Board of Ed meets today at 9 AM:

The Board of Ed has their regular monthly meeting today at 9 AM in Everett. You can find the agenda here. 

Daffodils. Because why not. 

After opening comments, they'll have a presentation by the Milken Educator awardee. Then, in what I fear is bound to be a deeply depressing section, the recommendations of the AI task force. They'll be considering sending proposed revisions to the regional school regs out for public comment. And there's (assuming the chair doesn't skip it) an update on the budget. 

Liveblogging to follow.

Concerned about tariffs and schools?

 This K-12 Dive piece from December tackles that topic. Construction gets hit both by a tariff on goods from Canada and by a crackdown on immigration. 

If your vegetable drawer looks like mine, you may have wondered about school nutrition; note: 

When it comes to the food served in cafeterias, K-12 food services are required by law to buy “to the maximum extent practicable, domestic commodities or products,” according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Not mentioned? Fuel.  

Not mentioned, of course, is that if budgets OVERALL tighten, money for schools ALSO will get tighter (and, for example, I'd suspect overrides get a little more tricky).  

Note, also: the tariffs aren't popular.

Check out Moody's

 I have a backlog of "nooo, that's not how this works" comments on budget articles, which I hope to get to, but in the meantime, do read about Moody's outlook for next year. I suspect it doesn't have a lot we don't already know, but sometimes "oh, it isn't just me" can be reassuring:

A main factor for slow revenue growth, Moody’s said, is the expiration of Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief allocations that helped schools recover from pandemic setbacks. American Rescue Plan allocations under ESSER — which at a total of $121.9 billion were the last and largest of the three COVID emergency aid packages approved by Congress for K-12 schools — must be spent by Jan. 28, 2025, unless districts receive a spending extension

That, coupled with rising staffing costs, means the median operating fund balance ratio — the available fund balance as a percentage of operating revenue — is expected to drop from 26% in 2024 to 24% in 2025. According to Moody’s and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, public education employment now exceeds pre-pandemic levels, and compensation growth in K-12 has outpaced the private sector.

If you've been following Brockton

 ...Mayor Sullivan released the report created by Nystrom, Beckman & Paris, a law firm, today at noon in advance of tonight's Brockton School Committee meeting, which did not discuss it. The report is dated August 15.

RSM, auditors hired by the school department, completed this report, which was released this evening during the Brockton School Committee meeting, at which it was discussed.

As it was the earlier, most reporting so far is on just the first: The Enterprise; MassLive; Boston Globe (which missed half the points)...updating as they come in. The Enterprise reporting on the School Committee meeting is here.

If I could make every school committee member, superintendent, mayor, school finance officer worker (of any level), city finance worker (of any level) read the report from NBP, I would.

Some recommended reading

 A few things I've been reading that I'd recommend:

• You've no doubt caught some of the coverage of the Brockton Public Schools' financial woes (and ensuing city woes). The report from the independent third party can be found here. It's only a few pages long, and worth a review.
  
  
• The maddening lack of American society to really accept the pandemic has been particularly frustrating in a few places, education among them. Conor Williams (who I always find worth reading) does a really nice job with this in this piece in the 74:
  
  This odd unwillingness to recognize the pandemic as an unavoidable calamity is part of why we’re still endlessly relitigating pandemic mitigation measures in schools — closures, masks, quarantine policies, and the like. If, in 2019, we’d conducted a thought experiment, asking folks to predict the educational impact of a then-hypothetical viral pandemic that would be transmitted via breathing and would kill nearly 1.2 million Americans, most of us would agree that kids wouldn’t steam forth making the usual academic progress. 
  
  
  
• This year's "and then ESSER was gone" gets some coverage in K-12 Dive.

If what we fund is what we value, what does it say when the inequities are this stark?

Released Friday from New America is a new report using 2021 funding data, "Crossing the line: Segregation and resource inequality between America's school districts." It looks specifically at "next door neighbor" districts, so to speak, where the gulfs between neighboring districts are the largest.

This is, let's be clear, generally accompanied by gulfs in enrollment by race and ethnicity, too. It doesn't happen accidentally. As they note in the report:

Nationwide, 53 percent of public-school district enrollees are students of color, including 14 percent Black students, 28 percent Latino students, and 5 percent Asian students, among others. However, these students are highly concentrated in a relatively small number of districts, and 26 percent of school systems serve student populations that are more than 90 percent white. The average district border separates districts that are 14 percentage points apart in their proportions of students of color. But along the 100 most racially segregating school district borders in the country, the average separation is between a district that is 92.4 percent white and a district that is 86 percent students of color. 

You can read the full report here (that's a PDF).

From a Massachusetts perspective, I want to call your attention to he multimedia story of 100 most economically segregated lines, because guess what? We're in there.

Four times:

We should of course note that this is 2021 data, so not full implementation of the SOA, but that doesn't mean a) that will be closed or b) more importantly, that the reasons for this shouldn't be examined and combated. A flag of four being in the national top 100 doesn't mean this isn't a statewide issue.

Among the 100 most racially segregated borders: 

I have ongoingly said that the conversation Massachusetts never wants to have is how segregated its school districts are. Even in all the ongoing "number one for some" and descriptions of achievement gaps, we are allergic as a state to discussing why it is that some districts don't even have statistically significant enrollment of students of color or whose first language isn't English.

I don't think that serves any of us well. 

 

PS, because you know I'd never leave off Worcester; you can do these comparisons with any school district borders here. 
Here's Worcester Public Schools compared to surrounding on low income enrollment:

And on students of color:

The first Worcester School Committee meeting of the new term

The Worcester School Committee had their first business meeting of the new term (and new makeup) on January 18.
While I noted the change in the budget bottom line settled at the meeting (also noted by the T&G), it seems clear that this Committee where keeping the record straight is going to be necessary, and, while I do want to recommend you take a look at Bill Shaner's piece on last week, I think keeping track of what's going on will be helpful (and the tracking was kinda shaky in this meeting, to be honest, with roll calls consistently out of order and reported incorrectly more than once).
As always, I'm not going to pretend here to be anything other than what and who I am, writing as a citizen of the city, so you can read with that in mind. The commentary is largely in italics. 

About process

'Can't argue with the truth, sir.' 
'In my experience, Vimes, you can argue with anything.
Terry Pratchett, Jingo  

One of the first challenges when you move to a new place is learning how things work: who has what authority; who gets to decide what to do what; and how are those decisions made.

In my own life, it was the state's proposal to plow an airport access road through my own neighborhood at the time that sent me into learning, rapidly, how things work. Issues since then--most notably the proposal to put a slots parlor into Green Island--have been further opportunities for learning.

The same thing is true when one joins a public body: how does one get things done? What is the process? Where are the levels? And what are the things over which your public body has control and does not.
And so one learns about filing items, having subcommittee meetings with public discussions with extensive reports from administration, making decisions in public meetings within the purview of that public body.

And then we have a week like the past one...

Live from the Board of Ed: Lawrence

 the backup is here though there should be a presentation, too

Presenting: Deputy Commissioner Russell Johnston; DESE Strategic Transformation Director Lauren Woo; Interim Superintendent/Receiver Juan Rodriguez; Patricia Mariano, Interim Chair of the Lawrence Alliance for Education

Rodriguez is talking about photos that are on the screen...
science of reading modules for PreK-2 educators through HILL for Literacy; will expand next year through grade 5
"Lawrence Leadership Consultancy Cohorts": 26 schools with instructional vision statements, targeted instructional priorities
increased co-teaching classrooms in special ed and multilingual
monthly learning walks; PD

Promoting paraprofessionals with BAs into teaching through emergency licensure
partnerships with post-secondary institutions: Regis, Merrimack, UMass Lowell
(That's diversifying the workforce)

family engagement specialists at all schools

SOA: 

Mariano: thanks lots of people, talks about early college and such

Craven: "this receivership was basically a function of the town wanting to work with the state"
that's...one spin
"and we know that a lot of the lessons learned can apply to other districts in the state"

Hills: how you see the governance model helping you or not in what you want to achieve?
what you expect to see over the next few years?

Rodriguez: have been in the district since 2005
Currently don't see anything inhibiting us from anything we want to do
continue to meet with elected School Committee
Met with City Council on school safety
"as far as the governance structure, to me it's working well right now. I don't see it inhibiting anything we want to do right now."
Mariano (chair): "I believe our structure is working very very well"
think that moving forward "we'll be ready to take the district back"
Rodriguez: strategic literacy plan to increase reading at every level 
"takes me back to a lot of things we were doing 30 years ago"
increase students in after dark programs
two people in his house: one at UMass Lowell, one an electrician
both "doing great"
doing more things for more students 
"amplify programs that are working well for our students right now"

Lombos: appreciate hearing an update
great to see how you're taking advantage of the SOA "which we all fought so hard for"
(the Board largely did not)
Lombos: Who decides when a district exits receivership?
Riley: decision is up to the Commissioner of education
Lombos: so, you
Riley: yes
Lombos: what do you need? What is the criteria?
Riley: stepping down over time
"hope that this will be the final step down...obviously will have to see how this works out"
updates part of that
"think we're in the next phase of that...yes, that's where we're at"

Moriarty: you're very new, inherited strategic plan for literacy
heartened with background in literacy

Rodriguez: attendance liaisons increased last year (in response to Q from Moriarty)

Canavan: do you set goals annually? "we hope that our Dibels scores will be X?"
Rodriguez: done by schools during budget process
setting goals in growth
SEL goals: out of school suspensions, mediation, training in restorative practices
Mariano: schools have evolved to a point, where initially they weren't looking at the data, but now more focus on the data and what the tests are telling them
"planning action steps to meet the needs of the kids"
"think the whole focus of the district has changed in the past four or five years"
(uh...so Riley didn't do that? Interesting timeframe there)

Craven: know that you were on School Committee under the old model
"things you want to keep about the receivership model"

"what are those things you'd say we need to keep as part of the learnings of receivership"
Mariano: I hope that the district just continues to move forward with the successes
Craven: I'm actually looking for these specific things that you could not do under an elected school committee, but CAN do now
Mariano: would like to keep the budget process running the same way
curriculum focused on data when planning for instruction
just want to see the successes continue

Q on DESE's involvement
Johnston: so pleased about the changes that have been mutually agreed upon 
support in mayor's office

To read this vacation week

 Here are some longer pieces to read as you have a chance this week:

• The L.A. Times on the school nutrition program: great internal look at what it means to feed 107 million meals a year while juggling multiple sets of regulations, supply shortages, and the palates of lots of different students.
  
  
• Rachel Cohen's deep dive for Vox on after school programs (and the lack thereof): 
  About 8 million kids are enrolled in after-school programs today, but that’s less than a quarter of

  total demand, according to the nonprofit Afterschool Alliance. Research it led in early 2020, just before the pandemic, found that nearly 25 million more children would be enrolled in an after-school program if one were available to them, up from 19 million in 2014.  

• This New York Times piece (oddly in the Opinion section) covering what it means to be a parent of a trans young person in a state which thinks such children shouldn't exist. The family spoken with is in Missouri; you might also read this piece speaking with parents in Florida.
  
  
• The first of what will be ten pieces for the next ten years of school finance from Jess Gartner and Jason Becker at Allovue, this one on teacher compensation. I wish I could make everyone involved in any aspect of negotiations, including public perception, read this one:
  

  Because teacher compensation makes up such a large percentage (over 60%) of district budgets overall, meaningful teacher compensation increases are nearly impossible strictly through reallocation of existing resources. Reallocating dollars from student transportation, nutrition, facilities, student support services (counselors, nurses, psychologists, etc), professional development, and technology cannot close the teacher wage gap. 

   

• And finally, if you're feeling worn out this February, read "You are not okay and tomorrow will come [and you should eat a banana]" from Emily Kingsley: 
  

  ...idiot or optimist, I still come home with hope each day. 

  It’s because of this one little word: and. 

  Everything is terrible and I can still change the clock battery.

  
  

Mid-January updates from WPS administration

 largely drawn from the weekly communication of Dr. Monárrez to the Worcester School Committee

First, I failed to note her op-ed in last Sunday's Telegram:

As a district we will lead others in the commonwealth and beyond if we are willing to lean in, act courageously, ignore the noise and stay committed to our purpose for existence — educating future leaders of Worcester.

Give it a read if you haven't! 

We actually got this last week, when several of us first heard of the terms of the Old Sturbridge Village lease, but administration did confirm that no such terms are in the leases we have with the Diocese of Worcester for either the St. Casimir or La Familia buildings. 
Relatedly, our lease for St. Casimir is up this year, and this week's agenda has a request for a vote to authorize a lease of space for that program for "three years with two additional three year extensions" for wherever it is that the administration agrees to put the program. There is a similar authorization requested, though for much longer--"a ten year lease with the option of two five year extensions"--for our Transitions program, which is for students in our special education program who are supported until age 22 to prepare them to transition out of the school system, currently housed at the Fanning Building, which doesn't have enough space.

In terms of access to basketball games, which has come up at a few different schools:

High Schools sports foster a sense of community and school pride. It was brought to our attention that our facilities at some of our high schools cannot accommodate large numbers of spectators. We are working with Dave Shea to identify options that will allow for our youth to attend games and not limit access.

And relatedly, specific to Burncoat:

The bid for the new bleachers at Burncoat High School is now posted on the City of Worcester website here. The bid opening date is February 2, 2023 and it is expected the project will be complete for the beginning of the next school year. In the meantime, we are seeing if temporary bleachers are available to expand seating capacity for the remainder of this year. We will also examine any short term options for repair of the gym floor as needed until the school is accepted into the MSBA replacement pipeline.

If you review the posting of the bid, it's a big project: 

The project scope generally includes replacement of existing wood bleachers with new telescoping bleachers and other related work necessary to complete all of the Work of the respective Sections and indicated on the drawings. Construction also includes installation of a new electrical transformer and sub-panel with new feed from existing electrical room. 

And note that our resubmission of Burncoat to MSBA is on this week's agenda! Once through the School Committee, it also needs to be voted by the City Council before submission. 

DESE was in the district on Monday, meeting with the district about our nine Sustainable Improvement Schools; those are designated by where schools are in the state's accountability system, which, as federally required, specifies a lowest performing 10% of schools. Per our update:

Currently these schools are strengthening teaming structures (Instructional Leadership Teams, and Professional Learning Communities), professional development (Science of Reading, Culturally Responsive Practices), and data driven informed decision-making.

I should perhaps note that this, along with the report we had earlier this school year on data, is the first update the Worcester School Committee has received on how we are doing on such state systems in...years. Literally. 

The transition to the city's new enterprise system is starting! Procurement (purchase orders) and bill payments (non salaries) are beginning on February 6, 2023. As a result, we Friday started a limiting of transactions, along with the city. Also, administration has on Thursday's agenda a request for the School Committee to approve the position description of a Workday Implementation Specialist as this BIG (and massively overdue) shift of city systems happens over the next several years.

And note that this week's Worcester School Committee agenda is here.

Oh, and finally: CHECK YOUR BUS INFORMATION this weekend! The Great Undoubling of routes has begun, and some information (whether your route was doubled previously or not) has changed! Please check the student and parent portals for accurate information.

What happened last night at Worcester School Committee (11/18/21)

So what happened at last night's Worcester School Committee meeting? 

For those for whom the sound didn't work until a bit of a way in, Roger Nugent, president of the EAW, spoke first requesting that we amend an earlier authorization for sick bank use for an employee (extending it beyond days donated by one school to the larger employee pool, as some donations came from outside the school), and shared a petition from some members on "choice" around vaccinations.

We had TWO student reps at the meeting last night: Stacia Zoghbi (who's our ex officio, as she was elected by the other student reps to be our official non-voting member) and Julianna Manxhari; Stacia goes to Tech and Julianna to Doherty. They sent out a survey to their peers across the district--students, PLEASE TAKE IT!!--and plan to share the results of that with us at one of our next meetings. They've also asked for a seat on the superintendent's search committee (and it sounds to me as if they're going to get it). 

The report of the superintendent was from Dr. Marco Andrade (whom I mentally refer to as "the data person") with a report that was framed from the perspective on the Office on Civil Rights (a subdivision of the U.S. Department of Education) around disparities in student data on social-emotional data, achievement information, absentee and discipline data, and post-graduate education and persistence. The report is here, starting on page 28. We have significant gaps, as was noted, and this is being referred to School and Student Performance for further discussion, because (as I said at the meeting) the data is only the start; the question is what we're going to do with it.

Reporting out were both Finance and Operations and Teaching, Learning, and Student Support standing committees. F&O had the transportation report, so we approved the new position descriptions (as budgeted for in the report, and as approved as part of the plan) for that department at the same time. And yes, we're hiring!
We also had the first quarter report, and one part concerned me: 

A $400K transfer from teachers to administration would raise an eyebrow, in any case, but it have it come in for the first quarter report--when we just passed the budget in June--and to have it explained as the conversation of five EL teachers to four EL administrators, particularly when we had just received a report from that department a few months back with no mention of this is simply bad process. 
I voted for the transfer, in part because it became clear that the administration had actually hired people ahead of the transfer, which is also bad process. 

TLSS had the vocational admissions policy, and Ms. McCullough noted that the deliberation also included discussion of the recruitment of more representative applicants (as the demographics of Tech become non-representative by who applies even with the new policy), as well as some discussion of the question of interest, which will be taken up during tours. The standing committee's report was passed, which gives provisional approval. Final approval will follow a public hearing next month.
Note that later in the meeting, we accepted a grant for $130K that is directed at this question of student recruitment to Tech.

We received back a report on an item I'd filed that had been bounced back and forth several times as incomplete regarding contracts that are directly with the superintendent. I'd heard concerns months ago that contracts weren't being completed, and so filed the item back in August. Eventually, the principal contracts largely were fulfilled, but there have been a number of outstanding administration contracts that were still not completed. I'll share here what we got last night: 

Beyond the contracts still not renewed, there are two things here that concerned me. The first is this group of people marked "N/A" who, I was told, simply do not have contracts. There isn't parity across administration in who this is, though, and I'm concerned that this not being based on something solid could open us up to discrimination allegations.
The second thing, from the far right column, is several contracts that now expire in 2026; that is, some people have recently been given five year contracts. This is itself unusual--five years for public contracts is covered for other circumstances by laws--but contracts given for five years by a superintendent who herself is leaving in seven months is particularly attention grabbing, as was my subsequent understanding that questions have been raised about extending contracts that are not yet expired.
As Mayor Petty noted, there is case law around the ability of executive successor, backed by the public committee, being able to cancel extensions in such circumstances, and he told Superintendent Binienda last night that he expected any updates not already included above to come before the School Committee.

We received back an updated report from Mrs. Clancey's motion asking for information on the transfers; this was the additional elementary teachers and the additional adjustment counselors. She asked for information to be shared with the school committee about what the adjustment counselors are finding in their discussions. 
I was concerned to learn that the elementary teachers, who we'd specifically transferred to lower class size, largely have not been assigned to do so; only three are classroom teachers. 

An additional position for the Chief Diversity Officer passed (6-1; I was the 'no' vote, as I think this office continues to be poorly defined, and I think that needs to be fixed first.)

We accepted at $12,500 grant from Mass Insight for AP teacher training.

The audits are coming to F&O! (That's all we know so far. They do every year.)

Ms. McCullough filed an item looking into playground inspection and repair, so expect to see that coming.

She also asked for a reassessment of the need for crossing guards at secondary schools.

We also had clarified, on her motion, that volunteers MAY be in schools, so long as they have provided either proof of up to date vaccination or recent negative COVID test (just like employees).

And she asked about virtual tutoring. Earlier in the meeting, Miss Biancheria questioned administration about part-time tutors who are retirees possibly being hired.

I filed an item specifically on bus 38, as I haven't gotten any response to my emails to the superintendent (who has directed that communication with Durham is hers) regarding it.

We're also going to recognize all the people who don't get recognized when you build a new school building for opening South (or at least we're going to try!).

And we're going to thank the National Guard, AA Transportation, plus WPS Transportation (per the superintendent's request) and the Lieutenant Governor (per the Mayor's request) for their work on transportation in October. Other amendments were not accepted.

And then a report I hope comes back soon: 

Request administration report urgently via school level staff on student disregulation, how it is manifesting in our schools, how staff is managing and coping with such disregulation, and what resources and policy changes from this Committee are necessary to better support students, families, and staff.

We next meet on the Monday the 22nd with the superintendent search firm! 5:30! 

Budget FY23: Board of Ed

 Hills: meeting before the November meeting
DESE budget and DESE priorities
understand the priorities the Commissioner has laid out

just missed the beginning of what Bill Bell said..will come back to this

Teacher Appreciation Week

It has been quite a week, and so observance of Teacher Appreciation week was put off 'til today. 

I am of the strong opinion that the most meaningful way one can appreciate teachers is not to do so during a single week. 

We appreciate teachers when we vote for budgets that support schools as needed.

We support teachers when we vote for (yes) politicians who *actually* support public education and don't just give it lip service at election time.

We support teachers when we create and sustain conditions that make it a career that can be entered and continued by people of all backgrounds, not just those who can afford it, or those who look like most of the field now.

We support teachers when we fund support for families, such that teachers are not scrambling to also find sneakers and winter coats and snacks and the myriad of other things that kids need.

We support teachers when we build and maintain the buildings in which they work. 

We support teachers when we speak of it as a profession, that people study to enter, in which people develop skills over time.

We support teachers when we don't stand idly by when teachers, or the education profession in general, is denigrated online. 

So while I may be late in this week in saying thank you, please know that the above is how I try to appreciate teachers all the time. 

Thank you for your work. Please know how much I value it and you.

Worcester joint education and finance & operations meeting

 which is mostly on the work being done on schools before reopening; the agenda, including backup, isn't here
Allen: limitations on return to instruction; used MSBA tool for measurement
spacing allows for bringing students back only a single day a week
district doesn't have the capacity to add more buses (due to cost, drivers, and manufacturing)
limitations on spacing severely cut down on number of students can be on
HVAC: use outdoor air instead of recirculated air and increase air filtration
adjust settings, open windows and doors, prevent or minimize recirculation, upgrade filtration
all basement classrooms "have been taken offline and will not be used as classroom spaces or other multi-purpose spaces until further notice"

Lest my silence be complicit

some of this overlaps with what I posted yesterday on Facebook

I don't want my wanting to say just the right thing here turn instead into silence.
I also don't want to take up more space when my words are not those that most need to be heard.

I don't think it should escape any of us that the same week that brought us Amy Cooper weaponizing white womanhood in Central Park also brought us the death of George Floyd by the hand she was trying to invoke.

8-year-old Khalil James of Boston pic.twitter.com/geqC38RCvc

— Nick Emmons WBZ (@NickEmmonsTV) May 29, 2020

White supremacy is enforced thousands of little ways, and most are not at the point of a gun.

And just as it doesn't take a gun, it doesn't take laws, either. As Clint Smith tweeted yesterday:

Tired of people asking what’s in their hearts and not asking what’s in their policies.

— Clint Smith (@ClintSmithIII) May 29, 2020

We make and enforce policies in schools, among other places. It's also one of the places in America were the disparities in race between who enforces polices and who is expected to follow them is particularly large.
What we have in student handbooks and district policies, what we spend time on in professional development and curriculum, and what we don't say is what matters here.

Policies are also what we spend money on in our budgets.

And what were you doing on grants?

If by chance you were watching the Worcester School Committee on Thursday night, at about two hours in (2:14 or so), you saw that I made a motion to hold the grants on which we were asked to vote acceptance. In total, it was about $400K in grants that administration had asked that we vote to accept.
Why?
My motion specifically was to hold the grants pending a recommended allocation from the administration for the School Committee to pass, which the Committee had not received.
In other words, all we had was "please say yes to X amount of money" with no "and please vote to spend it here, here, and here."
And the allocation authority belongs to the School Committee, within cost centers.

Now, while I am somewhat tetchy about whose authority belongs to whom (in part because nature and school districts abhor a vacuum), and this is part of the Ch. 71, sec. 37 authority of school committees,  that isn't why I made the motion I did.
Spending money on things makes commitments and sets priorities:

• Grants may be used to hire staff, who we may need to either keep on or let go when the grant runs out. 
• Grants may be used for professional development, which develop skills and understandings which may be in line with goals or not. 
• Grants may be used to purchase equipment or materials, which may need further funding for maintenance or replacement.
• ...and so forth. 

Grants decide things, and the School Committee needs to know what is being decided in order to do its job effectively.
The Worcester School Committee hasn't been getting allocation recommendations with their grants for, the mayor noted, four years. It had been getting such recommendations before. So this isn't a new request; it's going back to previous practice, allowing for greater transparency and accountability around district spending and priority setting.
My motion failed, 5-2, but the Mayor's motion, to have that allocation information for these grants at the next meeting and for all grants going forward at the time of the vote, passed unanimously, as did my subsequent motions to have grants added to the quarterly reports reviewed in subcommittee and to receive the final reports for all grants going back five years (don't fret: these already exist, as they're filed with the state).
This is really a basic budgeting best practice, and I'm relieved we'll have it going forward. Worcester spends a lot of money in grants, and we need to know where it is going.

Don't leave out the business office

Just in time for the largest investment in Massachusetts public education since the early 90's comes this report from Educational Resource Strategies, "The Strategic CFO."

Let's start by talking about all the reasons you might dislike this one:

1. You hate using the term "CFO" for the school business office, as it smacks of "making education run more like a business" and plenty of the baggage that comes along with that line. That's fair, 'though I also think that it tends to reflect our own personal experiences with those roles. There are "School Business Managers" that don't get how schools aren't businesses and CFOs who do, so...if it helps, ignore the title. 
2. It's sponsored by the Broad Institute. Yes, always look at funders, but read the report, anyway. I would hope we all read with a critical eye, in any case?
3. ERS has a lot (a LOT!) of Bain alums among their employees. Much like Broad, that speaks to this "we're going to come in and tell you all how to do education better (you poor benighted folks)" coming from heavily corporate industry. Thus again, read with a critical eye.

Let's talk about this. 

Traditionally, school district and corporate leaders regarded chief financial officers, or CFOs, as chief accountants. They were tasked with ensuring financial compliance, settling the books, creating reports, and cutting costs. The CFO was risk averse and internally focused; she was there to backstop the ambitious plans of others. 

Those accountability functions are no less important now than they were in the past — but today’s CFO is part of a district leadership team that is on the hook for so much more. A higher bar for student learning and great student needs require new ways of organizing resources, even as unsustainable cost structures and flat or decreasing revenue make it more challenging to invest in improvement.

The first part is certainly true, and I would argue it still is in many places. I'd dispute the idea we're necessarily seeing district leadership "on the hook for so much more," so much as we may be aware of that responsibility. Likewise, the organizing of resources to this end isn't new, so much as it is as much true as it ever was; always beware of thinking you've discovered a problem, when perhaps it is only new to you.

The three "mindsets" the report offers are:

• Look Forward: As chief problem-solver in the district, it’s important for the CFO to not just solve problems that are “smacking you in the face,” but also dig below the surface to root causes. This may happen through thoughtful inquiry into isolated issues raised by a colleague, or by stepping back to uncover patterns over time that may be indicative of a more systemic challenge 

Yes, for sure! And also: consider what kind of resources of time this takes, to have the space to consider and dig for systemic problems, and then work on patterns and fixing them.
I had considered earlier this week when the "state your unpopular opinion" was circulating online contributing that my "unpopular opinion on school finance" is that central offices are frequently understaffed. This is particularly true (again, in my view) of school business offices. Consider, then, that the reports and budgeting and accounting all need to still take place; if you also think that this visionary and problem solving perspective should be happening, we need to staff for it.

• Reach Outward: The CFO should foster trust among colleagues and the public by being transparent about the district’s financial picture, actively educating others about the “why” behind the numbers and maintaining a public persona as a competent financial manager  

Note that this requires that everyone trusts the business manager to do this, to do it well, and then...for the business manager to do this well.

• Focus on “How Well”: It is important to frame financial decisions within an overarching narrative about district strategy that the community can digest and connect with.

This is your most important policy document being your budget. This does mean, though, that budgets should be starting with goals, with the budget created to support them, not doing what has always been done or adding things that seem neat, and then backtracking to make the budgeting fit the strategic or goal-setting narrative. As is noted elsewhere in the report, this puts those in this position at the table earlier than might be true in some places.
This is also, of course, a core function of the school committee. If your budget starts with how much rather than where you're trying to go, it's backwards.

The report then lists five core functions:
1. Long-Term Financial Planning: assessing the forecast, defining root causes, aligning timeliness (amazing how often the budget operates in its own sphere), engaging other stakeholders, boosting public visibility (note how these two make it everyone's budget), and pursuing additional revenue
2. Strategic Planning: tuning into academics (note the de-isolation of the business office here), linking goals and measures, setting explicit resource-use goals
3. Annual District Budgeting: planning around the priorities (I would say FROM the priorities), integrating all funds (yes, you have to pass the grants for a reason!)), facilitating community decision making, proactively balancing the budget, periodically checking in (quarterly reports, yes, but your reports on goals should have allocation updates, too), monitoring impact metrics (which just means you're doing more than "we spent this much and we have this much left")
4. Annual School Budgeting: strengthening school support (we don't require budget training of principals; we should), clarifying flexibilities (what level of discretion does the school actually have on spending?), integrate decision-making inputs, coordinate timelines
5. Collective Bargaining: understanding student and teacher impact (what does the district need the contract to do?), expanding analytics, supporting stakeholder communication

This again all argues that this position--in fact, the entire office--is much more about the district direction than about spreadsheets and end of year reports. I'm not sure we can emphasize this enough as we work on the upcoming funding.
And? We may well not have enough people to do it.

MASC/MASS 19: Transparency: The New Normal

DeLai: you can do more with less but you're not going to get that less unless you improve transparency

Ready for presentation at @massupt @MASCSchoolComm joint conference on Fiscal Transparency with @DRG_mdelai and @MASBONet. Great crowd! #MASSMASC19 pic.twitter.com/mx3ivyOMw7

— Brian E. Allen (@Brian_E_Allen) November 6, 2019

comes not just from ESSA, but the increased public attention to awareness and attention
lack of equity, funding, understanding, communication, and trust
Allen: no secret sauce
things you're doing already and could do better

• ensure a highly participatory budget process
• make budget information accessible to all
• connect dollars to strategic outcomes

"It's in the report."

As you may have noted, I spend a good bit of my time at public meetings: I go to school committee meetings, I go to Board of Ed meetings, I go to City Council meetings...

In all of those meetings, there is one particular seemingly innocuous phrase that chills me:

"It's in the report."

That's the tip off that someone who was supposed to read something didn't. 

That's the teacher noting that you didn't do your homework. 

That's the public official demonstrating to those paying attention that they have not done their jobs.

Now, those who work on the administrative end of these are generally very good at being politick about this, so you may not hear those words particularly. But listen carefully during deliberations, and you can often tell who has done their homework and who hasn't.

We have had a great deal of demonstration of this during this week in Worcester.

The report, again, is here. And, as Tim Murray, speaking for the Chamber of Commerce, said yesterday, "Candidly, it's a no-brainer."

I have yet to see a question raised that isn't already answered by the report.

If some of us seem somewhat frustrated by this, I would say that's for two reasons:

1. This is a hypothetical issue for every single member of the Committee. Beyond emails, this in no way impacts the daily life of any member. The 13,000 or so Worcester students and their families that depend on Worcester Public Schools transportation do not have that luxury.
2. This has been discussed since 2010. If this is new or seems sudden to you as a member of the public, that's understandable, as most of us don't follow every angle. But if you're a member of this committee suddenly this week calling for more time or greater information? You haven't been doing your job.

I will also say that I have yet to hear anything from any member of this committee about the Nelson Place students, some of whom are non-verbal, who were on Durham buses for hours last Friday, as their parents grew increasingly frantic, getting no response from Durham and eventually calling the police to find their children. If you read the responses--and note that Durham called in their national crisis manager for this--there's a quick exchange of blame between the bus company and the superintendent. We have seen no apology, no explaination, and no assurances that this won't happen again. A promise of a plan by Friday doesn't fix this.

Never mind the next contract: how is it that no one is investigating the appropriateness of continuing the current one? 

The problem those parents had and that Nick D'Andrea speaks of this evening on Worcester News Tonight are not, ultimately, those of "district communication," as I have seen cited. Yes, it will be nice to know precisely where the bus is when it is late; we were supposed to have the app two contracts ago, so no one gets a cookie for finally getting that done. Currently, the WPS Transportation office can't tell us where the bus is, because frequently, Durham hasn't told them that, nor, frequently, has Durham told the schools.
You can take that from someone who has, multiple times, called Transportation, called Durham, called the schools, and called Transportation back again. Guess which places hadn't heard from the third?

Thus it will be difficult to take seriously administrative and school committee concerns around chronic absenteeism or tardiness, when one of the chief culprits is rehired to continue and at a greater rate. 

While I've been experiencing new levels of sealioning in my own comment threads, my sense is that there are some who are legitimately thrown by the idea of having to figure out how much busing is going to cost over several years. Running budgetary projections (luckily) isn't everyone's job. It's not easy (we were trained in it through MASBO). It is, though, a regular part of business--you'll note, for example, that the Chamber isn't thrown off by this--and moreover, it is a regular part of what the school district already has to do: that's what every single year's budget is. If you as a member don't believe these projections, what were you voting this past year's budget based on?
Yes, that budget includes commodities--we heat buildings and run vehicles including buses already--and maintenance and changes in enrollment and all of the things that can also be concerns of busing.

...which makes sense, because the district is running buses already.

This isn't the district "getting into the busing business" any more than the district is in the "restaurant busines" because thousands of children are fed (yes, in house) each day, or getting into the "custodial business" because the buildings get cleaned (yes, by district employees) each day, or getting into the "facilities management business" because the buildings are maintained (yes, by district employees) each day. It is a basic responsbility of the district to transport children to school so they can learn, just as it is a basic responsibility to feed them, to keep the buildings they are in clean and maintained. They can hire employees to do it or companies to do it. Hiring companies to do it, incidentally, is called "privatizing services." It is the district's responsibility just the same.
And right now, it is not happening. 

I thus find it extraordinarily difficult to believe the professed concern of those who have come out with public statements of their positions (in whatever fashion). Posting of your outrage in a comment thread to parents, telling families that they are "heard," and otherwise sending out sentiments means nothing when you're going to vote to continue the same conditions for another two years.

If you review the report, you will find: 

• an "apples to apples" comparison with the Durham contract (p. 2). As noted in the F&O meeting Monday, the district has chosen to move away from diesel, for a cost savings, while Durham is continuing with diesel, which costs more.
• the vehicles being leased to own, including the process and cycle (p. 7, including a link, if you copy the PDF, to a comparative Durham methodology); note that cost is included in the projections and there is still the savings
• where the vehicles would be housed (the School Committee has already voted on this)
• collective bargaining issues (see page 7 and 11)
• the pipeline to driver development (also page 2)

If at this point, you as a member of this Committee are claiming that you don't have enough information or have a need to wait? It isn't due to lack of information, and you had your waiting time. The bid came in in June. 

It's in the report.