Let's read the Worcester Cultural Academy FY24 budget!

I have posted it over here for you. Jeff Chamer did a nice job with some highlights, which also included the lease (which does not include the Bishop having any authority over what goes on the buildings, it appears). They will not be opening in the building on Hamilton Street, which is not ready--I'd be interested on why, as they've had lots of time--but mainly in the building the diocese canceled the lease with the Worcester Public Schools on. 

You might remember that I did some math, working to create a foundation budget for WCACS, and I struggled to get them to $2.5M; it appears (page 5) they're estimating $2.3M in tuition (which is what that would be). Let me reiterate that my estimate is based on my wildly overestimating how many students they'll have that are considered low income. As they are, per page 6, basing their foundation budget on an average per pupil rate of $18,291, which itself is based on Worcester's average per pupil rate (most of their students are Worcester students), let's note how wild that overestimation is: 

• The Worcester Public Schools' enrollment is 30.4% English learners; theirs is 5.5%
• The Worcester Public Schools' enrollment is 72.5% low income; we don't know theirs yet, but I very seriously doubt it is anywhere near that AND THAT IS WHERE MUCH OF THE MONEY IS.

We should note that the tuition that WCACS is getting is still based, in some part, on estimates: they know numbers of kids, but they don't have all the data on who those kids are. For those who might have followed the evolution of Worcester's cherry sheet through the budget process: that's a large part of why our charter tuition keeps switching , as it's getting less a projection and closer to real numbers (for all charters to which we send students, not just WCACS). WCACS tuition still, though, is based at ground on WPS numbers, which we know it won't reflect.

WCACS will have to report their actual enrollment, just like everyone else, in October. That will need to be trued up with the state, which usually takes some months, but by the beginning of next year, what they'll be getting is their actual tuition, not projected tuition. As the state at that point will need to make up for the fact that they've essentially overpaid in the first months, the school will take a double hit (the state only has half the school year to make back to overprojection). It's pretty concerning to see that they've made absolutely no allowances for that in their month-by-month projections on page 17: 

As they've also front-loaded the year with the major grant, they won't have that by February as a cushion, either. 

Doing the math on WCACS

 We got an enrollment update from the Telegram and Gazette today on Worcester Cultural Academy Charter School, which misses why enrollment matters, so I did some math on Twitter. I'm replicating that here in case Twitter implodes. 

Schools in Massachusetts are funded according to the foundation budget formula, and in Worcester, that is really about all we're funded at. This has the convenience of making the math pretty straightforward. 

• 133 kids K-4. There's a slight difference in the foundation rates for K and 1-5, but let's use the round number of $9500 per student for FY24.
  133 * 9500= $1,263,500
  
  
• 5.5% of their kids are English learners. That's 6.65 kids (Yeah, I don't know, either). We'll round up to 7.The foundation rate increment for K-5 EL is $2,724.17.
  7 * 2,724.17= $19,069.19
  
  
• Charters only carry in district sped, which is an assumed 3.9% of enrollment this year, so that's 5.187 kids for them.
  That rate is $30,771.12 for FY24, so that's an additional $153,855.6

• For the sake of argument, let's pretend that every single last one of their kids is considered low income. There's no way that's the case, but let's run with it. That's the highest low income group (80+%), which is $7,575.55 for FY24.
  133* 7,575.55 = $1,007,548.15
  
  
• They've have a smidge more from the towns for the 15 students who come from places other than Worcester that fund over foundation. I am leaving that out, but let's realize that it is NOT a lot of money we're talking about. 
  
  
• Charter schools get an additional facilities allocation of $1088 per pupil.
  133 * 1088 = $144,704
  
  

The total? $2,588,676.94

Their budget is $4M for this year, of which $250,000 is coming from a grant. They don't have it.

And, look, here's why this matters: not because we told you so, although we did.
Because far and away the largest cost center for schools is staff. 

Not enough money? Many fewer staff.

As it was, we in WPS didn't think they had adequate staffing for this school. We *know* their salary estimates don't pan out. 

That creates a situation that really not great for their students, which at the end of the day is what matters about this.

Updates from the Worcester Public Schools

 compiled in part, though not entirely, from the weekly updates, Dr. Monárrez sends the Committee

First up, ones that I've been worrying over: starting May 1

• Richard Ikonen will be serving as Director of Facilities. He's coming from Minuteman Regional, where he was Assistant Superintendent of Operations and Facilities.
  
  
• Ryan Hacker will be serving as Assistant Director of Facilities, focusing (I think I have this right) on capital projects. Ryan comes from UMass Med, BUT he last appeared here for his testimony during the hearing on the WCACS, as he's president of ArtsWorcester, AND he's a Burncoat High grad (yup, Burncoat!). 

I haven't met Rich as yet; I know Ryan. I'm looking forward to this.

The Auditor's office did meet with the WPS administration before vacation. That, plus our full delegation backing our call for investigations, is heartening that our concerns over OSV's management of the charter schools are being taken seriously. 

There's an executive session of the full Committee tomorrow (Monday) on negotiations with units A&B (and as it's negotiations, that's all I can say).

As I mentioned in my last post, the administration is recommending--much to the relief of many!--a new ELA curriculum for elementary students. This is of course in response to the many, many concerns from all kinds of places over the Fountas and Pinnell curriculum that the previous administration was very committed to. Major curricular changes need to go through the School Committee, so the recommendation is going to TLSS for a (virtual only) meeting tomorrow at 4:30 before coming to the full committee Thursday. This timeline has been an attempt to balance as much time for a pilot as possible, while still giving time to order materials and get them and PD to teachers before school is out.

Wit & Wisdom and Core Knowledge Language Arts are what was piloted in 21 or 22 classrooms each; page 13 of the presentation gives where. The rest of the presentation is based on feedback from the teachers and others involved in implementation. 
I won't say more on this here, as this is subject to deliberation and vote, but we'd of course welcome feedback (beyond "good bye F&P," which we've heard loud and clear!).

Finance and Operates meets this week on Wednesday at 5:30 ; you'll see that agenda tomorrow, but it will include the third quarter budget report, as well as the monthly transportation report. Also, for those who have been interested in the district streaming sports events, we'll be taking up that item as well. 

And speaking of budget: 

The budget's coming! The FY24 budget will be released on Friday, May 12 (start clicking refresh about 4, though sometimes it arrives earlier!).
There will be the statutorily required budget hearing on Wednesday, May 24 at 6; this is all of the Committee, gathered for no reason other than to hear from members of the public on the proposed budget. 
The School Committee deliberates and passes the budget, cost center by cost center, on Thursday, June 1 and Thursday, June 15. We start at 4 pm.

The one thing this doesn't include--because I don't know it yet--is the date on which the Worcester City Council hears the WPS budget. As a reminder, the Council approves only the bottom line of the Worcester Public Schools; they have no authority over cost centers. The Council also, under Plan E, cannot move funds or add funds to the budget; they can only cut. As the schools are generally funded at their statutory required level plus transportation and no more, one might argue that they cannot do that, either. 

That's what I have at this point. As always, if you have questions, send them along.

on the OSV boycott

 

"It wasn't being vindictive, it was being consistent" says Mayor Petty about the unanimous WPS OSV boycott vote from the Worcester School Committee

— Talk of the Commonwealth (@CommonTalkPod) April 19, 2023

Since last Thursday's vote of the Worcester School Committee to no longer send our students on field trips to Old Sturbridge has caught some attention, I thought it might be wise to refocus our attention on why this was both proposed and passed. 

I've set the below video to my comments--for the item was mine--last week:

The Worcester School Committee has very carefully laid our our concerns with the relationship between Old Sturbridge Village, Inc, and its charter schools in this letter dated March 10 to the State Auditor, the Attorney General, the Office of the Inspector General, and the Ethics Commission. If this is of interest, I recommend reading the letter itself, but in sum: 

• OSV Executive Director Jim Donahue has, both in public letters to membership and in employee meetings at the Village, made it clear that the schools are a source of revenue for the Village. As we have cited several times, in the FY22 Annual Report of the Village, Donahue wrote: 
  
  The Academies will provide reliable, contractual revenue to the museum, safeguarding us against fluctuations in uncontrollable factors that impact admission revenue such as weather and public health. 
  
  Providing reliable revenue to a private organization is not the purpose of public education funds. The Massachusetts Department of Revenue clearly states: 
  
  Public funds cannot be used for private purposes.  
  
  If there is both a private and a public purpose, the private purpose cannot be the primary one; that would invalidate the spending. Donahue's own words would appear to indicate that this is intended as a revenue stream primarily. 
  
  
  
• The Department very carefully guides charter school boards in their selection of a management organization, should they choose to have one. They are directed to follow the same public bid process they would for any major purpose. They also are directed not to have overlap between the charter board and the management organization, as that would clearly constitute a conflict of interest. 
  Of the 17 founding members of the new Worcester charter school, 11 have ties to OSV itself or the OSV charter school, and one more to the company that will provide the charter school's curriculum.
  The Board is not independent, and the ethical conflict is clear.
  Since the letter, the Board has had its first meeting, and it did not spend any time deliberating, let alone follow the public bid process, before appointing OSV as the management organization.
  
  
  
•  OSV currently holds a lease with the Roman Catholic Diocese of Worcester for the former St. Joseph's School on Hamilton Street. The lease has the following clause: 
  
  Neither Lessee nor any of its employees, servants, agents or invitees shall make any use of the [building] which would be inconsistent with the doctrines or teachings of the Roman Catholic Church, as determined by the Roman Catholic Bishop of Worcester in his ecclesiastical capacity of Ordinary of the Diocese of Worcester in his sole discretion
  
  There are of course significant conflicts, not only in what may or should taught in the building with what the Bishop of Worcester may feel appropriate, but even the basic civil rights protections a public entity like a public charter school must hold for staff and students are brought into question with such an agreement. As noted in the letter, this is not simply about Catholic teaching, but the particular bishop, who has a history locally regarding his perspective on these issues. 
  As yet, we have no evidence any successor lease has been negotiated. 
  
  
  

As of us who direct money, whether publicly or privately, must do so according to our best judgment. Massachusetts elected officials also much follow the state public finance laws and guidance; the state ethics laws; and both state and federal civil rights laws. If, in our estimation, those are not being followed by an organization to which we would direct funds, we are, as Mayor Petty notes above, being consistent to discontinue such spending. 

Boycott

It felt as if the website editors were having some fun this morning...

On tomorrow night's Worcester School Committee agenda, I have placed the following item: 

To request that the Administration arrange for an alternative LEAP trip in lieu of the current trip to Old Sturbridge Village; further, request that the Administration ensures that no Worcester Public Schools funds voluntarily are allocated to Old Sturbridge Village, Inc. or its affiliates.

I am not going to say too much about this here now, lest I predeliberate ahead of the meeting, but I'll note news here, here ('though that is a little confusing), and here.  

And if you haven't reviewed the request for an investigation filed by the Worcester School Committee, you can find that here. 

Two important Worcester Public Schools updates

 no, not school weather related!

• The agenda for Thursday night's meeting of the Worcester School Committee, including the preliminary presentation on FY24, is now available online here. This does include the annual "where are we actually at" calculation: 
  
  
  

• This afternoon, the Worcester School Committee sent a letter, per our vote on February 27, outlining our concerns with the Worcester Cultural Academy Charter School's financial relationship to Old Sturbridge Village, the proposed management fee under the public purpose limitation, conflict of interest issues with their trustees, and the civil rights concerns given their lease with the Roman Catholic diocese of Worcester. It is accompanied by 184 pages of documentation. 
  Now over to the state officials to respond.