SERIES 2000 Administration 

2400 Evaluation of the Superintendent

The Connecticut Association of Boards of Education (CABE) and the Connecticut Association of  Public School Superintendents (CAPSS) recognize the critical importance of a strong partnership  between every Board of Education and its Superintendent of Schools. This recommended  evaluation process collaboratively developed by CABE and CAPSS is an attempt to properly  communicate our strong belief that the Board of Education and Superintendent must view  themselves and function as the school district’s Leadership Team. To that end, we strongly believe  that the Leadership Team must share and enthusiastically advocate the same goals and a vision of  learning that sets high performance expectations for the entire school community. It is important  to note that the foundational components of the recommended evaluation process are the  CABE/CAPSS School Governance Position Statement adopted in March 2004 and the CABE  Superintendent Evaluation instrument. The Board of Education Chairperson, working with the  Superintendent and the rest of the Board of Education, is responsible for carrying out the  evaluation of the Leadership Team. 

While the Board of Education and Superintendent have different roles and responsibilities, their  work must complement each other. Ultimately, all serve to advance the goals and objectives of  their community for public education and, most importantly, student learning. As the Board of  Education’s Chief Executive Officer, Connecticut Education Law (C.G.S. 10-157(a)) requires the  Superintendent of Schools’ job performance be evaluated annually. Whether written or oral, the  annual evaluation of the school district’s Chief Executive Officer is one of the most important  responsibilities of every Board of Education. CABE and CAPSS have recommended an evaluation  process for the Superintendent of Schools that is collaborative, goal oriented and offers numerous  opportunities for focused and targeted feedback from the Board of Education to the Superintendent  of Schools regarding his/her job performance. We firmly believe that this collaborative and candid  approach to evaluation will improve Board of Education and Superintendent communications and  relationships, minimize evaluation surprises and most importantly, enhance the overall success of  the school district. 

While student achievement in academic areas as measured by test scores is important, other areas  of student achievement are equally important. All of the leadership performance areas and specific  areas of responsibility outlined in this document should be considered. Moreover, for purposes of  the superintendent’s performance evaluation, indicators related to student academic achievement  are necessary, but not sufficient to make final determinations about the Superintendent’s job  performance. 

To increase the effectiveness of the school district’s leadership team and the overall performance  of the Board of Education and its individual members, CABE and CAPSS believe that it is vitally  important that every Board of Education conducts a self-assessment each school year. An annual  self-assessment enables the Board of Education to thoughtfully and constructively evaluate its  performance as the community’s legislative body that develops, evaluates and oversees education  policy. CABE and CAPSS strongly recommend Board of Education self- assessment as a  necessary and worthwhile activity toward advancing the vision and goals of the school district.

The following is a recommended process and timeline for the annual evaluation of the  Superintendent of Schools. It is important to note that the recommended timeline is based upon a  traditional evaluation year model (July-June) and can be easily modified in those school districts  that employ a non-traditional evaluation year approach. The recommended Leadership Team  meetings can and should be conducted in Executive Session because they pertain to Board of  Education Self-Evaluation and Personnel. 

Legal Considerations: Executive Session and Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) 

The Connecticut Freedom of Information law allows for the discussion in executive session of  “personnel matters,” which includes “the appointment, employment, performance, evaluation,  health or dismissal of a public official or employee, provided that such individual may require that  discussion be held at an open meeting” (Connecticut General Statute Section 1-200(6)). Under  this provision the superintendent’s evaluation, as well as the performance of one or more Board  of Education members, are appropriate topics for executive session. District goals, procedures,  policies and data are NOT appropriate subjects for executive session under the FOI law. All votes  must be taken in public – only discussion can occur in executive session. 

Note:  Based on court decisions in Connecticut, written evaluation documents are likely to be  deemed public records subject to disclosure. Such written evaluation documents subject to public  disclosure would include any draft evaluation that is circulated among Board of Education  members. 

Sample motion: “I move that the Board of Education go into executive session for discussion of a  personnel matter – the evaluation of the Superintendent.” 

Mid-Year Evaluation Meeting – January 

Topic 1: It is recommended that the Leadership Team meets again in Executive Session to  informally discuss their progress on goals and objectives established in June. This session also  provides the Leadership Team with an opportunity to identify and strategize about new and/or  unexpected challenges not previously identified in the prior Leadership Team goal setting  meeting. This level of team collaboration allows all parties to be contributing members of a fluid,  responsive and strategic team. 

Topic 2:  During this same discussion, it is recommended that the Board of Education provide  targeted informal feedback to the Superintendent about his/her effectiveness vis-à-vis the  previously established goals and objectives. The purpose of this informal feedback session is to  assess the Superintendent’s midyear performance and provide him/her with an opportunity to  properly respond to any Board of Education concerns and avoid unnecessary performance  evaluation “surprises” at year’s end. Ideally, these informal discussions take place regularly  throughout the school year.

End of the Year Evaluation Meeting – May/June 

Topic 1:  The Superintendent and Board of Education should convene in Executive Session to  participate in an assessment activity which focuses upon the performance of the individual  members of the Leadership Team, including whether and how goals and priority objectives have  been successfully accomplished and/or addressed. Included in this discussion should be any  mitigating circumstances / unexpected challenges that have arisen since the Mid-Year Evaluation  Meeting that may have compromised the accomplishment of goals and objectives and thus affected  the performance of the members of the Leadership Team. 

Topic 2:  This recommended meeting should also serve as an opportunity for the Superintendent  to share a confidential “Year in Review” self-assessment with the Board of Education. This self assessment may be supplemented by submitting documentation as a formal narrative, portfolio or  some other mutually agreed upon format that was established during the Beginning of the Year  Meeting, with the understanding that any such written documentation would not be confidential.  This document serves as evidentiary documentation regarding the Superintendent’s job  performance and should aid the Board of Education in completing a comprehensive and fair  evaluation of the Superintendent. 

Board of Education Evaluation of the Superintendent – May/June 

The Board of Education conducts the evaluation of the Superintendent of Schools according to  Board of Education Policy in Executive Session unless the Superintendent exercises his/her  statutory right to require that such discussion be held in open session. It is recommended that there  be no prior sharing of written performance evaluation commentary (hard copy or electronic)  among Board of Education members prior to the Executive Session. The result of the Board of  Education’s Executive Session discussion regarding the Superintendent’s performance should be  a draft performance evaluation of the Superintendent of Schools. 

Formal Evaluation of the Superintendent – June 

The formal performance evaluation is completed and presented to the Superintendent of Schools  by a representative(s) of the Board of Education according to Board of Education Policy. It is  important to note that the Board of Education’s performance evaluation of the Superintendent of  Schools is a public document and subject to FOIA. A copy of the Superintendent’s performance  evaluation must also be placed in the Superintendent’s official personnel file. 

Superintendent’s Leadership Performance Areas and Specific Areas of Responsibility

1. Educational Leadership – Areas of Responsibility: 

• Collaborates with BOE to establish vision and strategic goals

Measurable Actions: 

1. Develops and presents a strategic plan to the BOE, or directs other staff to assist in data  collection and analysis.

Sample Artifacts:  Strategic plan document, meeting agendas and minutes, data  analysis reports, presentations to BOE, feedback surveys from BOE. 

Scale:  

▪ Exceeds (4):  Presents a comprehensive plan that incorporates BOE input and  exceeds goal metrics with additional initiatives. 

▪ Meets (3):  Presents a strategic plan that aligns with district goals and receives  BOE approval. 

▪ Developing (2):  Develops a partial plan but lacks full alignment with district goals.

▪ Does Not Meet (1):  Fails to develop a strategic plan or meet BOE expectations.

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

2. Conducts regular goal-setting sessions with the BOE. 

Sample Artifacts:  Goal-setting session agendas, meeting minutes, alignment  documents, goal progress reports, follow-up action items. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4):  Conducts more than the scheduled sessions, with detailed follow-up  actions that improve alignment. 

▪ Meets (3):  Conducts all scheduled sessions, with documented alignment of goals.

▪ Developing (2):  Conducts some sessions, but goals remain partially aligned.

▪ Does Not Meet (1):  Does not conduct regular goal-setting sessions with BOE.

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

• Promotes a culture of improvement and accountability 

Measurable Actions: 

3. Implements professional development programs for staff, or directs instructional  leaders to organize sessions. 

Sample Artifacts:  PD calendar, session attendance logs, feedback forms, PD  materials and presentations, evidence of program alignment with goals.

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4):  Exceeds requirements by offering additional, innovative programs  with high staff engagement. 

▪ Meets (3):  Provides required professional development aligned with district goals.

▪ Developing (2):  Partially implements programs, with limited staff participation.

▪ Does Not Meet (1):  Fails to implement professional development programs.

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

4. Establishes performance metrics and shares progress reports with BOE, or directs other  staff to collect and report data. 

Sample Artifacts:  Performance metric documentation, progress reports, data  dashboards, BOE presentation slides, analysis summaries. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4):  Develops metrics and shares detailed reports quarterly, including  improvement suggestions. 

▪ Meets (3):  Develops metrics and shares reports as required. 

▪ Developing (2):  Develops metrics but inconsistently reports to BOE. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1):  Lacks performance metrics or fails to report to BOE.

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

• Provides instructional leadership in curriculum, assessment, and staff development

Measurable Actions: 

5. Conducts curriculum reviews and provides updates to BOE, or delegates reviews to  curriculum coordinators or department heads. 

Sample Artifacts:  Curriculum review documents, BOE update reports, revised  curriculum standards, staff feedback on curriculum changes. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4):  Conducts reviews quarterly, provides detailed analysis, and suggests  improvements beyond requirements. 

▪ Meets (3):  Conducts annual reviews and provides updates aligned with district needs.

▪ Developing (2):  Conducts limited reviews, providing partial updates to BOE.

▪ Does Not Meet (1):  Fails to conduct reviews or update BOE on curriculum.

▪ Not Sure (no value)

6. Leads data-driven assessment initiatives and presents findings, or directs data teams to assist in analysis

Sample Artifacts: Assessment reports, data analysis summaries, presentations to  BOE, assessment tools, tracking charts for improvement initiatives. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Presents thorough data analysis biannually, with actionable steps for  improvement. 

▪ Meets (3): Provides annual data analysis and recommendations. 

▪ Developing (2): Provides limited data, with minimal actionable insights.

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to use or present data-driven assessments. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

• Keeps BOE informed on significant operational issues 

Measurable Actions: 

7. Provides monthly or quarterly reports on key operational updates, or delegates report  preparation to department heads. 

Sample Artifacts: Monthly/quarterly operational reports, issue summaries,  department head reports, BOE meeting minutes, follow-up documents. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Provides comprehensive, detailed updates beyond required frequency.

▪ Meets (3): Provides comprehensive, detailed updates beyond required frequency.

▪ Developing (2): Provides sporadic updates, with missing details. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to keep BOE informed on operational issues.

 ▪ Not Sure (no value) 

8. Shares summaries of district challenges and proposed solutions with BOE, or directs department heads to provide updates. 

Sample Artifacts: Challenges summary report, proposed solutions document, risk  assessment reports, communications to BOE, BOE feedback.

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Identifies challenges early and proposes innovative, actionable  solutions proactively. 

▪ Meets (3): Identifies challenges and proposes viable solutions as needed.

▪ Developing (2): Provides limited challenge summaries with vague solutions.

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Does not communicate challenges or provide solutions.

 ▪ Not Sure (no value) 

2. Organizational Management – Areas of Responsibility: 

• Manages daily operations, policies, and procedures 

Measurable Actions: 

9. Develops and implements district-wide policies and operational procedures, or  delegates to senior staff. 

Sample Artifacts: Policy manuals, implementation plans, policy update records,  communications with staff, feedback forms, compliance reports. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Develops new policies proactively, improving operational efficiency  beyond expectations. 

▪ Meets (3): Implements required policies effectively, ensuring operational efficiency.

▪ Developing (2): Develops policies with partial implementation. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to develop or implement required policies. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

10. Reports on policy adherence and adjustments as needed, or directs senior staff to  monitor adherence. 

Sample Artifacts: Compliance reports, monitoring summaries, policy adherence  records, BOE update reports, staff adherence feedback. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Provides detailed reports with recommendations for improvement.

▪ Meets (3): Reports on adherence and makes adjustments as required. 

▪ Developing (2): Reports inconsistently, with limited adherence updates.

 ▪ Does Not Meet (1): Does not report on policy adherence.

▪ Not Sure (no value)

• Oversees budget and provides fiscal updates to BOE 

Measurable Actions: 

11. Prepares and presents an annual budget proposal with clear justifications, or directs  finance staff to assist in budget development. 

Sample Artifacts: Annual budget proposal, financial projections, BOE presentation  slides, justifications document, cost-saving initiative reports. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Presents a comprehensive budget with proactive adjustments and  innovative cost-saving measures. 

▪ Meets (3): Presents a balanced budget proposal with clear justifications. 

▪ Developing (2): Presents a budget with limited detail and justification. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to present a coherent budget proposal. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

12. Provides regular budget status reports, highlighting variances and corrective actions,  or delegates preparation to finance staff. 

Sample Artifacts: Budget status reports, variance reports, corrective action  summaries, BOE presentations, financial monitoring tools. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Provides detailed monthly budget reports, proactively managing variances.

▪ Meets (3): Provides quarterly budget reports as required. 

▪ Developing (2): Provides irregular reports with minimal variance tracking.

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to report budget status to BOE. 

▪ Not Sure (no value)

• Assists BOE in policy development and implementation 

Measurable Actions: 

13. Collaborates with BOE to draft and finalize new policies. 

Sample Artifacts: Draft policy documents, policy discussion notes, BOE meeting  minutes, policy research materials, BOE feedback. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Actively engages in policy development, with contributions leading  to improved governance. 

▪ Meets (3): Collaborates with BOE to draft policies as needed. 

▪ Developing (2): Provides limited input on policy development. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Does not assist in policy development. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

14. Implements and communicates new policies to staff and community, or directs HR or  communications staff. 

Sample Artifacts: Policy communication emails, presentation slides, policy  manuals, community notifications, feedback from staff and community. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Communicates policies proactively, with positive feedback from  staff and community. 

▪ Meets (3): Communicates and implements policies effectively. 

▪ Developing (2): Implements policies with inconsistent communication.

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to implement or communicate policies. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

3. Community and Board of Education Relations – Areas of Responsibility:

• Engages with families, community, and stakeholders

Measurable Actions: 

15. Holds regular meetings with community groups, including parents and local  organizations, or delegates to community liaisons 

Sample Artifacts: Meeting agendas, attendance records, presentations, community  feedback forms, newsletters, event summaries. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Holds meetings more frequently than required, with high attendance  and positive feedback. 

▪ Meets (3): Holds required meetings with active participation. 

▪ Developing (2): Holds some meetings with limited engagement. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to hold required community meetings. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

16. Organizes informational sessions or forums to engage stakeholders, or assigns specific  sessions to senior staff. 

Sample Artifacts: Session agendas, sign-in sheets, session materials, stakeholder  feedback, summaries of Q&A sessions, follow-up communications 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Organizes additional forums and informational sessions, enhancing  stakeholder understanding. 

▪ Meets (3): Holds required sessions to inform stakeholders. 

▪ Developing (2): Holds sessions with low attendance or limited information.

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Does not organize sessions or forums. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

• Addresses family and community concerns effectively 

Measurable Actions: 

17. Develops a response plan for addressing community inquiries and concerns, or directs  staff to manage inquiries. 

Sample Artifacts: Response plans, inquiry logs, issue resolution summaries,  community feedback, communications with families and stakeholders.

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Responds to inquiries promptly and efficiently, exceeding  community expectations. 

▪ Meets (3): Develops and follows a response plan effectively. 

▪ Developing (2): Addresses concerns with delays or incomplete responses.

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to address community inquiries or concerns.

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

18. Tracks and reports resolution times and outcomes for community issues raised, or directs  staff to track and report. 

Sample Artifacts: Resolution logs, reports on issue outcomes, response time metrics,  summaries shared with BOE, feedback from families. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Tracks issues and provides detailed reports with timelines and  outcomes regularly. 

▪ Meets (3): Tracks and reports on resolutions as required. 

▪ Developing (2): Tracks issues inconsistently, with limited reporting. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Does not track or report resolutions. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

• Represents the district positively to the community 

Measurable Actions: 

19. Attends community events as a district representative, or delegates attendance to senior  staff for broader coverage. 

Sample Artifacts: Event attendance records, photos, press releases, summary reports,  positive community feedback, media mentions. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Attends events regularly, representing the district positively.

▪ Meets (3): Attends required community events. 

▪ Developing (2): Attends events sporadically with limited engagement.

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to attend community events.

▪ Not Sure (no value)

20. Contributes articles or updates to local media and district newsletters, or assigns  content creation to communications staff. 

Sample Artifacts: Media articles, newsletter contributions, social media posts,  publication records, analytics on reach and engagement. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Provides regular, proactive updates to media and newsletters with  positive impact. 

▪ Meets (3): Contributes required updates to media and newsletters. 

▪ Developing (2): Provides limited updates with minimal outreach. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Does not contribute updates to media or newsletters.

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

• Communicates transparently and provides data for BOE evaluation 

Measurable Actions: 

21. Shares regular updates on district performance data with BOE, or directs data analysis  teams to assist in preparation. 

Sample Artifacts: Performance data reports, BOE presentation slides, progress  summaries, data dashboards, feedback from BOE members. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Provides detailed updates with analysis on performance regularly.

▪ Meets (3): Provides required data updates to BOE. 

▪ Developing (2): Shares limited data, with occasional gaps in reporting.

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to share data with BOE. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

22. Provides analysis on program effectiveness based on measurable outcomes, or directs  program coordinators for data gathering. 

Sample Artifacts: Program evaluation reports, outcome metrics, analysis summaries,  BOE presentation materials, program improvement plans.

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Conducts detailed analysis with actionable insights and improvement plans.

▪ Meets (3): Provides basic analysis on program effectiveness. 

▪ Developing (2): Provides analysis with limited measurable outcomes. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to provide program effectiveness analysis. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

4. Personal and Professional Qualities and Relationships – Areas of Responsibility:

• Demonstrates ethical standards, integrity, and cultural competence 

Measurable Actions: 

23. Engages in cultural competency training and encourages staff to do the same. 

Sample Artifacts: Training attendance records, feedback forms, training materials,  follow-up evaluations, evidence of staff participation. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Initiates training opportunities beyond requirements and fosters  cultural awareness actively. 

▪ Meets (3): Participates in required training and encourages staff. 

▪ Developing (2): Participates in some training with limited staff encouragement.

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to participate in or promote cultural competency training.

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

24. Models ethical decision-making in meetings and public forums. 

Sample Artifacts: Meeting minutes, recorded statements, evidence of ethical  decision-making process, testimonials from staff and community. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Demonstrates ethical leadership consistently in challenging  situations. 

▪ Meets (3): Exhibits ethical behavior in all professional activities. 

▪ Developing (2): Shows occasional ethical lapses or inconsistencies. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to demonstrate ethical behavior. 

▪ Not Sure (no value)

• Builds trust with staff, students, and community 

Measurable Actions: 

25. Conducts regular meetings with staff, seeking their feedback and addressing concerns,  or directs department heads to lead meetings. 

Sample Artifacts: Meeting minutes, recorded statements, evidence of ethical  decision-making process, testimonials from staff and community. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Holds additional meetings, actively using feedback to make  improvements. 

▪ Meets (3): Holds required meetings with follow-up actions. 

▪ Developing (2): Holds meetings sporadically with minimal follow-up. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to meet regularly with staff or address concerns.

 ▪ Not Sure (no value) 

26. Creates opportunities for open forums with students and families to discuss district  initiatives, or delegates to staff liaisons. 

Sample Artifacts: Meeting agendas, minutes, attendance records, staff feedback  forms, summaries of concerns addressed, follow-up action items. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Holds forums more frequently than required, with active  engagement. 

▪ Meets (3): Provides required forums for open discussion. 

▪ Developing (2): Holds limited forums with low attendance. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Does not create opportunities for forums. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

• Manages resistance to change and communicates effectively 

Measurable Actions: 

27. Provides clear and consistent communication on new initiatives or changes, or  delegates communication efforts to relevant staff.

Sample Artifacts: Change management plans, communication materials, email  announcements, FAQs, staff feedback on change communications. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Communicates changes proactively, addressing resistance  effectively. 

▪ Meets (3): Provides clear communication on changes as required. 

▪ Developing (2): Communicates changes inconsistently, leading to confusion.

 ▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to communicate changes effectively. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

28. Conducts workshops or Q&A sessions to help stakeholders understand changes, or  assigns specific sessions to department heads. 

Sample Artifacts: Workshop agendas, session materials, sign-in sheets, Q&A  summaries, participant feedback, follow-up action summaries. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Holds workshops more often than required, ensuring broad  understanding. 

▪ Meets (3): Holds required workshops to explain changes. 

▪ Developing (2): Holds few sessions with limited impact on understanding.

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Does not hold workshops or Q&A sessions. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

• Maintains professionalism and diplomacy in interactions 

Measurable Actions:

29. Documents professional interactions and provides examples as needed. 

Sample Artifacts: Meeting minutes, interaction logs, testimonials, examples of  professional communication, positive feedback from colleagues.

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Demonstrates diplomacy consistently, with documented positive  interactions. 

▪ Meets (3): Maintains professionalism in all interactions. 

▪ Developing (2): Shows inconsistent professionalism. 

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to maintain professionalism or diplomacy. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

30. Handles conflict resolution cases with follow-up and feedback reporting to BOE, or  directs HR or conflict resolution staff. 

Sample Artifacts: Conflict resolution reports, follow-up documentation, BOE  summaries, feedback from involved parties, conflict resolution policies. 

Scale: 

▪ Exceeds (4): Resolves conflicts proactively with comprehensive feedback  reporting. 

▪ Meets (3): Resolves conflicts and reports to BOE as required. 

▪ Developing (2): Resolves conflicts inconsistently, with minimal reporting.

▪ Does Not Meet (1): Fails to address conflicts or report to BOE. 

▪ Not Sure (no value) 

Superintendent’s Performance Evaluation 

1. Year in Review - The Superintendent's Year in Review should serve as a summary of the  body of work presented within the Superintendent’s Performance Portfolio. It is recommended  that the Year in Review Document prepared by the Superintendent be organized according to  the four leadership areas: Educational Leadership, Organizational management, Community  and BOE Relations, and Personal and Professional Qualities and Relationships. This document  should also include any mitigating circumstances that may have compromised goal attainment  in any of the four leadership areas. 

2. Superintendent’s Portfolio of Work - The performance portfolio is designed to be a  compilation of the work product aligned with the Superintendent’s annual performance goals  previously established by the BOE. It is recommended that the portfolio be organized  according to the four identified leadership areas and contain evidentiary documentation  associated with each of the agreed upon performance goals. 

3. Questions to Guide the Superintendent’s Performance Discussion - Please refer to the  Evaluation of the Superintendent (Form 2). 

Recommended Success Strategies for Leadership Team Evaluation 

Leadership Team Self-Assessment 

1. Self-Assessment – It is strongly recommended by CABE and CAPSS that the Leadership Team conduct a self-assessment during each school year. An annual self-assessment provides the Leadership Team with an opportunity to thoughtfully and constructively evaluate its performance. This annual assessment will enable the Leadership Team to privately celebrate its successes, candidly discuss growth opportunities and establish focused goals for continuous improvement as a team. As a member of the Leadership Team it is highly recommended that the Superintendent of Schools be a participant in the discussion. 

2. Facilitation of Self-Assessment - Boards of Education may wish to contact CABE to access external facilitation services and/or utilize an external facilitator to guide the self-assessment discussion. In districts where an annual Board of Education self-assessment is standard operating procedure, an external facilitator may not be necessary. 

3. Questions to Guide the Board of Education Self-Assessment Discussion - Please refer to the Board of Education Self-Evaluation (Form 1). 

Policy adopted: November 18, 2024 THOMASTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS Thomaston, Connecticut

***PLEASE SEE PDF FOR FORMS