solving strategies, provide guided and independent practice, and use checks for understanding and exit tickets to identify misconceptions. Teachers will provide opportunities for students to explain their mathematical thinking using academic vocabulary and multiple representations.
Person(s) Responsible Principal, Assistant Principal, Mathematics Coach, Classroom Mathematics Teachers
Deadline 5/29/2026
Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 2 Implement a data-driven mathematics intervention system using flexible small groups and frequent progress monitoring. Teachers and interventionists will use FAST, district assessments, common formative assessments, and classroom data to identify students performing below proficiency. Students will receive targeted small-group instruction based on specific skill gaps. Student groups will be adjusted every 3–4 weeks based on progress-monitoring results. Students demonstrating mastery will transition out of intervention and students requiring additional support will receive intensified instruction.
Person(s) Responsible Principal, Assistant Principal, Mathematics Coach, Classroom Teachers, Interventionists/Tutors
Deadline 5/29/2026
Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 3 Provide targeted mathematics tutoring and acceleration opportunities for students identified as below proficiency or at risk of not demonstrating proficiency. Tutoring will focus on priority benchmarks, prerequisite skills, mathematical reasoning, and multi-step problem solving. Students will receive targeted instruction based on individual assessment data. Pre- and post-assessments will be used to measure the effectiveness of each tutoring cycle. Priority will be given to students in the lowest-performing achievement levels and students who are approaching proficiency and can benefit from targeted acceleration.
Person(s) Responsible Principal, Assistant Principal, Mathematics Coach, Classroom Teachers, Interventionists/Tutors
Deadline 5/29/2026

Mid-Year Reflection

Area of Focus: ELA/Reading

Measurable Outcome (SMART Goal) Professional Development Budget Monitoring Results
(End of Year)
Measurable Outcome (SMART GOAL) By May of 2027, 55% of 9th-10th graders, as assessed by FAST PM 3 in 2027, will score a level 3 or higher based on baseline data from last year's PM 3: 9th grade 52% of students scored a 1 or 2; 10th grade 52% scored a 1 or 2. Professional learning will support the intentional strengthening of Tier 1 ELA instruction and will be job-embedded, evidence-informed, and differentiated based on teacher and student need. 1. Standards-focused instructional planning and decision-making: Strengthening teacher understanding of the depth, progression, rigor, and intended student outcomes of B.E.S.T. ELA standards and using Item Specifications, Achievement Level Descriptors, adopted curriculum resources, student work, and formative evidence to make intentional instructional decisions. 2. Guided Collaborative Planning facilitation and instructional leadership: Building the capacity of administrators, the literacy coach, ELA department leadership, and teacher leaders to facilitate standards- and evidence-focused collaborative planning, support productive instructional decision-making, and maintain alignment while preserving teacher autonomy. 3. High-quality implementation of BEHS Tier 1 instructional practices: Strengthening teacher capacity in the seven identified instructional areas of focus, with professional learning responsive to evidence from the Guided Collaborative Planning-aligned classroom walkthrough protocol, student work, formative assessments, and student-performance data. Learning may include modeling, co-planning, coaching, observation of effective practice, targeted workshops, and follow-up support rather than relying solely on whole-group professional development. 4. Using evidence to differentiate teacher and student support: Building administrator, coach, and teacher-leader capacity to analyze multiple sources of evidence, identify the specific nature of instructional and student-learning needs, and determine the appropriate type, intensity, and duration of support. This includes strengthening the planning and implementation of targeted small groups for intervention, acceleration, and enrichment and effectively leveraging academic coach and ESE/ELL push-in support. 5. Data conversations, goal setting, and action planning: Strengthening the capacity of leadership and ELA teachers to move from data analysis to action by using FAST PM1 and PM2, intermittent common formative assessments, student work, and other evidence to establish goals, determine instructional responses, monitor progress, and make adjustments leading up to PM3. Professional learning will also support teachers in facilitating meaningful student data conversations, goal setting, and action planning. Professional learning effectiveness will be monitored through changes in classroom implementation, evidence from Guided Collaborative Planning, the aligned classroom walkthrough protocol, student work and formative evidence, and student-performance trends. Findings will inform subsequent professional learning and differentiated coaching support, creating an ongoing cycle of learning, implementation, evidence, feedback, and refinement. BEHS will monitor the ELA Area of Focus through a continuous, triangulated evidence cycle that examines both implementation and impact. Evidence will include Guided Collaborative Planning artifacts and commitments, Guided Collaborative Planning-aligned classroom walkthrough data, student work and formative evidence, FAST PM1 and PM2 results, and intermittent common formative assessments leading up to FAST PM3. A key monitoring tool will be the Guided Collaborative Planning-aligned classroom walkthrough protocol, which provides a common evidence framework for determining whether the instructional decisions and commitments established through collaborative planning are evident in classroom practice. Because the protocol is aligned to BEHS's seven high-yield Tier 1 instructional practices, walkthrough evidence allows the school to examine the quality and consistency of implementation across ELA classrooms, with particular attention to standards alignment and rigor, student thinking and understanding, instructional responsiveness, and differentiated support. Consistent with the BEHS Learning Walk Protocol, evidence focuses on student understanding rather than simply task completion or compliance. Leadership and instructional-support teams will triangulate implementation evidence with student-learning evidence at established monitoring points to identify patterns across grade levels, courses, classrooms, standards, student groups, and individual students. FAST PM1 and PM2 will provide key progress-monitoring benchmarks, while intermittent common formative assessments will provide ongoing evidence of student learning and response to instruction between FAST windows and leading up to PM3. This analysis will determine whether improvements in instructional practice correspond with improvements in student performance and where instructional or support gaps persist. Findings will inform timely decisions regarding instructional priorities and differentiated teacher and student support, with subsequent evidence used to determine whether adjustments are producing the intended impact. Progress toward the desired outcome will culminate with FAST PM3, with the goal of at least 55% of students in grades 9 and 10 demonstrating proficiency at Level 3 or higher by May 2027. This monitoring approach enables BEHS to continuously examine two critical indicators of progress: the extent to which strengthened ELA instructional practices are evident in classroom implementation and the extent to which those improvements translate into stronger student learning and performance.

Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies
Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 1 Strengthen Standards-Focused ELA Instructional Decision-Making Through Guided Collaborative Planning BEHS implements Guided Collaborative Planning to strengthen the intentionality and quality of instructional decision-making in grades 9 and 10 ELA. This strategy addresses an identified gap between using the adopted ELA curriculum and intentionally preparing instruction to meet the full depth, rigor, progression, and intended outcome of B.E.S.T. ELA standards for the students being taught. Based on observations and planning conversations, and direct-teacher response feedback feedback, teachers use the appropriate curriculum and maintain pacing while preparation remains centered on the next text, activity, assignment, or curriculum task rather than on what students must learn and demonstrate and what current evidence shows they need. Guided Collaborative Planning strengthens the preparation bridge among the full expectation of the ELA standard, adopted curriculum, evidence of student learning, and the students in front of the teacher. ELA teachers use student evidence and professional expertise to make increasingly intentional decisions about expected learning and rigor, how curriculum resources support that learning, what evidence demonstrates mastery, and how instruction responds to student need while maintaining grade-level expectations. The anticipated high-impact outcome is a shift from primarily resource- and task-driven ELA preparation toward intentional standards-focused, evidence-informed, and responsive instructional decision-making, resulting in stronger alignment among B.E.S.T. ELA standards, curriculum, rigor, student need, and classroom instruction.
Person(s) Responsible ELA Administrator; Literacy Coach; ELA Department Chair; Grades 9 and 10 ELA Teachers
Deadline 8/24/2026
Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 2 Build Leadership Capacity to Strengthen Tier 1 ELA Instruction and Authentic Tiered Teacher Support Blanche Ely High School is committed to continuously strengthening the capacity of administrators, the literacy coach, ELA department leadership, and another teacher leaders to support high-quality Tier 1 ELA instruction through aligned expectations, evidence-informed feedback, and authentic tiered teacher support. This strategy addresses variation in teacher readiness, instructional practice, implementation needs, and student outcomes that generalized support does not adequately address. The framework for developing instructional leaders includes a shared understanding of the seven targeted effective Tier 1 ELA instruction, use of classroom practice evidence, student learning outcomes, teacher reflection, Guided Collaborative Planning, and coaching and feedback cycles to distinguish department-wide, grade-level, and individual teacher needs. Leaders match the type, intensity, and duration of support to demonstrated need and adjust support as evidence changes. Support includes targeted feedback, coaching, modeling, co-planning, professional learning, resources, and opportunities to observe effective practice. The anticipated high-impact outcome is increased ELA instructional leadership and teacher capacity, with support more precisely matched to demonstrated need, resulting in stronger and more consistent Tier 1 ELA instruction and improved student mastery of grade-level ELA standards.
Person(s) Responsible Principal; ELA Administrator; Assistant Principals; Literacy Coach; ELA Department Chair/Teacher Leaders; District ELA/Instructional Support
Deadline 8/21/2026
Evidence-based Intervention/Strategy 3 Establish a Layered ELA Data-to-Action Cycle for Goal Setting, Progress Monitoring, and Shared Accountability BEHS will implement a coordinated ELA data conversation, goal-setting, and action-planning cycle across leadership, teacher, student, and family levels to ensure that student-performance evidence consistently results in informed action. This strategy will move ELA data beyond analysis and reporting toward a shared process in which each stakeholder understands the evidence relevant to their role, establishes or understands expected outcomes, identifies actions within their sphere of responsibility, and monitors whether those actions produce the intended progress. 1. At the leadership and instructional-support level, administrators, the literacy coach, ELA department leadership, and teacher leaders will analyze ELA performance trends across grade levels, courses, classrooms, standards, student groups, and individual students. These data conversations will identify priority areas, establish measurable improvement targets, determine instructional and teacher-support actions, assign responsibility, and monitor progress toward established outcomes. The analysis will connect directly to the Guided Collaborative Planning process, providing teams with evidence to plan, implement, and monitor targeted small-group instruction for intervention, acceleration, and enrichment based on identified student needs. Academic coaches and ESE/ELL support personnel will provide strategic push-in support aligned to those identified needs, extending teacher capacity and increasing students' access to targeted support within Tier 1 ELA instruction. Student-learning evidence from these supports will return to the data and Guided Collaborative Planning cycles to determine impact and inform subsequent instructional decisions. 2. At the teacher level, ELA teachers will analyze class, subgroup, standards-level, and individual student evidence to establish growth expectations and translate identified needs into instructional action. Teachers will use the evidence to determine what requires reinforcement, intervention, acceleration, enrichment, or adjustment within Tier 1 ELA instruction and will revisit the data to determine the impact of those decisions. 3. At the student level, teachers will engage students in developmentally appropriate data conversations, goal setting, and action planning so students understand where they are in their ELA learning, where they are expected to go, what they need to strengthen, the actions they can take, and whether evidence demonstrates progress toward their goals. 4. At the family level, BEHS will communicate ELA performance and growth information in understandable terms so families understand their student's current performance, expected growth, areas of focus, progress, and available supports and can meaningfully support established goals and actions. Across each layer, BEHS will establish a consistent cycle in which stakeholders examine evidence, establish or clarify goals, determine actions, implement those actions, monitor progress, and use new evidence to determine next steps. Student-learning evidence will return to Guided Collaborative Planning so that performance results inform subsequent Tier 1 ELA instructional decisions and differentiated student supports. The anticipated high-impact outcome will be a coherent ELA data-to-action system in which leadership decisions, teacher instructional actions, targeted student supports, student goals, and family partnership are aligned around student growth. Performance evidence will function as a continuous improvement tool for setting goals, determining actions, strategically deploying instructional support, monitoring impact, and making timely adjustments, thereby strengthening collective ownership and accountability for improved ELA outcomes.
Person(s) Responsible Principal; ELA Administrator; Literacy Coach; ELA Department Chair/Teacher Leaders; Grades 9 and 10 ELA Teachers; ESE & ELL Support Personnel; School Counselors & Other Student Support Staff
Deadline 10/5/2026

Mid-Year Reflection

K-12 Comprehensive Reading Plan

 

File Name File Uploaded By Upload Date
0361_07082026_SIP_CERP_-School-Based-Reading--Plan-26-27.pdfAndrea Smith9/3/2026
Literacy-Leadership-Meeting-Agenda-Sept-2026.pdfAndrea Smith9/4/2026
Literacy-Leader-Meeting-Sign-in-Sept-2026-(1).pdfAndrea Smith9/14/2026
0361BEHS_07082026_SIP-CERP-Literacy-Leadership-Team-Contact-Information-26-27.pdfAndrea Smith9/25/2026

Resources

Safe and Supportive Environment

Professional Learning Communities (PLC)

PLC Meeting Schedule

PLC Name Day(s) of Week Week(s) of Month Start/End Dates Start/End Times Grade  
Math Professional Learning PLC Thursday
 1st 4/1/2027 - 4/1/2027 12:30 PM - 1:30 PM 9, 10, 11, 12
ELA Professional Learning PLC Thursday
 1st 4/1/2027 - 4/1/2027 12:30 PM - 1:30 PM 9, 10, 11, 12
ELA Professional Learning PLC Thursday
 1st 2/4/2027 - 2/4/2027 12:30 PM - 1:30 PM 9, 10, 11, 12
ELA Professional Learning PLC Thursday
 1st 11/5/2026 - 11/5/2026 12:30 PM - 1:30 PM 9, 10, 11, 12
ELA Professional Learning PLC Thursday
 1st 9/3/2026 - 9/3/2026 12:30 PM - 1:30 PM 9, 10, 11, 12

Response to Intervention (MTSS/RtI) Plan

 

File Name File Uploaded By Upload Date
0621_07082026_SAM-Endnotes--Rubric-&-Guiding-Questions-Updated-3.14.25.pdfAndrea Smith9/3/2026
BEHS_MTSS_Action_Plan_2026-2027[1].pdfAndrea Smith9/4/2026
BEHS_SAM_Report_2025-2026[1].pdfAndrea Smith9/4/2026

RtI Team Meeting Schedule

Day(s) of Week Week(s) of Month Start/End Dates Start/End Times
Tuesday
 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th 9/1/2026 - 5/17/2027 11:30 AM - 12:30 PM

Social Emotional Learning (SEL) Plan

 

No files have been uploaded.

School-wide Positive Behavior Plan (SPBP)

 

File Name File Uploaded By Upload Date
Schoolwide-Positive-Behavior-Plan---2026-2027.pdfMalcolm Spence4/30/2026
Blanche-Ely-HS-SPBP-Feedback-Form-26.pdfDesiree Montalvo5/12/2026

Attendance Plan

Total School AVG

    Regular Attenders
(0%-4.9% Absent)		 At Risk
(5%-9.9% Absent)		 Chronic
(10%-19.9% Absent)		 Severe Chronic
(20% or more Absent)
School Year Population Number % Number % Number % Number %

Grade Level Breakdown

      Regular Attenders
(0%-4.9% Absent)		 At Risk
(5%-9.9% Absent)		 Chronic
(10%-19.9% Absent)		 Severe Chronic
(20% or more Absent)
School Year Grade Level Population Number % Number % Number % Number %
Attendance Type School Goal

 

File Name File Uploaded By Upload Date
BEHS_Attendance_Plan_2026-2027[1].pdfAndrea Smith9/8/2026

School Counseling Plan

 

File Name File Uploaded By Upload Date
BEHS_SIP_School-Counseling-and-LSW-Plans_26-27.pdfMasharie Powell9/15/2026

Equity Plan

 

No files have been uploaded.

Best Practices in Inclusive Education (BPIE)

 

File Name File Uploaded By Upload Date
BEHS_0361_09172025_SBPIE_2324_060361.pdfMasharie Powell9/8/2026

Effective Communication

SAC Documentation

SAC Upload Center

File Name Meeting Month Document Type Uploaded Date
BEHS-SAF-Calendar_2026-2027.pdf September SAF Meeting Dates 9/15/2026
BEHS-SACCalendar-with-Joint-SAF.pdf September SAC Meeting Dates 9/15/2026

Cognia eProve Survey Results

 

File Name File Uploaded By Upload Date
Blanche-Ely-HS-BCPS-SCHOOL-STAFF-CUSTOMER-SURVEY-2026.pdfJamillah Shakir9/2/2026
Blanche-Ely-HS-BCPS-STUDENT-(Grades-6-12)-CUSTOMER-SURVEY-2026.pdfJamillah Shakir9/2/2026
Blanche-Ely-HS-BCPS-PARENT-CUSTOMER-SURVEY-2026.pdfJamillah Shakir9/2/2026

Family and Community Engagement (FACE) Plan

 

File Name File Uploaded By Upload Date
BEHS_FACE_SPACE_Documentation_2026-2027[1].pdfAndrea Smith9/8/2026

Select a Different School

Go back to Select a Different School