future shock n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Future Shock PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Future Shock

Future Shock

173 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Future Shock

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Future Shock WASBO 2007 - Yakima

  2. The Future The future ain’t what it used to be. Yogi Berra The future belongs to those who prepare for it today Malcolm X

  3. JLARC—School District Accounting JLARC—Special Education Accounting JLARC—Transportation Study Emerging Themes Accountability through expenditure transparency Building-level expenditure data Better staff assignment information – especially supplemental contracts Isolate state responsibility By extension: better enrollment data Some legislators: one accounting system for all 2006 Legislative Session

  4. Accountability and Efficiency discussions. Financial warning system (Seattle). P-20 Council and E-MAP. Create a budget-overlay. Student data system. Themes Very expensive endeavor. We don’t know where we spend our money. We need more accountability (for current resources). No new resources w/o accountability. Wa Learns Steering Committee

  5. Themes Research tells us what approaches work State and districts need to invest in evidence-based model No block grants Building-level information Consultants’ Model School-level transparency Common-sense categories for staff, NERC Categorical programs based on funding drivers Evidence-based allocations and expenditures Black boxes Staffing ratios NERC TRI and supplemental salary data 12-month K-12 Advisory Committee

  6. 2007 Legislative Session • New transportation formula. • New special education formula and accounting changes. • 2008 graduation requirement, math reality, correlation of poverty and ethnicity and achievement. • Washington Learns Report. • Superintendent’s request for transparency and resources as recommended by K-12 Advisory Committee. • P-20 Council and E-MAP. • Article 9 lawsuit? • New resources will not come w/o new accountability and accounting detail.

  7. Transparency An Overview

  8. Non-Employee Related Costs (NERC) is based on number of certificated staff and based on 25-year-old assumptions 1. District Enrollment 2. Formula Staff Ratios(Teachers, Administrators & Classified staff) 3. NERC 4. Salaries & Benefits = State GeneralApportionment

  9. Professional Development supplies Security $5 Insurance $21 $44 $9,112per CIS $90 $108 Utilities = Technology $130 Central Office (includes legal svs. and student supplies) $65 $16 $479per student Instructional materials Maintenance and custodial supplies Split is derived by proportionally distributing current funding allocation among Picus & Odden recommended categories. Unblock NERC into Common Sense Allocations Example of what our 2005-06 allocation bought: =

  10. Salaries and Benefits are based on decades old snapshots 1. District Enrollment 2. Formula Staff Ratios(Teachers, Administrators & Classified staff) 3. NERC 4. Salaries & Benefits = State GeneralApportionment

  11. Certificated Instructional Staff Classified Staff Administrators Equalize Salary Allocations K-4: 53.2 5-12: 46 staff per 1,000 students 4 staff per 1,000 students 16.67 staff per 1,000 students • 281 different allocations for a classified staff person • Ranging from • $33,970 to • $22,454 • 269 different allocations for an administrator • Ranging from • $77,924 to • $46,485 • 34 districts receive more than the rest of the 262 districts on the salary schedule. • Difference ranges from 0.1% to 6.3% What does this mean? Two districts with similar enrollment receive different state funding amounts. Mabton receives $245,116 for four administrators and Columbia receives $212,244 for four administrators.

  12. I-728, Levies, Federal LAP and ELL Larger or smaller class sizes than funded ratios = Salary inequities are layered on top of other complexities Planning Periods, Librarians, Counselors, Nurses, etc. GeneralApportionment 1. Enrollment 2. Staffing ratios(K-4: 1:18.8;5-12: 1:21.7) 3. NERC 4. Salaries/Benefits + – + Current program Costs Exceed Revenue (e.g., Salary allocations, Transportation, NERC, Special Education, Struggling Studentsand TRI) –

  13. 1. Unblock the staffing ratios and NERC First step is cost neutral Perfect categories during interim with help from school districts and bring Legislature recommendations for re-structure in Supplemental Budget Recommendation: Unblock, Equalize and Improve 2. Equalize salary allocations over time 3. Improve NERC, staffing ratios and salary allocations over time

  14. Transportation Down Payment, Implement new Formula Devise Formula Special Education Formula Inequities, Continue Safety Net Improve Respond to Court decision Struggling Students Full Day Kindergarten FKD, LAP FDK, LAP PAS 12th Grade, I-728 PAS Science Professional Development Targeted Investments Improve toward 10 LID Improve toward 10 LID Math/Science/Reading Targeted Investments Improvement Plan Work in Progress… 2007-09 Biennium 2009-11 Biennium 2011-13 Biennium Instructional Unblock; $0 Improve Improve Ratio Improve Selected Selected Selected Classified Unblock; $0 Improve Improve Ratio Selected Selected Administrator Unblock; $0 Improve Ratio Selected Instructional Salary Equity Salary Equity Implement Salary progress; KSEP* progress Sal Study Classified Salary Equity Salary Equity Implement Salary progress progress Sal Study Administrator Salary Equity Salary Equity Implement Salary progress progress Sal Study Re-visit Improvement Recommendations Re-visit Improvement Recommendations NERC Allocation Unblock; $0 Improve Improve toward P/O** Improve toward P/O** Selected *Knowledge and Skills Enhanced Pay, National Board and Pro Cert **Picus and Odden

  15. Legislative Bills And JLARC Recommendations

  16. JLARC K-12 Data Study Report • OSPI, in consultation with others, should develop state standards and methodologies for reporting and allocating school-level expenditures. • OSPI should collect improved information about teachers and staff, including teacher schedules, qualifications, professional growth, and reasons for additional pay. • OSPI should conduct regular audits of the student data it collects. • OSPI should collect better information about courses, including course minutes, and core coursework completed by students in preparation for college. OSPI should also develop statewide conventions that districts adhere to when naming courses.

  17. JLARC Reports • Transportation • Separately account for To/From versus other transportation costs. • Special Education • Review current 1077 and recommend revision or replacement of.

  18. SB 5627 • This bill provides a joint Task force to review all current basic education funding formulas, develop a new funding structure, and develop a new basic education definition.

  19. E2SSB 5843 • Directs OSPI to: • Conduct a feasibility study on establishing a longitudinal student-teacher data system • To Gather: • Student level courses. • Teacher qualifications. • Teacher assignments. • Creates an educational data center within OFM for the P-20 system.

  20. E2SSB 5843 • Further directs OPSI to develop standards for school data systems that focus on validation and verification of data entered into the systems.

  21. 2SHB 1871 • Establishes a financial health and monitoring system to evaluate and rate the long term financial health of school districts, and requires a review of the current budget submittal and approval process. • Also supported creation of a P-20 Data center. • THIS BILL DID NOT PASS!

  22. Implications for K-12 Finance • Building-based accounting (programs) • Improved staffing assignment data. • Building level enrollment. • Defining buildings. • More and revised expenditure categories. • More TRI and supplemental salaries data • Revenue to program accounting. • Pressure for one accounting system. • Building-based allocations overlay. • Formalized financial outlook.

  23. School District Accounting Committee • Inform specifics of Superintendent’s response to proposals • Key consultants on how to implement: • Accounting changes • Unknown implications for school district operations and administration • Cost implications for districts • Informal communications network