Week+4+EDLD+5342+Wiki+Group+5+Collaboration

Week 3 EDLD 5342 Cohort 5 Wiki Group 5 Collaboration Marie Adams, Brenda Avance , Lorissa Bailey , Jody Kotys


 * Week Four Assignment, Part 1 – Understanding FIRST (Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas) in School Finance **

Collaborate with your Wiki group, and **__write a one – two page group paper that identifies and justifies your group’s opinion regarding the three most important components of FIRST.__**

As stated in the Week 4 Lecture by Dr Lu, "the FIRS T (Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas) is for the accountability of the school district's business and financial operations. It is designed to encourage Texas Public Schools to manage their financial resources better in order to provide the maximum money possible for instructional purposes. It monitors the processes and procedures used at all levels of money management in a school district" (Dr Lu Stephens, 2012). Provisions for FIR ST  (Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Title 19, § 109.1001) started in 2002 and is one of two accountability systems that was started by the Texas Education Agency for the purpose of holding school districts accountable for financial resources. The School FIRST Annual Financial Management Report template consists of Superintendent's Current Employment Contract, Reimbursements Received by the Superintendent and Board Members, Outside Compensation and/or Fees Received by the Superintendent for Professional Consulting and/or Other Personal Services, Gifts Received by Executive Officers and Board Members (and First Degree Relatives, if any) (gifts that had an economic value of $250 or more in the aggregate in the fiscal year), Business Transactions Between School District and Board Members, Summary schedule of Data Submitted under the Financial Solvency Provisions of TEC 39.0822, and Additional Financial Solvency Questions (Retrieved from the Internet April 30, 2012 [][|School FIRST Management Report (Excel, 31KB)]  ). This is a very important part of the superintendent's job to monitor, analysis, and implement improvements through this rating system process to improve education and make sure resources are maximized for students learning. “The purpose of the financial accountability rating system is to ensure that school districts and open-enrollment charter schools will be held accountable for the quality of their financial management practices sand achieve improved performance in the management of their financial resources. The system is designed to encourage Texas public schools to manage their financial resources better in order to provide the maximum allocation possible for direct instructional purposes. The system will also disclose the quality of local management and decision-maki8ng processes that impact the allocation of financial resources in Texas public schools. An evaluation of the long-term effectiveness of the system should disclose a measurable improvement in the quality of Texas public schools’ financial decision-making processes.” (19 TAC Chapter 109, Subchapter AA, 109.1001. Purpose of Financial Accountability Rating System)

The first important component of FIRST is the school district financial management report. This report gives TEA an overview of how funds are being utilized within the district.

The second import component of FIRST is the amount of funds in the general fund account. Currently districts are required to have 60 days of operating expenses available. Districts that have this cushion are in better position to be able to handle changes in funding and economic conditions.

The third important component of FIRST is the actual accountability rating given to the district. This rating ranges from Superior Achievement down to Suspended—Data Quality. This rating is based on standard indicators and gives an overall picture of the district’s financial health.

The three most important components of FIRST me are the change in the amount of funds that needed to be available to in the general fund, that districts are held accountable for their financial management and the decision making process that impact the allocation of resources. “Texas Education Agency (TEA or agency) is beginning the process of modifying indicators in the 2010-2011 School Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST) that require school districts and charter schools to maintain approximately 60 days of operating expenses in their general fund account. The purpose of the financial accountability rating system (Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Title 19, § 109.1001) is to ensure that school districts and open-enrollment charter schools are held accountable for the quality of their financial management practices and achieve improved performance in the management of their financial resources. The system is designed to encourage Texas public schools to manage their financial resources better in order to provide the maximum allocation possible for direct instructional purposes. The system will also disclose the quality of local management and decision-making processes that impact the allocation of financial resources in Texas public schools.”

In the lecture this week, Dr. Lu introduced us to the other district report aside from the AEIS that takes precedence in the superintendent’s responsibilities, FIRST (Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas). “Texas Education Agency (TEA or agency) is beginning the process of modifying indicators in the 2010-2011 School Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (FIRST) that require school districts and charter schools to maintain approximately 60 days of operating expenses in their general fund account. The purpose of the financial accountability rating system (Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Title 19, § 109.1001) is to ensure that school districts and open-enrollment charter schools are held accountable for the quality of their financial management practices and achieve improved performance in the management of their financial resources. The system is designed to encourage Texas public schools to manage their financial resources better in order to provide the maximum allocation possible for direct instructional purposes. The system will also disclose the quality of local management and decision-making processes that impact the allocation of financial resources in Texas public schools.” Our group consensus indicates this report gives TEA an overview of how funds are being utilized within the district, the amount of funds in the general fund account, and the actual accountability rating given to the district based on standard indicators giving an overall picture of the district’s financial health. However, when analyzing the Socorro ISD FIRST Status Detail, the district budget director, Susan Olson, and I determined indicator 5- Was there an Unqualified Opinion in the Annual Financial Report?, indicator 6- Did the Annual Financial Report Not Disclose Any Instance(s) of Material Weaknesses in Internal Controls?, and indicator 8- Was the Three-Year Average Percent of Total Tax Collections (including delinquent) Greater than 98% were the three most important components of the FIRST Report. In the case of indicator 5, if there is an unqualified opinion in the financial report, this could throw off all of the calculations. Qualified personnel that are thoroughly vetted and experienced in school financial accounting are needed since it is a process very different from any other kind of public and private accounting practices and has such a labyrinth of regulations. For indicator 6, internal checks and balances are critical to ensuring accounting practices keep within legal mandates. Often when these are not kept in balance, districts have difficulty with ethics violation that can lead to lawsuits. Indicator 8 measuring tax collection revenue is critical to produce a working budget with verified funds coming in to cover costs. All the indicators have importance, but these three have considerable impact on whether an institution has sound financial backing to operate efficiently.

** Week Four Assignment, Part 2 – Comparing Economy of Scale in Large and Small Districts ** Using the lecture/interview from Week Four, the Glossary in the Resource Section, and information from //Week Four Snapshot District 1 Example// and //Week Four Snapshot District 2 Example// Information in above chart retreived from EDLD 5342 Resources: //Week Four Snapshot District 1 Example// and //Week Four Snapshot District 2 Example// Using the lecture/interview from Week Four, the Glossary in the Resource Section, and information from //Week Four Snapshot District 1 Example// and //Week Four Snapshot District 2 Example we will as a group (Wiki Group 5) see the contrast between a small district, Week Four Snapshot District 1 Example and a large district, Week Four Snapshot District 2 Example. The two districts look very similar until you dissect the information and consider “economy of scale” and how it relates to school finance.// Economy of scale as stated by Dr Lu in the Week Four Lecture/Interview is a concept that indicates that increasing the size of an organization can result in a lower per unit production cost. This is shown when looking at the data for the two district’s snapshots the total revenue per pupil is close with District one having 10,529/pupil and the larger District two actually having less with 10,316/pupil. District 2 is larger with 45 campuses, 32,326 total students and 2,299 total teachers while District 1 has three campuses, 830 total students, and 70 teachers (EDLD 5342 Resources: //Week Four Snapshot District 1 Example// and //Week Four Snapshot District 2 Example).// In District 2 the overall infrastructure cost per pupil is less. As indicated in the lecture an “economy of scale is a concept that indicates that increasing the size of an organization can result in a lower per unit production cost.” With this in mind we must consider the impact of an economy of scale on school districts and the costs associated with the education of our children. Obviously the larger the organization, or in this case the district, the more funding they would receive. This would be realized in a lower operating cost per student. To further explore this concept let’s look at two district with very different demographics.
 * Week 4 Snapshots || District 1 || District 2 ||
 * Total Revenue per pupil || 10,529 || 10,316 ||
 * Total Operational per pupil || 8,611 || 8,908 ||
 * Total Instructional Expenditures per pupil || 4,619 || 5,494 ||
 * Average Teacher salary || 39,771 || 50,307 ||
 * Total Teachers || 70 || 2,299 ||
 * Total Students || 830 || 32,326 ||
 * Total # of Schools || 3 || 45 ||
 * Economically Disadvantaged || 43.0% || 53.9% ||
 * Locally adopted Tax Rate || 1.391 || 1.383 ||
 * Attendance Rate(2007-2008) || 96.7 || 95.9 ||
 * Total Revenue || 8,823,250 || 329.638,930 ||
 * Analysis of data regarding Total Revenue per pupil in each district;
 * Analysis of Total Operational Expenditures per pupil in each district;
 * Analysis of average teacher salary in each district;
 * Your group’s analysis of the contrasts between large and small districts and how economy of scale may address these contrasts

District 1 is a very small district servicing 830 students with a total staff of 130. Of the student population, 43% are considered economically disadvantaged; therefore one would make the assumption that the district is relatively lower income with relatively low tax base. The average teacher salary in district 1 is $39,771. The total revenue for the district is $8,823,250 which equates to total revenue per student of $10,529. The total operating expenditures for this district was $7,216,335 which equates to a total operating expenditure per student of $8,611. Because the total operating expenditures is so great per student it reduces the amount of funds available to dedicate to the improvement of instruction or learning per student. A total of 54% of the funds are dedicated to instruction.

District 2 is a very large district servicing 32,326 students with a total staff of 4,582. Of the student population, 53.9% are considered economically disadvantaged. The average teacher salary in district 2 is $50,307. The total revenue for the district is $329,638,930 which equates to total revenue per student of $10,316. The total operating expenditures for this district was $284,664,004 which equates to a total operating expenditure per student of $8,908. A total of 62% of the funds per student are dedicated to instruction.

In comparison, district 1 appears to be in a better financial situation per student with total revenue of $10,529 per student. This is $213 more revenue per student than district 2, however district 2 has a larger student base which spreads the operating cost more and results in a lower total operating cost per student.


 * Week 4 Part 2 Data || District1 || District2 ||
 * Total # of Students || 830  ||  32,326  ||
 * Total Revenue per pupil || $10,529  ||  $10,316  ||
 * Total Operational Expenditures per pupil || $8,611  ||  $8,908  ||
 * Average teacher salary || $39,771  ||  $50,307  ||

When looking at the total revenue per pupil, District 1 makes more money per student but District 2 has about 31,500 more students than District 1. District 2 spends about $300 more per student than District 1 according to the total operational expenditures per pupil. This extra money spent could account for the higher average teacher salary in District 2. In the lecture this week Dr. Lu Stephens talk about how larger schools districts can pay higher salaries due to them having more students to divide to cost with. “Economy of scale is a concept that indicates that increasing the size of an organization can result in a lower per unit production cost. In other words, as an organization becomes larger, it develops the ability to reduce infrastructure costs for the product produced. Very often the result is more instructional program revenue per student, which enriches the academic programs of the district. Equally important, is the fact that the larger district can use some of the efficiency savings to improve teacher salaries. An improved salary schedule usually enables the district to attract and retain more excellent teachers.” These two district are equably matched there are some places where one district is doing more or getting more but for the most part they are equable based on the demographics of each district. The biggest differences in the districts are there geographic locations.

EDLD 5342 Week 4 Part 2 In this week’s lecture this, Dr. Lu Stephens spoke about how larger schools districts can have an advantage over smaller districts due to having more students to divide to cost with. “Economy of scale is a concept that indicates that increasing the size of an organization can result in a lower per unit production cost. In other words, as an organization becomes larger, it develops the ability to reduce infrastructure costs for the product produced. Very often the result is more instructional program revenue per student, which enriches the academic programs of the district. Equally important, is the fact that the larger district can use some of the efficiency savings to improve teacher salaries. An improved salary schedule usually enables the district to attract and retain more excellent teachers.” As we can see in the data above, both districts have similar numbers for total revenue per student and total operational costs per pupil. The major difference is in the total number of students with District 1 at 830 while District 2 has 32,326. Obviously, District 2 will receive considerably more funds. Even with 43 campuses, District 2 is able to use their funds to create more differentiated learning facilities, create more instructional opportunities, and pay better salaries to attract and retain great teachers. The operating cost will also be lower for District 2 because in can be spread between so many more students. District 1 will have less to spend on facilities, programs and teachers because the concentration of students is greater which drives up the operating costs per student.
 * Week 4 Part 2 Data || District1 || District2 ||
 * Total # of Students || 830 || 32,326 ||
 * Total Revenue per pupil || $10,529 || $10,316 ||
 * Total Operational Expenditures per pupil || $8,611 || $8,908 ||
 * Average teacher salary || $39,771 || $50,307 ||
 * Week Four Assignment, Part 3 – Analysis of Differentiated Staffing on a campus of your choice **


 * Directions: ** In this activity, you will be asked to post to your faculty section blog and to your group Wiki and comment on at least one other group’s wiki.

Using the lecture/interview from Week Four, the Glossary in the Resource Section, and data and observations from a campus of your choice, discuss and share your observations, select a campus from your group**__, and develop a 1 – 2 page group paper describing how differentiated staffing might impact and/or improve the goals of that campus.__**

Differentiated staffing was defined in Week 4 Lecture as a concept that proposes specialized use of personnel. Even though teachers and administrators tend to not be that specialized differentiated staffing could bring about greater efficiency by analyzing and redefining essential teaching tasks and many teaching functions that would create a way to distribute new educational roles for teaching the students that could bring about a significant operational cost savings for the district. Barriers to differentiated staffing are commitment to status quo, loss of teaching jobs, and opposition to organizational change (Week 4 Lecture p2 Stephens).

According to Dr. Stephens differentiated staffing is the use of staff in a specialized way. “Differentiated staffing is a concept that proposes specialized use of personnel. We tend not to be that specialized as public school teachers or administrators. Differentiated staffing could create greater efficiency in a school district by assigning teachers and other educators different responsibilities based on carefully prepared definitions of many teaching functions. It would analyze essential tasks and create a means to implement new educational roles for teaching the students. The results could create significant operational cost savings for a school district.” When listening to the lecture this week it reminded me of seminar that I attend at the TASSP conference a couple of years ago it was call “The breakthrough coach”. It was about how as administrators we feel like we have to do every little thing like answer every phone call and email which caused us to miss walk throughs, observation and valuable time in the building, walk your campuses. The thought behind this was the more you are out of your office the more you see potential concerns before it gets to you and you can be proactive with matters. The seminar gave you only a piece of the 2 full day classes are about but it gave points about using your office staff more effectively and efficiently. 1 and ½ days were for the office staff without the administrator and a ½ day with you. For instance is there a need to speak to a parent that wants to know why her student’s class changed, when she has not spoken to the building principal. Or is it better to allow your secretary to call the parent and direct her to the building principal and email the building principal to be expecting that parent. This could potently give you 30 minutes to monitor and access other areas of the district. With all that said differentiated staffing with the right training and support could change the look of education. The questions are, are you ready for that change? And are you willing to lead that change?
 * According to the week four lecture “differentiated staffing is a concept that proposes specialized use of personnel.” An example of differentiated staffing within my district in the area of instruction would be the use of instructional aides within the classroom to provided instructional support. The teacher of record is the master of the content and the instructional aide can offer the specialized delivery (ie. Oral testing, etc…). The special education teacher, who is the master of learning styles, can provide content mastery and more specific instruction on a one on one basis. This concept allows the teacher of record to cover more material within a class period allowing more learning to occur. **

EDLD 5342

Week Part 3

According to the lecture this week, Dr. Lu Stephens stated, “Differentiated staffing is a concept that proposes specialized use of personnel. We tend not to be that specialized as public school teachers or administrators. Differentiated staffing could create greater efficiency in a school district by assigning teachers and other educators different responsibilities based on carefully prepared definitions of many teaching functions. It would analyze essential tasks and create a means to implement new educational roles for teaching the students. The results could create significant operational cost savings for a school district.” Interestingly enough, this has been a focus in our district that has gotten keener and keener resulting in quite a few changes for the upcoming school year in staffing and scheduling. The superintendent with his team in the cabinet and budget office changed the way teaching personnel are going to be paid. For at least the last 15 years, the high schools have been on a 4 x 4 block scheduling pattern. When comparing this to an 8 period day, the 4 x 4 uses more personnel to implement. Teachers were also receiving one 90 minute period a day. On A Days, this period was designated for conference, on B Day, it was designated for specific work with at-risk students. This has actually resulted in teachers having twice as many minutes in planning as required by law. The B Day period was funded by the State Compensatory Education Allotment and accounted for 13% of each teacher’s salary. This coming school year, the superintendent not only eliminated the 4 x 4, but the extra conference period and a “skinny” period put into place that every teacher was required to teach for 20 minutes to serve the at-risk provision in the ARMI funds utilized to pay the 13% of teacher salaries. Two new positions have been created to address at-risk populations on each campus utilizing the same State Comp Ed funds since they will not be spread throughout the entire teaching staff. No teachers will have seven classes per day with one conference period.

This configuration is much easier for scheduling as well. Since more periods are available, classes are more easily balanced, including CWC sections. In an effort to assist teachers and students to prepare better for the STAAR, a decision has been made to assign only one to two preps to each teacher enabling them to specialize. This kind of differentiation is hoped to provide deeper, more complete preparation for students and make teachers more comfortable in directing more focused instruction. The two newly created positions eliminate a number of initiatives for instructional coaches at each department. One position will be responsible for individualized instruction for at-risk students. The other position will be an instructional coach for all teachers. It is thought that these changes will add more quality instruction as they differentiate for teachers as well as students.