Formative principal or schooL/district administrator evaluation – permanent administrators

District Name:	L

Date:	Click here to enter text.

ADMINISTRATOR INFORMATION

Principal/Administrator Name	Click here to enter text.	Assignment:	Click here to enter text.

School(s)	1. Click here to enter text.	Evaluator:	Click here to enter text.

2. Click here to enter text.	School Year:	Click here to enter text.

3. Click here to enter text.	Date of Evaluation:	Click here to enter text.

☐ Formative Year One

☐ Formative Year Two

Part I: Nebraska Effective Practices. During formative evaluation years no ratings are given for the Effective Practices. However, evaluator comments based on informal and walk-through observations can be made.
EFFECTIVE PRACTICE 1 - Foundational Knowledge EFFECTIVE PRACTICE 2 - Planning and Preparation EFFECTIVE PRACTICE 3 - The Learning Environment EFFECTIVE PRACTICE 4 - Instructional Strategies EFFECTIVE PRACTICE 5 - Assessment EFFECTIVE PRACTICE 6 - Professionalism EFFECTIVE PRACTICE 7 - Vision and Collaboration EFFECTIVE PRACTICE 8- Professional Ethnic and Advocacy

Evaluator’s Comments
Areas of Strength
Click here to enter text.
Areas for Development
Click here to enter text.

Additional Comments
Click here to enter text.

Part II: Principal/Administrator Action Plans. Combined rating. (attach Action Plan template)
Evaluator Rating	Description
☐ Exemplary	Results across all Action Plans demonstrate that objectives have been met or exceeded to a significant degree. Improvement in student achievement or school/district performance as a result of the Plans exceeds expectations. Plan design is exemplary and implementation strategies were carried out in a highly effective fashion. The results can serve as a model for other administrators.
☐ Proficient	Results across all Action Plans demonstrate that objectives have been met or nearly met on an overall basis. Significant improvement in student achievement or school/district performance as a result of the Plans is evident. Plan design evidenced appropriate quality and/or rigor and implementation strategies were carried out effectively.
☐ Basic	Results across all Action Plans demonstrate that objectives have been met in part. Some improvement in student achievement or school district performance as a result of the Plans is evident. Plan design may have been somewhat lacking in quality and/or rigor and implementation strategies were not carried out as effectively as expected.
☐ Unsatisfactory	Results across all Action Plans demonstrate that objectives have not been achieved or have been achieved at a level that is significantly below expectations. Improvement in student achievement or school/district performance as a result of the Plans has been minimal. Plan design may have evidenced insufficient quality and/or rigor and implementation strategies were not carried out effectively.
Evaluator’s Comments
Click here to enter text.

☐	Plan for Improvement attached (required for rating of “Basic”)

☐	Plan for Assistance attached (required for rating of “Unsatisfactory”)

Part III: Individual Professional Development Plan. (Attach plan)
Evaluator Rating	Description
☐ Exemplary	The Individual Professional Development Plan's goals have been met or exceeded in all respects. There is evidence that implementation and completion of the Plan has led to significant, positive, and lasting change in job performance.
☐ Proficient	The Individual Professional Development Plan's goals have been met or nearly met on an overall basis. There is evidence that implementation and completion of the Plan has led to a positive change in job performance.
☐ Basic	The Individual Professional Development Plan's goals have not been met or have been only partially met on an overall basis. There is limited evidence to date that implementation of the Plan has led to a positive change in job performance.
☐ Unsatisfactory	The Individual Professional Development Plan's goals have not been met to a satisfactory degree. Implementation of the Plan has not led to a positive change in job performance.
Evaluator’s Comments
Click here to enter text.

☐	Plan for Improvement attached (required for rating of “Basic”)

☐	Plan for Assistance attached (required for rating of “Unsatisfactory”)

Part IV: Local District Standards (Optional)
Local District Standards	Meets District Standards
Click here to enter text.	☐ Yes	☐ No
Click here to enter text.	☐ Yes	☐ No
Click here to enter text.	☐ Yes	☐ No
Click here to enter text.	☐ Yes	☐ No

Overall Rating for Local District Standards Meets Districts Standards
☐ Yes	☐ No
Evaluator’ Comments
Click here to enter text.

Part V: Overall Evaluator Comments: There is no overall rating during the formative evaluation years, but space for evaluator comments is provided.
Areas of Strength
Click here to enter text.
Areas for Development
Click here to enter text.

Additional Comments
Click here to enter text.

Evaluator Signature:	______________________________________________________

Date: __________________

Principal/Administrator Signature:	______________________________________________________

Date: ___________________

My signature certifies that the evaluation results have been discussed with me. I understand my signature does not necessarily indicate agreement and that I may respond in writing to any issues contained in the evaluation.

Part VI: Attachments (attach the following items)

Record of Evaluation Activities

Annual Self-Assessment (Optional)

Onsite Observation Summaries

Action Plans

Individual Professional Development Plan

Plan for Improvement (if any)

Plan of Assistance (if any)

Part VII: Record of Evaluation Activities (Formative years)
Activity	Date	Principal/Administrator Signature	Evaluator Signature
Orientation
Annual Self-Assessment Completed and Submitted (Optional)
Individual Professional Development Plan Approval
Action Plans Approved
Dates of Site Visits
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Dates of Observation Conferences
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Action Plan Review Conference
Action Plan Summative Conference
IPD Plan Review Conference
IDP Plan Summative Conference
Formative Evaluation Conference