F AIR S TUDENT F UNDING : P ROMOTING E QUITY &
A CHIEVEMENT IN B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC
S CHOOLS
Andrés Alonso, Chief Exec...
AGENDA




                           FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS
1. GOALS & PRINCIPLES

2. CHALLENGES TO REFORM

3...
WHAT DO OUR CITY SCHOOLS LOOK LIKE?




                                                                                  ...
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA




                                                                                             ...
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA




                                                                                             ...
CITY SCHOOLS: GRADUATION & DROPOUT RATES




                                                                             ...
HISTORICAL STATE OF THE CITY SCHOOLS:




                                                                                ...
HISTORICAL STATE OF THE CITY SCHOOLS:




                                                        FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CI...
HISTORICAL STATE OF THE CITY SCHOOLS:




                                                                           FAIR ...
HISTORICAL STATE OF THE CITY SCHOOLS:




                                                        FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CI...
HISTORICAL STATE OF THE CITY SCHOOLS:




                                                                  FAIR STUDENT F...
PRIORITIES FOR REFORM




                                                               FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOL...
UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES FOR THE WORK




                                                              FAIR STUDENT FUNDING:...
CHALLENGES TO REFORMING THE SCHOOL FUNDING                14
MODEL




                                             BALTIM...
PREVIOUS BUDGET MODEL: STAFFING-BASED




                                                                                ...
SOME SCHOOLS GOT MORE MONEY THAN OTHERS




                                                                              ...
ENROLLMENT DOES IMPACT FUNDING




                                                                                       ...
SMALL ES & MS RECEIVED DISPROPORTIONATELY MORE




                                                                       ...
SMALL HIGH SCHOOLS WERE RECEIVING VIRTUALLY THE SAME




                                                                 ...
THE NEED:




                                                                                      FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: ...
PROCESS: GETTING FROM THERE TO HERE                21




                                      BALTIMORE CITY
           ...
POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS




                                                                                     FAIR STU...
POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS (CONTD…)




                                                                               FAIR ...
POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS (CONTD…)




                                                                       FAIR STUDENT ...
AGGRESSIVE STEPS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF FAIR STUDENT




                                                                  ...
FSF TIMELINE: PLANNING (JAN – APRIL)




                                                              FAIR STUDENT FUNDIN...
FSF WORKGROUPS




                                                        FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS
          1....
PROGRESSING TOWARDS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING:




                                                                            ...
DECIDING UPON “LOCKED” V. “UNLOCKED” DOLLARS:




                                                                    FAIR...
DEVOLVING DOLLARS TO SCHOOLS:




                                                                                        ...
EXPLANATION OF FAIR STUDENT FUNDING ALLOCATIONS




                                                                      ...
STUDENT WEIGHTS IN THE FUNDING FORMULA




                                                                               ...
IMPACT OF HOLD HARMLESS CAPS: GAIN/LOSS BEFORE AND




                                                                   ...
IMPACT OF HOLD HARMLESS CAPS: GAIN/LOSS BEFORE AND




                                                                   ...
FSF TIMELINE: IMPLEMENTATION (APRIL - OCT.)




                                                                          ...
BUDGET APPROVAL PROCESS




                                                                                   FAIR STUDEN...
CITY SCHOOLS REVISION OF THE BUDGET PROCESS AND




                                                                      ...
INCREASING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT




                                                                                    FA...
PRINCIPALS’ ONLINE BUDGET TOOL




                                                                                    FAI...
ENROLLMENT & SCHOOL BUDGET RECONCILIATION




                                                                   FAIR STUD...
FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS
           Enrollments Lower Than Projected                        Budget Reductions


...
OUTCOMES OF FAIR STUDENT FUNDING                42




                                   BALTIMORE CITY
                 ...
EVERY SCHOOL LEVEL EXPERIENCED AN INCREASE IN FUNDING




                                                                ...
DOLLARS MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED ACROSS SCHOOLS OF




                                                                    ...
DOLLARS MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED ACROSS SCHOOLS




                                                                       ...
DOLLARS MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED ACROSS SCHOOLS




                                                                       ...
HIGH POVERTY SCHOOLS STILL RECEIVE MORE FUNDING




                                                                      ...
VARIANCES BETWEEN SCHOOLS ON THE TOP V. SCHOOLS ON




                                                                   ...
STAFFING SHIFTS: KEY POINTS




                                                                   FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: C...
FAIR STUDENT FUNDING OUTCOMES:




                                                                     FAIR STUDENT FUNDI...
FAIR STUDENT FUNDING OUTCOMES:




                                                                                       ...
FAIR STUDENT FUNDING OUTCOMES:




                                                                                   FAIR...
FAIR STUDENT FUNDING OUTCOMES:




                                                                                       ...
EFFECT OF TITLE I & TITLE II ALLOCATIONS ON FINE ARTS




                                                                ...
EFFECT OF TITLE I & TITLE II ALLOCATIONS ON AFTER-SCHOOL




                                                             ...
EFFECT OF TITLE I & TITLE II ALLOCATIONS ON SCHOOL-




                                                                  ...
GUIDANCE & COLLEGE READINESS




                                                                               FAIR STUDE...
GENERAL RESULTS OF FAIR STUDENT FUNDING




                                                                            FA...
NEXT STEPS FOR CITY SCHOOLS




                                                                                         F...
CONTINUAL REDESIGN OF CITY SCHOOLS CENTRAL OFFICE




                                                                    ...
COMMITMENT TO CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT




                                                                                F...
GUIDANCE, SUPPORT, & ACCOUNTABILITY




                                                                                  ...
F AIR S TUDENT F UNDING : P ROMOTING
E QUITY & A CHIEVEMENT IN B ALTIMORE
C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
Copies of this presentati...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Final (For Web) Presentation To Council Of Great City Schools Houston

1,486 views
1,405 views

Published on

Published in: Education
1 Comment
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Erik Syring
    You still owe me $6000 you stole from me. Time to pay back.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,486
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
31
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
1
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Final (For Web) Presentation To Council Of Great City Schools Houston

  1. 1. F AIR S TUDENT F UNDING : P ROMOTING E QUITY & A CHIEVEMENT IN B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS Andrés Alonso, Chief Executive Officer Presented With: Tisha Edwards, Special Assistant to the CEO & Matt Hornbeck, Principal, Hampstead Hill Academy Additional District Members: Irma Johnson, Executive Director of Elementary Schools , Sean Conley, Principal, Morrell Park ES/MS, Jerrelle Francois, Vice Chair Board of School Commissioners & Janet Johnson, Board Executive BALTIMORE CITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  2. 2. AGENDA FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS 1. GOALS & PRINCIPLES 2. CHALLENGES TO REFORM 3. PROCESS DEVELOPMENT & IMPLEMENTATION 4. RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY 2 P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  3. 3. WHAT DO OUR CITY SCHOOLS LOOK LIKE? FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS School & District Statistics • 19th largest urban school district in the country. • 192 schools - 55 Elementary, 70 ES/MS, 19 Middle, 7 MS/HS, 35 High Schools, 6 Alternative Schools. • 25 charter schools, 13 contract schools, 9 alternative programs, and 2 service programs. Student Demographics • 82,565 students – 88.4% African American, 7.7% White, 2.8% Hispanic. • 15.3% Special Education. • 68.3% Free & Reduced Meals Program. Other Factors • City-State Partnership, governed by appointed Board of School Commissioners. • Local & State government, private funding sources. • 7 different CEOs in 10 years. • Union affiliations – AFT, Baltimore Teachers Union (BTU), AFSCME, PSASA, CUB. 3 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  4. 4. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Maryland School Assessment Reading 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 90 80.5 75.9 73.4 80 73.1 68.8 65.6 65.4 65.1 65.0 70 61.0 61.0 60.5 60.3 58.7 57.6 Percent Proficient or Advanced 54.6 53.6 60 49.9 49.0 46.4 45.7 45.5 43.8 43.5 50 43.0 42.5 42.4 40.0 39.7 39.4 40 30 20 10 0 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 (2008 N=6033) (2008 N=5904) (2008 N=5636) (2008 N=5490) (2008 N=5687) (2008 N=5775) (2007 N=5850) (2007 N=5490) (2007 N=5536) (2007 N=5628) (2007 N=6126) (2007 N=6141) (2006 N=5786) (2006 N=5789) (2006 N=6016) (2006 N=6359) (2006 N=6559) (2006 N=6688) (2005 N=6020) (2005 N=6380) (2005 N=6705) (2005 N=6875) (2005 N=7416) (2005 N=7075) (2004 N=6673) (2004 N=7053) (2004 N=7161) (2004 N=7743) (2004 N=7745) (2004 N=5937) 4 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  5. 5. STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT DATA FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Maryland School Assessment Mathematics 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 90 79.8 80 73.3 72.2 67.4 63.9 70 62.7 62.0 60.4 56.5 Percent Proficient or Advanced 54.2 53.7 53.6 60 50.5 48.5 47.6 43.8 50 42.4 33.6 40 31.4 28.4 28.4 25.7 24.8 24.0 30 21.6 19.8 19.5 19.0 18.4 17.9 20 10 0 Grade 3 Grade 4 Grade 5 Grade 6 Grade 7 Grade 8 (2008 N=6032) (2008 N=5906) (2008 N=5632) (2008 N=5469) (2008 N=5678) (2008 N=5746) (2007 N=5852) (2007 N=5496) (2007 N=5546) (2007 N=5626) (2007 N=6114) (2007 N=6108) (2006 N=5794) (2006 N=5790) (2006 N=6011) (2006 N=6355) (2006 N=6549) (2006 N=6688) (2005 N=6024) (2005 N=6374) (2005 N=6709) (2005 N=6892) (2005 N=7410) (2005 N=7064) (2004 N=6691) (2004 N=7072) (2004 N=7173) (2004 N=7780) (2004 N=7756) (2004 N=5960) 5 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  6. 6. CITY SCHOOLS: GRADUATION & DROPOUT RATES FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Baltimore City Graduation and Dropout Rates 65.0 60.6 58.7 58.5 59.0 62.6 60.1 55.0 54.2 54.3 50.5 49.5 45.0 46.2 46.0 42.6 35.0 25.0 15.0 13.8 13.5 10.9 11.3 11.7 11.7 10.2 10.4 10.3 10.5 10.5 9.6 7.9 5.0 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 6 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  7. 7. HISTORICAL STATE OF THE CITY SCHOOLS: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS ENROLLMENT Official September 30 Enrollment 1994-1995 through 2008-2009 120,000 113,428 109,980 108,759 110,000 107,416 106,540 103,000 98,226 100,000 95,475 94,031 91,738 88,401 90,000 85,468 82,381 81,284 82,052 80,000 70,000 Number of Students 60,000 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009* *2009 data still preliminary Note: 2008 includes the return of three Edison Schools 7 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  8. 8. HISTORICAL STATE OF THE CITY SCHOOLS: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS STAFFING 8 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  9. 9. HISTORICAL STATE OF THE CITY SCHOOLS: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS ENROLLMENT-STAFFING CHALLENGE Number of Students in City Schools vs. Number of Staff Employed 2000-01 through 2007-08 9 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  10. 10. HISTORICAL STATE OF THE CITY SCHOOLS: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS GRADUAL INCREASED FUNDING SOON COMING TO A HALT 10 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  11. 11. HISTORICAL STATE OF THE CITY SCHOOLS: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS REVENUES Shortfall in Base Operational Expenses Baltimore City Public Schools Estimated Increase in FY 2009 General Fund Revenue & Expenditures (in thousands) Estimated FY 2009 Revenue Increase $ 11,100 Estimated FY 2009 Expenditure Increase $ 61,500 Estimated FY 2009 Funding Shortfall (without new needs) $ (50,400) 11 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  12. 12. PRIORITIES FOR REFORM FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • Create a system of great schools led by great principals, with the authority, resources and responsibility to teach all of our students well. • Engage those closest to the students in making key decisions that impact them. • Empower schools and then hold them accountable for results. • Ensure fair and transparent funding our schools can count on annually. • Right-size the district – schools & central office – to address realities of revenues and expenditures. 12 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  13. 13. UNDERLYING PRINCIPLES FOR THE WORK FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • Dollars should follow each student. • Resources should be in the schools. • Students with the same characteristics should get the same level of resources. • Equitable, simple, and transparent approach to help schools get better results for our students. 13 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  14. 14. CHALLENGES TO REFORMING THE SCHOOL FUNDING 14 MODEL BALTIMORE CITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  15. 15. PREVIOUS BUDGET MODEL: STAFFING-BASED FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Core Staffing Model 2006 Core Staffing Model 2007 Admin & Support Staff  Principal – 1 per school Admin & Support Staff  Assistant Principal – 0-300 =0 301-500 =1  Principal – 1 per school 501-1000=2  Assistant Principal – 1 Per 300 students 1000 up =3  Secretary – 1 Per school plus one extra for schools  Secretary – 1 Per school plus one extra for schools over over 900 students 900 students  Instructional Aide – 1 for every Pre-K and  Instructional Aide – 1 for every Pre-K and Kindergarten class Kindergarten class  Non-Instructional Aide – 1 per school plus one per 250 students plus 1 Guidance Aide Per High School Resource Teachers Resource Teachers  1 for every 6 teachers in Elementary Schools  1 for every 8 teachers in Elementary Schools  1 for every 3 teachers in Middle Schools  1 for every 3 teachers in Middle Schools  1 for every 3 teachers in High Schools  1 for every 4 teachers in High Schools Classroom Teacher Ratios Classroom Teacher Ratios  Pre-K: 1 per 20 Students (with an aide)  Pre-K: 1 per 20 Students (with an aide)  Kindergarten: 1 per 22 students (with an aide)  Kindergarten: 1 per 25 students (with an aide)  Grades 1-3: 1 per 22 students  Grades 1-3: 1 per 24.9 students(grades combined)  Grades 4-5: 1 per 27 students  Grades 4-5: 1 per 26.9 students(grades combined)  Grades 6-8: 1 per 30 students  Grades 6-8: 1 per 30 students  High Schools: 1 per 32 students  High Schools: 1 per 32 students  5 discretionary teacher positions per area 15 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  16. 16. SOME SCHOOLS GOT MORE MONEY THAN OTHERS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS $35 School Attributed $/pupil SY 2007 - 2008 $30 Thousands of Dollars $25 $20 $15 $10 $5 $0 Elementary Elementary/ Middle High Schools Middle Schools Schools Schools Range: $8K-$28K $8K-$19K $11K-$29K $8K-$17K Note: Data in chart is NOT adjusted for student need; Actual salaries. Additionally, data does not reflect minor shifts resulting from November 5, 2008 enrollment reconciliations. 16 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  17. 17. ENROLLMENT DOES IMPACT FUNDING FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Small Schools Received More Money than Larger Schools: $35 $/pupil vs. % school size SY 2007-2008 $30 $25 $/pupil (000) $20 $15 R² = 0.1933 $10 $5 $0 0 500 1,000 1,500 K-12 Enrollment Note: excludes 5 Alternative schools, 7 Special Ed schools, 3 Edison contract schools, all charter schools. Data in chart is NOT adjusted for student need. Additionally, data does not reflect minor shifts resulting from November 5, 2008 enrollment reconciliations. 17 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  18. 18. SMALL ES & MS RECEIVED DISPROPORTIONATELY MORE FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS MONEY School Attributed $/pupil Elementary and Middle Schools SY 2007-2008 $12 $10.9 Thousands of Dollars $10 $9.1 $8.5 $7.8 $8 $6 $4 $2 $0 <250 251-500 501-750 >750 Enrollment category: Number of Schools: 18 70 21 6 Avg. enrollment: 214 363 620 898 Note: excludes 5 Alternative schools, 7 Special Ed schools, 3 Edison contract schools, all charter schools. Data in chart is NOT adjusted for student need; includes Elementary, Elementary/Middle and Middle schools; excludes 10 Middle Schools that are in the process of closing; per pupil calculation excludes Food Services. Note: Data does not reflect minor shifts resulting from November 5, 2008 enrollment reconciliations. 18 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  19. 19. SMALL HIGH SCHOOLS WERE RECEIVING VIRTUALLY THE SAME FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS AMOUNT PER PUPIL AS LARGE HIGH SCHOOLS… School Attributed $/pupil High Schools SY 2007 - 2008 $10 $9.2 $9.1 $9.0 Thousands of Dollars $8 $6 $4 $2 $0 < 500 501-750 > 750 Enrollment category: Number of Schools: 11 8 11 Avg. enrollment: 351 610 1,112 Note: excludes 5 Alternative schools, 7 Special Ed schools, 3 Edison contract schools, all charter schools. Data in chart is NOT adjusted for student need; excludes Baltimore School for the Arts. Per pupil calculation excludes Food Services 19 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  20. 20. THE NEED: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Analysis of school operations and feedback from schools and community indicated that the then-present way was not working: • Present funding system was unfair, complex, inflexible, and lacked transparency, with unexplained variances among schools. • Schools did not have sufficient flexibility to use resources to address the specific needs of their students, and provide the optimal programs to bring all schools to excellence. • The City Schools’ outcomes had improved over time, but the recent baseline continued to be unacceptable: 92 schools remained in school improvement status. • City Schools could not hold schools accountable and build responsibility for outcomes without providing schools with resources and opportunity to exercise leadership in the use of those resources. Most importantly: There is no time to waste. 20 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  21. 21. PROCESS: GETTING FROM THERE TO HERE 21 BALTIMORE CITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  22. 22. POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS The Board – “Courageous Decision-Making” • Transparency and proactive approach to information-sharing to support fundamental shifts in funding policies – multiple Board work sessions. • Requirement of honesty about the challenges – winners & losers as a result of paradigm shifts. Baltimore City Mayor & City Council – “Partners in the Work” • Key funder of the City Schools, State primary funder. • Historical City-State Partnership, created political tensions. • City Councilpersons as historic defenders of individual schools throughout the City. External Partners with Historic Ties to City Schools – “School-Based Decision-Making” • Moving from central funding to school-based funding. • Vested interests in the status quo. 22 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  23. 23. POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS (CONTD…) FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Central Office Staff – “Moving in a New Direction” • “Right-Sizing” & “Right-Staffing”: Handling significant changes in leadership at all levels, including the elimination of 309 central office positions. • Changing the culture of the approach to the work – moving from a reactive culture to a proactive culture. • Overcoming a hesitation to change – pilot v. system-wide initiative. • Developing a common vocabulary and mission. The Unions – “Avoiding the Pitfalls of Reform” • Frequent collaboration & discussion to ensure that contractual obligations reflected the shifting priorities of the system. • Avoiding failures of earlier attempt at school-based decision making. 23 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  24. 24. POLITICAL CONSIDERATIONS (CONTD…) FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS School-Based Staff – “A New View of Central Office” • Effectively communicating the reforms to the field. • Addressing an overwhelming distrust of central office. Parents & Families – “Empowering Parental Involvement” • Parent information sessions & backpacked materials. • All Fair Student Funding information on the web. • Parental communication requirements in school budget creation. The Public – “Informing for Change” • Transparency with the media to promote awareness. • Not change for change’s sake but focus on the students. 24 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  25. 25. AGGRESSIVE STEPS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF FAIR STUDENT FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS FUNDING: Continually Improve • Implement revised Evaluate process for FY10 Depth and Sustainability of Change & Extend • Ongoing strategic review and • Analyze reform adaptation impact vs. goals Implement • Evaluate FY09 budget process • Roll-out FY09 implementation budget Plan • Provide ongoing process support where needed • Train and • Deeper planning • Analyze current state support around future budget • Design FY09 principals cycles, system budget, funding • Complete design, principal system, and central school training, and office systems to support budgeting implementation of school autonomy BCPSS strategy Jan–Mar 2008 April–May 2008 June–November 2008 Dec 2008 and beyond 25 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  26. 26. FSF TIMELINE: PLANNING (JAN – APRIL) FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Creation of Guidance Documents for Principals Determine Locked v. Unlocked Devolution Students Weights & Hold Harmless Caps Workgroup Creation & Meeting 26 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  27. 27. FSF WORKGROUPS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS 1. New School Budgets 2. Resources to Schools (Shared Services) 3. Training & Support for Principals 4. Financial Impact on Schools 5. Redesign of Central Office 27 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  28. 28. PROGRESSING TOWARDS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • City Schools faced a $76.9 million overall shortfall with inclusion of new needs. • Central office & school leadership team workgroups identified $165 million that could be utilized through FSF to cover the funding shortfall and redistribute approximately $88 million to schools. • Previously, principals had only $90 per pupil in discretionary funding (Title I schools got an additional $1,000 per pupil). For instance, a principal of a typical non-Title I school with 300 students had just $27K in discretionary funds. With FSF, principals could have as much as $1.7M. • Schools have dramatic new flexibility over resources. Schools can use new flexibility to redesign their programs according to their needs, and identify the positions they require within their budget. 28 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  29. 29. DECIDING UPON “LOCKED” V. “UNLOCKED” DOLLARS: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • Budget funds would be distinguished between “Locked” and “Unlocked” dollars. • “Locked” Dollars = Positions or resources tied to compliance (i.e. Special Education), specialized programs (CTE or vocational) and/or recommended by a focus group of principals were kept as a central mandate. • “Unlocked” Dollars = Funds previously controlled by the central office that were devolved to schools for site- based management. Schools have discretion for all other non-specified resources. 29 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  30. 30. DEVOLVING DOLLARS TO SCHOOLS: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS $700 $22 Million $600 $39 $500 Title I & Title II $455 $455 Millions $400 Grant Funds Unlocked Funds $300 $562 $200 Locked Funds $100 $212 $212 $0 FY08 Total FY09 Initial FY09 Total $601M Distribution Allocation $667M $689M * Excludes charter schools and Pre-K funding. 30 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  31. 31. EXPLANATION OF FAIR STUDENT FUNDING ALLOCATIONS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Base funding for all students except $3,940 per pupil self-contained special ed pupils Base funding for self-contained special $1,282 per self-contained special ed pupil (not including devolved $) ed pupils Dollars devolved from central office $1,000 per pupil Drop-out prevention weight $900 per high school student eligible for free or reduced-price lunch Gifted weights ES $2,200 per advanced pupil, defined as students scoring advanced on BOTH reading & math Grade 1 Stanford 10 tests, extrapolated to school population $2,200 per advanced pupil, defined as students scoring advanced on AT LEAST ONE MS reading or math MSA test; incoming 6th grade scores from prior year extrapolated to school population $2,200 per advanced pupil, defined as students scoring advanced on AT LEAST ONE HS reading or math MSA test; incoming 9th grade scores from prior year extrapolated to school population K-8 Treat the K-5 grades as ES and the 6-8 grades as MS Low-performance weights $2,200 per low-performing pupil, defined as % scoring quot;not readyquot; on the K-Readiness ES Test MS $2,200 per low-performing pupil, defined as % scoring basic on both tests HS $2,200 per low-performing pupil, defined as % scoring basic on both tests K-8 Treat the K-5 grades as ES and the 6-8 grades as MS Hold harmless caps Loss cap Losses capped at 15% of the current year budget, for year 1 Gain gap Gains capped at 10% of the current year budget, for year 1 Locked dollars Unique to each school (principals, vocational/ESOL/JROTC teachers, etc) Special revenue Special ed and grant dollars allocated out per school given guidelines 31 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  32. 32. STUDENT WEIGHTS IN THE FUNDING FORMULA FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS ADVANCED WEIGHTS LOW-PERFORMANCE WEIGHTS $2,200 per low-performing $2,200 per low-performing pupil, pupil, defined as follows: defined as follows: • ES: % 1st graders scoring advanced • ES: $2200 per low-performing on BOTH reading & math Grade 1 pupil, defined as % scoring quot;not Stanford 10 tests * school population readyquot; on the K-Readiness Test • MS: % incoming 6th grade students • MS: $2200 per low-performing scoring advanced on reading OR math MSA test * school population pupil, defined as % scoring basic on both tests • HS: % incoming 9th grade students scoring advanced on reading OR • HS: $2200 per low-performing math MSA test * school population pupil, defined as % scoring basic on both tests • K-8: Treat the K-5 grades as ES and the 6-8 grades as MS • K-8: Treat the K-5 grades as ES and the 6-8 grades as MS 32 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  33. 33. IMPACT OF HOLD HARMLESS CAPS: GAIN/LOSS BEFORE AND FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS AFTER CAPS (IN DOLLARS) Gain/Loss BEFORE Hold Harmless Caps* Gain/Loss AFTER Hold Harmless Caps* $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $500,000 $500,000 $0 $0 -$500,000 -$500,000 -$1,000,000 -$1,000,000 -$1,500,000 -$1,500,000 -$2,000,000 -$2,000,000 *General Fund unlocked dollars, not including Title I or devolved funds, since caps were applied prior to adding devolved funds. $2,000,000 Gain/Loss AFTER Hold Harmless $1,500,000 Caps, including Title $1,000,000 I, Devolved Dollars, and $500,000 Projected Enrollment Changes $0 Note: Data does not reflect minor shifts -$500,000 resulting from November 5, 2008 -$1,000,000 enrollment reconciliations. -$1,500,000 -$2,000,000 33 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  34. 34. IMPACT OF HOLD HARMLESS CAPS: GAIN/LOSS BEFORE AND FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS AFTER CAPS (IN PERCENTS) % Gain/Loss BEFORE Hold Harmless Caps % Gain/Loss AFTER Hold Harmless Caps 50% 50% 40% 40% 30% 30% 20% 20% 10% 10% 0% 0% -10% -10% -20% -20% -30% -30% -40% -40% -50% -50% 50% 40% 30% % Gain/Loss AFTER Hold 20% Harmless Caps, including Title 10% I, Devolved Dollars, and 0% Projected Enrollment Changes -10% -20% Note: Data does not reflect minor shifts -30% resulting from November 5, 2008 -40% enrollment reconciliations. -50% 34 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  35. 35. FSF TIMELINE: IMPLEMENTATION (APRIL - OCT.) FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Budget Approval Enrollment Process Reconciliation Budget Title I & Title II Distribution Distribution to to Principals Schools & Site- (ongoing) Based Creation of Support Online Budget Submission Tool & Principal’s Dashboard 35 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  36. 36. BUDGET APPROVAL PROCESS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • Initial guidance and support: o Creation of guidance aligned with Essentials to assist schools in making funding and programmatic decisions around priorities. o Teams of key central office personnel and external partners met individually with each school leadership team. o Central office hosted peer group working sessions to discuss “hot topics” related to budget development. o Telephone hotline established for principal questions. • Three rounds of review and feedback: o Executive Directors coordinated preliminary feedback to all schools prior to final submission. o Budget Review Team compiled list of key positions and contracts to be resolved and contacted each school. o Budget Review Team compiled preliminary approval list and contacted schools with outstanding issues. 36 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  37. 37. CITY SCHOOLS REVISION OF THE BUDGET PROCESS AND FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS SUPPORT FOR SCHOOL LEADERS Principal Training Budget On-Site Team Helpline Support Pre-Submissio Peer Support n to CAO Groups Office Vendor Fair 37 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  38. 38. INCREASING COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • Principals were required to meet with parents/communities about school budgets to gather input about school priorities and direction. • The central office communicated more frequently and directly with all employees, external partners and students to ensure understanding and support. • Schools chose to allocate nearly $1 million for parent and community involvement to host workshops and other activities. o These funds were allocated in addition to the City School’s $1 million investment in community outreach through a Parent and Community Involvement RFP from City Schools central office. o RFP provided opportunities for 23 community-based organizations to service 68 schools to assist with efforts related to: o FARM application submission rates, Great Kids Come Back campaign, climate survey participation rates, Parent Portal usage, recruitment of “community coaches” (spreading the word about high school choice and college access), and strengthening organized parent groups and helping parents support their children in school. 38 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  39. 39. PRINCIPALS’ ONLINE BUDGET TOOL FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Options for ongoing Key improvements this year: improvement: • Online budget submission • More tightly link the tool created. Ongoing narrative strategies to the development of Principal’s funding decisions. Dashboard. • Schools can see fund • Enable additional trend sources and allocations more analysis. easily. • Show more detail for • Fringe benefit dollars are teacher positions by reported along with salary in including grade and subject. budgets. • For positions reporting • Job title details are now average dollars, add an included. option to see actual dollars. 39 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  40. 40. ENROLLMENT & SCHOOL BUDGET RECONCILIATION FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • In April, schools received enrollment projections from Department of Research, Evaluation, and Academic Achievement (DREAA). • Principals were able to adjust their enrollment projections, and the principal’s projection became the basis for developing each school’s budget. • Based on the September 30 enrollment data, schools were required to adjust their budgets:  Those that were under-funded received additional dollars mid-year (dollars followed the students).  Those which were over-funded made budget cuts to reflect lower than anticipated costs. 40 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  41. 41. FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Enrollments Lower Than Projected Budget Reductions • 7 schools had enrollments more • 6 schools’ FSF budgets were than 20% below projection. reduced more than 20%. • 14 schools had enrollments • 13 schools’ FSF budgets were between 10-20% below projection. reduced between 10-20%. • 30 schools had enrollments • 28 schools’ FSF budgets were between 5-10% below projection. reduced between 5-10%. Enrollments Higher Than Projected Budget Increases • 22 schools had enrollments • 20 schools’ FSF budgets gained between 5-10% above projection. between 5-10%. • 11 schools had enrollments • 12 schools’ FSF budgets gained between 10-20% above projection. between 10-20%. • 5 schools had enrollments over • 3 schools’ FSF budgets gained over 20% above projection. 20%. •94 schools had enrollments that were •101 schools’ FSF budgets that changed within 5% of projection. less than 5%. 41 GOALS & PRINCIPLES CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  42. 42. OUTCOMES OF FAIR STUDENT FUNDING 42 BALTIMORE CITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  43. 43. EVERY SCHOOL LEVEL EXPERIENCED AN INCREASE IN FUNDING FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS With the devolution of additional Title I and Title II grant dollars, every school level on average experienced an increase of funding. ACTUAL Average $ ACTUAL % Increase from Increase FY08 Elementary $380,785 19.79% K-8 $459,895 17.83% Middle* $13,621 0.55% High $708,819 19.11% * Traditional middle schools received a significant increase in funding (roughly $8.7 million) in SY07-08 to implement reforms, including small learning communities, additional collaborative planning periods with SPAR teachers, alternatives to suspensions, twilight school, parent engagement, student truancy, and professional development, which explains the small average increase this year when Fair Student Funding balanced school funding district-wide. 43 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  44. 44. DOLLARS MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED ACROSS SCHOOLS OF FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS DIFFERENT SIZES $8,000 Total Under 300 300-800 Over 800 $7,254 $7,000 $6,698 $6,554 $6,572 $6,118 $6,000 $5,705 $5,830 $5,000 $4,817 $/PUPIL $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 BEFORE AFTER 300- Level Total <300 800 >800 Total <300 300-800 >800 Ratios 1.00 1.17 1.02 0.84 1.00 1.11 1.00 0.93 Note: General Fund unlocked dollars, including 100% of devolved funds and Title I dollars. Additionally, data does not reflect minor shifts resulting from November 5, 2008 enrollment reconciliations. 44 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  45. 45. DOLLARS MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED ACROSS SCHOOLS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS LEVELS Total ES K-8 MS HS $8,000 $7,239 $6,880 $6,899 $7,000 $6,554 $6,494 $6,269 $6,048 $6,000 $5,705 $5,719 $4,981 $5,000 $/PUPIL $4,000 $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 Level Total ES K-8 MS HS Total ES K-8 MS HS Ratios 1.00 1.06 1.00 1.27 0.87 1.00 1.05 0.99 1.05 0.96 Note: General Fund unlocked dollars, including 100% of devolved funds and Title I dollars. Additionally, data does not reflect minor shifts resulting from November 5, 2008 enrollment 45 reconciliations. OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  46. 46. DOLLARS MORE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED ACROSS SCHOOLS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS REGARDLESS OF PERFORMANCE LEVEL Total Under 50% proficient 50-75% proficient Over 75% proficient $7,000 $6,554 $6,613 $6,610 $6,354 $6,006 $6,000 $5,705 $5,703 $5,333 $5,000 $4,000 $/PUPIL $3,000 $2,000 $1,000 $0 BEFORE AFTER Note: General Fund unlocked dollars, including 100% of devolved funds and Title I dollars. Additionally, data does not reflect minor shifts resulting from November 5, 2008 enrollment reconciliations. 46 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  47. 47. HIGH POVERTY SCHOOLS STILL RECEIVE MORE FUNDING FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Before After Note: General Fund unlocked dollars, including 100% of devolved funds and Title I dollars. Additionally, data does not reflect minor shifts resulting from November 5, 2008 enrollment 47 reconciliations. OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  48. 48. VARIANCES BETWEEN SCHOOLS ON THE TOP V. SCHOOLS ON FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS THE BOTTOM OF THE DISTRIBUTION • Schools at the top of the distribution tend to be: o Small (250 on average) o Primary schools (no high schools are in this group) o Mostly high poverty (three quarters have >80% free/reduced lunch) o Achievement levels vary widely (29-100% reading proficiency rates) • Schools at the bottom of the distribution tend to be: o Larger (620 on average) o More likely to be high schools (8) and less likely to be middle schools (1) o Less poor (only 2 out of 25 have >80% poverty) o Achievement levels vary widely (28-98% reading proficiency 48 rates) OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  49. 49. STAFFING SHIFTS: KEY POINTS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • Student-teacher ratios became more equal across schools. • Assistant principal and aide positions, which had been high relative to comparison districts, were reduced: • Assistant principals dropped by 20% • Instructional and non-instructional aides (excluding SPED aides) were reduced by 25-30% • Staffing shifted away from guidance and social workers as schools found different ways to provide pupil services. • Over 500 additional FTEs are now reported at the school level (e.g. custodial workers, hall monitors). 49 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  50. 50. FAIR STUDENT FUNDING OUTCOMES: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS PLANNING TIME & COLLABORATIVE PLANNING HIGHLIGHTS Planning Time Collaborative Planning Time All schools have at least: All schools have at •4 planning sessions least: per week in elementary •1 collaborative schools. planning session per • 5 planning sessions week. per week in secondary • 45 minute long schools. collaborative planning • 45 minute long sessions. planning sessions. 50 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  51. 51. FAIR STUDENT FUNDING OUTCOMES: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS ENRICHMENT, YOUTH DEVELOPMENT, & AFTER-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES 100% 100% 91% 80% 68% % of Schools* 60% 55% 49% SY07-08 SY08-09 39% 40% 20% 16% 14% 0% Offered School-based Program External Partners CAROI (HS Only) (Teacher Stipends) (SES) Summary: After-school programming is increasing in SY 08-09. In addition, contracts and partnerships with after-school providers are also increasing. Survey Response: 190 schools responded to the survey. 51 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  52. 52. FAIR STUDENT FUNDING OUTCOMES: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS INCREASING STUDENT SUPPORT TO IMPROVE SCHOOL SAFETY Schools’ choices emphasize providing additional support and positive interventions for students. Schools allocated over $3 million in FY09 for intervention initiatives including twilight courses, character education, school-based programs, Student Support Teams, and others. # Schools # Schools 2007-2008 2008-2009 Positive Behavior Interventions & Supports 32 46 (PBIS) Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies 2 6 (PATHS) Mental Health Professionals 96 103 52 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  53. 53. FAIR STUDENT FUNDING OUTCOMES: FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS ALTERNATIVES TO SUSPENSION Alternatives to Suspension 120% 100% 100% 100% 90% 94% 81% 82% 85% 78% 83% 80% 71% % of schools 60% 50% 54% 47% 46% 41% 42% 40% 16% 20% 20% SY 07-08 0% SY 08-09 Summary: Schools are increasing the alternatives to suspension in SY 08-09. Survey Response: 190 schools responded to the survey. 53 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  54. 54. EFFECT OF TITLE I & TITLE II ALLOCATIONS ON FINE ARTS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS EDUCATION Fine Arts Education 120% 100% 100% 100% 86% 84% 81% 79% % of schools 80% 65% 61% 57% 53% 60% 40% 33% 26% 24% 18% 20% SY 07-08 0% SY 08-09 *Summary: Although full-time fine arts educators have decreased slightly, schools Title I & II Allocations: are expanding their offerings in fine arts for SY 08-09. • $40,000 directly to train & support fine arts education. *Survey Response: 190 schools responded to the • Funds used to acquire additional 0.5 FTE. survey. 54 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  55. 55. EFFECT OF TITLE I & TITLE II ALLOCATIONS ON AFTER-SCHOOL FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS PROGRAMMING Schools are providing trainings to staff and students to support school climate. Description Total In-class Tutoring $451,360 Peer mentoring $433,207 Classroom Practices $375,408 training Innovative Training $300,248 Mentoring for new $217,281 teachers Student Support $29,324 Services Grand Total $1,806,828 55 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  56. 56. EFFECT OF TITLE I & TITLE II ALLOCATIONS ON SCHOOL- FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS BASED PROGRAMS SUPPORTING SUSPENSION REDUCTION Schools are providing trainings to staff and students to support school climate. Description Total In-class Tutoring $451,360 Peer mentoring $433,207 Classroom Practices $375,408 training Innovative Training $300,248 Mentoring for new $217,281 teachers Student Support $29,324 Services Grand Total $1,806,828 56 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  57. 57. GUIDANCE & COLLEGE READINESS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS 2007-2008 2008-2009 # Schools & AOP Programs 102 101 with Guidance Counselors # Schools with College 20 29 Access Programs CollegeBound, Loyola College Access Program College Advising CollegeBound Providers Core, and College Summit New in 2008-2009 - Urban Alliance: 2 schools - College-readiness workshops and experiences. - AVID: 1 school - 4 year, college-readiness curricular program. 57 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  58. 58. GENERAL RESULTS OF FAIR STUDENT FUNDING FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • An additional $88M goes directly to schools. • Principals have more control over the staff positions and other resources in their school. • Principals have more responsibilities. • Dollars are distributed more evenly across school levels and school sizes. • Student-teacher ratios have become more equal across schools. • The high number of assistant principals and aides has been reduced. • Small schools appear to have sufficient staffing this year, but may not in future years as hold harmless caps are phased out. • Funding in Baltimore is more transparent. 58 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  59. 59. NEXT STEPS FOR CITY SCHOOLS FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • Determine how the hold harmless caps should be phased out and long-term impact on specific schools. • Revisit weight amounts (determine sufficiency of base amount). • Revisit weight basis (should % basic and % advanced be allowed to sum to more than100%?). • Revisit locked categories (particularly special education). • Refine enrollment projections system (totals and weighting data). • Revisit charter school funding levels and services. • Assess small school funding issues. • Monitor allocations to small schools, schools in transition, and alternative schools. • Continue improvements to our Principal Dashboard – budget reconciliation tool. • Make final decision on average and actual salary. 59 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  60. 60. CONTINUAL REDESIGN OF CITY SCHOOLS CENTRAL OFFICE FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • Clarify objectives and goals for each department; clearly delineate responsibilities. Are the right people in the right jobs? • Determine how to provide the right services at the right costs. • Continue to develop support & accountability processes. • Refine data collection and reporting systems. • Determine how best to use staff who are no longer needed by schools but who are under contract with the district. • Develop communication strategies to ensure coherence within and across departments. • Re-negotiate union contracts to give principals more control over staffing, as contracts are up for renewal. 60 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  61. 61. COMMITMENT TO CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS Process and Structures: • Continued redefinition of the role of central office toward guidance, support and accountability to schools. • Concerted effort for customer service to schools, staff, and community, with opportunities for feedback increasing. • Continuous improvement project management approach taken with central office projects. Stakeholder Involvement: • Principals involved in all decisions and vetting of processes and initiatives. • Feedback solicited from teachers, unions, formal parent organizations, community leaders, and other school staff. 61 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  62. 62. GUIDANCE, SUPPORT, & ACCOUNTABILITY FAIR STUDENT FUNDING: CITY SCHOOLS • Shift to greater school flexibility requires significant central and partner support, a clear accountability framework, and structures designed to provide guidance and checks and balances to principals and school-based leadership teams. • Schools received greater flexibility over resources in exchange for accepting responsibility for fiscal accountability, academic accountability, and pupil services accountability, all with clear consequences when accountability metrics are not met. • In addition to following Federal and state guidelines, each school’s education plan must also meet City Schools set guidelines. For instance, City Schools includes an accountability metric that assesses whether schools are providing Algebra in the 8th grade, whether schools are offering Algebra to all Algebra-ready students, and whether schools are providing college access services. • Autonomy is bound. It is not “do as I wish” but “do within a framework set by policy, outcomes, and student needs.” 62 OVERVIEW CHALLENGES PROCESS RESULTS B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS
  63. 63. F AIR S TUDENT F UNDING : P ROMOTING E QUITY & A CHIEVEMENT IN B ALTIMORE C ITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS Copies of this presentation are available at: http://www.bcps.k12.md.us QUESTIONS & COMMENTS? 63 BALTIMORE CITY P UBLIC S CHOOLS

×