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.

For the sake of the record

...I do want to note that this notion of "business partnerships" for the Worcester Public Schools that is being acclaimed as being a new idea in today's Worcester Telegram and Gazette isn't new to Worcester at all. A quick search of my blog notes for "Worcester business partnership" turns up this result, and that's just what I wrote down. The business partners for each school was a regular part of principals' reports in the previous administration.

Note that you can also do this with ad-hoc committees on attendance, and half a dozen other things that have been proclaimed to be new and innovative in the past three years, when they were things that were regularly happening in the previous five or ten.

"Conditions of Education in the Commonwealth: Putting Students at the Center of Reform"

The event posting is here. Hashtag is #COE2017

Business in education via politics

While it's the infuriating quote from Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson that is getting all of the attention--

“I’m not sure public schools understand that we’re their customer—that we, the business community, are your customer,” said Tillerson during the panel discussion. “What they don’t understand is they are producing a product at the end of that high school graduation.”
The Exxon CEO didn’t hesitate to extend his analogy. “Now is that product in a form that we, the customer, can use it? Or is it defective, and we’re not interested?” American schools, Tillerson declared, “have got to step up the performance level—or they’re basically turning out defective products that have no future. Unfortunately, the defective products are human beings. So it’s really serious. It’s tragic. But that’s where we find ourselves today.”

--I would recommend reading Fortune's article about how business got involved in the Common Core learning standards. It isn't as driven by the level of conspiracy-theorizing that has characterized some coverage, while also being honest about who is behind which parts.
It also concludes that, due to the level of implimentation, we're probably over most of the flips, which may have implications for the Massachusetts ballot question

Articles of faith (in education)

h/t to Andrew Sullivan for pointing me to this excerpt from Getting Schooled in Harper's:

In the increased emphasis on data and the imposed emphasis on standardized jargon and tests, including the standardized inanities that result (no student I meet seems to believe that the universe formed in six days but a disturbing number insist that an essay is always formed in five paragraphs), I sense the encroachment of the totalitarian “business model” that has destroyed family farming as a way of life, of the same itch for arcane nomenclature that has turned literary criticism into a pseudoscience. A veteran foreign-language teacher still going strong since my last stint at school says to me with a sigh, “I’m afraid the day of the teacher-as-artist is drawing to a close.”

School to business partnerships

Ten page backup on this one tonight

The Quadrant managers are working with the schools that don't have business partnerships at this time (response to a question by Mr. O'Connell)

So what happened there?

A few thoughts about the tax level discussion after some reflection:

This was not the first, but was the most recently egregious, example of a huge dissonnance between what happened at a City Council meeting that I attended and the meeting I read about in the next day's Telegram and Gazette. It's pretty clear to me that, after so many meetings and so many years of covering it, getting to the point is really all that we're going to get from the daily. Unfortunately, this leaves out a huge amount of very significant information. Last night, it was the number and the identities of those who were testifying in favor of a single tax rate. They were not, by any means, all weathy business owners. There were homeowners, small business owners, a remarkable mix of people, nearly unanimously in favor of the tax rate. You'd never get that from the paper.

By the same token, you wouldn't have gotten that from listening to the city councilors, either. It's sad that public comment can be so unacknowledged. Thanking people for coming isn't enough.

It's clear that there's still a gap between taxation and services even in the conversation (not to say the minds) of the city councilors. I'd expect any conversation about taxation to talk about where that money goes. While it happened last night, it didn't happen nearly as much as I'd expect.

Brace yourself, folks: last night, Councilor Rosen threw in the first call for city layoffs for next year's budget.

Vote on the tax rate

Vote is 9-2 for lowest residential tax rate, Petty and Rushton opposed

Residential rate will thus be $13.50 per $1000
Commercial rate will be highest possible, $28.72 per $1000

That will be an average homeowner increase of $50 for homeowners (Rushton's motion would have raised it an additional $21 dollars, totaling $71 dollars) and $1600 for business owners

Public testimony, part III

Elizabeth St. John (speaking very quietly) has seen the city deteriorate over the past years. Wants to see the city all thrive. Approves of PILOT, too. Would like to see a single rate, and get druggies off the street, as that would also attract business.

We've had several residential property owners arguing in favor of a single tax rate. That's huge. Usually, there's a barrage of homeowners complaining about their high residential taxes, but tonight there's a large number of homeowners speaking in favor of a single rate to attract and retain business.

Public testimony, part II

Richard Kennedy, Worcester Chamber of Commerce, speaks that we need to cut spending, and also bump up the proportion of the commercial tax base. The way to do that, he says, is to go to a single tax rate. "As the commercial business base shrinks, a great proportion falls on the residential" side. "We have to start down that road...begin to make it more equitable." He reads off a list of local rates for surrounding communities. "important from the residents' perspective as well...a five year time frame is something we should set ourselves."

Bill Kelleher (you'll recognize his name from realty signs) passes out a single sheet, says "sometimes we lose track of the bigger picture," and now runs through a comparision of apples and apples: a Worcester restaurant to a West Boylston restaurant (O'Connor's, in fact), drugstores, locksmith, manufactors...it's a huge difference if those businesses are outside the city. He says that the councilors not only have a leadership role, they also have an education role. They need to explain that when a company goes elsewhere, where does the excise tax go? Where does the property tax go? "Inch away from the low rate tonight, and please help us...help people understand better why it is in the interest of the city to bring us closer to parity"

Gary Vecchio, Shrewsbury Street Neighborhood Association, asking 1) for PILOT, 2) that tax classification be held before the election, 3) asking for the lowest residential property tax rate (he says he's been here for six years in a row). He says that only six times in the last 19 years has the Council voted for the lowest residential property tax rate. He goes on to compare tax bills to the cost of living.

Ed Profield (?), lives here, owns five properties in the city, operates a business here. The current business climate is the worst he's seen...a solution to keep businesses here, rather than have them go one town out. "There has to be a more level playing field." Points out that offering a TIFF package is contrary to the tax rate. Pitting the "rich business owner against the poor homeowner" may get votes, but does not solve the problem. "have the foresight to appoint a committee to level the playing field"

Public testimony, part I

We've got six or more people who want to give public testimony.

First up, Ralph Crowley, a member of the Crowley family (that would be Polar Beverages), who is speaking of the disrespect the Council is showing the business community by having their minds made up ahead of time. He's looking for leadership. He's gone through how many he employs (from 250 up to 1200). He urges the Council to get up with the realities of business.

Sumner Tilton, now, an attorney, speaking, among his many hats, as the chair of "Choose Worcester." This would convince business that are here to stay here, and those that are thinking of being here of locating here. He says, "It's a tough job." The split tax rate does not help. Communities surrounding the city have half the tax rate for business. He speaks of the shrinking business tax levy (from 35% down to 19%; he forecasting that it will go down to 10%).

Roberta Schaefer, chair of the Municipal Research Bureau, speaking of what businesses look for: good schools (including MCAS scores), low taxes, a fair permitting process. She's reading off a list of how local communites fall in friendliness to business, putting Worcester down in the 240's (also chastising the City Councilors who are not paying attention to her). She argues that the other communities are benefitting from Worcester's assets.

Ad-hoc committee on the superintendent

If you stayed longer than my unintentionally dramatic exit with children in tow, please add comments if there was anything further said that is relevant to the school budget!

Tonight was the first of two public hearings on the new superintendent of schools. The ad-hoc committee is looking for public input on what we need in a superintendent. In her introduction, Mayor Lukes spoke of having "a vision to excel in the education sector."

The first speaker was Richard Kennedy, president of the Worcester Chamber of Commerce. He said that the first question asked by any company they are attempting to get to relocate to Worcester is "Tell us about your school system." They want to know what the opportunities for their children are. He closed by saying that the Chamber is "very, very supportive of an exceptional school system."

This sounds like the opening of a conversation with the business community regarding school funding!