DCPSWatch Home

Major Areas
DC Public Schools
Mayoral Takeover
Special Education

State Education Agency
State Education Office
Vouchers
WTU
Wilson S.H.S.

Calendars
Board of Education
School Year

Columns
Elizabeth Davis
Ron Drake
Erich Martel
Nathan Saunders

Directories
Schools

Letters

Links

Organizations
DC Education Compact
Parents United
Proposition 100%

Press

Search

DCWatch Home

Submitted to the District of Columbia Board of Education

by

Interim Superintendent, Dr. Robert Rice

By the 

Office of Academic Services
Office of the Assistant Superintendents and Executive Director
Offices of Finance
Office of Human Resources

May 11, 2004

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Overview, Dr. Robert Rice, Interim Superintendent
Rationale, Dr. John Musso, Chief Financial Officer

DCPS FY 2005 Proposed Budget (Table 1)

Implementation, Dr. William Wilhoyte, Assistant Superintendent
Senior High Schools, Dr. Juan R. Baughn, Assistant Superintendent
Middle Schools/Junior High Schools/Transformation Schools, Dr. Gloria Grantham, Executive Director
Elementary Schools, Mr. Dale Talbert, Assistant Superintendent
Results, Dr. John McCoy, Assistant Superintendent
Rebuilding, Dr. John McCoy, Assistant Superintendent
Employee Assistance Program (EAP), Dr. Karen Jackson, Chief Human Resources Officer
Weighted Student Formula, Mr. Adam Porsch, Director of Performance Management
Reinvestment, Dr. Arthur Curry, Executive Director of Career & Technical Education

Initiatives (Table 2)

Recommendations, Dr. William Wilhoyte, Assistant Superintendent
Next Steps/Closing Summary, Dr. Robert Rice, Interim Superintendent
APPENDIX
Assistant Superintendents (Appendix A)

The Office of the Assistant Superintendents SY 2003/04 Summary Abolishments Spreadsheet

Dr. Karen Jackson (Appendix B), Revised School-Based Abolishment Timelines

Back to top of page

Overview
Dr. Robert Rice, Interim Superintendent

We are here to make decisions about teaching reading, writing and mathematics, and reducing expenses. The current budget requires a reduction in expenditures to cure the anticipated imbalariced for FY'04. Earlier this school year we reduced the Central Office budget, mainly through abolishing positions, and had the direction to hold schools harmless until adjustments could be made during the summer months when students were not negatively impacted by the reduction of school positions.

This evening we report to you the process used and the impacts on the recommendations to close the FY '04 budget gap and to reallocation of the 2005 budget. You will hear presentations by Divisional Assistant Superintendents, and other key district wide administrators.

I request that we be permitted to make the entire presentation before entering into a discussion. There are several sections of our presentation that need to be developed and have implications for other sections that lead to several significant recommendations.

Keeping in mind that our academic focus is to improve student achievement in reading, writing and mathematics, the Superintendent recommends the proposed budget cure be implemented through position abolishments as anticipated, and that we redirect a portion of new initiative resources, and that we proceed to improve the teaching of reading, writing and mathematics.

Back to top of page

Rationale
Dr. John Musso, Chief Financial Officer

FY 2004 Budget Gap Analysis May 11, 2004

In October 2003 the DCPS Board of Education recognized that a budget modification was necessary due to the lack of resources necessary to fully fund the original budget as well as effectuate employee steps and salary increases. With that, the Board directed the administration to identify gap closing measures that would balance the budget for $40.4 million. A number of gap closing strategies were identified. Among those were the identification of efficiencies and opportunities while others were reductions in goods, services and personnel.

In response to the anti deficiency requirement, the Board directed the administration to institute a variety of gap closing measures to realize $19.4 million. This amount was made up of 1.73% or $2.8 million in reductions for all non-school departments. $16.6 million was made up of reallocations, reductions and transfers to capital. There was an additional $21.0 million that was to be reduced through staff reductions. The Board directed the administration to proceed with the abolishment process to realize the $21.0 million or approximately 423 staff. In order to meet the requirements of the abolishment process and taking into account the necessary steps to get to that point, it was determined that by the time the abolishments were completed, only one half of the year would have passed. With that, only one half of the savings would be accomplished since the savings would have to have been realized for the full 12 month period of the FY 04 budget. In order to achieve the full $21.0 million in savings, an additional 348 staff or $30.4 million would have to be abolished for an estimated annualized total of 771 staff or $38.8 million.

In December 2004 the Board of Education was ready to implement the necessary abolishments. At that time however, the Superintendent, Board of Education and Council identified that classroom staff reductions at mid year would create unnecessary educational gaps at the classroom level that could potentially have a negative impact on the students. Council approved the infusion of additional dollars for the FY 04 Budget totaling $14.6 million. As a result, DCPS was able to delay the school based abolishments until the end of this school year

After completion of the delayed abolishment process, the budget gap for FY 04 will technically close. While the deficit was cured for FY 04, the defects that created the deficit still exist to some extent, Those defects must be cured in FY 04 so that a projected deficit does not exist in FY 05.

As we analyze our current budget vs. expenditures and project out, we have become aware of instances where over spending will occur if the current rate of spending continues. Those areas are Operations & Maintenance, Charter School Oversight, Information & Referral Service Center, Transportation Administrator, Fixed Costs, Choice, CAPPS Maintenance, and Teacher's Legal Fund. As those gaps are identified and dealt with in the FY 04 Budget, they present a potential gap in FY 05 that must be dealt with based upon the Preliminary FY 05 budget allocations.

All of the areas listed above have been adjusted within the FY 05 Reallocated Budget presented herein with the exception of Transportation. In order to increase budget authority in that area, the Transportation Administrator must first seek approval from the Judge.

Back to top of page

DCPS FY 2005 Proposed Budget (Table 1)

Back to top of page

Implementation
Dr. William Wilhoyte, Assistant Superintendent

Factors Used For Consideration Of Selected Abolished Positions

• Human Face of Abolishment
• Compliance Requirements (ESY, Special Education, Custodians, Head Start, WTU Contract)
• AYP / NCLB
• Literacy and Numeracy Supports
• Instructional Impact
• Pupil Teacher Ratios
• Floor Plan from Weighted Student Formula (WSF)
• Organizational / Structural impactions
• Special Services - Art, Library, Educational Aides, etc.
• School Support Services - Custodians
• Abolishments will result in reduced services

Back to top of page

Senior High Schools
Dr. Juan R. Baughn, Assistant Superintendent

The Senior High Schools' recommended abolishments were based on several reports including, but not limited to the following:

• Council of Great City Schools Report
• Blue Ribbon Report on High School Reform
• DCPS Business plan
• Principal recommendations

Additionally the following factors were taken into account:

• School enrollment
• School programs
• Course requirements
• National test results
• Scheduling for Instruction
• Supportive Services

School Profiles

Statistical Impact for Senior High Schools

Back to top of page

Middle Schools/Junior High Schools/Transformation Schools
Dr. Gloria Grantham, Executive Director

The Middle Schools/Junior High Schools/Transformation Schools recommended abolishments were based on several reports including, but not limited to the following:

• Council of Great City Schools Report
• Blue Ribbon Report on High School Reform
• DCPS Business Plan
• Principal Recommendations

Additionally these factors were taken into account:

• School enrollment and projected membership (Teacher/Student Ratio)
• School programs (Emphasis on Reading and Mathematics)
• Course requirements (Including Carnegie units for 8th and 9th graders)
• National test results (SAT 9 -AYP)
• Scheduling for Instruction
• Supportive Services (Limited, e.g., Counselors, Social Workers, Psychologists, Business Managers, and Support Staff)
• Impacts will vary by school and circumstance

School Profiles

• Hart Middle School
• Hine Junior High School

Statistical Impact for Middle Schools/Junior High Schools/Transformation Schools

Back to top of page

Elementary Schools
Mr. Dale Talbert, Assistant Superintendent

The Elementary Schools' recommended abolishments were based on The Citizen's Budget FY 2004 Reaching For Academic Excellence report for the District of Columbia.

Additionally the following factors were taken into account:

• Current membership/grade levels
• SY 04/05 Projected Membership
• Classroom size/pupil teacher ratios
• Early childhood programming (Headstart, Pre K)
• Academic supports for literacy, numeracy, and writing
• Special subjects-Art, Physical Education, Science, Computer Technology, World Language
• Leadership and Management Systems-financial, administrative, and clerical (i.e. business manager, data entry clerk, staff assistant, assistant principal, counselor, special education coordinator)
• Differentiated Instruction for ESL, Special Needs Students, Gifted and Talented - School Climate (safety and security, facility maintenance)
• Special Programming! Supplemental Funding (Before and Aftercare, Federal Funding, Special Grant or Private Funding)

School Profiles

• Peabody ES
• Ferebee Hope ES

Statistical Impact for Elementary Schools

Back to top of page

Results
Dr. John McCoy, Assistant Superintendent

• Intent of the Assistant Superintendents
• Actuality of Abolishment Process
• Statistical Impact for all D.C. public schools
• Results of Abolishment Process

Back to top of page

Rebuilding
Dr. John McCoy, Assistant Superintendent

• Charge to Principals
• Role of the Assistant Superintendents During the Rebuilding Process
• Epilogue

Back to top of page

Employee Assistance Program (EAP)
Dr. Karen Jackson, Chief Human Resources Officer

In compliance with the District Personnel Manual, Chapter 20, Section 2050.1, and Superintendent's Directive 651.18, the District of Columbia Public Schools (DCPS) offers an Employee Assistance Program to its employees. The program is administered by COPE, Inc. COPE has been delivering EAP services (assessment, counseling, and referral services) for over 20 years in the Washington area.

As stated above, EAP provides counseling and referral services to assist employees and members of their immediate family/households to better handle personal and workplace problems. The services are available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. When employees call, they never receive an automated service. Employees talk directly to a masters-level counselor who is able to provide assistance. A local phone number (202-628-5340) and toll free long distance number (1-800- 628-5240) are provided.

Our EAP program also provides the related services:

• Orientation sessions - EAP staff meet with school/office staff to discuss the program and explain the services available
• Wellness workshops (i.e., stress management, health/benefits fair)
• Participation and support during reorganizations and transitions
• Crisis Intervention
• Supervisor/Manager consultations

During the most recent annual period, April 1, 2003 through March 21, 2004, our EAP program had 630 contacts and provided approximately 320 hours on these contacts to our employees. These contacts included services to one employee who was at risk of selfharm/suicide and 5 employees/clients who presented they may be at risk for physical violence at the workplace and away from the workplace.

Since 2001, DCPS has piggybacked on the city EAP contract. The cost of providing the EAP program is calculated at $1.40/month per full time employee. The annual cost is approximately $193,000 per year. This rate has remained unchained since 2001.

During a particularly tight budgetary period, February 2003 - August 2003, DCPS did not have the funds to provide the full service EAP program. However, we were able to negotiate an hourly rate for reduced EAP services. This approach enabled us to provide basic services to our employees. Employees still had access to the help they needed 24 hours per day, seven days per week.

EAP services play a critical role in providing a productive and safe environment for our employees, and thus for our students.

Back to top of page

Weighted Student Formula
Mr. Adam Porsch, Director of Performance Management 

Weighted Student Formula Inputs For SY2004-2005:

• Average salary costs
  • Includes negotiated pay increases through September 2004 (estimated impact: $31.7 million)
  • Includes projected FY2005 step increases
• Enrollment projections
  • Total WSF enrollment: Decrease 2.6% to 60,518 in October, 2004
  • Special education: Increase by 1,167 to 9,975 total seats (including federally funded expansion seats)
  • ESL: Decrease 0.4% to 5,164 in October, 2004
• Grant Allocations
  • Increase grant allocations for Title I,11, III; and V
• Local Budget Amount
  • Starting budget of approximately $380 million
  • Possible addition of $10 million from new initiatives

Next Steps To Finalize School-By-School Budget And Staffing Allocations

1. Cross-functional team to finalize preliminary WSF allocations, including total amount included in formula, staffing and budgeting guidelines, etc.
2. Meet with principals and LSRT's to discuss preliminary decisions and changes to WSF
3. Budget Analysts distribute WSF allocations to schools, along with Local School Planning Guide
4. Principals develop local school budget allocations, in collaboration with LSRTs
5. Principals return detailed budget allocations, staffing sheets, and local school plans to Divisional Assistant Superintendents
6. Roundtable review of individual school budgets, including: Principal of school, Divisional Assistant Superintendent, Budget Analyst, HR, Special Education, Bilingual Education, Federal Grants
7. HR Processes impact of new budgets, including staffing changes from prior year 
8. HR sends notices to affected local school staff prior to the start of the school year

Back to top of page

Reinvestment
Dr. Arthur Curry, Executive Director of Career & Technical Education

Restoring Excellence to Curriculum and Instruction
A Strategic Leadership Budget for DCPS

Restoring Excellence to the District of Columbia Public Schools, the December 2003 "Report of the Strategic Support Team of the Council of Great City Schools [CGCS]," traced the roots of the chronic and growing crisis of DC public schools primarily to a systemic failure of leadership, particularly in the area of curriculum and instruction.

As a district, the report concluded, DCPS has "abdicated its leadership responsibility for student achievement" to the individual schools and principals. "The district has lost its instructional focus; its efforts have become fractured and incoherent... The result is what one sees today: no plan for improving student performance, low expectations for children, no accountability for results, haphazard instruction, incoherent programming, and dismal outcomes."

In a very real sense-at least from the standpoint of curriculum and instruction-DCPS today is not really a school system: it is merely a system of schools.

The key to raising student achievement up to the levels demanded by the 21st century economy -- to rebuilding the confidence of students, parents, and community leaders -- to rearming public education as an engine of economic development -- to reforming our high schools, and renewing career-technical education -- to, as the report said, Restoring Excellence to the DC Public Schools--  is to retake the leadership of curriculum development, staff development, and the process of instruction.

First, we must adopt validated, world-class standards of academic achievement -- particularly in the areas of literacy and numeracy-applied with consistency to all our programs in all our schools.

Second, we must commit to realistic, measurable, and urgent performance goals and objectives, calibrated to ensure that all of our students rise to meet world-standard levels of achievement.

Third, we must select coherent, proven, leading edge instructional strategies and curriculum, keyed to our achievement standards and performance.

Fourth, we must provide focused, sustained and standardized professional development and leadership development opportunities -- to teachers, administrators, and parents as well -- focused on implementation of the new District-wide curriculum and instruction program.

Fifth, we must develop priorities for the rationalized and wise use of District and Federal funds, to manifest our leadership and achieve our goals and objectives.

And finally, we must build a unified, strategic budget, organized around those priorities -- not an eclectic spending plan, but a leadership program, a strategy for the targeted use of resources that is greater than the sum of its parts.

Those six fundamental principles drove the design of the budget on the following pages. It is organized around seven key priorities for the systemic, root-and-branch reform of both DCPS as an organization and all the public schools of the District of Columbia.

Our first and highest priority is Literacy. The Information Age and the Knowledge-Based Economy are no longer just cliches--they are defining realities of everyday life. The ability to read well and communicate effectively has become the essential prerequisite to entry and success at virtually every level of the labor market. If we fail to ensure that all our students can read and write at world-standard levels, we are dooming them to a life at the margins of the 21st century economy.

For far too long, literacy instruction and the language arts curriculum has been adrift in DCPS_ Key leadership positions were left vacant. Principals have been abandoned to do their own things. As the CGCS team noted, one program was piled on top of another; no one could tell where we were trying to go or what we were trying to achieve.

That ends right now. We have a full team on board for the first time in a long time. We must come to agreement, swiftly, on universal, world-class standards of reading and writing achievement, for all students, at both the elementary and secondary levels. We must adopt stateof-the-art performance-based assessments that can authentically assess our students' mastery of those standards; we must select uniform, system-wide, standards-based curricula and instructional standards, aligned directly with the assessments. And we must adopt successful, research-based, nationally validated literacy instructional strategies, aligned with the curricula and adaptable and scalable to meet the needs of different sizes and types of schools and different student populations.

Our second highest priority is Numeracy -- mathematical knowledge, skills, and problem-solving techniques. Everything just said about the key role of literacy in a modern, global economy applies with almost equal force to numeracy. Elementary computing and calculating are often done for us, by ever more amazing machines. But the ability to understand mathematical concepts and apply mathematical techniques to problem solving is fast becoming a key to the door of almost every high wage, high skill career the American economy has to offer. It is no accident that successful completion of Algebra II has become a universal gatekeeper of successful entry into postsecondary education.

Just like literacy, numeracy has been adrift in DCPS. It should hardly be surprising that the math scores of our students are among the lowest in the nation. That drift ends right now. We will adopt exactly the same approach to the numeracy crisis as just outlined for literacy: We have a full team on board for the first time in a long time. We must come to agreement, swiftly, on universal, world-class standards of mathematics achievement, for all students, at both the elementary and secondary levels. We must adopt state-of-the-art performance-based assessments that can authentically assess our students' mastery of those standards; we must select uniform, system-wide, standards-based curricula and instructional standards, aligned directly with the assessments. And we must adopt successful, research-based, nationally validated numeracy instructional strategies, aligned with the curricula and adaptable and scalable to meet the needs of different sizes and types of schools and different student populations. 

Our third priority is Professional Development. Teachers are the medium for our message. The finest standards, assessments, curricula, and instructional strategies will have no value to our students if they remain sealed away on a shelf We must empower and engage all our teachers to put those new tools of excellence into full effect -- all day, every day, in every classroom, in every school.

For too long, as the CGCS report pointed out, DCPS has been content with "a very disjointed professional development program that mirrors the incoherence of the instructional strategy." In many schools, professional development has been an almost recreational activity, or little more than a pleasant summer job for teachers. That ends right now. We will put in place a centralized, standardized, focused, sustained, and intensive professional development program, reaching every teacher in every school. And the driver of that comprehensive professional development program will be the universal curriculum and instructional program. Every teacher must be highly qualified in their subject area, skilled in teaching and mentoring, and fully committed: to implementing the new curricula, to utilizing the new instructional strategies, and to raising their students' performance to reach the new goals and meet the new standards,

Paralleling and complementing the system-wide professional development program for teachers and paraprofessionals will be an equally rigorous leadership development program for principals and other administrators, to ensure they have the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed to lead their schools in restoring excellence to DC public education. And we also plan a "professional development" program for parents, to empower them to support their children's learning and achievement in the new DCPS.

Our fourth priority is High School Reform. For two years, we have been developing and refining a plan for reorganizing the high schools of the District of Columbia into Gateway Academies-smaller learning communities (SLCs) meeting the standards of the U.S. Department of Education, the Gates Foundation, the National Academy Foundation, and many other organizations and foundations leading the educational reform movement.

Both research and practical experience in schools across the country have lent more and more support to the SLC approach, which is fast becoming the format of choice for the "high schools of the new millennium": cohesive, supportive, "human-scale" learning communities, each with a thematic focus, offering a rich mix of theoretical, applied, and experiential learning opportunities, and allowing students with a range of interests and achievement levels to create individualized learning programs uniquely suited to their own interests and educational and career aspirations.

We have defined 10 Gateway Academies, adapted from the U.S. Department of Education career clusters, and made up of program majors combining rigorous academics with the life, career, and advanced technical knowledge and skills needed for success in postsecondary education and a high performance economy. The 10 Academies span the entire labor market. Each program major is designed to prepare students for a seamless transition to postsecondary education, and to equip students to pursue either technical or professional careers or both. A separate set of options is also under development within the Academy framework to prepare students with significant cognitive disabilities for a successful transition to productive employment and independent living.

It's time to put those plans into practice. Detailed flow charts have been developed, program of study templates for each program major in each academy. Plans for "wall-to-wall" academies have been presented to schools, parents, and the Board of Education. The response has been highly positive. Both high school reform in general and a vital renewal of career-technical education will be achieved through the Gateway Academies -- gateways to 21st century knowledge and skills and 21st century careers.

Our fifth priority is Gifted and Talented Programs. Historically, DCPS has committed vast resources to compensatory and special education, programs to meet the special needs of students with disadvantages and disabilities. The task of restoring excellence to DC public schools also includes ensuring that world-class programming is available to meet the special needs of students with unusual gifts and abilities. Gifted and talented programs must be strengthened in all our schools. Beyond that, steps must be taken to ensure that Advanced Placement options are readily available to every student in DC public high schools. And finally, we must also lay the groundwork for making the International Baccalaureate advanced liberal arts curriculum available to high-achieving and highly motivated students -- as, in effect, an eleventh Gateway Academy.

Our sixth priority is Revamping Student Data Systems. No reform efforts can be fully successful if we lack the data needed to track success --to account for student performance, monitor our efforts, evaluate our triumphs and our defeats. Neither "common sense" nor traditions -- much less stereotypes and prejudices -- can serve as an acceptable basis for decisionmaking. Research-based practice must be the standard, and data must drive instruction data that is valid, reliable, sufficient, and meaningful.

The new DC STARS student information system is a state-of-the-art data engine; in tandem with the SETS special education data system and the web-based DC Education Accountability Portal being developed with Federal career-tech funds, STARS will give ready, interactive, near-realtime access to a wealth of information about student achievement and school performance. We must commit the resources needed, now, to bring that system fully on line, build a data warehouse to allow longitudinal studies of performance growth over time, and train every member of the DCPS community to use the system and meet their individual responsibilities for data gathering and integrity.

Finally, our seventh priority -- last but not by any means least -- is Support for Local Schools and Students. By any standard, the conditions in far too many of our schools are simply intolerable. No one can be expected to achieve to world-class levels in buildings that are run down and dirty, if not crumbling-in schools that don't have toilet paper and paper towels, let alone computers. The message our schools send is exactly that: no one is expected to achieve; if they were, they would be given decent places to learn and grow. We must commit the resources needed, now, to begin refurbishing and rebuilding our schools. We also need student support systems: multilevel safety-nets and ramp-up programs, including double-period courses, designed to actually ensure that no child is left behind, let alone held back. And finally, we need a comprehensive, middle-school-to adult, dropout prevention and recovery system that will play the role of an intensive, individualized support system for atrisk middle and high school students, to promote reengagement, academic achievement, high school graduation, and success in postsecondary education and careers.

Back to top of page

Initiatives (Table 2)

Back to top of page

Recommendations
Dr. William Wilhoyte, Assistant Superintendent

Recommendations From The Assistant Superintendents

• Reallocate any assistance funds through the WSF
• Assistant superintendents guide and direct the funds
• Review and maximize the use of all local school funds
• Clarify and define the role of the LSRT
• Greater or less local school autonomy based on school and student performance
• Consolidation of services in small schools
• Instructional delivery and organizational configuration decisions should be made as soon as possible to maximize facility utilization and reduce staff and operating costs
• Establish library partnerships with DC Public Libraries
• Consolidate all Professional Development funds centrally
• Develop a comprehensive Professional Development Plan to build system wide capacity to address staff, instructional and organizational needs
• Renegotiate employee contracts to support Instruction, Professional Development and increased teacher planning time
• Explore the cluster and consortium concepts for enhanced program possibilities

Long Term Recommendations

• Define the highly effective school and the essential determinates to inform over-site and improved quality.
• Finalize organizational and staffing floor plans for all schools at all levels

Back to top of page

Next Steps/Closing Summary
Dr. Robert Rice, Interim Superintendent

[Blank in original]

Back to top of page

APPENDIX

Assistant Superintendents (Appendix A)
The Office of the Assistant Superintendents SY 2003/04 Summary Abolishments Spreadsheet

Divisio