| School Name | Sawgrass Springs MS (3431) | School Grade (2024 - 2025) | |
| 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 |
| File Name | File Uploaded By | Upload Date |
|---|---|---|
| Cognia-Executive-Summary-25-26.docx | wendy stull-milordis | 8/21/2025 |
| File Name | File Uploaded By | Upload Date |
|---|---|---|
| Projection-of-Revenue-26.pdf | wendy stull-milordis | 9/4/2025 |
|
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.
|
|
|
|
| Measurable Outcome (SMART Goal) | Professional Development | Budget | Monitoring | Results (End of Year) |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| By June of 2026, the percentage of ELL and SWD students identified in the ELL and SWD subgroups will show an increase in proficiency from 59% to 63% (ELL) and 53% to 57% (SWD) which is 4% percentage points overall as evidenced by the Florida Student Report Card. | School-wide literacy focus across content areas, Intentional Planning, Word of the Week, Science of Reading Introduction and Vocabulary Maps, Graffiti Brainstorming, Close Read with text annotations, Reading Data Presentation; knowing your Tier 2 and Tier 3 Readers in the Science of Reading, Implementation of Small Group, Learning Stations, Differentiated Instruction, ESE, Accommodations and Strategies/Activities Training. | $0.00 | The area of focus will be monitored through HMH Growth Measure, Common Assessment Unit tests found in HMH, iReady, and the comparison of PM 1 FAST, PM 2 FAST, and PM 3 FAST to reflect growth. Quarterly, Teacher Data Chats with Admin and Teacher and Data Chats with Teacher with Students. | ||||||
Mid-Year Reflection |
|||||||||
| Progress: Is desired progress being made to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus by the end of the school year? | Yes | ||||||||
| Evidence: Provide evidence of the implementation challenges the school encountered during the Fall semester. Describe the changes made to address these challenges. | |||||||||
| The implementation challenges the school encountered during the Fall Semester include: -in addition to loss of funding/budget, scheduling is an audacious task. -Loss of students which resulted in loss of teachers - due to scheduling issues, we have teachers that teach multiple preps. Therefore some classes might have a higher student to teacher ratio while other classes have a lesser student to teacher ratio. |
|||||||||
| Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies: What was each Intervention/Strategy’s identified strengths and weaknesses? | |||||||||
Strengths and Weaknesses based on strategies:
- Targets the most critical (bubble students: LEvel 1 and 2's) - standards impacting overall achievement. - Prioritizes the highest-need students first. - Allows teachers to deliver high-quality small group instruction. Weaknesses
-Provides individualized attention for struggling students. - Supports learning in the general education setting. - Builds confidence through test-taking strategy practice. -Can co-teach -Work on strengths and weaknesses and IEP -Reinforce standards that need remediation. Weaknesses - Scheduling across grade levels may reduce consistency. -Limited man-power (more students needs than adults resources) - Students may miss whole-class instruction during pull-out. 3. iReady Strengths - Standard specific lessons that can be assigned for enrichment or remediation purposes -Provides adaptive lessons tailored to student needs. - Targets individual and classwide areas of weakness. - Routine weekly work supports continuous progress. - Small-group reinforcement strengthens skills. - Easy-to-track student performance data. Weaknesses - Students do not always like this program. Some students may click through lessons. - Weekly sessions may not be enough for the lowest performers. - Students may struggle without scaffolds. -Motivation is tied to an incentive -Cost of program.
- Identifies trends early to adjust instruction. - Promotes shared accountability. - Enhances PLC discussions and planning. Weaknesses - Not a part of the school culture at this time. -Time-consuming process for teachers and administrators. - Data accuracy depends on consistent input. - Requires strong data literacy skills. - May cause fatigue or pressure if overused. |
|||||||||
| New Actions: Describe any new actions that are needed to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus. | |||||||||
| Administrators will continue to monitor CFAs and meet with teachers during regular PLCs to discuss results. They will identify weak standards and students performing below grade-level expectations in order to provide targeted remediation. Teacher will be encouraged to implement small group instruction and work stations in the classroom. When Teacher is working with a small group, other students can continue working in work stations. Administrators will conduct walkthroughs to monitor "look fors", data usage and the implementation of workstations, and they will provide feedback to support effective instruction. For students performing on or above grade level, we will continue to provide enrichment opportunities and celebrate all successes. Professional development workshops led by district trainers, administrators, coaches, and the leadership team should be followed up with additional support for high‑need teachers. These teachers should receive modeling and coaching to strengthen their ability to deliver effective lessons. Trainers can also provide onsite coaching as needed. Literacy coach support: The literacy coach will maintain a schedule with open time slots for teachers to sign up. She will also be available to visit high‑need classrooms or co‑teach to ensure a smooth teacher‑learning process across various standards to promote student success. |
|||||||||
| Measurable Outcome (SMART Goal) | Professional Development | Budget | Monitoring | Results (End of Year) |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| By June of 2026, the middle school student percentage of acceleration students proficient in Biology, Algebra and Geometry will increase from 82% proficiency to 85% proficiency, which is a 3-percentage point increase in proficiency overall as evidenced by the 2026 End of Course (EOC) Exam. | Professional Development for Biology, Geometry, Algebra will include: Implementation of Learning Stations in Math and Science in addition to Labs and hands-on-activities, Trainings in Prizms Virtual Reality Math for Algebra and Geometry teachers and Trainings for Biology, as well as all science courses, will include more emphasis on the 5E (Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate and Evaluation) method of instruction. | $0.00 | The area of focus will be monitored by the following: Labs will be monitored through teacher observation, administrative walkthroughs. Math will be monitored through teacher observations, administrative walkthroughs. Admin/Teacher Data Chats and Teacher/Students Data Chats will be conducted quarterly, and Utilization of Performance Matters. | ||||||
Mid-Year Reflection |
|||||||||
| Progress: Is desired progress being made to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus by the end of the school year? | No | ||||||||
| Evidence: Provide evidence of the implementation challenges the school encountered during the Fall semester. Describe the changes made to address these challenges. | |||||||||
| The implementation challenges the school encountered during the Fall Semester include: -in addition to loss of funding/budget, scheduling is an audacious task. -Loss of students which resulted in loss of teachers - due to scheduling issues, we have teachers that teach multiple preps. Therefore some classes might have a higher student to teacher ratio while other classes have a lesser student to teacher ratio. |
|||||||||
| Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies: What was each Intervention/Strategy’s identified strengths and weaknesses? | |||||||||
1. ELO Camps Strengths - Standard specific lessons that can be assigned for enrichment or remediation purposes -Provides adaptive lessons tailored to student needs. - Targets individual and classwide areas of weakness. - Routine weekly work supports continuous progress. - Small-group reinforcement strengthens skills. - Easy-to-track student performance data. -10 Weeks -A minimum of 3 and a maximum of 5 camp sessions before or after school Weaknesses - Students do not always like this program. -Some students may click through lessons. -Motivation is tied to an incentive -Cost of program.
- Identifies trends early to adjust instruction. - Promotes shared accountability. - Enhances PLC discussions and planning. Weaknesses - Not a part of the school culture at this time. -Time-consuming process for teachers and administrators. - Data accuracy depends on consistent input. - Requires strong data literacy skills. - May cause fatigue or pressure if overused. |
|||||||||
| New Actions: Describe any new actions that are needed to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus. | |||||||||
| Administrators will continue to monitor CFA’s, Performance Matters and meet with teachers during regular PLCs to discuss results. They will identify weak standards and students performing below grade-level expectations in order to provide targeted remediation. Teacher will be encouraged to implement small group instruction and work stations in the classroom. When Teacher is working with a small group, other students can continue working in work stations. Administrators will conduct walkthroughs to monitor "look fors", data usage and the implementation of workstations, and they will provide feedback to support effective instruction. For students performing on or above grade level, we will continue to provide enrichment opportunities and celebrate all successes. Professional development workshops led by district trainers, administrators, coaches, and the leadership team should be followed up with additional support for high‑need teachers. These teachers should receive modeling and coaching to strengthen their ability to deliver effective lessons. Trainers can also provide onsite coaching as needed. |
|||||||||
| Measurable Outcome (SMART Goal) | Professional Development | Budget | Monitoring | Results (End of Year) |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| By June of 2026, the percentage of ELA students proficient in ELA in grades 6 through 8 will increase from 64% proficiency to 65% proficiency, which is a 1 percentage point increase in proficiency overall as evidenced by the PM 3 FAST Assessment. In addition, our ELA lowest 25% will also show an increase from 61% to 63%, which is 2% percentage points overall in learning gains earned. | School-wide literacy focus across content areas, Intentional Planning, Word of the Week, Science of Reading Introduction and Vocabulary Maps, Graffiti Brainstorming, Close Read with text annotations, Reading Data Presentation; knowing your Tier 2 and Tier 3 Readers in the Science of Reading, Implementation of Small Group, Learning Stations, Differentiated Instruction, ESE, Accommodations and Strategies/Activities Training. | $0.00 | The area of focus will be monitored through HMH Growth Measure, Common Assessment Unit tests found in HMH, iReady, and the comparison of PM 1 FAST, PM 2 FAST, and PM 3 FAST to reflect growth. Quarterly, Teacher Data Chats with Admin and Teacher and Data Chats with Teacher with Students. | ||||||
Mid-Year Reflection |
|||||||||
| Progress: Is desired progress being made to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus by the end of the school year? | Yes | ||||||||
| Evidence: Provide evidence of the implementation challenges the school encountered during the Fall semester. Describe the changes made to address these challenges. | |||||||||
| The implementation challenges the school encountered during the Fall Semester include: -in addition to loss of funding/budget, scheduling is an audacious task. -Loss of students which resulted in loss of teachers - due to scheduling issues, we have teachers that teach multiple preps. Therefore some classes might have a higher student to teacher ratio while other classes have a lesser student to teacher ratio. |
|||||||||
| Evidence-based Interventions/Strategies: What was each Intervention/Strategy’s identified strengths and weaknesses? | |||||||||
Strengths and Weaknesses based on strategies:
- Targets the most critical (bubble students: LEvel 1 and 2's) - standards impacting overall achievement. - Prioritizes the highest-need students first. - Allows teachers to deliver high-quality small group instruction. Weaknesses
-Provides individualized attention for struggling students. - Supports learning in the general education setting. - Builds confidence through test-taking strategy practice. -Can co-teach -Work on strengths and weaknesses and IEP -Reinforce standards that need remediation. Weaknesses - Scheduling across grade levels may reduce consistency. -Limited man-power (more students needs than adults resources) - Students may miss whole-class instruction during pull-out. 3. iReady Strengths - Standard specific lessons that can be assigned for enrichment or remediation purposes -Provides adaptive lessons tailored to student needs. - Targets individual and classwide areas of weakness. - Routine weekly work supports continuous progress. - Small-group reinforcement strengthens skills. - Easy-to-track student performance data. Weaknesses - Students do not always like this program. Some students may click through lessons. - Weekly sessions may not be enough for the lowest performers. - Students may struggle without scaffolds. -Motivation is tied to an incentive -Cost of program.
- Identifies trends early to adjust instruction. - Promotes shared accountability. - Enhances PLC discussions and planning. Weaknesses - Not a part of the school culture at this time. -Time-consuming process for teachers and administrators. - Data accuracy depends on consistent input. - Requires strong data literacy skills. - May cause fatigue or pressure if overused. |
|||||||||
| New Actions: Describe any new actions that are needed to accomplish the intended outcome for the Area of Focus. | |||||||||
Administrators will continue to monitor CFAs and meet with teachers during regular PLCs to discuss results. They will identify weak standards and students performing below grade-level expectations in order to provide targeted remediation. Professional development workshops led by district trainers, administrators, coaches, and the leadership team should be followed up with additional support for high‑need teachers. These teachers should receive modeling and coaching to strengthen their ability to deliver effective lessons. Trainers can also provide onsite coaching as needed. Literacy coach support: The literacy coach will maintain a schedule with open time slots for teachers to sign up. She will also be available to visit high‑need classrooms or co‑teach to ensure a smooth teacher‑learning process across various standards to promote student success. |
|||||||||
| Additional Reflections (optional): Please add any additional reflections for this Area of Focus. | |||||||||
| No additional reflection at this time. | |||||||||
| File Name | File Uploaded By | Upload Date |
|---|---|---|
| Sawgrass-Springs-Middle-Reading-Plan-2526.pdf | Frances McMahon | 9/5/2025 |
PLC Meeting Schedule
|
| File Name | File Uploaded By | Upload Date |
|---|---|---|
| MTSS-Plan.pdf | Denise Laurel | 9/12/2025 |
RtI Team Meeting Schedule
|
No files have been uploaded.
| File Name | File Uploaded By | Upload Date |
|---|---|---|
| Schoolwide-Positive-Behavior-Plan.docx | Denise Laurel | 4/29/2025 |
| Sawgrass-Springs-MS-SPBP-Feedback-Form-2025-2026.pdf | Shawana Smith | 5/20/2025 |
| SPBP-Template-2026-27-(1).docx | Eric Reeves | 4/17/2026 |
| 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 | % |
| 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 |
|---|---|---|
| NEW-Attendance-25.pdf | Denise Laurel | 9/12/2025 |
| File Name | File Uploaded By | Upload Date |
|---|---|---|
| SSMS-Annual-School-Counseling-and-support-Plan-25-26.pdf | wendy stull-milordis | 9/4/2025 |
| LSW-calendar-25.pdf | Denise Laurel | 9/16/2025 |
No files have been uploaded.
| File Name | File Uploaded By | Upload Date |
|---|---|---|
| Sawgrass-Springs-MS-BPIE_05.2024.pdf | wendy stull-milordis | 9/12/2025 |
SAC Upload Center
|
| File Name | File Uploaded By | Upload Date |
|---|---|---|
| Parent-Customer-Survey.pdf | wendy stull-milordis | 9/12/2025 |
| Staff-Survey-Report.pdf | wendy stull-milordis | 9/12/2025 |
| Student-Survey-Report.pdf | wendy stull-milordis | 9/12/2025 |
| File Name | File Uploaded By | Upload Date |
|---|---|---|
| FACE-PLAN-Template.pdf | Denise Laurel | 9/22/2025 |
| SawgrassSpringsMiddleFACESpacePic.jpg | wendy stull-milordis | 9/30/2025 |