how states can support transformation in tough times
DESCRIPTION
CCSSO Moving Forward Conference Given January 13, 2011TRANSCRIPT
How States Can Support Transformation in Tough TimesMoving Forward Conference January 13
• ERS is a non-profit consulting firm, head-quartered in Boston
• We work with leaders of public school systems to rethink the use of district and school-level resources
• We analyze district spending, human resources, school organization and performance data to generate insight around resource strategies
• We leverage this insight to design new ways to allocate and organize resources at the district and school level
• Our work is grounded in over a decade of experience, working with school districts across the country
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC. 2
Education Resource Strategies
• Real spending doubled from $3,800 to $8,700 per pupil
• 80% of increase went toward adding staff positions and increasing benefits while educator salaries remained flat in real dollars*
• Spending on special education programs has gone from 4 to 21% of district budgets while regular education spending has dropped from 80% to 55%**
Despite increased spending achievement gaps persist
* Parthenon group analysis, 2008**Richard Rothstein, Where has the money gone? 2009
From 1970
to
2005 :
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
Source: Digest of Education Statistics 2007: Tables 61, 64, and 66
Overall class sizes have decreased, but basic structure of schooling has remained the same
4EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC. 5
Budget Gaps are systemic due to a fundamental cost structure that continues to rise regardless of revenue
• Teaching salaries growingat ~2-4% annually
• Benefits growingat ~10+% annually
• Expensive class size mandates
• SPED spending continues to grow
• Tax revenue falling
• Enrollment declining
• Sudden drop in Federal Funds
The districts we have are not the systems we need
• Schools and students with same needs receiving different levels of resources
• Rigidly defined budgets that don’t enable principals to match needs
• Salary and job structures that do not encourage effectiveness , contribution or collaboration
• Antiquated schedules and school organizations that do not match time and individual attention to priority needs
WE HAVE
Effective teaching for all students
School designs that maximize teaching effectiveness, academic time and individual attention
WE NEED
Equitable, transparent, and flexible funding across schools
6EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
The districts we have are not the systems we need
• Underinvestment in formative assessments and fragmented professional development
• Underinvestment to build and reward leadership effectiveness
• Central office services that are not designed to improve productivity or customize support to school needs
• Districts that pay too much for social services and non-core instruction that could be provided through outside partners
Aligned curriculum, Instruction, assessment, PD
Strong school and district leaders
Central services that foster empowerment, accountability and efficiency
Partnership with families, communities and outside experts
WE HAVE WE NEED
7EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
8
1. CompensationReducing compensation spending by managing teaching work-force mix and differentiating instructional roles
2. Class size models to target individual attentionStrategically raising class sizes and rethinking one-size-fits-all class size models for providing individual attention
3. Special EducationRedirecting special education spending to early intervention and targeted individual attention for all students
4. TimeStrategically using existing time and extending where needed to meet student learning needs
Four of the biggest areas of “misalignment” that states influence include:
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
9
• Build understanding of the needed changes
• Create the right incentives
• Remove barriers
• Support and invest in new strategies and structures
• Change legislation
• Provide political cover
How can states support transformation at the district level?
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
10
High-performing schools are about team, not just individual performance
Collaborative planning
time
Formative assessment
s
School-based expert support
Deliberate assignments to teaching team
Each school’s specific
curricular,faculty, and
student needs
11EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
Compensation cost adjusted to District A areaSource: ERS District Aspen District Analysis FY 2009
Most districts spend little to reward increased teacher responsibility and contribution
Base
Education
Longevity
Responsibility & Results
Benefits
Rochester Northeast District A $-
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
$80,000
$90,000
51% 42%
3% 7%
20%
27%2%
0% 25%
24%
Total Dollars per Teacher
$ p
er
tea
ch
er
District ABalanced work-force
District BSenior work-force
$78,232
$88,052
12
Stop or reduce increases for steps and credits to redirect compensation spending toward increased responsibilities and contribution
Aggressively manage low performers out of the system
Revise compensation structures to link pay to increases in responsibility and contribution as well as individual results
Revise work rules to insure flexibility in teacher assignment to match team and school needs
What can be done to optimize compensation spending?
Start Now
Build Toward
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
Grades K-2 Grades 3-5 Grades 6-8 Grades 9-12
21 22 22 222225
2831
In this District Class Sizes are Far from Max-imum
and do not Vary by GradeAverage class size Contract max
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES 13
Source: Elementary Grades Homeroom file Oct 2009; Includes elementary schools and K-8 schools (grades K0-5); excludes classes that are special ed 60%+, ELL 60%+; includes Advanced Work classes; excludes schools with Two-Way bilingual program; excludes classes with “mixed” grade (mainly due to teacher data NA)
Most districts have opportunities to strategically raise class size…
1.Class Size Models
2.Special Education
District T District L
27
2118 18
Average Class Size by Course Type
9th Grade Core Class Size* 12th Grade Non-Core Class Size
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES 14
*Core class defined as ELA, Math, Science, Social Studies; Non-core defined as Art, Computer Literacy, Vocational, Foreign LanguageSource: District A and B 9th and 12th grade course data (internal – Resource Mapping presentation)
…and to target class sizes to priority subjects and students
In these districts class sizes for core subjects are higher than non-core
1.Class Size Models
2.Special Education
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
15
District S
District M
District E
District B
District A
District C
District P
District R
District G
29
25 22
26
18
22
29
20 22
17 14 13 14 14
16 16
12 15
General Education Class Size versus Student-Teacher Ratio
ERS Estimated Average General Ed Class Size Average Total Student-to-Teacher Ratio
Districts have more teaching staff, but use those FTEs for specialist positions outside of the core classroom
1.Class Size Models
2.Special Education
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES 16
A cycle of isolation and specialization pulls students with additional needs out of regular education classrooms
Large, diverse classes
Overextended teachers
Remove “problem” student from
classroom
Administration to coordinate, monitor special services
Resources and responsibility move outside regular
classroom
CurrentStructure of SWD & ELL services
Provide additional support:- Social services- Pull-out instruction
1.Class Size Models
2.Special Education
General Ed ELL SWD Resource SWD Sub Sep$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
$30,000
$35,000
$40,000
$45,000
$11,725.7 $15,230.4$19,949.1
$42,567.2
District Spending by Student Type2009-2010
LEP
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES 17
Note: Excluded are all district Alternative/Adult schools. Sources: SY10 October enrollment, district budget as of 10/09. Excludes students who did not report; ELL includes those currently in programs, excludes students who opted-out
Moving students into rigidly defined programs diverts dollars from early intervention and targeted small groups for all students
Enrollment: 37.8K 6.6K 5.4K 5.5K
Weight: 1.0 1.2 1.7 3.5
PovertyIncrement
1.Class Size Models
2.Special Education
Atlanta FY06
Boston FY06
Chicago FY06
DCPS FY05
LA FY06
St. Paul FY06
Rochester FY09*
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
2.5%
9.6%
3.7% 4.0% 4.5% 3.5%6.4%
8.0%
8.7%
8.7%
12.0%
5.7%
13.6%
2.0%
7.4%
K-12 Special Education Placements as % of Total Enrollment
Integrated Special ClassResource Room/ConsultantSelf Contained & Home Instruction
% T
ota
l Enro
llm
ent
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES 18
*Rochester SWD enrollment includes all students with a designated category of disability.Source: ERS Benchmark Database, National data from U.S. DOE Programs, SDP Special Ed student data (PIMS); Self contained typically defined as 60% or more time in special education setting.
Districts vary widely in how many students they place in special education settings
FY06: National ID rate:
9%
1.Class Size Models
2.Special Education
19EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
Dollars to redirect come from the combination of fewer referrals and more cost-effective practice
Total # of Students
District Support Models
School Level
Implementation (Fill Rates)
• Special Education diagnosis rates by disability type
• ELL enrollment trends
• Staffing models
• Inclusion models
•Out of district policies
• Program placement
• Student assignment
20
Note: For the average district this translates into a savings of almost 7% of total budget
The opportunity to redirect dollars can come from meeting student needs in different ways and using cost-effective practice
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
100%80% 75% 68%
Special Education Cost Dynamicsin a Typical Urban District
To
tal
% o
fS
pe
cia
l E
du
ca
tio
n B
ud
ge
t
Base Case Reduce refer-rals to 12% by supporting high need students in other ways
Shift 1% of students
fromself-contained
to resource
Increase class fill rates from 75% to
90%
Total sped 15% 12% 12% 12%
Self-contained sped 5% 4% 3% 3%
Percent of Enrollment
1.Class Size Models
2.Special Education
21
Highlight the class size vs. teacher quality trade-off
Strategically raise class sizes in non-core classes and later grades
Review special education spending to reduce compliance spending and unplanned extra spending on subscale programs
Encourage movement away from class size mandates in state regulations and contracts
Clarify rules on maintenance of effort spending
Champion revisions to special education funding that create incentives for more integrated services
Explore improved ways to measure special education outcomes
What can be done to rethink one-size-fits-all class size model and redirect special education spending to targeted individual attention for all students?
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
Start Now
Build Toward
Chicago
LA
Seattle
Milwaukee
Rochester
Baltimore
Philadelphia
Leading Edge schools
963
1080
1110
1120
1125
1138
1160
1170
1180
1200
1210
1250
1250
1260
1276
1476
Student Hours per Year
22
Sources: District figures are from Time and Attention in Urban High Schools: Lessons for School Systems (Frank, 2010) and from ERS analyses for the Aspen CFO network. Leading Edge school figures are from Shields, R. A., and K. H. Miles. 2008. Strategic Designs: Lessons from Leading Edge Small Urban High Schools. Watertown, MA: Education Resource Strategies. Charter school figures are from The Boston Foundation report (May 2010) “Out of the Debate and Into the Schools.”
Many districts have an opportunity to increase instructional time by increasing the school day
National Avg. = 1170
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
3. Making every minute count
23
….by varying time by grade and subject
TYPICAL DISTRICT PERCENT OF STUDENT TIME
BY GRADE & SUBJECT
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
ES 7-9th 10-12th
PE
Foreign Language
Electives
Science
Social Studies
Math
ELA
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
3. Making every minute count
24
1. CompensationReducing compensation spending by managing teaching work-force mix and differentiating instructional roles
2. Class size models to target individual attentionStrategically raising class sizes and rethinking one-size-fits-all class size models for providing individual attention
3. Special EducationRedirecting special education spending to early intervention and targeted individual attention for all students
4. TimeStrategically using existing time and extending where needed to meet student learning needs
Four of the biggest areas of “misalignment” that states influence include:
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
25
1. CompensationReducing compensation spending by managing teaching work-force mix and differentiating instructional roles
2. Class size models to target individual attentionStrategically raising class sizes and rethinking one-size-fits-all class size models for providing individual attention
3. Special EducationRedirecting special education spending to early intervention and targeted individual attention for all students
4. TimeStrategically using existing time and extending where needed to meet student learning needs
Four of the biggest areas of “misalignment” that states influence include:
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
26
• Build understanding of the needed changes
• Create the right incentives
• Remove barriers
• Support and invest in new strategies and structures
• Change legislation
• Provide political cover
How can states support transformation at the district level?
1. Revise funding systems to promote equity and flexibility
2. Revamp teacher compensation, including benefits and pensions, to increase compensation for teachers who have the best results and contribute the most to improving student performance
3. Overhaul regulations that strictly define specific staff positions and use of school time
4. Rethink graduation requirements that are linked to taking specific courses rather than demonstrating skills and knowledge
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC. 27
Top 10 things states can do in “tough times” to focus resources to their most productive uses …
5. Create new models of accountability and support for special education and English language learners that redirect resources to more integrated settings
6. Insist on turnaround strategies that restructure existing resources and consider district-wide impact, including the challenge of displaced teachers
7. Invest in statewide leadership development and succession planning, including providing information tools
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC. 28
Top 10 things states can do…
8. Remove barriers to creative provision of education and support services by untraditional providers
9. Promote the use of technology as a productivity improvement tool in education and school support services
10.Report useful comparative data on school and district resource use that includes information on spending by student as well as on the use and organization of resources
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC. 29
Top 10 things states can do…
30
Back up
31
The Baltimore City Schools Transformation Strategy—a three-year journey
Under new teacher contract, decisions about trade-offs to pay higher salary
for teaching quality will be made at school levelEDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
BCPSS cut $40M and >200 FTEs from the central office
BCPSS shifted ~$70M to school budget and control through Fair Student Funding
BCPSS realigned Central to support schools, moving positions to school focused support “network” teams
BCPSS replaced ~90 of 200 principals
+New teacher contract increases school flexibility and increases compensation tied to performance and contribution
Consolidation
Decentralization
Restructuring
Transformation
Rochester 09-10
Oakland 07-08
Atlanta 07-08 Boston 09-10 Philadelphia 08
Chicago 080%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
50% 50% 55% 54% 52%60%
9% 9%5% 9%
7%
7%7% 9% 7%7%
4%
3%20% 14% 17%
20%24%
18%
4%7%
8%2%
3%2%
10% 10% 7% 7% 8%8%
Total Operating Budget by UseUncoded
Leadership
Business Services
O&M
ISPD
Pupil Services
Instruction
Note: Dollar amounts are adjusted for inflation (using BLS inflation adjusters) and for cost of living (NCES-CWI); all dollars from K-12 operating budgets.Uncoded dollars in Philadelphia are dollars spent on alternative schools and additional EMO paymentsSource: RCSD 2009-2010 budget data; RCSD BEDS enrollment; Oakland Unified School District annual report 2008; ERS Benchmark database
Real per pupil spending varies widely across districts, but spending patterns similar
Enrollment 32K 39K 46K 55K 152K 405K
Operating Budget per
Pupil15.3K 7.9K 10.8K 11.5K 9.2K 7.7K
32EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
Assumptions:Net step increase of 3.5% (4% average discounted for staff turnover)Lane increase of 2.5% Benefits increase 7.5% annually
One district example: If the district must pay COLA at 3.5%, this number nearly doubles to equivalent of 360 average cost teachers next year or 600+ first year teachers by 2015
FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 -
100.0
200.0
300.0
400.0
500.0
600.0
700.0
$494.8m$522.5m
$552.3m$583.9m
$617.6m
$653.3m
Benefits
COLA (3.5%)
Experience (& longevity)
Educational At-tainment
Base Compensation
33EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
EDUCATION RESOURCE STRATEGIES, INC.
34
Den
ver
Charlo
tte LA
Philade
lphia
Bosto
n
Atlant
a
Seat
tle
Baltim
ore
DC
Milw
auke
e
PG C
ount
y
Pittsb
urgh
Roche
ster
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%Performance Pay
National Board Certification
Leadership Roles
Education
Experience
The way districts reward salary increase over a teaching career varies; merit pay is rare, primary increase is for leadership roles and NBPT
TOTAL POSSIBLE RAISES OVER TEACHER’S CAREER
Source: Salary Schedules and Teacher Contracts.
Methodology: Experience and Education derived from salary schedules. Stipends aggregated from contracts – leadership roles conservative avg of multiple stipends (e.g. dept head, lead tchr, curric devel)
Total Possible Raise
$47k $54k $42k $61k $55k $60K $48k $47k $56k $42k $50k $49k $50k
% Over Base 124% 156% 92% 142% 122% 135% 113% 115% 131% 117% 111% 134% 128%
35
Transformation: In year 2, BCPSS redesigned the remaining Central Office support staff to create a “network” structure to provide more direct support to schools
Moving From a compliance focused organization …Fragmented, often reactive support, far away from the work of schools
…to a performance-driven organization that supports school-based decision-making:Problem solving focused teams closer to schools; flexible design to meet the individual needs of schools
School
School
School
School
School School
School
School
School
HR
PD
Budget Finance
Attend. Sc. Sch.
Office
Ac. Achieve
.
Ele. Sch. Office Etc…Title I
Network #1
Network #2
10-15 School
s
10-15 School
s
Etc.
Network Team Members :• Network Leader• Instructional Support • Finance & Ops• Special Pops• Human ResourcesEDUCATION RESOURCE
STRATEGIES, INC.