Although my superintendent was not available for an interview, I responded according to my previous experiences in working on the budget with the Superintendent.
What types of input could you receive for budget development from each of the following individuals or groups:
* Central Office Administrators and Staff - they offer information on fulfilling the goals generated by the Board of trustees, federal budgets (i.e. special education, Title I, Bilingual/Migrant, etc.), staffing requirements for each department, curricuum and instruction needs, technology requirements, finance information, information on personnel budgets (FTE’s, salary increases, additions or deletions for positions, etc.), benefit requirements;
* Principals - staffing needs, curriculum and instruction needs based on student achievement and demographics;
* Site Based Decision Making Committees – curriculum and instruction needs based on student performance on state developed assessments, needs based on goals established by the committee, funding sources, responsible parties;
* District Improvement Committees - strategies to fulfill the district goals, funding sources to obtain goals, activities to achieve district goals, persons responsible;
* Teacher Organizations - teachers’ curriculum and instruction needs, teachers’ concerns and needs;
* Key Stakeholders - Community concerns, parent concerns;
* Board of Trustees - District goals and objectives, district priorities.
Saturday, November 26, 2011
Superintendent's Interview
Since we were dismissed from school this week, my Superintendent was unavailable to interview. I have learned that by law, the superintendent is responsible for preparing the budget. My superintendent has worked in the same capacity in districts of varying sizes. With this said, the size, demographics, and the student needs, vary from district to district.
After the Board of Trustees develop the district’s goals, the superintendent is then responsible for preparation of the budget. If the Superintendent has the full support of the Board for each goal, it is easier to prioritize. First and foremost on the list of priorities is addressing students’ needs.
Although the Board does not prepare the budget the Superintendent must work collaboratively with them to develop the budget. Because the Board represents the community as well, they must have full buy-in to every aspect of the budget. In the end, they are responsible for approving and adopting the final budget.
The Superintendent not only focuses on revenues and expenditures, he/she must also pay attention to the fund balance. Every superintendent works extremely hard so that he/she won’t have to use any of the district’s rainy day fund.
The Superintendent has to also make sure that the district uses the public funds conservatively. The Superintendent is certain to make enemies when public funds are expended on what the public views as unnecessary items. This is also important when the district wants the public to consider the passage of a bond. Even when items of importance are included, if the public feels that the district has been wasteful in the past, they are more than likely not to approve a bond. The Superintendent has to remember that he/she and the Board are custodians of the taxpayers’ tax dollars. Finally, the district’s spending should be tailored to the attainment of district’s goals.
Reflection:
I had never taken the time to examine all of the factors that a Superintendent must consider in developing a goal driven budget. Although he is responsible for preparing the budget, he must give the opinions and views of others strong consideration. He/she must listen to all key community constituents. I was aware of all the timelines and dates, but I didn’t realize their importance. Some of the dates are legal timelines that must be adhered to. Just because the Board is not responsible for preparing the budget, their establishment of the district’s goals is the main source for the development of a comprehensive goal driven budget. The goals set the foundation for which the budget must be built.
After the Board of Trustees develop the district’s goals, the superintendent is then responsible for preparation of the budget. If the Superintendent has the full support of the Board for each goal, it is easier to prioritize. First and foremost on the list of priorities is addressing students’ needs.
Although the Board does not prepare the budget the Superintendent must work collaboratively with them to develop the budget. Because the Board represents the community as well, they must have full buy-in to every aspect of the budget. In the end, they are responsible for approving and adopting the final budget.
The Superintendent not only focuses on revenues and expenditures, he/she must also pay attention to the fund balance. Every superintendent works extremely hard so that he/she won’t have to use any of the district’s rainy day fund.
The Superintendent has to also make sure that the district uses the public funds conservatively. The Superintendent is certain to make enemies when public funds are expended on what the public views as unnecessary items. This is also important when the district wants the public to consider the passage of a bond. Even when items of importance are included, if the public feels that the district has been wasteful in the past, they are more than likely not to approve a bond. The Superintendent has to remember that he/she and the Board are custodians of the taxpayers’ tax dollars. Finally, the district’s spending should be tailored to the attainment of district’s goals.
Reflection:
I had never taken the time to examine all of the factors that a Superintendent must consider in developing a goal driven budget. Although he is responsible for preparing the budget, he must give the opinions and views of others strong consideration. He/she must listen to all key community constituents. I was aware of all the timelines and dates, but I didn’t realize their importance. Some of the dates are legal timelines that must be adhered to. Just because the Board is not responsible for preparing the budget, their establishment of the district’s goals is the main source for the development of a comprehensive goal driven budget. The goals set the foundation for which the budget must be built.
TEA Budgeting Guidelines, January 2010
This document is not only important to a superintendent, but it could also be useful to any school district administrator. This whole section on the budget made me realize that the fundamental nature of any budget should be derived from the goals established. The goals are defined to insure that the districts allocate money to fulfill student needs. The budget is not only a page with numbers representative of different categories. It is a document that is prepared carefully and meticulously taking into consideration the goals set forth by the Board of Trustees. There are also several legal components that have to be considered. The district has to guarantee that it adheres to all federal guidelines, or it stands to lose funding. One example of this would be federal funding for special education. If a district does not continuously meet the previous year’s Maintenance of Effort (MOE) for special education, it may have to refund some of the federal dollars it received.
This document also made me realize that making budget projections is no game. A district cannot spend more revenue than it receives. It is important to accurately make predictions of student projections and taxable values. If these components are inaccurate, the entire district’s budget is at risk. It is also important for a district to periodically monitor the budget to substantiate whether the dollars are being spent effectively.
It is essential that the superintendent and the leadership team be knowledgeable of the TEA Budgeting Guidelines, published January, 2010. Without this knowledge, vast errors are eminent, and the superintendent could be at risk of losing his/her job. I know more now than I have ever know about a budget. This information will definitely be used in my current job as Director of Special Education.
This document also made me realize that making budget projections is no game. A district cannot spend more revenue than it receives. It is important to accurately make predictions of student projections and taxable values. If these components are inaccurate, the entire district’s budget is at risk. It is also important for a district to periodically monitor the budget to substantiate whether the dollars are being spent effectively.
It is essential that the superintendent and the leadership team be knowledgeable of the TEA Budgeting Guidelines, published January, 2010. Without this knowledge, vast errors are eminent, and the superintendent could be at risk of losing his/her job. I know more now than I have ever know about a budget. This information will definitely be used in my current job as Director of Special Education.
Top Five Events and Important Dates in the Development of a District Budget
Although I have been assigned to Group 1, my input has not been considered; therefore, I will list my top five events and important dates in the development of a district budget. They are listed according to district’s fiscal calendar.
1. October thru November - These dates are important because the Board of Trustees adopts the campus staffing formula and the non-campus staffing guidelines. During this time, a collection and an analysis of student projections is also made.
2. Late October thru December – Student projections are refined the district applies for student/teacher ratio formulas.This is one of the major funding sources.The districts receive a large amount of funding that is based on the district’s WADA (Weighted Average Daily Attendance).
3. February thru March – Campus and central office budgets are received.Other than employee costs and benefits, the second most important costs are the campus costs.Campuses make projections based on goals developed by the Campus Improvement Committee.Student learning and performance is directly related to the campus budget.
4. May thru June – The districts receive a preliminary estimate of taxable values from the Appraisal District.This gives the district an estimate of the revenue they will receive from the Certified Taxable Values that will be received in July.This timeframe is important because it allows districts to develop a preliminary budget that will be reviewed by the Board of Trustees near the beginning of June.At this time, the district will also publish the proposed budget summary on the web.They also publish the adoption of the district’s budget in the newspaper.
5. August – It is legally required that the district adopts a tax rate, approves and adopts the final budget.
1. October thru November - These dates are important because the Board of Trustees adopts the campus staffing formula and the non-campus staffing guidelines. During this time, a collection and an analysis of student projections is also made.
2. Late October thru December – Student projections are refined the district applies for student/teacher ratio formulas.This is one of the major funding sources.The districts receive a large amount of funding that is based on the district’s WADA (Weighted Average Daily Attendance).
3. February thru March – Campus and central office budgets are received.Other than employee costs and benefits, the second most important costs are the campus costs.Campuses make projections based on goals developed by the Campus Improvement Committee.Student learning and performance is directly related to the campus budget.
4. May thru June – The districts receive a preliminary estimate of taxable values from the Appraisal District.This gives the district an estimate of the revenue they will receive from the Certified Taxable Values that will be received in July.This timeframe is important because it allows districts to develop a preliminary budget that will be reviewed by the Board of Trustees near the beginning of June.At this time, the district will also publish the proposed budget summary on the web.They also publish the adoption of the district’s budget in the newspaper.
5. August – It is legally required that the district adopts a tax rate, approves and adopts the final budget.
A Goal Driven Budget
It is imperative that every school district and every school develop a goal driven budget. A goal driven budget is a budget that that is completely aligned and funded are to the goals that are developed by the organization for which it is prepared. In other words, a goal driven budget is crucial to a district and a school because it is designed and funds are allocated to attain the goals set forth by the district and/or campus.
The initial goals are developed by the district’s Board of Trustees. These goals basically determine how the district will spend its funds for the school year. These goals are based on the defined goals and priorities that are defined by the District Improvement Committee. This is a collaborative effort that involves representatives from the district’s stakeholders. Communication between the groups is extremely important.
After the district’s goals are developed, they are then distributed to each campus. Each campus has the responsibility for developing a Campus Improvement Committee. These committee members are comprised of members of the school’s stakeholders. The Campus improvement Committee then develops a Campus Improvement Plan. The goals of the campus plan mirror the goals established for the district. Since I have previously served as an elementary school principal, I know that each goal has objectives, persons responsible, resources required (funding and personnel), timelines (formative and summative), and evaluations. I agree with Dr. Arterbury that the district plan should be “version of the vision.” I interpret this as “although each campus plan will be somewhat different because of the student demographics, there should be some alignment to the district’s plan.”
Ultimately, district and campus spending should be tailored to insure the attainment of goals that have been established. When the budget shows commitment to achieving the developed goals, we have a goal driven budget.
The initial goals are developed by the district’s Board of Trustees. These goals basically determine how the district will spend its funds for the school year. These goals are based on the defined goals and priorities that are defined by the District Improvement Committee. This is a collaborative effort that involves representatives from the district’s stakeholders. Communication between the groups is extremely important.
After the district’s goals are developed, they are then distributed to each campus. Each campus has the responsibility for developing a Campus Improvement Committee. These committee members are comprised of members of the school’s stakeholders. The Campus improvement Committee then develops a Campus Improvement Plan. The goals of the campus plan mirror the goals established for the district. Since I have previously served as an elementary school principal, I know that each goal has objectives, persons responsible, resources required (funding and personnel), timelines (formative and summative), and evaluations. I agree with Dr. Arterbury that the district plan should be “version of the vision.” I interpret this as “although each campus plan will be somewhat different because of the student demographics, there should be some alignment to the district’s plan.”
Ultimately, district and campus spending should be tailored to insure the attainment of goals that have been established. When the budget shows commitment to achieving the developed goals, we have a goal driven budget.
Sunday, November 20, 2011
Equity, Equality and Adequacy
For any school administrator to be successful, he/she must have a clear understanding of equity, equality and adequacy from an educational stand point. Equity is insuring that all children have an equal access to a high quality education regardless of where they live or who they are. An example would be Title I funding that provides additional money for schools that have a large population of students that receive free and reduced lunches, or economically disadvantaged. A second example would be federal funding received by a district to provide supplementary services to special education students. Both of these funding sources provide money to insure that the learning field is somewhat leveled or equitable for all students.
Equality in education is defined as every student having the same access to the same type of basic educational programs. Permanent school funding is an example of fairness in funding. Another good example would lie in a district's ability to hire a high quality teacher just as a neighboring district. Due to demographics and salaries in many districts, it is very difficult to hire and retain quality teachers.
Adequacy is defined as a minimum level of funding needed for every school to teach its students or a district receiving financial support sufficient to meet state accreditation standards. Providing school improvement funding to a school that is rated unacceptable would be one example of adequate funding. All of the sub-groups identified in PBMAS and the funding provided in the District Improvement Plan is another example.
Equality in education is defined as every student having the same access to the same type of basic educational programs. Permanent school funding is an example of fairness in funding. Another good example would lie in a district's ability to hire a high quality teacher just as a neighboring district. Due to demographics and salaries in many districts, it is very difficult to hire and retain quality teachers.
Adequacy is defined as a minimum level of funding needed for every school to teach its students or a district receiving financial support sufficient to meet state accreditation standards. Providing school improvement funding to a school that is rated unacceptable would be one example of adequate funding. All of the sub-groups identified in PBMAS and the funding provided in the District Improvement Plan is another example.
State Formula Funding
State formula funding is too complex and has too many variables to be 100% successful for each school district in the state of Texas. Dr. Nick's did assist me in acquiring more knowledge than I initially started with. Although there are several issues impacting the state formula, I have addressed four. State funding is affected by WADA (weighted average daily attendance, ADA (average daily attendance), property taxes, allotments for special instructional programs, etc. If all of the variables were constant and equitable, maybe then, all of the districts in Texas would be funded equitably. Our legislatures need to develop a funding plan where all of districts would receive the same amount of funding for all of our students. Therefore, we would more apt to provide all of the students of Texas an equal, equitable, and adequate education.
History of Texas Education
I found the history of educational history evolving in Texas to be amazing. I have a new found respect for education as it relates to our state's forefathers. Although there were several contributing factors in history for education in Texas, there were three I found most important. The first factor being the Constitution of 1869. This constitution established compensatory education for students ages eight through fourteen. A poll tax to establish support for education and an ad valorem tax for education was created. The second most important act was the establishment of the Permanent and Available School Funds. This was established by the adoption of the new 1876 Texas Constitution. It was then mandated that 25% of the state's general revenues be dedicated to education. The new constitution set the foundation for school finance dealing with equity, adequacy, and efficiency in the state of Texas. The third most important event affecting education in Texas was the Gilmer-Aiken Laws that were passed during the 51st Legislative Session. These laws developed and organized approach to the way the state supplemented local taxes to fund public education. These three historical events were a great beginning to the development of education in Texas. For some reason, education does not appear to be a priority to our current legislatures. As educators, we have to force our legislatures to take a closer look at the injustices they are now forcing on our students.
Comparison of Two District Improvement Plans
In comparing the Austin I. S. D. plan to my district, there were several components that were similar, but there were also many differences. Both plans address long and short term goals. The plan for the district that I work in only stated the goals and listed some of the short term goals to accomplish the long term goals. The Austin I. S. D. plan, in my opinion was better organized. In addressing the comprehensive system for continuous improvement, Austin not only stated the policy, but it also illustrated the alignment of the district's planning efforts (Figure 2). However, my district completed a comprehensive needs assessment, and included the data documentation for the assessment. Austin I. S. D. did not include a needs assessment, but made reference to one being conducted.
In the plan for the district that I work, each area to be addressed is outlined in a table format that indicates the following: 1) the goal that is to be addressed; 2) the person(s) responsible; 3) resources; 4) the timelines for implementation; 5) timelines for monitoring; and 6) evidence of completion. The Austin I. S. D. does not include any of the fore mentioned. The AISD plan uses a balanced scorecard to monitor performance. A template of the scorecard should have been included.
The Austin I. S. D. Plan presented a very detailed strategic plan along with three principal components. Although both plans refer to and list the Vision, Mission Statement, Values, Goals, Measurable Outcomes and Strategies, the Austin I. S. D. plan discusses it as a part of its strategic plan. The Austin plan goes on to discuss Departmental and Employee Plans. These components are not a part of my district’s plan. I also like the fact that AISD has established stakeholder groups that are a part of the decision-making process. My district has individuals from the community listed.
The AISD plan did not include enough data based on student performance. Since student performance is the basis for any school district’s improvement plan, more emphasis should have been placed on student performance data. In fact, there is no real data, only reference made to addressing the data. It also referred to Figure 3 that was to list annual actions for 2010-2011. I could not locate Figure 3.
Although there are major similarities and differences between the two plans, the most important components are included in both. The major differences are the presentation and the format in the two plans.
In the plan for the district that I work, each area to be addressed is outlined in a table format that indicates the following: 1) the goal that is to be addressed; 2) the person(s) responsible; 3) resources; 4) the timelines for implementation; 5) timelines for monitoring; and 6) evidence of completion. The Austin I. S. D. does not include any of the fore mentioned. The AISD plan uses a balanced scorecard to monitor performance. A template of the scorecard should have been included.
The Austin I. S. D. Plan presented a very detailed strategic plan along with three principal components. Although both plans refer to and list the Vision, Mission Statement, Values, Goals, Measurable Outcomes and Strategies, the Austin I. S. D. plan discusses it as a part of its strategic plan. The Austin plan goes on to discuss Departmental and Employee Plans. These components are not a part of my district’s plan. I also like the fact that AISD has established stakeholder groups that are a part of the decision-making process. My district has individuals from the community listed.
The AISD plan did not include enough data based on student performance. Since student performance is the basis for any school district’s improvement plan, more emphasis should have been placed on student performance data. In fact, there is no real data, only reference made to addressing the data. It also referred to Figure 3 that was to list annual actions for 2010-2011. I could not locate Figure 3.
Although there are major similarities and differences between the two plans, the most important components are included in both. The major differences are the presentation and the format in the two plans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)