WCSD Mission Statement

Millcreek High School

2011 - 2012 Final Report

1. School's identified most critical academic need(s) addressed in the plan.
Please check only the primary area(s). Improvement in some academic areas may improve all other academic areas, but if the goal is to improve reading (or technology), please check only that area.

Academic areas as identified in the plan


Academic areas as implemented in the plan


2. Financial proposal and report - This report is automatically generated from the School Plan entered in the Spring of 2011 and from the District Business Administrator's date entry of the School LAND Trust expenditures from the 2011 - 2012 school year.

Available Funds Planned Expenditures
(entered by the school)
Actual Expenditures
(entered by the District Business Administrator)
Carry-over from 2010 - 2011 $0 $2,808
Distribution for 2011 - 2012 $7,685 $9,233
Total Available for expenditure in 2011 - 2012 $7,685 $12,041
Salaries and Employee Benefits (100 and 200) $7,685 $10,735
Professional Development and Technical Services (300) $0 $0
Repairs and Maintenance (400) $0 $0
Other Purchased Services (Admission / Printing) (500) $0 $0
Travel (580) $0 $0
General Supplies (610) $0 $0
Textbooks (641) $0 $0
Library Books / Periodicals / Audiovisual (644, 650, 660) $0 $0
Software / Technology related Hardware / Other Equipment (670, 730) $0 $0
Total Expenditures $7,685 $10,735
Remaining Funds (Carry-over to 2012 - 2013) $0 $1,306

2. a Please describe all expenditures in Other Purchased Services (Admission / Printing) and Travel and how they supported the plan.

2. b Please describe each expenditure in General Supplies and how it supported the plan

2. c Please explain the reason for the carry over to 2012 - 2013.

The total amount of carry-over and the total distribution were both larger than anticipated.

3. This is what the School Community Council or Trust Lands Committee planned to do and how they planned for the money to be spent

The specific steps that Millcreek High School LAND Trust Committee will take to reach the above mentioned goals are:

  1. Hire a licensed teacher for .14 of their yearly teaching contract to teach math skills and concepts.  The balance of their contract (.86) will be paid for using district basic funds.
  2. Provide noontime assistance to students needing additional math support.


3. a What did the school do and how was the money spent to improve student academic performance? (Be specific)

The specific steps that the Millcreek High School LAND Trust Committee took to improve student academic performance in math were to:

  1. Hire a licensed teacher (Lanae Anderson Cactus ID# 91839) for .14 of her yearly teaching contract to teach Basic Math Skills.  The balance of her contract was paid for using district M & O basic funds.
  2. Provide noontime assistance to students needing additional math support.
  3. Provided at “team-taught” period where the Special Education math teacher came into the class to provide extra assistance to all students, but more to students who had a math IEP goal.


4. The following are the committee's specific goals for student improvement entered in the plan

Millcreek High School LAND Trust Committee has one specific academic goal:  To improve student math skills according to individual needs and abilities.



4. a Please explain how the goals described above were achieved or not achieved and why.

Our goal to improve student math skills was achieved to the degree in that we were able to provide additional math support available to all students.  For those students who were willing to put forth effort to improve their math skills and to be intentional learners, there was success for them.

We added one period of the Basic Math Skills course in addition to our Algebra I, Geometry, Math of Personal Finance and Algebra II courses.  Our math teachers were available to students who wanted extra math help during our Noontime Assistance during lunch.  We also implemented our PLUS time, a response to intervention, which allowed all teachers, and in this case math teachers specifically, the opportunity to “tag” a student to come into the math teacher’s class during PLUS time to work on assignments they were behind, to take quizzes or tests they missed, or to get added instruction on a daily basis.  During one period of Geometry, we provided at “team-taught” period where the Special Education math teacher came into the class to provide extra assistance to all students, but more to students who had a math IEP goal.

5. The following is how the committee planned to measure/assess academic improvement

Individual student skills and abilities will be measured as follows:

  1. Benchmark assessment results from fall, winter & spring
  2. Number of academic credits earned
  3. Number of students attending noontime assistance
  4. Informal teaching assessments  to include pre and post test results



5. a Please show the before and after measurements and how academic performance was improved

The math benchmark assessments were given in the fall, winter and spring.  The data for this ended up having a glitch in that we can’t pull the spring data even after consulting with the district testing department.  So with that said, the following is based on the fall and winter scores. When comparing the students who took both the fall and winter math benchmark assessment, 50 percent of students increased their scores with 2% of students remaining at the same level.

In looking at our CRT mathematics proficiency scores,  for students who were considered part of our Full Academic Year (FAY) in 2011-2012, our overall math percent proficient was 9%, which is a 9% increase over the 2010-2011 school year which had 0% proficient.  If you break it down by course specific, Geometry had 14% proficient and Algebra I had 6% proficient.

In looking at the number of math credits earned, in the 2011-2012 school year, a total of 136.25 credits were earned by 326 students.  This averaged out to be .4179 credits per student.  The variable here is that some students were only here for half of a quarter, some a whole quarter, and clear on up to the whole school year with varying amounts of enrollment in between.

6. In the school plan, there was an opportuinity to explain how additional funds, exceeding the estimated distribution would be spent. The following is what was approved by your school district.

This is a multi-year project and any additional funds received will be used to full fund this years expenditures and any funds not used can easily be carried forward to support the ongoing efforts of the council, school, teachers, and students.

6. a The distribution to schools in 2011 - 2012 was approximately 20% more than School Community Councils planned for in the approved School Plans. How were the additional funds spent?

These additional funds will be/were carried over for the purpose of fully funding the .14 of Lanae Anderson’s salary to include Social Security and Retirement. 


7. The school plan was advertised to the community in the following way:

Letters to State Senators, Representatives, Governor, Attorney General, State Treasuerer and Congressional Delegation
School Website
Other. Please Explain.

This information was shared with our Community Council, as well as with our parents/guardians during the two formal SEOP meetings that were held in September and February. 

8. Please select from the pull down menus the policy makers the council/charter board has communicated with about the School LAND Trust Program.

Governor: Gary R. Herbert.
State Attorney General: Mark Shurtleff

Dist 29 Steve Urquhart

Dist 73 Mike Noel
Dist 74 David Clark
Dist 75 Don Ipson

Debra G. Roberts

Orrin Hatch
Mike Lee

Rob Bishop
Jim Matheson
Jason Chaffetz

Carole Morris
Craig Seegmiller
Wes Christiansen
Kelly Blake
Laura Hesson
Wendell R. Gubler
Cal Durfey

9. The State Board Rule requires reporting of the dates when local boards approved the other four plans community councils are responsible for. Please enter the most recent approval date for each plan listed. These approval dates are for plans being implemented in the 2012 - 2013 school year and require a 2012 date.

2012 - 2013 School Plans
(required for all schools)
Not Yet Approved
(required for all schools)
Not Yet Approved
(required for all schools with K-3 grades)
Not Required
(required for all elementary, middle & jr hight schools)
Not Required

A summary of this Final Report must be provided to parents and posted on the website by November 15th of the 2012-2013 school year. When was this task completed?


An Official School Web Site of the Washington County School District
2010 © - All Content Rights Reserved