EDLD 5342 Week 2 Part 4

Week 2   Part 4 – Superintendent’s Role in the Budget Process

Our Superintendent had various meetings with his Cabinet this week pertaining to the budget. However I did have the opportunity to meet with our Associate Superintendent of Business and Finance. He is the person that works closely with the Superintendent and actually puts the budget together for him, so the meeting was very insightful. Our Associate Supt. shared that under the law the Superintendent is ultimately responsible for the budget, therefore even though there is a finance department to assist, the direction for the budget comes from the Superintendent. The template from the state is used and basically thought of as a big Excel sheet. The Board and Superintendent work closely together to create the district goals and then work together to ensure that financially the goals can be met. There is also a biennium worksheet that the Board and Superintendent put together and send to the state every two years. It basically is a forecast of what will happen in our district the next two years. There is Legislative Planning and District Planning, the state posts both of the numbers and our district monitors the numbers as they continuously change all year. Their work starts in August and they meet monthly or weekly depending on what is happening in the legislator. If changes are made to the current budget or as the budget is being created, DEC (district committee) will be informed.  Eighty-five percent of our district budget is spent on payroll. The superintendent works closely with the board, Assoc. Superintendents and principals throughout the year to ensure communication of what is being spent or sharing forecasts for the upcoming year.  I learned that our Superintendent is much more involved than I thought he was; I thought the finance department plugged in a few numbers and we were done. At the end of the year we have to settle up, meaning we have to pay back or receive money from the state based on student numbers and special programs numbers. Communication is vital for the Superintendent through this process.

EDLD 5342 Week 2 Part 3

Week 2   Part 3 – Understanding TEA Budget Guidelines

At first glance, I thought there is no way I can finish this a week! However after getting started and realizing it was a quick and interesting read, it wasn’t so bad. The explanation of the budgeting process was simplified by breaking it down in three phases planning, preparation, and evaluation.

Reviewing the planning stage, it was interesting to be exposed to the various methods used by districts to build a budget. As I was reading the reflections of my peers, it was great to actually apply the knowledge I learned as they discussed the different methods used in their districts to plan. We use Site-Based Budgeting in our district. Since we have 52,000 students, the needs of each campus may vary. The Site Based Decision Making Committee on each campus makes decisions on instruction and the campus budget.

The section over TEA Legal Requirements was enlightening to read through. While I always think about General Funds, Special Revenue, etc., I completely overlooked the Food Service Fund and the fact that it is submitted to PEIMS. The budget calendar sample and role responsibility sections were a good review and affirmation to what is happening in our district. The deadlines set out by SBEC are a must!

As for contributing to creating to a district budget, I feel that I have a better understanding of what the process is and what discussions should be held. Before I did this assignment, I thought of revenues and expenses in a general sense, now I realize such items as health services, security and monitoring services along with Alternative Education Programs need to be included.  All stakeholders need to be included in campus and district budgeting process.

EDLD 5342 Week 2 Part 1 - Defining and Describing a Goal Driven Budget

As Dr. Arterbury stated in the lecture this week, “The purpose of a goal driven budget is to assist in the attainment of a shared vision for the school district and each campus.” I feel that together a District Improvement Plan and a goal driven budget can communicate a districts’ accountability for funds and a quality education for all children to all stakeholders.

Our district went through a process of creating a five year strategic plan. It was a tremendous process which involved stakeholders such as community members, teachers, students, administrators to parents. We are currently in the first year of the new district strategic plan. Sadly enough, the software the district uses does not convey the wonderful plan the district spent so many hours creating. The district recognizes this and will be changing the software next year so that the district plan can truly communicate what is taking place with programs and funds.

Having a new district improvement plan has allowed us to begin focusing on a goal driven budget. The Title money, Title Stimulas money and Technology money can be seen on the district plan along with local revenue money, however it is not specific enough.

A big change that has occurred this year is that we have gone through the process of board goals, district goals and now campus goals are being aligned. Principals run our campus budgets through Site Based Decisions Making Teams and therefore campus budgets have not really been aligned with district goals. Change is good and has allowed our district to have bargaining power with companies to receive lower rates on software and various other material that are being purchased in bulk, since we are a large district. A positive going into next year is that our district committee (DEC) is helping ensure that our district improvement plan spells out goals, who is accountable for those goals, what growth will look like and where the funds for these goals will come from. It is a painful process but the payoff will be that our district funds are being spent wisely and stakeholders will have a plan that communicates the vision of the district.

Week One Finance Reflections

Week One Assignments

Texas History of School Finance Reflection – Part One

There are numerous historical events that have impacted Texas education. It’s important to know our history as there is a tendency for history to repeat itself; we can possibly prevent failures by learning from the past.  I believe that one of the events that impacted school finance was the first “unfunded mandate.” In 1824, the Federal Constitution of the United Mexican called for elementary schools to be established. The schools were never built, thus it helped lead to Texas seeking its independence and Mirabeau B. Lamar organizing  an effort to fund education.  The second historical event that impacted school finance was the 1876 Texas Constitution.  While it specifically named the Permanent and Available School Funds, the wording was and still is critical. As stated on Lecture Notes, Week 1, p.2 , “A general diffusion of knowledge being essential to the preservation of the liberties and rights of the people, it shall be the duty of the Legislature of the State to establish and made suitable provision for the support and maintenance of an efficient system of public free schools.” The language has been the basis for many lawsuits as adequacy, equity and efficiency are at the forefront of arguments. The third event that impacted how the state funds schools is the Gilmer-Aiken act. There were many important strands to this act, however the most important as far as funding was the state’s supplemental  funding to local taxes in order to adequately support public education in an organized approach.

Issues Impacting the State Formula Reflection – Part Two

As I read through the materials this week, there were a number of issues impacting school finance and the state formula; I felt like the most prevalent issues were district property taxes, average daily attendance (ADA) and special instructional program allocations. There is a wide range of local property based taxes across our state. Since property values are different from district to district, the amount of money that can be generated varies. This has drawn a heated debate amongst Chapter 41 and Chapter 42 schools. Another issue that impacts the state formula is average daily attendance. When students are absent, schools lose money. Since students are not in attendance, they can’t learn which will eventually have an impact on the campus rating. People do not want to move into communities that have  Unacceptable rated schools. Therefore schools lose twice, once through not receiving state funds for ADA and secondly for low campus ratings. Special instructional program allotments result in districts receiving more or less money. It depends on the number of students identified in programs such as CATE, GT, bilingual and at-risk.

Equality, Equity, and Adequacy Reflection – Part Three

Reviewing our vocabulary in terms of finance and education assisted me in a better understanding of why we need to have a better state funding formula.

Equality :  Equal dollar amounts; every student has the same access to the same type of basic education

1.  All students must attend school for the same number of days
2. All students have access to the same basic courses (math, ELAR, science, etc)

Equity:  equitable amounts of money to educate students; system is fair and responds to the needs of individuals.

Funds that are provided for

1. CATE – Career and Technology Education
2. Special Education
3. Gifted & Talented
4. At-risk – economically disadvantaged students.

Adequacy:  means the school district receives the financial support sufficient to meet minimum or basic state accreditation standards.

1. Technology fund and Textbook fund are given to all districts
2. State minimum salaries

Definitions from Lecture Notes, Week 1, p. 7

District Improvement Plan Comparisons – Part Four

I compared the Austin ISD District Improvement Plan to the Pasadena ISD District Improvement Plan.

At a first initial glance, Austin ISD seems to have put some thought into their district plan. There are Long-Range plans, Ongoing plans, and Annual plans. There are committees with specific people named that will be planning for the district and there are few timelines. The annual budget with broad headings can be found with percentage changes from year to year. However overall, there are no specific measurable goals with specific dollar amounts tied to them. How are departments, schools held accountable for change implementation? As for Pasadena’s plan, there were numerous categories that had to be included because the software that they use only allows them to go up to a certain digit; therefore they had to create generic categories to have their money accounted for.

There are Special Program monies (Title money) that can be seen on both plans. However, how are employees going to be held accountable for these funds? Who is measuring growth?

Overall, both districts need better plans as they were both a bit confusing and vague. Pasadena is in the process of buying new software that will allow them to create a plan that is specific and can be understood. Both districts do some excellent things for students, nevertheless it does not get truly conveyed in their district improvement plan.