AEPR FAQs

See below for select FAQs about our Alternative Education Progress Reports. To view a full version of FAQs, please select the year of interest from the table below.

AEPR FAQsSY 2021-2022SY 2020-2021SY 2019-2020SY 2018-2019SY 2017-2018SY 2016-2017
FAQs2021-20222020-20212019-20202018-20192017-20182016-2017

What is the purpose of the Alternative Education Progress Report (AEPR), and how is it different from the District’s School Progress Report (SPR)?

The AEPR is the School District of Philadelphia’s tool for understanding the performance of its alternative programs across multiple dimensions, from academic achievement to college and career readiness.

The AEPR differs from the SPR in ways that reflect the unique structures and goals of alternative programs. More specifically, the AEPR:

  • Includes different performance metrics designed to be more relevant to the types of alternative programs being evaluated;
  • Is scored using different performance expectations and methods; and
  • Uses different terminology to categorize program performance.

How do alternative programs compare to traditional schools receiving an SPR?

Alternative programs cannot be compared to traditional schools using scores from the AEPR and SPR. Scores from the AEPR reflect how programs are performing relative to performance targets established in program contracts; scores from the SPR reflect the percentage of points earned.

Additionally, while many metrics on the AEPR appear to align with those on the SPR, the AEPR metrics are often calculated using different definitions and business rules and are scored using different performance expectations.

What are the different AEPR types?

There are four different versions of the AEPR, each intended to evaluate performance on metrics that are most relevant to the type of program and its unique purpose:

  • Accelerated – programs that allow students who are overage and under-credited to get back on track. Students in accelerated high school programs are able to graduate within three years or less. Students in accelerated middle school programs are able to get back on track and eventually graduate from high school with their age-appropriate cohort.
  • AEDY – Alternative Education for Disruptive Youth programs are designed for students who have committed serious Code of Conduct violations. Students enroll in an AEDY Transition program, through disciplinary transfer, after a determination is made through a due process hearing conducted by the Office of Students Rights and Responsibilities.  AEDY programs assist such students with transitioning back to non-disciplinary schools.
  • Continuation – programs that serve middle grade students in need of smaller school settings that provide intensive academic and social supports
  • Dual Enrollment – programs that allow students to earn credits towards their high school diploma and a college degree simultaneously
  • Adult Diploma – programs that allow those who are older than 17 years of age (no upper age limit), have earned more than 8 high school credits prior to enrolling, and are not currently enrolled in a regular day school to continue earning credits towards a high school diploma.

Note: In SY2016-2017 and SY2017-2018, all Adult Diploma programs were referred to as EOP programs.

How are overall scores grouped into categories?

Overall categories are based on the percentage of targets for which schools met or exceeded expectations.

  • A label of Excelling indicates that a school has met 75% or more of targets;
  • A label of Achieving indicates that a school has met 50-74% of targets;
  • A label of Approaching indicates that a school has met 25-49% of targets;
  • A label of Underperforming indicates that a school has met less than 25% of targets.

How are the four performance tiers – Exceptional, Target, Near Target, and Did Not Meet – determined?

These categories are based on the performance targets established during contract negotiations with contracted alternative providers in summer 2017.

Three performance categories – “Unacceptable”, “Target/Mid-Range”, and “Exceptional” – are explicitly included in the program contracts. For the AEPR, the “Unacceptable” category has been divided into two categories:

  • Near Target – within 20% of the Target score
  • Did Not Meet – more than 20% from the Target score

For example, the target for Credit Accumulation in Accelerated programs is 75%. Consequently, in order to receive a Near Target rating for that metric, a program must have a score of at least 60% for the Credit Accumulation metric [75% – (75% * 20%)) = 60%]

The cutpoints required for each tier and program type can be found in Appendix B of the AEPR User Guide.

If you have any questions or require additional information regarding the Alternative Education Progress Report, please contact us at performanceframework@philasd.org.