Amendments to the Rise Act UPDATED

The following is simply drawn from my notes on the amendments filed to the Rise Act, so I can following along during tomorrow's deliberation (which I plan to liveblog and tweet). I don't promise that they represent all the nuances that may be in each, but they at least hit the main point. The name indicates the main sponsor of the amendment.

1. Moore: local approval for charters required for local funds to be used; no local approval=state must fund directly
2. -withdrawn-
3. Flanagan: charters must follow ch. 30B in purchasing
4. Flanagan: district and charter must agree on start times, and district (always) only responsible for 50% of transportation costs
5. Brady: no cap lift on charters
6. Brady: no change in the Level 3 schools language
7. Lewis: specifies ELL and special ed data as being part of subgroups to be considered in evaluation; also improvement plans must be compiled by district
8. Rodrigues: charters eligible for MSBA funding
9. L'Italien: tightens "at risk" language on charters that can exists as alternative over the cap; also drops "opt-out" from lottery language (the term, not the concept)
10. L'Italien: "high risk" language only for high school (grades 9-12, not 7-12); insists on "early warning system" not a replacement
11. L'Italien: like 3 in requiring ch 30B NOW WITHDRAWN
12. O'Connor Ives: similar to 10 in tightening alternative ed language
13. Chang-Diaz: calls on DESE to establish regs for lottery; provides for regional charters to be included in a lottery 
14. Chang-Diaz: requires reporting on reasons for students who leave (both district schools and charters)
15. Keenan: special commission on dyslexia
16. Tarr (co-sponsored by L'Italien): report by DESE on innovations of charters
17. Tarr (co-sponsored by L'Italien): plan for all students reading at grade level
18. Tarr* (co-sponsored by L'Italien): no solicitation or gifts for families applying to charters
19. Tarr (co-sponsored by L'Italien): Board of Ed can reconsider granted charter in 6 months if not meeting requirements 
20. Tarr (co-sponsored by L'Italien): requires a 30 day confirmation that new charters are meeting their requirements
21. Tarr (co-sponsored by L'Italien): provides for Board revoking charter if charter is not meeting requirements 
22. Tarr: requires regs for Ch 71 Sec 89 (MGL on charter schools) and regs for waivers of charters not meeting suspension and attrition requirements
23. Rodrigues: substitute bill (S.2208)
24. Tarr: establishes a charter working group
25. Chang-Diaz: adds date to requirement of charters to abide by Ch 222 (date discipline reg changes were implemented)
26. Moore: requires state to fund charters directly; funds increases to charters on 100/50/25 basis
27. Pacheco: no cap lift through Sept. 1, 2018
28. Ross: foundation budget funding for special ed from prior five year ACTUAL average (both in-district and out-of-district)
29. Chang-Diaz: calls for study of effective and efficient funding (per FBRC recommendation)
30. Humason: charter regional transportation depends on full funding of regional transportation reimbursement
31. Chang-Diaz: defines in-district and out-of-district rates for special education (per FBRC)
32. O'Connor Ives: revamps innovation fund (from section 1) for innovation schools and Horace Mann charters
33. Welch: adds end time to what must be agreed upon between charters and districts for transportation
34. Barrett: advanced notice to charters if they aren't lining up with district attrition rates
35. Barrett: advanced notice to charters if they aren't lining up with suspension rates
36. Barrett: alternative education exempt from attrition quotas
37. Barrett: provides for Board to waive attrition quota
38. O'Connor Ives: covers collective bargaining within the Level 3 section
39. Barrett: provides for Board to waive suspension quota
40. Pacheco: requires retroactive approval locally of charter schools
41. Barrett: provides for charters to remediate their suspension and/or suspension data
42. Barrett: eliminates requirement for charters to meet with superintendent and have local hearing with school committee
43. Barrett: requires DESE to do impact analysis (not district)
44. Barrett: paraprofessionals
45. Barrett: paraprofessionals
46. Barrett: paraprofessionals in Levels 3, 4, 5, respectively (44-46)
47. Dorcena Forry: deals with excessing of teachers (as is done in Boston)
48. Chang-Diaz: drops the double of "regulation by Board" language (simple language edit)
49. L'Italien: puts charter schools under school committee oversight; requires that school committee members not be part of charter school (teacher or the like)
50. Spilka: cleans up the math of the foundation budget calculations (doesn't change anything of recommendation) AND SOME LATE ADDITIONS!
51. Tarr: substitute bill (S.2210) does create a foundation budget commission; doesn't reform charters
52. Chang-Diaz: adds "fully" to districts receiving mitigation.

* I should perhaps note that Senator Tarr represents Gloucester; it appears their experience with a charter school has stayed with him.

Foundation Budget Review Commission September meeting

I'll update as we go once we've started..
Looking at the overhead, it appears that Melissa King from DESE is presenting on "in-district special education costs compared to foundatoin budget--revised"
Chang-Diaz announces that they have appointed a consultant (and I totally did not catch the name; this room swallows sounds...David Bunker!)
minutes accepted
David Bunker (consultant) "walking through his work plan" per Chang-Diaz
he was legislative aide to Hal Lane (who he had as high school principal which means he's a Wachusett kid!)
research director for Joint Committee
elected as state rep, then to House Ways and Means as Director of Special Projects
CFO for the Executive office for Education (I just looked this up on Linked in. Does anyone know if he's getting the time off to do this or is doing it as part of his job? UPDATE from Senator Chang-Diaz's office: he left after the change in administration.)
Thank you to Senator Jehlen for saying she can't hear! Me, either!
summarize work proposal: a month left, choices to be made over the coming month
how can we use that time to be sure that places with an achievement gap get the resources they need, particularly for ELL and low income students
also other foundation assumptions that we will look at "as we can"
not only about research, but about writing final report
discussing with people in the field what they think might be useful
looking at national research
reviewing RTTT requests: many letters from superintendents referenced RTTT
asking members of the commission who would be most useful in consulting
"high achieving districts serving high numbers of low income and ELL students"
"what do you think you need and what are your recommendations about the effective use of money"
"effectively both principles will be woven in"
talking "especially to superintendents, or administrators with some business background, and business managers"
Teachers?
"teachers or administrators with some teaching background"
Chang-Diaz: talk about catagories of what is discussed and who is spoken to
Jehlen: didn't see any weighing for vocational students
Chang-Diaz: would push back on adding to the list at this point
Q1: what extra resources are needed to address the achievement gap particularly for ELL and low income students?
question is always is this something you want everyone to do or something you need to focus on particularly for these needs
whether there is any capacity to or interest in to discuss concentrations of poverty
Q2: review of national literature on weighings; national research of best practices
"fair amount of literature about that"
district level spending data, state level spending level
Race to the Top submissions, one suggestion that some had was how much they thought they needed for Race to the Top
"they may not have told us everything they need, but" may give some direction
interviews with the field
other suggestions of non-achievement gap districts
look at places that are spending above foundation:and where the funding over foundation (once special ed and health care are paid for) is going
fairly tight timeline
one meeting between now and the end of October to bring back information and then start writing for the end of October
Chang-Diaz clarifies that district-level spending data
Verdolino questions if the commission has "adequately" addressed the special ed and health insurance
he comments that "this is about my package" (thus that question will not be addressed by him)
MTA: look at current allotments to see if existing ratios can accomodate increases, if not, they may need to be changed
"We're only interested in catagories that will address the achievement gap?"
"just to be clear, we're not going to do anything about student-teacher ratio or other items, under this model?" Agreement
Chang-Diaz: is the allotment that's currently written into the foundation budget enough to produce success? He'll attempt to answer that question. The answer may be we don't know. It may be that it's not sufficient everywhere. Or the answer may be that it needs to be adjusted to communities that have high concentrations of low income or ELL.
"those populations exists in many places"
MTA: "the middle class kid, wherever, has an interest in a lower class size as well"
"it looks as though we're going to take up all the issues besides the inflation factor"
Agreement. If other things are going to be fixed, may not need to be fixed (!!)
MASS rep: cautionary notes
"when we're talking about district spending above the foundation....pay attention" to where it goes
what are we using for achievement? MCAS? PARCC? are we also using ACCESS for ELL students?
highlight on ELL allotment; recommend bumping up allotment in K-8 fo gaps of students that have come from elsewhere
Reville: outcomes model versus an input orientated model. What are we looking for in the end?
are you coming up with interventions that have been successful and how much those are? Are we going to be categorical as we ask for additional increments?
response: trying to stay away from specific interventions
bulleted points were taken from the initial report
"district's existing flexibility on what interventions are being used"
Reville "trying to discover what works and what doesn't work before we put in more money"
hope that if the evidence suggests that these types of interventions work that you'd include that so we can include that in our deliberations
Chang-Diaz: districts that co-chairs have suggested that he focus on
districts that are spending above foundation and showing strong outcomes as a district
what are they putting into professional development, etc? to get these strong results
we're not going to acknowledge that most of the districts that fund over foundation are also higher income districts that also would have higher test scores, anyway? Also just got a reminder that the Hancock case said that lower spending districts with higher test scores were NOT evidence that funding wasn't needed
MBAE: may not be right to look at district, rather than individual student needs, suggest looking at individual student needs and management and controls
Wulfson: intervening school level: may be "interschool distributional effects"
where the money for the kids who go to that school actually go to that school
Jehlen: how do you know a high achieving district? Student scores in achievement or in growth
"at this point, we almost have to look at both"
Reville: is there looking at low spending districts with high achievement?
correlation with school practices
Peisch: identifying districts with high populations of ELL and low income that are high achieving (most relevant)
Verdolino: (who suggests that if MASBO sees this, his job could be on the line) Title I is by defintion is by defintion a low income grant; if low income dollars were to segregated into a specific pot, you'd have accountability. Otherwise, I don't know how you'd have accountability
gets to be "very difficult in the cost accounting"
Chang-Diaz: other things you'd encourage David to have in his interview questions
Moreau: a little dubious about the scope he has here
very early on identifying two major expenses, yet major overhaul not being in the cards
low income increment is going to need to be address by Board regardless
no, it's going to need to be addressed by Legislature
should outline some general principles for that work
day coming for greater granularity for spending "that in and of itself will be an enormous task" suggests thus outlining it
Verdolino: are enough dollars being devoted to performing this?
might also ask if you were allowed to spend foundation budget on that category, would that be sufficient?
Jehlen: Education Trust report: assume that low income should be 40%; ours is around 30%. Should be thinking about that question as well
Schuster: comparing staffing ratios to budget will be hard statewide, but could be done district by district
could be done, would be very instructive
MASBO has undertaken exactly that; "we may be able to put that in front of you"
Schuster: schedule? Commissioners should get thoughts to Dave how?
will be sure his contact information is shared
MBAE: don't think should look at current models; should ask what districts are doing to reform their staffing models "to make new models more appropriate for kids"
MASBO working on a model, reminder going out to members who are working on it
Jehlen asks for draft ahead

in-district sped: Melissa King from DESE
some of this is looking at the same thing as previously
"only eight slides"
"What we have to say about this is pretty aggregated"
on average districts spend a lot more than is in the foundation budget
actual cots $30,161 vs $24,368
adding recommendation from commission brings it to $37,589
about 7% increase in budget and in enrollment
foundation budget is calculated using an estimate of time receiving sped services
categories don't line up precisely, nor do actual costs
not definative, if you look at sped placement, full inclusion is up to 20% of the time receiving services
could have wide variation depending on what you assume
by and large, districts spend more than is alloted for in the foundation budget
"why is there a difference in cost? Well, there are more teachers on the ground."
I totally can't read these charts, BTW...I'll see if I can snag one to at least take photos
"Obviously, staff being the biggest cost driver"
Rep Ferguson: "this was a huge issue that we spend hours talking about and looking"
"grossly underreported and underrepresented"
districts doing a great job keeping our kids in and sending them out to costly programs
This has been the biggest issue brought to me
Moreau (who says he's attempting to channel Moscovitch) need for better data and how it correlates
MASS: change in best practices from 1993, very few subseparate classrooms where teachers with only a small handful of kids
special ed teacher assigned to a co-teacher within the classroom
"that means you need more staff to be able to pull off the best practice for our students who need the support of best practices"
Verdolino: "I suspect you're employing those staff...if you look at most important lines of teachers, teaching staff and in school staff"
may actual being spent, but money is coming from outside of that category
quick math $650M short
"that's the magitude of the issue in a nutshell"
Schuster: "very clear...actual staffing levels is over 30% below foundation budget for actual teaching"
"are we wasting money by hiring more teachers than we need ?"
"I don't know what the right answer is" wonders who would know correct staffing level
"I don't know that we need much more data beyond that"
MBAE: question is how do you address the gap? address the gap going forward
"just appropriating more money wouldn't do that"
also remember Commissioner that there are programmatic ways that the gap could be addressed
Moreau: if we have no capacity to know what we're doing and trace what we're doing, we don't know how it's being spent
"general notion of more intent services" is good, but problem with going beyond
"probably being services being delivered to the student being delivered to the student by the classroom teachers"
"perhaps the gap is in" what the regular classroom teacher isn't delivering
Reminder that IEP services must be delivered by a special education licensed educator
Chang-Diaz: how predictable are the needs from year to year? are you able to pretty predictably set a budget?
within a range (of 10%) it's predictable
know that the more we do inclusion, we increase class size
Chang-Diaz question about "other teaching services" being higher
need for guidance and such being higher in that population
only way to determine actual need under language delay and such is to test in both languages, also need to translate IEPs into different languages for parents

MBAE: improve quality of information that state has:
establish a data advisory committee overseen by DESE in collaboration with executive office
"effective and efficient allocation"
add, beyond usual suspects, charter schools and collaboratives
major goals would be improving financial reporting
people who use the data express some frustration at quality and consistency of data
work to strengthen department's capacity to report and develop local capacity to use the data well
report annually to Board of Ed and Joint Committee chairs
exploration of what finacial impacts of reporting would be
anticipation of increased costs: "impossible to predict what that would be"
"want to be sure that the ways districts report don't become the tail that wags the dog of how programming is done"
only recently has Title I allowed to provide services across the whole school "so tail doesn't wag the dog" and accounting doesn't create the programming
"don't want to create the same problem that finally got solved for Title I"
state really does need more data around things like inclusion
presumably "effective and efficient" ways to do inclusion, likewise ineffective and inefficient ways
some back and forth about teacher salaries and what level of information the state gets; upshot is that teacher salaries are public record
MBAE: think that groups made up "of the usual suspects" start with current model
also should include early childhood
Reville: doing this as part of our report? Yes. And this is assumed to be under authority of Commission to establish?
Peisch: think Commissioner could, but we might consider if we want to do so
so far, both teachers' unions and the vocational association have asked to be included
Does this have a defined life? Imagine it being a committee that would end
"can be eliminated when it is no longer needed"
Verdolino: a lot would depend on the training and implementation phase
bringing them in increases the chances that they could play a role in implementation
Jehlen: want to be really excited about streamlining and duplicative reporting
make sure we include all resources
"how do you know what is effective and efficient if you don't know what the goal is? If the goal is increase MCAS achievement, what's efficient is eliminating art and music."
admission that this won't necessarily result in fewer reports being required from the state
Chang-Diaz: what's your reaction to this overall?
must be linked to what the use of the data is and how it improves work in classrooms
MOTION to include in Commission report
Moreau: there are creative minds out there that would come to the table, but they can put something together without having any feel for what it MEANS to the field; thus crucial to have those doing the work at the table and should include IT

after a break, Commission now looking at Part B of the other options before them:

• Limit the use of new funding to investments in the following initiatives to be described in a publicly accountable benchmarked school improvement plan. The parameters of those individually crafted plans would invest from the following priorities: (1) Provide greater support for low-income and ELL students; (2) Expanded teacher professional development; (3) Hiring staff at levels that support improved studentperformance; (4) Purchase and implementation of technology and instructional materials; (5) Expanded learning time (day / year / venue); (6) Add instructional coaches; (7) Provide wrap-around services that engage the entire community and families in strengthening the social emotional support system for students; (8) Provide common planning time for instructional teams;
• Designate an investment component of the Foundation Budget and require that funds allocated to the investment accounts be spent on those investment items. Underscore the importance of these investments by requiring each district to report annually on how it intends to spend its investment funds, how it intends to measure its success, and (after the first year) whether itsucceeded in reaching its goal;
• Establish a better data collection system that allows for greater access to school-level expendituresand data; 
• Ensure that additional funds attributable to low-income and ELL students are spent on programs and services that support the needs of those particular students; and
• Establish an innovation fund distributed competitively to meet specific goals asking if there are differences among suggestions

MARVA concern about competive granting which measures ability of districts to write grants
MTA: last one, adding a fund outside of the foundation budget: "how does that fit into accountability for additional funds"...different category
agreement from Chang-Diaz
"foundation budget shouldn't have anything to do with competitive grants"
MBAE: legimate question on if it should be included, but different fund for supporting ideas that are most promising ideas could have some sort of support
Peisch: certain tension between ensuring the money is well-spent and every district and every school has its own challenges, and what may be the best way to address a challenge in one school may not be the right answer for all
"have to really consider what is the best way on the one hand that the dollars get to the students that need them...and at the same time ensure that the people who are on the ground can make the decision that serve the students best"
going to require a fair amount of thought
suggest maybe looking at proposed language for the next meeting
MASS: innovation fund interpreted as start-up funds, where is sustainability after two or three years
careful of word "services" (which for Title III doesn't mean 'salaries')
MASC: distinction of "new funding": is it new funding with respect to fully recognizing special ed and health insurance or is it recognizing services to ELL and low income and such?
can understand concern of Legislature that there be some accountability issue there;if you recognize the funding that I'm spending on special education and health insurance, why wouldn't I then be able to fund art or music (or whatever had been cut meanwhile)?
also, accountable to local district voters
And also, who is going to measure it?
response that it would be included with school or district improvement plan (one of those don't run through SC)
additional funds if I receive them, additional funds will go to restoring programs lost; I don't have the flexibility in here
suggestion is "and development of whole child"
Chang-Diaz: tool for soft accountability for parents to value
MASS: to me, where community places values
Hatch: not sure you can even measure "new funding" unless you run old formula versus new formula and some districts wouldn't get any more than minimum aid
Moreau: perhaps it's simple staying in the same Reville "loose and tight" accountability
performing low, have to report more strictly to state; performing higher, less to state
in hearings, very many different thoughts: individual districts can get funds for the specific needs for a particular area
just going to interject here that the utter mistrust of local government by state authority in these sorts of things is appalling
Question is if those categories are all covered in question 1
MASC: infrastructure: maybe cut custodians, maybe cut routine maintenance
all of which are bad policy, and that's not included in here
Chang-Diaz: at some point, as we begin to broaden the area, the point becomes meaningless
"if this is the new money here, can you spend the old money on buildings?"
putting discussion on hold, bringing forward at next meeting
Peisch says forward language to chairs for next meeting for David Bunker
Next meeting is October 16

"The art of the trade/ How the sausage gets made"*

Cheers to Yawu Miller for covering the discussion at Boston Foundation last week where a group of Latino organizations had invited Rep. Andy Vargas, Senator Jason Lewis, and Senator Sonia Chang-Díaz to speak about the proposed changes to education funding in Massachusetts. Notably, this got into tying up the money, which you might recall was discussed and defeated at the Foundation Budget Review Commission:

Vanessa Calderón-Rosado, a member of the Greater Boston Latino Network, asked Chang-Diaz what accountability measures she would support. Diaz pushed back, reiterating the importance of sufficient funding.
“We know money isn’t everything,” Chang-Diaz said. “But if you give a district $50 to do a $100 job, they can have the best teachers in the world and they’re still going to struggle.”
Shana Varón, who heads the Boston Collegiate Charter School and sits on the board of the Massachusetts Association of Public Charter Schools, said she would like to see more accountability measures and said she is concerned that many in Massachusetts are advocating against the state’s standardized testing regime.
Sen. Jason Lewis of Winchester noted that accountability measures are already in place, implemented as part of the 1993 Education Reform Act.
“We put very strong accountability measures in place in 1993,” said Lewis, who is Senate chair of the Joint Committee on Education. “We backed that up with tests. What we haven’t done is deliver the funds for schools to do their work.” Chang-Diaz noted that the accountability measures put in place in 1993 were enhanced in 2010.
“We have a system for more rapid intervention when we don’t see progress on the achievement gap or school performance,” she said. “The state can step in and take over a district.”
Other than the governor’s call for withholding funds and enhanced interventions, Chang-Diaz said, she hasn’t heard calls for specific additional accountability measures.
“Show me your version of what accountability is,” she said in her response to Calderón-Rosado. “Maybe we’ll agree.”
But with the clock running down on the state budget deliberations, Chang-Diaz said, legislators would have to agree on such measures on an accelerated timeline.
“I don’t want us to go another school year while we dither and talk about accountability,” she said. “Bring your proposal forward.”

I, too, am weary of vague calls for "accountability" which never appear to amount to anything more than more calls for privatization or otherwise channeling funding away from schools that actually serve all kids.
Chang-Díaz of course is entirely correct: the state got another round of accountability on the Fed's dime when the state passed the Act Relative to the Achievement Gap in order to qualify for Race to the Top funds in 2011. That law has not been revoked, even as the federal funding which was the reason for it is long gone.
Moreover, the original foundation budget was to be reviewed and updated periodically, which it was not. The state thus owes the districts this funding from the 1993 law, over and above the 2011 changes.
-------
*shamelessly borrowed from Lin-Manuel Miranda's "Room Where It Happens"

Foundation Budget Review Commission hearing: Boston

Commissioners are just coming in now: light crowd. I'll post once it starts.
And there is a ridiculous bright TV light shining at the audience...

Apologies in advance for missed names, schools, districts, etc.
Chang-Diaz: common themes across different regions
"increasing cost of health care most common theme"
Commissioners have a strong understanding of
"instead of using your three minutes to describe that problem to us...help us with our mission in the context of the politics of twenty-two years ago"
"no one anticipated that after such a massive influx of money that we'd still be struggling with the issues that we're struggling with"
looking for assurance that if the massive investment is double-down on that it will be worth while



Superintendent McDonough (Boston Public Schools)
Fromer CFO of BPS
drop of state aid has become a major issue in our schools
does not accurately reflect special ed and ELL students we serve, nor true cost of serving them
true costs of health insurance
does not differentiate between high and low need special ed students
non-regional, non-vocational transportation was originally funded; was cut in 2003
"please be wary of unintended consequences"
any adjustment made to the underlying components would not impact Boston aid (I think? if I heard that right?)
would need foundation budget to increase $56 million to receive an increase in Chapter 70 aid
"does not fairly balance Boston's aggregate wealth against Boston's need"
and dang, they're going to let him go with this!
reviews needs of Boston Public Schools
comparing target shares of urban districts, which have lower municipal wealth, which is why their target share is lower...
so basically his whole argument there was about the aggregate wealth formula, which was not part of the committee
Senator Chang-Diaz says that she is full of questions but they are beyond the scope of the Commission (as they're on aggregate wealth)

someone speaking on behalf of the urban superintendents (the acoustics here are AWFUL)
"our students are at risk before they reach our doorsteps"
"increased foundation budget, not simply a reallocation and redistribution"
"witnesses to the growing disparities"
families living in extreme poverty, homelessness, hunger
"not all ELLs are equal" yet funding is equal
propose a weighed formula takes into account need, including poverty
Q: what would you look for in intensive interventions for immigrant families?
domestic situation of children who just got here: PTS, adjustment, not speaking English

speaking on behalf of a resident of Springfield: grandfather of a six year old
"take into account the increased cost of education English language learners"
"I want to be sure both my grandchildren will receive a quality education"

Parent of a child at Orchard Garden Public School
"help make sure that funding for" schools like hers will continue
Orchard Garden is a turnaround school, federal and state fundings running out
"I know the programs at Orchard Garden are helping my daughter" and other children as well

Stand for Children staffer: ELL, special ed, poverty


Chang-Diaz asks what programs she sees as key
children's grades, we have music, art, extended day program

Tom Gosnell, AFT-MA
"overwhelmingly urban locals"
teachers deal with low income and poverty-stricken students all the time
substantial increase in students living in poverty
guarantee those students are in the public schools
"have increased enormously in number"
"frequently not only not knowledgable about English, but illiterate in their own languages"
special need programs "not common back in the early 90's"
"impact on a regular classroom is absolutely enormous"
"unless you deal with the opportunity gap first, you will not be able to deal with the achievement gap"
Q, Barbara Madeloni: sense of sort of resources that would be necessary to close gap?
"I would say an absolutely critical resource is the wraparound services"
"have an inclusion gap" need for training and resources and needs to be ongoing

Generations Citizen: advocating for "an actions based civics organization"
a civics mission that we must provide
"crucial moment for Massachusetts to regain" leadership in this field
must provide salaries, professional development
concerned about combined humanities program

Walpole School Committee: "Legislature prioritized education"
minimum aid cities and towns didn't receive much aid
statewide was 11% increase; some recieved none
just going to interrupt here to say that Walpole funds schools at 25.9% over foundation, $10M more than required...

Reminder from Chang-Diaz of charge of commission

Citizen Schools: expands learning day
expand beyond small number of kids
"need to double down on expanded day"
should fund the models that work and avoid more of the same models that aren't proven to work
Chang-Diaz: other things that don't work so well
"just tinkering around the edges, just adding time around the edges"

teacher at Joseph Lee : testimony around Citizen Schools for longer day with other people testing
"more time in school gives more kids more of a chance to do these things"
"offer teachers and school leaders additional district capacity"
"students ready to start a second shift of their day"

National Center on Time in Learning and 20/20
"Massachusetts is one of the wealthiest states in the country with a 14% child poverty rate"
many lessons learned on expanded time
"twice as likely to be high growth in mathmatics"
all high performing charter schools are expanded learning time, some with as much as 60% more time
more opportunities beyond test scores
"we believe the state should consider"
back and forth about if expanded time was required or intended in original foundation formula
which is fun, because it's coming from the guy who wrote the foundation formula
Q from Madeloni: do you mean test scores?
more time for teachers to collaborate, other activities for children, as well as measurable

parent/grandparent of children in BPS: Quest
"committed to building stronger public school systems by engaging community forces"
"educate the whole child"
recess and PE equipment, art and music
creating more robust wraparound services
more counselors, nurses,
safe and affordable transportation to school
"growing two-tiered system"
age-appropriate, not test-driven education
"partner with parents, teachers, and the community"
fully fund education

Comment by Madeloni on the differences of school buildings based on socio-economics of community school is in
response from parent "every piece of a child's development should be taken into consideration"

Chang-Diaz comments that they have to be out of the building by 8 am

"We need schools that our children deserve; we need schools that our communities deserve"
"what does a foundation budget mean? Sounds strong, sounds loving"
"never experienced a foundation budget"
"my children never experienced a foundation budget"
"there's been a desertion and abandonment by the federal and state government of what our children need"
"always or almost harmful and destructive budgets"
"let's have a foundation budget that's really strong, that's really loving, that will really take care of the children that we love"
"let's tax the rich"
"our children's lives matter, our children's education matter"

per MassBudget would require $2.1B annual
"costs have gone up"
"state needs to generate more revenue for educational purposes"
get rich to pay their fair share
Boston could use an override
Boston has 50% of real estate occupied by non-profits
maybe take another look at non-profits
"city of Boston needs more money and our schools need more money"
"first priority should be our children"
"Bring it back to the 1993 funding level"

senior at Dorchester Academy: believe that lack of support has triggered closing of school next year
see negativity, non-nutritious breakfast with expired milk
400 students sharing one guidance counselor
sharing books, 4 kids per book, books are outdated
"have become an advocacy for change in our community"
"you're not investing in a building, you're not investing in a book, you're investing the future of your children"

senior at sorry, I don't know the BPS names well enough to catch them
"I'm younger than this budget, but I make changes every day"
extracurricular activities, A/C, better food, more options, working bathrooms
working water fountains
nurses, guidance counselors
"I live in Boston. Why don't I have these? Why don't all students have these basic needs?"

Senior at Dorchester Academy:
didn't have a schedule for the first few days of school of 9th grade as the school moved
moved again this summer, significantly smaller space
now school closing
weren't categorized as Level 4 school until they moved into this building

Junior in high school: breakfast and lunch
don't have healthy or options for things to eat
"how do we expect students to give 100% in classes if they don't have the food they need"
"outdated lack of school supplies"
have Windows 98 computers "Why do we have Windows 98 computers? My phone is smarter than my computer!"
thanks coming from Commissioner to students who came "but you've gotta keep coming!"

Madison Park student: bring it down to the level of interventions
"its not really all about budget"
"I don't want to see my little sister go through what I've gone through"
"make it more of a democracy and open it up more to parents and teachers and students"

Student: increase in our budget "so we can end the plague known as failing"
end the crimilization of our youth
"less money for our youth"
harrassment by police over non-violent offenses every day
"the dreams of being the scholars we want to be die"
hard to walk back into the building where you've been accused of being a criminal
"it's not about the test scores; it's about us"

Sen. Jehlen: "very different conversation than we've been hearing"
"as a member of the Education committee, I am disturbed that we are holding schools accountable (without these resources) and I want to know if that's happening more in some poor communities than others"
"Some people in Boston are getting a good civics education, and they're giving it to us."
Madeloni thanks students for their testimony "of what they need"
Chang-Diaz "please know that your testimony is not falling on deaf ears"
Chang-Diaz "please don't ever believe that budget don't matter. Budget calendars don't lie. Budgets are a written expression of our priorities."

teacher:spent $3000 over four years
pencils, scissors, carpets
didn't include a carpet or an easel from Donors Choose
didn't include $750 for books and blocks for second graders in indoor recess
or clothing for student who just came to the US
or groceries for a family that's just arrived
students do not arrive with skills they need
"when our school budgets cannot meet our students' needs, we teachers have to pick up the slack"
could only afford these expensese because family sent her through college and grad school
"pains me to think of what their (classmates still paying college loans) classrooms still lack"
how can schools recruit teachers from backgrounds like their students when these are the lacks in the classrooms? Teachers can't afford to make up the difference 
"giving a fighting chance to students"

2nd grade teacher in East Boston
given $500 by Cambridge (when she taught there) and $500 from parents organization
"this year I have no money"
book donations from friends and family
spent over $600 of own money
pencils and paper are necessity
change in poverty reporting level means her school will lose $70,000 (I should point out here that this is due to how BPS, not the state, allocated funds)
"an undocumented family is far less likely to be" recorded as being in poverty
"want the budget my students deserve and the schools my students deserve"

teacher in Roxbury
really proud to be part of pioneering a new practice school
"have all walks of life...we don't have resources, don't have specialized resources"
"remarkable to see the compassion and the respect of all our children"
20% of children are living in homeless shelters
have a slab of cement to play, about five hulahoops and three balls

Jessica Tang, BPS teacher, BTU organizer
share stories from teachers: leaks, holes, crumbling walls
"well-kept facilities affect learning abilities"
consider facility costs when considering foundation budget
history and social studies being cut; happening to science, arts, music
aren't getting health, PE
amount of money spent on testing: $35,000 for an achievement map to prepare for MCAS (!!!)
spent over 25 days a year testing
fully reimburse charter schools expenses; creates resentment
money going to outside consultants
"how do we create revenue?...work with us so all students are able to have the schools they deserve"
"must find a way to do so"

parent: "i can't understand the budget system" having moved here from elsewhere
"it's like my kids are falling in the cracks"
"son has to get up at five o'clock to get to school at nine" (that would be transportation)
affects not just students, but parents as well, due to stress
"if this is a budget issue, it needs to change and it needs to change fast"

BPS parents: chair of Citywide Parent Council
decline amount of Boston Public Schools budget that is state funded
"my choice is to be in the Boston Public Schools, but I feel as though that choice is being taken away from me."
would endorse notion of base rate being raised to $100 (this is the $25/pupil budgets are raised by (at least) each year; Baker's budget is $20)
"equal funding is not the same as equitable funding"
points back to MASS proposal on special education, health insurance, inflation rate

MASS Executive Director (I think?)
thanks Commission for having this happen
"believe exceptionally in Chapter 70 framework"
about $2B short of that requirement
about 44 municipalities have exceeded 120% of foundation budget
many urban districts, poorer districts cannot exceed foundation
have had several studies of this issue
going bak to 2007; inequities
health insurance and sped
correct assumptions and calcucations
recommend a seven year plan, increasing $200M per year
get to 70-80% of actual expense in that time
1/4% increase in assumption of special education
increase out of district tuition by $10,000
regular ed has suffered, as a result of these two areas being funded
consider extending commission
"continue the grand bargain" of increasing funding, increasing education
Q: no requirement that districts spend money for special education that are provided
should there be more strings on categorical funding?
answer: individual districts need to make some determination within categories, should provide backup, then state benchmarks
superintendents want to help out

"elephant in room is health insurance"
"other money in the wings...OPEB...that needs to be budgeted"
also 132 munipalities that are counting retirement towards foundation budget
recommend that you fund those huge deficits"
could he be MMA?
could allow a shift in funding over seven years to get those other things right
begin to fund the real needs for supplies and materials for our students

can't come close to eloquent testimony of students; would recommend having a student in future such commissions
comparison with students in suburbs
"Why is the Newton school so much nicer than mine?"
"it's not just how much money, it's how you are allocating it"
differences among ELL students (given family background and such)
"complex needs in urban districts"
"funding is equal, but even with adjustments, it is not equitable"

student at West Roxbury Academy (which is being closed)
state has turned its back on us
"we are proud of our school...school had made above target grades in reading and math...isn't that what school is about? Growth?"
every year we're told we have to cut
"it hasn't been updated since I was born"
"make it work for all schools"

Lisa Guisbond, Citizens for Public Schools
"I want the schools our communities deserve"
need less testing and more time for learning
testing is not only taking time and less resources for learning
doesn't give education provided for by Mass Constitution
"focus on testing is actually undermining public schools...misrepresenting our schools as failing"
could turn that around
court set out broad guidelines for sufficient education
testing is not one of those goals
have instead been narrowing and constraining learning
need to have other ways of measuring what we're doing
"need to stop putting our valuable resources into high stakes testing"

student at Madison: here to ask for state to fund Madison
cites BPS budget cutting Madison budget
vocational programs at Madison don't have the equipment needed for the program
"I am in welding and we haven't done any welding"
asks for increase in vocational increment


Deputy Superintendent of Lawrence Seth Racine: perspective of Gateways Cities
can only fund at foundation
cannot go to voters to ask for more, minimum is what has been funded
increase comes down to inflation in foundation budget (which he just cited from memory!)
what's that look like over town
average funding used to be over suburban districts; now has fallen below or at
compares with Andover
compares Fall River with surroundings
"how are we to compete and keep the best teachers?"
would be reluctant to tie strings to particular parts of budget
"what is the baseline budget of the district? then it comes down to school committees and districts deciding how the money will be spent"
Q: if foundation budget increased sections, how can districts prevent from having that measures from going to health insurance?
other measures available to district: GIC and such
strong baseline budget
Q about comparison he's making
average per pupil spending not near surrounding districts as others fund over foundation
Q: grant buckets tend to be more politically volitile...is grants still recommendation
grant funding can provide an opportunity to get a program off the ground
then assess if it's working, bring it in house if you can find the funding and its working

Mass Business Alliance for Education : original assumptions made in foundation budget has not kept pace with what our students need
increased funding has not lead to student achievement "in a straight line"
recommend targeting specific needs of students: fundings should follow student to school
which is what Boston does and part of what's causing the concerns from parents and teachers tonight
should focus on outcomes not inputs: reward success when people do
productivity reviews as recommended by Center for American Progress
Q: about pass through
would like to see schools ultimately decide on what district to go to for services
Q about growth scores
need better measures
also recommends rewards for positive outcomes (which is sounding a lot like providing more for districts that "succeed"?)
my battery is about to die
Madeloni: how do you talk about outcomes if you've never controlled from inputs?
Q: not making decisions based on that
dispute from Madeloni on funding for inputs and not doing that yet

Kenny Jervis: parent of BPS students
"every time I hear from students, I hear what they don't have"
"it pains me, it pains me to hear this, day in and day out"
"when it comes to the funding of our schools, it's obviously not working!"
"if someone has a need, you need to address that need: you don't wait around twenty years!"

Final testimony of the night from a librarian regarding libraries being recognized as a necessary part of education. 

FY19 Joint Hearing on Ways and Means

Coming to you today from Peabody City Hall...the hearing begins at 10 am.
EDIT: My cleared up and probably more readable report for MASC is over here.
Opening this morning with the National Anthem and other music from the Peabody High School Chorale and welcome from Peabody Mayor Edward A. Bettencourt, who notes that the building was an opera house.

Legislative update

posting as we go...
Legislative update from Representative Alice Peisch and Senator Sonia Chang-Diaz, chairs of the Joint Committee on Education in the Massachusetts legislature.

Liveblogging the Foundation Budget Review Commission

live from a well-refrigerated fourth floor room at the State House (which still doesn't have wifi)
posting as we go 

UPDATE: Because it becomes relevant, a partial cast list: Pat Francomano is Mass School Committees president; Dave Verdolino is MASBO (finance people)'s Executive Director; Barbara Madeloni is the Mass Teachers' Association (union) president; Melissa King does some finance things for DESE;Tom Moreau is there for the Secretary of Ed; and Ed Moscovitch wrote the foundation formula originally.

in approval of minutes, Q from Francomano: preliminary report was going to lay out remainder of things that will be discussed beyond sped and health insurance; not reflected in the minutes
motion to add consensus report will innumerate "all of concerns"
Chang-Diaz: recollection not crystal about this, recall discussing it in the workplan
thought preliminary versions of findings included?
Francomano: that they would be listed, "that it was essential that these be dealt with as well"
Peisch: told that third paragraph on second page, essentially verbatium from that
by notes he's right; the suggestion was made by Sen. Jehlen
Jehlen: we all understand that it's going to be the case; would that be sufficient in your view
Francomano: I don't want to have a preliminary report be issued with other items that are equally valid
Peisch: I don't think there's great disagreement about what needs to be addressed over this month
varying recollection of what was produced
minutes are not a transcript, a reflection of actions taken
Francomano: would not have voted for compromise item if it did not include other items
MBAE member expects other items
EEC: today's conversation will be included in preliminary report in some way, "captured" in some way
"I think whether it's reflected in the minutes are not" that's consensus
Chang-Diaz; include in minutes for THIS minute that catagories that will continue to deliberate on over the session in preliminary report
Francomano agrees
minutes approved

review and discuss feedback on health care and special ed
vote was "subject to input from advisory members"
comments have been submitted and distributed
chairs have reviewed comments and have in packet a proposal
under health care benefits: adjust health care to reflect average group insurance rate, separate health care cost adjuster
Peisch: in reviewing comments from advisory group, this is the proposal that reflected the majority of the comments that were received
Madeloni: recommend blended rate, not just GIC
some municipalities don't wish to shift costs to employees
acknowledge that not everyone is using the same rate
MBAE: into details of what the average is and what the average means
not clear it's being driven by actual cost, actual numbers
have to consider that
"it is not clear...what the average means here, is there some weighting, are retirees in there...what average means versus what other factors are included"
whether or not we take into account a weighted average versus the cost of all plans or as Mass Taxpayers suggested the highest enrollment plan
a little more understanding what just what we mean by average
Melissa King (DESE): average employer share of the premium
"to do any refinement of that primarily relies on getting good data"
MASBO: might be helpful to know, back in '93, what was the basis of this rate
"I have trouble trying to blend something with other providers who may come and go"
assuming that GIC being used because many are in GIC
anything from how number was derived then? (this to creator of formula)
met with five superintendents, who shared their information
at the time thought of having several inflation rates
why are we looking for a different rate? You want something that goes up at whatever rate the cost of health care goes up
Is our purpose to fund whatever health costs are occurring or a reasonable rate?
Edward Moscovitch: Don't just want to fund what everyone is spending
"I was thinking last night about the politics; it isn't so much what we're going to vote on but what's going to pass the Legislature"
important to understand what made the conservative Governor to fund a $2B increase in education
business community pushed for proposal: "It was the business community's proposal"
the other thing that gave it legs was a number of other things having to do with schools: charter schools, testing increase
"they believed that built into this were things that were going to change schools"
"if we don't include those sorts of things it this, I don't think we're going to be successful"
regional schools: have to find a benchmark people can live with
"I think there have been a number of legsilative" measures with GIC
think retiree part is excellent
also some cost of living
"we're never going to come to a perfect solution"
brings $684M to the table to begin to address some of the areas we've all heard about
another: think average will be nailed down (later)
send a bad message (if use something other than GIC)
"presumably that money has gone back to schools in varying fashions"
Chang-Diaz: Q on costs of insurance (family/individual)
Madeloni (MTA); most of our districts are not in GIC; even if we could look at BC/BS, get a more realistic view of the costs
Peisch: some may not be part of GIC but costs are in same general rates
"I think it's a reasonable benchmarks"
motion to amend using Mass Taxpayers recommendation of average of GIC rate
"rate has to be multiplied by something"
"most widely used GIC program weighed according to the way it's actually used in family and individuals"
MASBO: "I don't disagree with what Ed's saying, but isn't that farther down the line?"
"in two lines, there's a lot of work to do of what's captured in that sentence"
I'm making the assumption that they're going to look at split at family/individual and range of copays
"if we were to try to capture all of that in here, we wouldn't get anything else done today"
Peisch: thinks number is embedded in calcuation
King: it's the statutory staff (not actual employees)
Peisch recommends that people think about the time
Tom Moreau: you're picking up the average, you're picking up the commonality of usage
of reforming health care: "like this, these things don't come down from Sinai"
Peisch asks if there are any further comments
motion seconded by Francomano
Madeloni: using MassBudget, this proposal will leave a gap in funding
MBAE: does this give leverage to municipalities to have 'is this a good conversation to have or not'
"it certainly is directionally covering part of the gap"
regionals point out that the conversation has to happen every year, anyway,as they need to show gap between most common and plan used by district
Chang-Diaz: don't know that we can get there today
"worry a little bit about volitility"
Reville: incumbent upon us as we set benchmarks to create "maximum efficiencies" at the local level
aka: districts may spend more, that doesn't mean it's right
Reville: review of history of standards applying to everyone, some periodic measures of accountability
Peisch: any comment on other two components as related to health care
now onto retiree health insurance
One way or the other, it has to be in for everyone or other for everyone
MASBO: had it be included in 93, wouldn't have the gap we have now
could be most significant part of proposal
Mass Taxpayers wants to include retirees health insurance in NSS
argument is that there's no formula that would captured it
assume that towns actual costs would be included, can't come up with any way to do it
Peisch: recommendations are intended to be general for those who will actually draft legislation
"how municipalities deal with unfunded liabilities they have in the past is not part of this"
MBAE: some capture of inflation has to be in here, some thing that has to be in here is frequency (of taking this measure)
actual drafting of report should include; montior for volitility
like Mass Taxpayers' argument on leaving it out; how it can be part of mandated spending
Peisch: draft report will be circulated for comment
Moreau: concern about crowding out happens currently, as it isn't included in all but is included in that
"expenditures towards that are being counted as expenditures towards education"
"has been a thorny, troubling problem that no one has been able to resolve"
regionals: remember that if we take it out, communities will pick it up as an additional assessment
those towns it does impact will not be supportive
consensus to move forward on using "most common" versus "average"
Reville asks what the difference is; Peisch "we don't know" as the calculation hasn't been done
staying with average, rather than most common

Peisch: special education
moves it up to the level of what actually is
16% receiving special education services 25% of the time
Jehlen: I know that it's about 17% receiving services; I don't know that it's 25%
Peisch: number was put forward by superintendent
Jehlen: is number based on what's typical, what's average?
MASS: based on "what's typical"
Francomano: have heard that this number has varied
does MASS argue that this is a realistic representation of what currently exists?
MASBO: we've not done the math to quantify
I don't know if data was available to support 25%
"some districts are going to overrun 25% on average"
"I think for the purposes of what we're doing here you have to have a benchmark"
"I don't think that has come from the administrative group; I know it didn't come from MASBO"
Francomano: if it's merely better than what we have, that's not a benchmark for what we should be striking for
DESE: state average for sped is 17% head count
MASS: don't collect under federal
"it's a benchmark to start from"
Francomano(MASC): don't want to start from, concerned about grabbing something while we can
Moreau: there was a time when we had better information
information we need
"you want to base it on practice rather than what we've been doing"
Francomano: want to be sure we all know that and include that in the report
reminder that the assumption was low
if the assumption was low or if the costs were low
running through what the assumptions of the costs were when foundation budget was constructed
Ferguson: year to year it looks different
different program may have different models
"we're not going to be able to do it" (in getting a standard)
"you could have a great program for autistic program in one district that isn't replicable in other districts"
"what you look at staffing and things, it's a whole other ballgame...we aren't going to investigate it without" much more work
Jehlen: recommend that it is an inadequate measure and should be revisited in three years
"I believe that 25% is too low...know a lot of kids that have one on one and I don't want those kids outsourced"
this assumption should be revisited after three years of data collection of actual amount of time students are being served
Madeloni: is the rate adequate accurate?
MASBO: really have to get one of them right, recognizing where only one of them lies
"I think there should be something aspirational to this rate"
in other words, he's arguing that the state should be pressuring districts to drive this cost center down
"there's two components to sped: an in-district component and an out-of-district" component
MBAE: modest movement in the direction of actual costs
'there is a difference with special ed" versus health care
Peisch: out of district cost to eliminate gap between
some back and forth about mathematics of how it works
MassBudget: still has a comment on in district
in-district may have a problem "and we just don't know yet"
set current staffing against previous assumption
"I hope moving forward there's room" to discuss
"I didn't hear an amendment to the language that's being adopted"
Peisch: no, there wasn't
MassBudget: so statement of the problem isn't what's being dealt with right now

and everything else. They have a list. I haven't seen it.
Peisch: proposal preschool adjusted from half day to full day for those who provide full day
particularly for those who can most need full day
Chang-Diaz: mention of early ed has been woven in
demonstrated best practices
Edward Moscovitch concern that preschool could be expensive
"you could have every district in the state do it!"
if every district does half day does full day
"are you saying that every district could have as much preschool as it wants?"
Melissa King: don't think you'll see a rush, but a slow take-off
Moscovitch: full day K is more important
Peisch: percentage of fullday K is very high
Chester: up over 90% for full day K
Moreau: delivery system, bringing up to speed, it's a robust conversation
think it's an item to get discussed over summer to November
Madeloni: important that we don't do this just piecemeal
question about what works and what we want our young people to be experiencing
Reville: don't think a lot of districts do it, don't have space
not worried about a stampede
Peisch: straw poll on preschool in for June versus putting it off
most want to put it off
Chang-Diaz: wish to say something about early education even without a high level of detail
if we are putting it off, are we signing ourselves up for a more complex consideration
Francomano: think could develop a bulleted point, this is a priority for us, yes it needs to be looked at comprehensively
Moscovitch: thought always seems to be that you can do so much for these kids in preschool, neglect K, 1,2
Reville: so late in dealing with low income factors, seems to me that this is one
some inclusion in June report, more detail to come in November report

Peisch: to go into some accountability measure that we might be able to include in the report
based on something from superintendents proposed and others
also run through list of other items to be included
Moreau: to look at data in three years, either as part of discussion or otherwise
staffing and budgeting information from districts
Peisch: discussion in late June meeting for district data collection
Verdolino: because of information of special ed, to have some wording to put up front
"remains unaddressed by the really good comments that make up the report to this point"
Chang-Diaz: how much of this is knowable at this point?
Could we over the summer get really numbers
Moscovitch: asks teachers and superintendents to nominate ten schools that are 'good' and ten that "aren't"
look at actual special education spending
"we heard some testimony about school buildings in terrible condition...I'm curious if they're spending what the foundation budget calls for in custodians"
actual numbers on if those numbers are about right or not about right
Moscovitch: including instructional coaches
MASS suggests including PD as part of language
suggestion that mental health and wraparound services be separated
what if a strong mayor cuts the school budget: could ten taxpayer suit be brought?
Peisch: three or four more meetings ;can't put everything in
five more catagories, have added two more
Chester: real concern about low income or ELL: have a real concern if those increments really benefit the kids that they're intended for
concern about small district
"staying solvent by stripping away offering for kids and incentives for teachers"
incentives offered efficiencies for scale
Jehlen: would make low income separate from extended learning time
Chang-Diaz: slash marks mine
extended learning time presented as one way of helping low income students
not saying that the thing on one side of the slash is the solution for the other side of the slash
Moreau: discuss what we have, what we do
MBAE: if discussion is going to be about increment, also tracking of it
adjustment about technology: "don't envision how we come up with a number"
Moreau: will low income include a discussion of how the students are counted?
Peisch: yes, since change in technical count is problematic due to federal government change
Chang-Diaz: would hope that technical discussion of how we count does not need to be more than ten minutes, technical discussion of how we count them is more broad
Francomano: need to look at western part of state
they have particular issues delivering services, as they are scattered about
(not that they don't want to work together; there's so much space!)
Verdolino: no one wants to take anything off, would it be helpful to prioritize for discussion?
Peisch agrees
Jehlen: how we're going to make decisions about what these numbers are going to be
"who is going to do this work?"
took all the categories they had and made an expert judgment in 1993
either we can take what exists and update it
or we can take what an adequate education is, which is our charge
"there are studies that we can look it, but I would settle for expert judgment on what we should do in each of these categories"
Francomano: part of it is methodology, but it's beyond methodology, it's validating the assumptions
MASS: similar to previous, recommendations on all these particular areas
Moscovitch: would suggest that numbers of special ed
"I think there's a sense that because the health care is too low that everything is too low"
"is eight to one reasonable?"
"you'd have a better idea of what's underfunded if you see the staffing levels"
Peisch comments that they think they've seen that
Schuster: think that would really interesting
having trouble picturing the four to six topics on the agenda
could think through, for example, eight to one, and why there's still a really big gap
similar discussion on low income and what those supports and staffing look like
Chang-Diaz: one version of what this could look like is the work plan is the superintendents' working group
do work, put that out to group and respond, then August compilation going on
September group reviewing collated responses
maybe categories of districts to be part of the working groups
could also focus on studies, without casting out, working groups
Peisch: seems to me that we've exhausted what we can get out of these topics
back with recommendations about how we will analyze the topics
Chang-Diaz: remainder in bullets? or some paragraph
Peisch: put together some language for rest of group by next meeting

accountability for how funding is spent
in order to access additional funds, districts would have to submit a plan on how those funds would be spent
areas (UPDATED with full list): low income, ELL, professional development, ELT, instructional coaches, common planning, "hiring staff at levels that support student improvement," technology and instructional materials, wrap-around services,
recommend some plan on how those areas would be addressed be submitted
Francomano: have a problem with the concept
foundation budget has been underfunded, but comment is that somehow districts have been mismanaging their funds
"I've had to cut things in order to meet my obligations in special ed and health care"
"you're increasing the foundation budget...but it's just reflecting my actual spending"
"maybe I want to restore art or music...maybe I want to deal with overcrowded classrooms"
there has been nothing to indicate that districts have been mismanaging funds
MBAE: state and local contribution
original grand bargain, results, whatever those results are giving
fix to the foundation budget: is acknowledging gap
"it's just the reality"
perhaps regionalization, perhaps getting dollars to follow the student
Reville: how will it go to a cause that it's been targeted for
"I don't think the main feature is second-guessing locals"
MASS: don't see this as strings, as ties
Verdolino: don't see an option in one or two that we're going to spend special education and health insurance
"tell me from what we've heard in the public hearings...where else would you spend it on?"
MMA: there are so many needs on local level
"there are things that we've cut, things that we've gone without to take care of the most basic needs"
"to be handcuffed to a specific list of the needs and the responsibilities does a disservice to the 6000 students I'm responsible for"
Peisch: to clarify: asking districts to submit a plan
there may be districts were any number of these particular items are not being funded
I don't anticipate
Francomano: but if it's not in numbers 1-8, I can't spend it
but if I want to add money for a music teacher
argument that you can add staff "to improve student performance"
DESE is going to tell me that a music teacher doesn't do it
"the way that we measure student improvement these days is MCAS or PARCC; music isn't included"
Peisch trying to get to general agreement on some accountability measure of some kind
Jehlen: this commission is supposed to say what's adequate
we are supposed to be fulfilling the grand bargain "and we haven't"
many more measures than there were in 1993
there's the wrong message in putting these limits
"to say that Boston can't spend money to put in water fountains...I don't think that's our intention"
districts at foundation are spending less than they're supposed to on class size and teachers
"it's insulting"
If it's submitting school improvement plans, that's fine.
"I think that's moving away from something...we should not both be controlling the outputs and the incomes"
Moreau: reminded of Reville's phrase: loose and tight concept
McDuffy: constitutional obligation does fall on state and local
Moscovitch: this money isn't going to happen without people voting for it
senior legislators won't vote for it without some assurance it will go to
my thought was a broad area that most likely effects the way teachers teach
can't only spend money, you have to report on it
Madeloni: I think this is a huge decision and a major change in thinking
needs a lot more thinking
in a particular social-political context: micromanagement is the wave of the day
a shift to this kind of accountability is dangerous
"I like a lot of things on this list...but what's not on this list...I can't even tell you, because I'm not going to be able to tell you until I'm putting my budget together"
(sorry, didn't catch who this was)
we need to also justify our budgets: for us to simply ask where is this money going
reconvene on June 23

Foundation Budget Review Commission meeting

The Foundation Budget Review Commission meets at 2.
updating as we go
They're starting with a presentation by David Bunker, which I've posted here. 
Bunker: asked me to focus on ELL and low income increments
theory of action was we want to make sure a lot of schools and districts are receiving sufficient funding to accomplish what they're trying to do
moving quickly through how other states do it; "we're within the ballpark"
"success could be defined as MCAS scores, as growth in MCAS scores, or turnaround schools"
a way to get some testimony and cost that out
top two things I heard were extended time "not just considered learning time, common planning time, professsional development"
second thing "incredible growth in the need in social and emotional attention"
"That was the striking thing to me, was it was almost the first thing out of everybody's mouth"
early ed, full day kindergarten, a desire for more preschool, professional development
"class size, but considered a " particular way
entering high school, high level of need and not much education behind them
"given that not every district does every single one of them...when there's been success in a school, they've done several"
when you look at where you are "a flat rate largely driven by class size assumption"
"how do you address poverty when it's concentrated poverty"
"how do you process this many ELL students"
for ELL, "we were not wildly not outside of national bounderies"
need to address the high school rate, and not added at all to the vocational rate
"both of these were addressed with DESE"
"when we say that we're progressive, we get more to the highest poverty quartile than the lowest poverty quartile"
"did not give a specific number" as they're still looking at the change to low income from F/R lunch
citing Worcester, turnaround was "about $2000" per student
"as we start to talk about...needs...might need to be flexible" as district needs vary

Q from MTA: weighted ELL add on took the difference (I think he said to secondary?)...wouldn't that be sufficient? (separate increment)
most of those things we're thinking of as being carried of by the low income increment
'though those decisions will be left to Legislature
current estimate is $25M
"rooted in the middle school"
Chang-Diaz combining the data points, "it's not out of step with the national level...and bring everyone up to the high water mark"
"we don't know that it's the magic number"
"hard to find conclusive ELP data about what's right"
Peisch: very high percentage of ELL students are also low income
would also be benefiting from low income addition
"will vary dramatically" depending on numbers

Jehlen: idea of recognizing different concentrations of poverty
listing two of them are ELT and wraparound services is $2600 per pupil
even if you said all your kids were low income, it'd be significantly more than that
2001 report for MA said the low income increment should be "at least 50%"
NY thought the low income increment should be 100%
questioning if they're adequate at the lower level
cites Bruce Baker most disadvantaged communities are smaller communities like Everett
"the ideas are right..you know what's going to happen" (it will shrink)
"I would like us to say what we think we need, and leave it our different role" to shrink it

Q MASC: is there a factual basis for quartiles?
Bunker: $1500 is just an example
"kind of differing that decision to whenever the Legislature will take it up"
Jehlen "whatever you say will be the upper limit"
Bunker "not a lot of evidence out there about what the middle quartile should be"
Chang-Diaz: Worcester spent $2000 for turnaround; where would they be in quartile?
Bunker: lowest
highest is 9%; lowest rate starts at where the highest low income rate is right now
MBAE: anything from schools that have shown the most improvement and seen what they did, "like Lawrence"
"there might be different evidence"
all used different
"we'd like to see dollars attached to outputs not inputs"
Bunker: focused on specifically "what are you doing in the places you had the most success"
Verdolino: anything on where the money came from?
Bunker: varied by district, one of the challenges of all of this
"very often grants, Race to the Top, turnaround"
Race to the Top "didn't prove" very useful (for information)
certainly ELT grant funded...worked into collective bargaining costs
Verdolino: best practice is sustainable funding, that you can count on
joke that you get a Level 3 to a Level 2 by letting a Level 3 become a Level 4 and then you get the grant
Moscovitch: like the idea of an ELL increment
Lawrence has very high 4th grade growth scores and their scores are falling
"we should be careful about that"
other services: is there a sense in which we'd be asking for this money twice
biggest gap is professionals who are not classroom teachers
if they could spend their whole allotment on that, would they be whole?
if we adjust the rest of the foundation budget on that, would they have enough?
since we're already making the adjustment on that,
"creditability question if you wind up asking for it twice"
note: we don't know this; no one has proven this; we don't have the money
small group instruction "need for wraparound services go away"
nooo, you don't
Did you look at if those districts could spend their health insurance and sped gap money on the rest?
Moscovitch: if they don't know their allotment, then they can't answer the question
Bunker: Oh, they know what their allotment is
"I know we used to say that only ten people understood the foundation budget, but that's no longer the case"
MASS: social emotional has exploded in our state
"HUGE"
Chang-Diaz "what do smart people tell us it costs to educate a low income student versus otherwise"
last commission said 50%
"it may correct and we're not spending it that way, but I saw a lot of data points pointing that even if we spent it as proscribed," we wouldn't be there
Moscovitch: "you'd be doubling or even tripling the amount alloted"
Peisch: "I think the response that I'm hearing is that" it's still too low
"particularly given the need in mental health services"
Moscovitch: "if there are schools where it is happening" (cites Revere) with high test scores even though they don't have enough wraparound services
MBAE: should make a recommendation that mental health and other departments "to make sure that they can provide the services at schools"
"taking on a responsibility that they don't think they should have to provide services that they aren't trained to perform"
MASS: social emotional is different than mental health
"have social workers with every one of our schools, we could certainly use more social workers"
"partner with outside providers" for some children
MBAE: "then it isn't coming out of your budget"
MASS; if they don't have Social Security numbers, it does
"it's complex"
Ferguson "it's a very complex area" some small schools are contracting with outside providers
some of the kids in my area may go to counseling or an outside provider
whole child not impacted, needs smooth back and forth
MASS: also connected to in-district special ed

Peisch: met with Bunker
General consensus around these recommendations for special ed and low income

PRELIMINARY RECOMMENDATIONS:

1. ELL: convert the ELL increase from a base rate to an increment on the base rate; apply the increment to vocational ELL students as well; equalize the increment for each segment including high school to the current middle school increment of 34%
2. Low income: increase the increment for districts with high concentrations of low income students; ensure that any new definitions of economically disadvantaged properly count all high needs students
3. leave the exact calculation of each increment to legislative action, based on further review of data and debate, but with guidance from the Commission that national literature recommends a low-income weighting of 40-100% and that practices in model districts in the Commonwealth suggest that multiple concurrent internventions are necessary to effectively close the achievement gap.
4. establish a better data collection and reporting system that allows for greater access to school-level expenditures and data, and tracks funding allocated for ELL and low income students to esnure that spending is targeted to the intended populations.
5. require each district to post a plan online about how it will use the extra funds calculated in the ELL and low income allotments and what outcome metrics they will use to measure the success of the programs so funded. The plan will be public but not subject to approval by DESE.

some concern about calculation about low income

Moscovitch having  trouble about tying funds specifically to low income and ELL students

Peisch "don't want to tie the districts' hands" in how they deal with it

Moscovitch want to ensure it's going to learning

Chang-Diaz: mandate here is to do well what we have not yet figured out how to do well

average levels of achievement are fantastic; what do we need to do to close the achievement gap

a lot of what we heard was ELT and social emotional

"we want to allow districts to have flexibility"

"we think it's best to leave it at the district school level with a strong accountability structure"

"a place where people are looking at what is your plan and did it work"

MASS: this is above and beyond phase I recommendations

yes

this does refer to the things that were in the limits of the spending; it "can encompass"

Chester: I've been someone who's advocated for some way of ensuring funds are spent on ELL and low income students

advocate for doing a better job of tracking and reporting where schools and students are spending their money to the school level

figures on where money is being spent in Holyoke compared to other Commissioners district

"some degree of skeptism..not confident people are coding dollars correctly"

endorse spirit of this

MBAE: didn't read data collection as limiting how the funds could be allocated

"I think that the idea is asssessing the productivity of investments and make sure it gets to the points its intended for"
"not going to use the word accountability...effectiveness and efficiency" were words used
should be an addition that the results should be online; be sure the results were met, improving
"case made the funds are being used as effectively as possible"
Peisch: the more that I have looked into these issues the more I've been made aware "there's no silver bullet"
"theres no one thing that's going to work for every kid in every school in every district"
think I started out thinking that we had to be sure that every dollar went to where it was allocated by the foundation budget
have come to see that some things may work in 70-80% of districts but may not work everywhere
but should see where it goes
Moscovitch: foundation budget reads proscriptive, but "of course the superintendent would have the flexiblity to do it within that total"
just going to point out there that it'd be the School Committee that passes the budget...
"small disagreement...there are some areas that if you don't spend it, it's very difficult to succeed"
"really hard to change teaching in schools that don't have instructional coaches"
MTA: are we putting plan online because it should be or to sell this package
Chang-Diaz: both
plans online so it's more focused for academics, others, beyond local stakeholders, so can see in comparison with one another
Moscovitch: some way of "nudging school committees to focus on improving pedagogy and improving things for low income kids"
Chester: "feeling ornery...going to stir it up"
assumption on low income and ELL are well-intentioned
when it comes to expenditures "biggest driver is salaries"
convinced that spending same amount for different schools (with different needs)
MASC: mechanism for this: it's the school improvement plan
don't need to create a whole new mechanism
not approved by School Committee; which is a problem
would have to be beefed up some more, but it exists
put them online and link to them
MBAE: would need to beef up, certainly
MASC; school councils not being treated with appropriate gravitas
Peisch: is that something that you could actually get sufficient...do any of your districts have difficulty filling your school council?
MASS: level of pedagogy left to non-education professionals
MBAE: heavily on the loose side here
Chang-Diaz: gesture of a recommendation about sending money directly to the school level
MBAE: leaving flexibility to different districts for different needs
language suggestions to David?
Verdolino: if you try to mandate a way to make sure that this money goes to each individual school, are you putting in a tremendous layer of accountability...you backfill from central budget
"this could be a lot more trouble than its worth"
I'm not sure who is talking now
"want to be about results...how kids are doing"
don't want to get into looking into if additional money went into ELL, where it went into PD to address ELL, and it's harder to track
want to be sure it doesn't put us into defensive mode
MARVA "over time it becomes increasingly difficult" over time to track new money
MassBudget: is there a way of merging the story: there are things we never did that we intended to, and things we now know we should do that we didn't
confirmation from MASC that this now deals with "accountability" bit

BREAK

Peisch: placeholder that acknowledges the need for early education
Chang-Diaz: heard about high quality early ed in so many places
"high quality preschool is a promising practice"
tactic that we frequently saw highlighted
"both for closing achievement gap and for saving money in special education"

MTA: correct historical underinflation
5% total
Peisch: caution that list is so expensive that it won't be taken seriously
MTA: compromise: historic underinflation in 2010 (which was 2%)
MASC: is there a difference between recommending the change and recognizing that inflation has not been completed
"there is a significant dollar differential here"
Peisch: some statement in the report "that general indicates...a recognition that the foundation budget from time to time as it has been calculated over the year has not" included inflation
"maybe in a footnote"
("maybe in a footnote?")
MTA: "I know it strikes some people as trival..." (he's interupted "We KNOW it's not trival")
Note that this would $7M for Worcester Public Schools

early ed commissioner: more than "promising practice"
"strong evaluation of that"
Peisch: drafting language to include

Peisch: in district special education: presentation at last meeting
"no real impact or best practices"
came to conclusion "that we've essentially run out of resources" to deal with in district special ed
may put a sentence in that it needs to be looked at "but it's beyond our time and resources"
Moscovitch: "I don't agree with that"
MASS: instructional core for improving schools
"elephant in the room when we talk about coaches is Ed owns" a coaching company (?)
13 year rollout on...I have no idea what her proposal is...oh, she's introducing this
Moscovitch: "about improving instruction"
"unless this report is seen as improving instruction not just for low income kids"
free up two hours each week for a teacher, two instructional coaches at each school
"yes there is a lot of money on the table...but at its heart, this is a proposal for improving instruction"
Moscovitch is now going through his prosposal
want to say what the problem is
need to talk about it in terms of teachers and class size
thinks that this is a much greater guarantee of ongoing funding support
"I think we all understand you can't have a good class with 28 or 30 kids in it"
"resume using staffing as part of what you report"
Chang-Diaz: different catagories of teachers
Moscovitch: "other teacher" catagory
importance of "guidance counselors and other sorts of services"
when people ask why the music teacher was cut "the music teacher is paying for health care"
essential for understanding and for long-term political support
Chester: concern about staffing whether that drives folks to a standardized approach across the Commonwealth when we're seeing a lot of different directions
Moscovitch: superintendents said (back in 1993), we're all going to do this differently
but no one felt uncomfortable that just because there was a standard, they all had to do it this way
Chester: on PD, coaches...seeing a number of different models some of which are very effective
Both Louisiana and Tennessee have developed an approach to identify lead teachers; quarterly meeting regionally, statewide once a year
"thinking about the foundation budget, I hate to lock us into a one-size-fits all sort of model"
Moscovitch: "that was never the intention"
"there's got to be a way to identify that you've" used the resources to improve instruction
Chester: "I'm not enthusiastic about requiring a lot more planning...want more transparency of where the dollars went"
to show differences in how schools are spending dollars and identifying things that are working
MBAE: felt we dealt with this issue in the preliminary report
felt like this was reopening professional development
Moscovitch: "we never discussed professional development in the preliminary report"
MBAE "trying to give discretion to school leaders" to spend their money
"also very input oriented"
MTA: should be taken very seriously...don't know that we have time"
MASC: focusing on in-district special education number "is there anything to suggest it isn't accurate?"
if it's significant, can't ignore it
MASBO; "numbers all corraborate each other"
"my recollection is that in-district special education was part of the" next steps
Peisch: if you just try to recommend what is being spent without benchmarking to some performance, some evidence to what works, it's problematic
health insurance benchmarked to GIC
"we haven't done that kind of looking to make that kind of judgment"
"I think that to endorse a number runs the risk that inflation does but to a greater extent"
"selling the need for greater influence...a little concerned about having everything class size driven"
acknowledge in our recommendations is left open
concerned about simply funding what is currently happening
Moscovitch: based on walking through schools
Peisch: that's the same thing to me
Moscovitch "when you see how an inclusion model works, you can see why you need more than 15 minutes a day" per classroom
"I think you need some way of focusing attention in districts"
MBAE: "very serious proposal that I want to read carefully" but don't think there's time
Chang-Diaz: include in it "the delta"
"the difference between a recommendation and a recognition"
would you be comfortable if we included that this is an issue and we haven't gotten to it, recommend it to the Legislature's attention
"I honestly don't know the answer to the question what is exactly the problem in many districts that need to get fixed"
"In many districts, I think it's instructional quality"
"if we had heard from everyone, or much of anyone, a concern with instructional quality, I would feel better about putting a fence around instructional quality" as a special category
essentially, they didn't decide on this. They're going to circulate things, discuss them via email, and HOPE to vote on final draft at next meeting October 26