Central to California's school accountability system are programs to engage low-performing schools in improvement efforts. One of these is the High Priority Schools Program (HPSGP), created by Assembly Bill 961 (Chapter 747, "Statutes of 2001") to provide funds to the lowest performing schools in the state. To be eligible for funding, schools must rank in the bottom decile of the state's Academic Performance Index (API). This study seeks to answer the question whether some schools participating in the state intervention program were more successful than others in meeting student achievement goals. Did schools that met their API growth targets each year and by all subgroups share common characteristics? There was not a great deal of difference among schools in how they spent HPSGP funds. Predictably, the greatest proportion of funding went to personnel costs. These included literacy and mathematics coaches; counselors, and administrative personnel. The next largest spending category was professional development followed closely by collaboration and planning. (Contains 1 table, 1 figure and 40 footnotes.)