Board of Ed February meeting: the budget

 Bell: funding schedule for SOA implementation
$198M "if you round up" increase in Ch. 70 aid 
especially for schools with high concentration of low income, for students learning English, with special ed needs
circuit breaker: increase the state's commitment
lowered reimbursement ceiling at which the state starts paying
along with funding transportation: increase of $22M in appropriation
increase of $26M in charter school tuition reimbursement
up about 2 1/2% increase in appropriation overall
$25M in Feb; $25M in April for state COVID aid
big news between first fed stimulus and subsequent COVID aid have made over $1B in ed grant aid to districts; formulaically distributed to districts, weighted to those with higher need students
much discussion of ESSER III coming through Congress
foundation charges increased also increased local contributions, so Gov allows municipalities to use district ESSER II grant funds towards their local contribution
"suffice to say there's been some confusion among municipal and school leaders"
"continue to have dialogue" with local districts on that
spending down first federal stimulus grants
award authority for emergency assistance to non-public schools from second stimulus

Stewart: long terms costs not only learning loss, but also reopening costs
what have you identified already?
Bell: not sure I have the answer to what is available
Stewart: mostly the buckets of what is need
State commitment to making resources available 
listing off what has been offered
Stewart: when you're looking at older schools and ventilation
Bell: theme is those with biggest need will be getting largest support

DESE Financial update at MASBO

Circuit breaker: Jay Sullivan

circuit breaker relief email has gone out to districts: this fiscal year costs must be 25% over cost last year for circuit breaker

60-65 districts that file on an annual basis

hopefully by end of this month should be filed

Gov's budget: budget will go through a number of iterations through House and Senate
may or may not use ESSER funds for local contribution
DESE will continue to plan as if that's going to happen; guidance will be available, but not yet
Still not (and won't be) sure

House 1 Ch. 70 proposal: Rob O'Donnell and Rob Hanna

slides are on DESE Ch.70 page (this set is updated as of today)
updated Ch.70 formula workbook, as well, as to how ESSER II funds should be available to regional district members
Ch.70 aid increases over $197.7M over FY21
1/7th implementation of SOA
low income up to 185% threshold (FY16 % of low income student enrollment)
assumed in district sped enrollment percentages (increased to 1/7th)
inflation of 1.48% (2.78% for insurance from three year GIC average)
Hold harmless for 20 districts that would have otherwise lost aid under SOA implementation 
local contribution reduced 100% of gap for those over target
CEY of 175% of foundation or more required to contribute to 82.5% of foundation
House 1 allows districts to use up to 75% of ESSER II funds for their local contribution increases
Members of regional district may deem a proportional share of 75% of the regional district's ESSER II grant toward increases in required contribution 
charter tuition based on same foundation rates
implements 100/60/40 schedule for charter reimbursement (year 1): 75% of total entitlement based on current projections: $143.5M (will be 90% in FY23, 100% in FY24)
charter tuition being reduced by per pupil required local contribution that can be supported by each sending district's ESSER II award (reduction statewide of $7.5M)
Charters then asked to offset with their own ESSER funding
allocations of coronavirus funding $53M statewide just over $50M in funding for districts ($25 per pupil + $75 per low income pupil) 
two equal payments starting this month (later) 
No grant applications needed but for eligible expenses; only for use in FY21 (so by June); thus can go back to July 2020, must be spent by June 2021
to be put in separate account "available to school committee without further appropriation"
will at least need to be reported on End of Year report; may be other reporting requirement
"we're going to have all kinds of pages in the end of year report, starting in FY21"
Federal CvRF next round of reporting due March 5

Transportation: Craig Delmonte:
district that provides own transportation should have heard from recently
how districts are reporting transportation costs on End of Year report
accurate measure of claiming for costs under circuit breaker for districts that provide own transportation 
working on cost per ride across Commonwealth

Questions:
FY21 rural aid distribution: no info as yet
if my charter reimbursement is going down, what's up? Your tuition must be going down
ESSER funding: available to school committee up to 75% of total amount to cover increase
aid to state and local governments potentially coming in President's bill
150 districts that haven't drawn down CvRF
if you're funding right at net school spending, 
First time in history that a grant will be counting towards NSS
"you're going to spend the money, and then journal enter the money in your EOY report"
ESSER II use is putting off the local funding of the increase in local contribution, which will need to be picked up the following year

January Board of Ed: update on budgeting matters (offline)

State education finance update (with ongoing thanks to those who respond to my emails)

•Baker files House 1 tomorrow; you already know the admin line is "fully funds year 1 of SOA."

•New ESSER II grants (that's $800M in total to state; $733M to districts directly, based on Title I allocations) will be live to apply for in the next week or so. District by district allocations at link here

Actual quote on that page: "DESE is providing an additional $10,000 to each district for student mental health services and supports." Don't spend that all in one place, folks.

•On the $53M (I thought it was $54M, but whatever) from the state: payments coming in Feb ($25M) and April ($25M) based on state’s allotment schedule. Update on the School Finance page soon.

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.

A few thoughts on tonight's Worcester School Committee

As always, my blog posts are from my perspective, so you can and should of course keep in mind that I'm running for one of these seats. I'd say that tonight again illustrates why. 

I never broke open a blog post, as nothing quite ever rose to that; you can find my tweeting threaded starting here:

Heading over to the Worcester School Committee meeting; periodic tweeted as warranted. My write up of the agenda is 👇🏼 https://t.co/tosKRoL3H8

— Tracy O'Connell Novick (@TracyNovick) September 5, 2019

I think what we saw again tonight was a Committee that in many ways is casting about for relevance while largely missing major concerns.

The item on Columbus Park, in which Mr. Monfredo noted that it was already being dealt with, yet filed the item asking for a report, anyway, revealed the crucial information that multiple classes of students are meeting in basement rooms because the building is so crowded.
Yet we don't have a facilites replacement plan for elementary schools.

Mr. Foley's relevant and should-have-been-expected question of where the security grant funds are going...the superintendent didn't have an answer to.
We're going to spend $80,000; it would be good if we literally had any idea of where it's going.

Mr. O'Connell, who has been on the Committee since the mid-80's, asking when the audit documents will be available.
The district runs on a fiscal calendar and the documents come at the same time every year.

An intimation as part of a larger item from Mr. O'Connell that cell phones are a health hazard.
This is, bluntly, pandering to those who reject science.

An extended speech from Mr. Monfredo and Miss Biancheria that the launch of school event at the DCU was a marvelous event.
The teachers' union for the second year is collecting information on how the time was wasted, as professional development time is in far too short supply to be squandered.

A sudden interest from Mr. O'Connell in the School Committee's legal authority around school siting. This is the third school to be built in the last ten years, but this one is Doherty.

Even this sudden interest in the School Committee having goals (their policy says they are do perform an annual self-evaluation, as well) led to a list by Mr. O'Connell of a series of things, many of which are not under the power of the School Committee.
The Committee, though, is so far afield that it isn't clear to me that it knows where its job even lies at this point.

In any case, the meeting may have been relatively short, but there was plenty there to argue that you should vote next Tuesday to make changes on this Committee.

Worcester School Committee meets Thursday, September 5

You can find the agenda here.
Should you be wondering if the Worcester Educational Collaborative's weekly question for candidates makes any difference at all, you might go read this week's responses on balancing constituent needs and the work of the committee, which was published Tuesday, August 27, and then look at how many agenda items that reflect challengers' concerns were filed on Wednesday, August 28.
Right. So.

There is no report of the superintendent.
As I noted in my own response to WEC's question, there is again an enormous number of recognitions and appreciations.
There are some beginning of the year appointments.

There's a response to the item asking about the teaching of cursive in the Worcester Public Schools; this is one of the better responses I've seen in some time, as it cites the state standards, reviews where the state is going, lays out where the district is and plans to be, and brings it home with research. 

There's a question about mold at Columbus Park (see above on filing items that should simply be referred to administration for solution).

There's a one page request for acceptance for an $80,000 security grant upon which the only description is "locks and cameras" with program location "the Worcester Public Schools." That's a lot of money to spend so vaguely.

There's likewise a one page request for acceptance of an innovation pathways grant of $28,683, and...I have no idea what it is being spent on, as here's what it says:

• To support the development of new and effective strategies to scale high-quality career pathways, and significantly expand student access to, participation in, and successful completion of pathways that culminate in meantiful postsecondary and workforce credentials
• To provide participating students with supportive, rigorous academic experiences and career development education relevant to their next stepss after high school
• To enhance a student's ability to gain awareness and prepardness of future employment opportunities

I mean, it's the innovation pathways, so it has stuff to do with getting kids to work, but what is the $28K going to?

xkcd 1860: Communicating

There's likewise a one page request for acceptance for the $116,250 21st Century Exemplar program which is going to Burncoat Middle "to provide activities rooted in project based learning practices that were developed around the need for enhanced literacy programming." So the funding buys...what?

Lest you think I'm being overly particular, I know for a fact that the district had to supply significantly more information than this to the state to get the grant, and the district within recent memory was reporting enough information to know where the money was actually going on grants.

Miss McCullough is asking for a report on the JumpStart orientation programs at the secondary schools. I assume, incidentally, that there will at some point be a report of the superintendent on back to school?

The usual settling up from the prior fiscal year is on here without a backup at this point; it'll be referred to Finance and Operations.

The auditors are coming! The reports aren't attached; this will go to Finance and Operations, too.

Mr. Monfredo thinks there should be:

half day professional development for staff in light of the training provided to principals that dealt with SEL, the impact of homelessness and foster children and on disciplinary alternatives.

Just a reminder that professional development time in the Worcester Public Schools is very, very limited.

Mr. Monfredo also offers this:

Request that the Administration continue its collaborative work with various agencies in dealing with the needs of homeless and foster children and consider reviewing the Cincinnati model entitled “Kids in School Rule.”

Yes, that is really a "keep doing what you're doing" item.

There's a request to pay a prior fiscal year item $2,323.00 to CliftonLarsonAllen, LLP for the student activities account audit which is a little odd.

Mr. O'Connell is coming in with two alternative district policies banning cell phones in different ways, both of which made the rounds of the news this summer: San Mateo and Crestwood. It's always interesting to me which ones get picked; one could just have easily cited Stoughton's: 

Stoughton High School Student Handbook changes for 2019-2020 regarding the Electronic Device Policy.

Parents and guardians please review this policy below with your child & encourage responsible and appropriate use of electronic devices during the school day. @StoughtonPS pic.twitter.com/plisODjFt1

— Alan Bontya (@BlackKnightsAP) August 29, 2019

Note also that, so long as the district both requires technology to complete work and does not provide said technology, having a cell phone ban is literally barring students from doing their work, or requiring that they violate district policy to do so.

The Committee is requested to accept donations:
– $67.55 from a donor to the Worcester Public Schools
– $100.00 from a donor to the Patricia Falcone Memorial Scholarship
– $3,820.00 from Worcester Area Mission Society for the Summer Cubs Program held at Woodland Academy

Mr. O'Connell has put the updated superintendent rubric on the agenda for consideration; note that the redraft is only for superintendents, not for district administrators as on the agenda.

The Committee is also being asked to accept (surely we could even just group these together?) the Comprehensive School Health grant for $200,000. While the backup on this one is of no more use than any of the other grants on the agenda, luckily we know from the FY20 budget what this grant is going for: "trauma informed teams" that would go to schools in most need (that's on page 262). More specifics about how many positions are being hired should be included here, however.

Mr. O'Connell (on August 28) suggests that the School Committee should establish goals for itself. Note that during Mr. O'Connell's extensive tenure, I do not believe he has ever before made this proposal.
...and wants to review the siting of Doherty (citing the city charter, which I don't think is going to carry weight with the MSBA).
...and wants to send leftover food home with kids (as you no doubt saw on Facebook this summer).
...and wants to know when site councils are meeting (as he does this one time each year; it does not get connected to goals or evaluation at any point).


Mr. Comparetto asks for an update on ongoing transportation issues. Note that the Committee was to have the Durham bid and the WPS report on the in-house alternative by now. Keep your eye on the schedule of Finance and Operations meetings, as that report will appear there first. This is the appropriate place to bring your concerns about WPS transportation. I would think it would have to happen before the next full committee meeting on September 19. UPDATE: Note Scott O'Connell's article on this; Finance and Operations expected to meeting 9/1716, with the full committee taking it up 9/19. Again, this is the right place to bring your transportation concerns.

There is another prior year payment of $5,252.25 to Harbor Networks; since there's no backup, we don't know for what, but they do "managed IT services" which leaves more questions than answers, really. 


Mr. Comparetto, on an item co-sponsored by Mr. Foley, Miss McCullough, and Mr. Monfredo (that's interesting) calls for:

Request the establishment of an inclusive and transparent process for selecting and implementing a comprehensive Sex Education Curriculum that is age-appropriate, evidence-based, medically-accurate and LGBTQ inclusive in the Worcester Public Schools.

And yes, the candidates have been asked about that quite a bit.

Miss Biancheria would like a count on Worcester Tech enrollment and applicants; a list of Ch. 74 programs and enrollment; and AP courses, enrollments, and results (they won't be able to do a full list of this as some of the sizes will be too small; FERPA violation); and to "highlight its successes in the STEM/STEAM programs" during a week in October.

There's prior fiscal year payments totalling $7800 going to nurses, which does actually have a backup.

Miss McCullough, no doubt noting the ongoing calls these past weeks for class supply lists, request clear links to such lists, as well as calendars and forms. Might we go a step further and remind all involved that such lists can only always be optional, which is not something I saw emphasized nearly enough? For these to be expected in a district like Worcester is, bluntly, wrong.

And there's an executive session at 6: three collective bargaining sessions and three litigation consultations.

Worcester School Committee meets Thursday

After a posting issue last week caused a same-day cancellation of the main meeting, the agenda for this week includes the entire agenda from last week, which I covered here. As Worcester Magazine notes, the executive session again includes the superintendent's contract.

In addition to some new recognitions and such, it also includes:

• requested acceptance of a grant for $110,000 for improving mental health access; it appears that this is $10,000 for professional development and $100,000 to "secure supervision" for community agencies to provide the actual mental health services, which would appear to mean that this is simply to keep the buildings open.
• requested acceptance of a state grant of $178,560 for teacher diversification, which only runs through August?, to include:

  ...an assessment of practices in the school district by a state designated vendor to review district policies and procedures and identify the cultural proficiency and anti-bias training neesd for district hirning managers, teachers, principals, and school committee members...

  ...which seems like a report that ought to be made public, plus support for IAs to become teachers.
   
•  voting for the delegate and alternate for the MASC annual Delegate Assembly (in November...)
• a prior year payment of $1,069.10 to a custodian 
• a prior year payment of $3,038 to a computer tech 
• a prior year payment of $1,444.43 to a nurse
• Ms. McCullough, supported by Mr. Monfredo and Mr. O'Connell, suggests the hiring of a Director of Corporate and Community Relations 
• Ms. Biancheria, along with Mr. Monfredo and Mr. O'Connell, requests "that the Facility Division clean areas of growth at school sites to make student pathways clear and safe." 

Worcester School Committee meets Thursday, March 7

I know it's confusing, as they just met last week; February does that!
The agenda is here.
There are the usual array of resignations, appointments, and thanks.

The report on the superintendent is on technology (and can we talk about how hard it is to read a scan of a PowerPoint sideways?). Page 21 gets to access, with 2:1 access (planned? I think?) in K-2, 1:1 on carts in 3-6 and in general in 7-12, but the key point there is "funding to be identified." This ties in explicitly with the motion last week to re-examine the cell phone policy; note that with the big push towards technology use in the classrooms but the dearth of actual technology, students are using smartphones in the classroom and for homework. The district absolutely should not be making this push towards use without supplying devices and then punishing students for using the devices they have. Also, it's a relief to see student information staying in house; that gets shockingly expensive quickly, and WPS being able to staff and adapt is a district strength.
I'm a little puzzled by this appearing now, though, as it was one of the goals on which the superintendent was evaluated back in November.

The other item of note is the response of the administration on Advanced Placement courses, and I don't just say this as a parent who has a couple hundred dollars in checks to the high schools here on the desk next to me. While it lists the courses and reports the costs, it doesn't mention two things that are of central import in understanding this in Worcester: the first is how few other options there are at the high schools when it comes to what might otherwise be "honors" or "advanced" courses. Once you get to junior year (and I say this as a parent of kids in two high schools), your options get very, very limited beyond AP (and most students are urged into AP's in any case). The other key part of the contract that has not been mentioned in the backup is this:

The exams--the part that costs money--are not optional; this is a required cost for a course, and the cost of the exams--and the vast majority of the exams, despite the mention, are not covered by grants--is borne by students, in a district in which most of our kids are poor.

There is a response to an item on contractor wages for school construction projects.
There is a request for approval for new courses (these usually go to subcommittee for consideration):

• Acting Character Study Magnet
• Introduction to Networking
• Advanced Acting I Magnet
• Language and Literature Through the Arts
• Advanced Acting II Magnet
• Machine Operations
• Advanced Technical Theater
• Media Arts III
• African American Literature
• Media Arts IV
• American Literature
• Meteorology
• CNA and Health Care Skills
• Musical Theater for Performance Majors
• Comparative Mythology
• Neuropathophysiology and Film
• Construction Techniques and Specifications Course Application
• News and Media Literacy OCPL
• Computer Science Discoveries (For Middle School)
• Personal Financial Literacy OCPL
• Directing I Magnet
• Playwriting Magnet
• Directing II Magnet
• SAT Math Preparation
• Economics
• Shakespeare- Tragedies and Comedies
• Ensemble I Magnet
• Technical Theater II & Design II Magnet
• Ensemble II Magnet
• Theater Lab Acting
• History of Theater Magnet
• Theater Lab technical Theater
• Integrated Dance
• Urban Agriculture and Food Systems
• Introduction to Acting Magnet
• US Government and Politics
• Contemporary World Religions

...which is a lot? Remember that just because it exists, doesn't mean it is offered. 

There is a request that the committee vote to accept:

• a $150K English Learners pathways grant which appears to be for professional development for "bilingual education," if I have waded through the edu-lingo correctly. No word on the link with current programs, including the dual language one.
• a $7540 planning grant for implementation of the updated history and social studies standards 

Mr. O'Connell would like Worcester to participate in Massachusetts State Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate Diploma Program (APIB) Fee Subsidy Program  (which...doesn't seem to exist? I can't find this anywhere.).

There is an executive session posted for two grievances, collective bargaining with IAs, bus monitors, plumbers/steamfitters, and tradesmen, and contract negotiations with the superintendent. 

Worcester School meetings this week

Two meetings this week:
The Finance and Operations subcommittee meets on Tuesday at 5. The agenda is here.

The part to watch on that (and arguably the most important thing that will end up on Thursday's meeting's agenda) is the second quarter update on the FY17 (current year) budget.

A $375K gap is a lot of ground (yes, non-Worcester readers, even in a $300+M budget) between now and June. You can see that the City Manager's partial filling of the hole left by the Quality Kindergarten grant helps; the city's contributing $280,000. Since the Quality K grant for Worcester was $750K, though, that doesn't get us all the way there.

Also, note what else is going on on the quarterly update:

• rarely do you hear anyone in Worcester talk about special education tuition. That account, though, is now $596K over what was budgeted last June. To interpret this paragraph: "based on student fiscal responsibility" means that kids have moved districts, and we've now sorted out that Worcester has to pay for them. The "approved tuition rate increases for residential placements" means the cost went up for schools kids live at (and this has to be approved the state; it has been). "This account also represents the processing of several necessary prior year payments" means some of this is FY16;  and "as well as new student placements for the current fiscal year" means that new IEPs are still coming through. Remember that the foundation budget only recognizes 1% of the district enrollment as out-of-district special education (and not actual students or costs), and that the circuit breaker, which covers extraordinary costs, is also underfunded (for Worcester, by $294,500 for FY17). It's probably past time to start talking about this.
• because of the ongoing flat funding of the WPS capital account, the district isn't buying new buses at the rate required, so they're increasing the number leased: they're adding adding a special education route, increasing rental use for the transitions program, adding two midday routes through the end of the year, and "The district is developing contracts for the lease of 10 buses during later this fiscal year." The account is projected at $156K over at this point; watch this for FY18.
• Workers' comp. Still over.
• Personal services had some movement due to bringing special education services back to the district, but there's some things going on here besides that: an increase in legal (ok, contract negotiations year, plus the ongoing PCD-ness); translation services (underfunded in about every district serving high numbers of first-language-other-than-English speakers);  security guard contracted rates (has anyone asked why we still have them when we have cops in the schools?); and "nursing services contract rates," (?) as well as "an increase with necessary student services" (and I don't know what that is).
• A balance of over $500K is still in instructional materials; given the above, I have a sneaking suspicion that the schools aren't going to see their remaining $10/pupil.
• And hey! Money saved on utilities!

Also on the agenda: bus tracking (hey, pilot testing before the end of the year!) and running totals on how much the state has underfunded charter reimbursement from FY12 on. 

The full committee meets on Thursday; the agenda is here, and it's a long one, because there was an extra week between meetings. As a result, the following is not in agenda order, but re-sorted into one that is a little easier to follow.
The report of the superintendent is on AVID. 

There are a few appointments and a number of requests for congratulations.

There's (apparently? no backup) a report coming back on window replacements. How the district plans to deal with PCB's is also in there, so perhaps it will be dealt with at least partly in executive session. 

There's a request to approve the update of the agreement with the Collaborative.
They're also being asked to approve the innovation plan for Goddard Elementary.
They're being asked to update the policy on physical restraints (the state adopted new regulations a bit ago on this).

The committee is being asked to accept a donation to Clark Street to encourage families to visit libraries over the summer.
They're also being asked to accept a donation to Worcester Tech for their science fair.
They're being asked to accept a donation from Target to Woodland Academy for the annual Freedom Trail trip.
They're being asked to accept a donation from Fallon for SAT testing for all juniors.
They're being asked to accept accept the Secondary Transition Systemic Improvement Grant for $37,000, which is to improve how high-need kids on IEPs are transitioned out of services from the public schools.
They're being asked to accept the Biobuilder grant for $28,000, which builds on the biotechnology programs at North, Doherty, and Tech, and includes a $500 stipend for students who complete the program.
They're being asked to accept a $10,000 donation for a scholarship from DCU.
They're being asked to approve a prior fiscal year payment of $2,066.40 to a parent for transportation.
They're being asked to accept a donation of $3,000.00 from the Patterson Family Foundation & Scholastic Reading Club for Chandler Elementary.
The audit is in! But not yet attached; being sent to F&O.

Mr. O'Connell is concerned about the edge of Tatnuck Magnet's property; truck traffic from CSX; the federal budget; the update on state accountability (for which comments are due April 5).

He also would like the city to consider issuing bonds to replace schools more quickly.
He also thinks we should have a literary magazine.

Miss Biancheria would like to know which schools are using Mass Work-Based Learning Plans.
She'd like to know about the online program being offered Creamer.
And she'd like a schedule of STEM programs. And a report on the bullying conference.


Mr. Monfredo wants all teachers to read "Casey at the Bat" to students during the week of May 29th.
He would also like the committee to express its concern at the federal budget.
He also wants to celebrate "Heart Health month."
And he's accepting donations for his annual book drive.

Ms. Colorio wants to create a task force "to investigate and seek solutions to drug and alcohol problems in the schools." She's also asking for a report on the Massachusetts ESSA plan and what changes that might bring, and a report on the mathematics and ELL (I think she means ELA?) standards, both of which were voted last week.
She also would like to create "a Hotel and Restaurant within a vacant Worcester public school." Which we don't have any of.

There is also an executive session at 6 pm on negotiations with the teachers' union, two grievances, and (you guessed it!) PCB litigation. 

March Board of Ed: budget and Chapter 70

Chester updates on FY18 (plus a spreadsheet) and on chapter 70

Kindergarten aides are saved! (But pay attention to the details)

I keep telling you that finance departments are crucial...

Brian Allen, chief financial and operations officer for the Worcester schools, said health insurance savings following the city’s open enrollment period, as well as special education cost reductions created through in-sourcing services, have helped cover about half of the roughly $750,000 cost of retaining the positions. Financial staff will comb the budget for additional savings, such as through deferred spending or position attrition, to pay for the aides for the entire year, he said.

"about half"
It isn't all there yet, so pay attention to that.

On the other hand, the schools aren't going to be as short as they were going to be on kindergarten aides, which is excellent news, as is the saving of four of the secondary positions (that's also part of an answer to two of the outstanding questions).

Because this has now happened in Lowell and Fitchburg, as well as Worcester, I suspect the lesson being drawn some places on Beacon Hill is "well, see? They didn't need it anyway."
Instead, the question should be "What are they NOT doing to save this?" In every community, there are sacrifices of other things being made in order to make this choice. That shows how important early education is, but it doesn't mean the things sacrificed aren't important. I hope to hear the "what did we lose to do this?" question asked.
And yes, this has everything to do with the foundation budget needing reconsideration.

Worcester School Committee: Bastille Day edition

probably mostly notes on budget, once they get there.
Oh, hey, I'd missed that this is on here! 

To accept a donation in the amount of $2,500 for student scholarships from the Voya Foundation in recognition of the Worcester Public Schools being the 2016 recipient of the Donald Johnson Operational and Cost Efficiency Award from the Massachusetts Association of School Business Officials. 

 Verdolino (quoting Brian Allen): "we believe that this collaborative budget approach has brought millions of dollars" in cost efficiency
Allen "is an exemplary business official, as I'm sure you all know"
Worcester gave the best testimony to FBRC; hope for a resolution to bring a better resolution for Worcester

Jointly passed budget leaves Worcester $1.1M short (and School Committee meets Thursday)

I'd urge those interested in Worcester education to read the backup to Thursday's meeting regarding the budget. Note that this was prior to Governor Baker's released vetoes, which cuts down circuit breaker further (that's probably the only impact the Governor's vetoes have on WPS, though there are quite a number that hit Worcester in other ways).
The budget passed by both parts of the Legislature leave WPS short by $1.1M from the budget the School Committee passed last month. That's:

• $736,360 lost for the kindergarten grant. I'd urge you to read the memo, but, in short, there will be schools with simply will not have a kindergarten aide this year. And that's with elementary class sizes growing. 
• a $63,139 increase over the House budget, as the joint budget adopts the Senate number (again, read the memo for why).
• a $364,059 loss in charter school reimbursement (this is due to the increase in seats, but not in reimbursements). This means that Worcester is $1M underfunded for charter school reimbursements for FY17.
• a further loss of $82,000 in tuition assessment change.

The general fund budget is impacted by $383,725. 

But that's not all!
The elementary classes are, of course, bigger in size than last year. You'll remember, though, that secondary positions were cut in the FY17 budget as passed. As course schedules are being filled "there are courses with full enrollment without budgeted teaching slots" (emphasis in the original). In other words, there are classes full of secondary kids for which Worcester doesn't have teachers.

AND because the preliminary estimates showed a significant drop in the count of Worcester's school-aged population, the Title I numbers are expected to be down. No word yet on how much.

As I was saying, there's a meeting of the Worcester School Committee on Thursday at 4 (summertime!). The agenda is here. The big (big) news is the budget update. 

There are several recognitions. There are also a significant number of donations. 

There are responses coming back to budget questions on: what a .8 position is; how other districts handle their McKinney-Vento reimbursements (Worcester isn't the only school district that loses it); and the IA who handles CORI checks. 

There's a response about buses using Granby Road.

The administration is requesting that the School Committee file this list of outstanding motions (just item numbers given; no motions).  Further, the administration is requesting that all items referred for a Friday letter that have not received a response within 24 months be automatically filed. 

The administration is forwarding these dates as legislative meetings: Friday, November 4, 2016; Friday January 20, 2017' and  Friday, March 10, 2017.

There are proposals to extend the contracts of both Attorney Paige L. Tobin and Attorney Sean Sweeney for three years.

Mr. O'Connell wants to know about each school's substance abuse policy.

Ms. Biancheria wants to know about the new transportation position. Mr. O'Connell is requesting information about the technology capacities of WPS with regarding to state testing (something which has been answered before, when the requirements were heavier; WPS had enough then.).
And Mr. O'Connell is asking about budget impacts.
Mr. Monfredo wants an update on the teacher survey.
Miss Biancheria wants data on MCAS appeals. Miss Biancheria is asking again this month that the grounds of City View and Belmont Hill be trimmed, for an inventory of recess equipment, and for crosswalks, particularly Belmont Hill's, to be repainted, and a list of schools by accountability level.

There is also an extensive executive session, with discussion of litigation, a grievance, and negotiations with most of the unions. The executive session is AFTER the meeting. 

Senate budget deliberation, day three UPDATED at 3 PM

If you aren't watching the #SenBudget wall, fun and often informative

We're entering Senate budget deliberation day three with a few things educational outstanding:

• amendment 120, covering the foundation budget review commission update to M.G.L. Chapter 70, has not yet been voted
• amendment 190 for innovation schools remains outstanding
• amendment 196, eliminating the required use of district-determined measures in teacher evaluation, has yet to be voted on
• amendment 206, bringing the kindergarten grant to level-funded at $18.5M, has not yet been voted (and Worcester? That's $750,000 in the FY17 the School Committee considers next week that IS NOT IN the Senate budget!) 

They've just opened budget deliberation for the day; you can still call your Senators!

3PM update:

• amendment 120 passes unanimously on a voice vote, having been amended with a July 2017 implementation date
• amendment 206 is rejected as part of a second bundle of amendments, meaning the kindergarten grant will go to conference committee

Worcester School Committee legislative breakfast tomorrow IS CANCELLED

Sorry, missed this til recently:
The Worcester School Committee meets with the Legislative delegation tomorrow morning at 9:30 at Worcester Tech.
From the agenda, it looks as though they're talking about preschool, Quality K, charter reimbursement, the inflation factor as pertaining the Foundation Budget Review Commission, the low income calculation change, and summer programs. UPDATE: oh, and H4338, which doesn't apply...
I won't be there.

AND it is cancelled. So there you go.

CPPAC talks budget

at the Worcester Public Library tonight for an update on the FY17 budget at both local and state levels
starting tonight with Brian Allen 

Allen: outlined where we see WPS being next year
slightly updated from presentation given to School Committee in February, based on Governor's budget
flat foundation budget enrollment & negative inflation
there is a one time adjustment in low income to economically disadvantaged: note that Worcester benefits from that change, but it's a one time advantage
certain costs continue to exceed normal inflation
"at the end of the day, when all is said and done, we may not know our final budget until July" when the state budget is set
state budget: Quality K & charter school reimbursement changes
61 cents of every dollar is from the state; 28 from local; 11 cents from federal grants (=WPS budget)
per pupil enrollment of previous year determines budget
enrollment similar to what it was in 2003 (2004 and 2007 closed 4 schools, each); eight fewer elementary schools than we had then

enrollment is relatively flat, but number of ELL students continues to grow: up 616 from previous year
economically disadvantaged drop 3575 students BUT the weighted per pupil amount
=$3.1 million increase
"most of our increase is solely" this change (for Worcester)
there are other districts that substantially have lost money in this

second time in history, negative inflation rate
ch. 70 going up $3.7M
change in charter school reimbursement, "roughly level funded"
city has pledged to increase funding by almost half a million
less charter tutition 300K
total budget going up by about $3.5M
and these numbers aren't the same as they were in February...there's an additional million here...
AH! We went from the city reducing its spending by over half a million, as it could, to it committing to fund at a half a million over

now running through school by school needs

with no staff added the citywide average would go up by 1 child
but 11 more classes would be 27-30
with 36 more teachers, no classes would be above 26 students

gap of $20M between what needs are and what resources are
does not include anything from safety committee; does not include anything from advanced academy

FBRC: health insurance, special ed, ELL, low income
foundation budget allotment exceeds by 140%
does not factor retiree health insurance
WPS spends about $12M on retiree health insurance, which was never included in foundation budget
WPS gap of health insurance is nearly $30M
"and this is after, many years, a lot of discussion" of plan changes, changes in contribution rates, and so forth
districts spend "far more" on out of district by 59%
and in district by less than actual population
"even by doing what they are proposing doing in the foundation report, they are underfunding" sped by $700M
gap in Worcester is $30M on special ed
"Worcester, like most urban districts, is funding right at foundation...we live and die by what's in foundation"
non-special ed teachers: we should have 661 more teachers than we do
"just imagine what we could do with 661 more teachers in our classrooms"

ELL increment for middle school students

low income: looked at successful turnaround efforts (like in Worcester: WPS said $2000/student)

inflation factor skipped in 2010 (used 3.04% rather than 6.75%)
"one way to provide, particularly to urban districts, some additional chapter 70 aid"
there are some who are interested in exploring it further, particularly in the House budget

impact on Worcester could be $93M

And right about then my battery died. However, Senators Chandler and Moore were there to talk about the state budget: crucial, as most of the schools' funding comes from the state, and any discussion of the foundation budget needs to happen there. There was quite a bit of coverage of there being a lack of revenue, some discussion of the level of interest across the state on adopting the Foundation Budget Review Commission's findings (check the Suburban Coalition's front page for the list which needs to be updated daily!), and related budget discussions. I'd say there some advocacy needed at the state level on this.

Friday news dump: the 9Cs come in at 4:57 pm

...I kid you not...

I've run through the 9C cuts from Governor Baker over on Twitter under #bakerbudgetcuts (edit: just check the year of the tweets; I used the same hashtag last year). There are four notes on education:

• The $300,000 in the budget for studying how best to meet our needs for preK has been entirely zeroed out. Again. So much for preschool and early ed expansion; we're not even figuring out how to do it.
• There is a $75,000 cut in DESE's line item, with no details. That could be an internal, Malden, cut; it also could be cutting something under DESE's discretion. I'm assuming Malden, but I've asked, and I'll update once I hear for sure.
• Adult basic education has been cut $500,000 (from a $31M line).
• The innovation grants have been cut $440,000 from 736,898; given that we're halfway through the year, that may be zeroed out. If last year is any measure, however, they'll probably tell us that these grants have not yet been awarded.

There's plenty more, but not in education.

UPDATE: this just in from DESE:

@TracyNovick FBRC staffing, but alt source found to cover cost. No reduction in service. @MissDebGee @wire2wre @JonathanCohn @marcela_elisa

— Massachusetts K-12 (@MASchoolsK12) January 9, 2016

I imagine that would be consultant David Bunker, who was brought in over September to finish the report.

9C cuts...

You may have missed it in your holiday planning, but, bad news:

Despite growing revenues, Gov. Charlie Baker is still considering mid-year budget cuts.

...and I've heard from multiple places that it's pretty serious consideration.
As a reminder, 9Cs can only be made by the Governor in Executive office spending:

The Governor can only use 9C powers to cut funding in parts of the government that are under his control—in other words, his 9C authority extends only to the executive branch agencies. The Governor cannot use 9C authority to cut local aid, the courts, the Legislature, or other constitutional offices. The Governor can file legislation recommending cuts to those other areas of the budget. The legislature can then pass a law with those cuts, or with other cuts, new revenue, or the use of reserves.

You might remember that we went through this earlier this year at the end of February. Worcester Public Schools lost half a million dollars in one fell swoop, and with a midyear cut, the impact is double.
Should Governor Baker hit Quality K this year again, if your district is on this list, they'll get hit. 

Public comment: IAs in Kindergarten

Zalauskas, EAW president: speaking on behalf of parents at City View schools
recently experienced loss of IAs in kindergarten
what is the formula for assignment of IAs?
60 parents signed a petition about it
I should note that we have a chart on the number students in kindergarten classes, which is how IAs are assigned: larger classes get them first. City View's kindergarten are 20, 21,21; they have 1 assigned to the building. Borrowing Steve Foskett's photo:

parent: they do a great job there, but they only have one IA who goes from class to class each day
would be a very big help
parent: when we first enrolled her, we enrolled her in first grade and she had to roll back to kindergarten. IA was a huge help to assure her that she wasn't a baby and hadn't done something wrong. Why were they taken out of City View and put in a school...it's something I would like to see back.
Petty: we go through this every year; if we had our way, we'd put an IA in every kindergarten. Importance of early years
our state delegation put Kindergarten grant back in; 20 IAs
63 IAs; 90 kindergarten classes
Boone: "over time...grant has diminished"
state cut Quality K grant in March; do we lay off IAs to balance the books or do we take from elsewhere? Took from elsewhere
share concern
district would need an additional $750,000 to have an IA in every classroom (as well as keep Quality K grant)
challenge when we don't have an IA in every classroom, and try to maintain reasonable class sizes
currently five schools in same predicament with one shared IA
overall enrollment, class size, need of class
Petty offers to go over numbers with parents

Credit where due

A new trend we've noticed in Massachusetts education: whenever any district gets a grant, there's a press release from the Governor's office. So then, we had these articles yesterday about extended day grants, even though the grants aren't new, aren't necessarily going to different districts, and aren't adding new programs.

This was particularly silly when we were notified about our federal grants, something for which we as districts apply to the federal government, and thus have nothing (save oversight) to do with the state at all.

In other words: the Governor's laying it on a little thick when it comes to taking credit about things in Massachusetts education. Proceed with caution.