Professional Documents
Culture Documents
INTRODUCTION
This report was done as part of an 8-week review at the request of the
Mayors office in collaboration with the district. Findings are preliminary
and indicate potential options for leadership consideration
What this work IS
INTRODUCTION
Cost
effectiveness
Student
outcomes
Operational
effectiveness
Stakeholder
engagement
Opportunities
Opportunities for
for BPS
BPS have
have been
been prioritized
prioritized
while
while keeping
keeping all
all of
of these
these factors
factors in
in mind
mind
INTRODUCTION
Glossary of terms
Term
Definition
Students whose native tongue is not English and have not achieved fluency
in English appropriate with their grade level
Students who have been formally evaluated by BPS and have been found
to have a disability that requires additional resources to meet the student
need, beyond a traditional general education setting
Inclusion
OT is individualized support for students to help them acquire basic skills for
daily living (e.g., self-grooming, self-feeding, self-dressing); PT is
individualized support for developing motor skills (e.g., walking, jumping,
lifting)
FNS is the department responsible for delivering food to all BPS students
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
Appendix
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive summary
While BPS pushes 55% of its funds to the schools, BPS has a significant
number of underutilized buildings and classrooms, spreading funds thin
across the system and lessening the impact of resources on a per pupil basis
To concentrate resources more effectively for students, BPS can right-size the
district to reflect current and projected BPS enrollment
Over a quarter of the BPS budget goes towards Special Education, meaning that
small changes in student classification can translate to large BPS savings
and better learning environments for students. A move towards inclusion,
currently underway, has a 12-year horizon that if executed well will improve
special education student outcomes and lead to substantial cost savings
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Right-size
the BPS
Footprint
Special
education
Transport
Food
Services
Maintenance
Capturable
Activity
Savings opportunity
$50-85M /yr
$120-205M one-time
Phase in of inclusion
External paraprofessionals
$9-11M /yr
$8-10M /yr
$6-19M /yr
$5M /yr
$1-3M /yr
$1-3M /yr
$1-3M /yr
FY16
FY17
FY18
Onetime
revenues
custodian work
contractor
Immediate
Immediate opportunities
opportunities to
to save
save ~$20-40m
~$20-40m in
in FY16
FY16 ifif intense
intense focus
focus and
and execution
execution placed
placed on
on activities
activities
With
With bold
bold decisions
decisions and
and focus,
focus, annual
annual savings
savings could
could total
total ~$200M
~$200M /yr,
/yr, and
and additional
additional $120-200m
$120-200m one-time
one-time
benefit
benefit
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DRAFT
BPS per pupil spend is higher than peer averages, while just 36% of spend
gets to all students in the classroom
Per pupil spending
$, per student
BPS per pupil spend
is 11% higher than the
peer average of
$15,7552
2
4/27/16
4/27/
16
1
4/27/1
6
20% of per
pupil dollars
are directly for
SPED students
Central
Central office
office
support
functions
support functions
capture
capture aa lot
lot of
of
spend,
with
spend, with
subpar
subpar systems
systems
for
managing
for managing
towards
towards
improved
improved operatoperations
outcomes
ions outcomes
An
An overextended
overextended
BPS
BPS footprint
footprint
stretches
stretches limited
limited
funds
over
funds over aa
large
large number
number of
of
schools
schools
Special
Special education
education
drives
drives per
per pupil
pupil
expenditures
expenditures but
but
only
reaches
only reaches
20%
20% of
of students
students
4/27/16
1 This excludes out of district tuition dollars, as those students are being educated outside of district
2 Boston is more in-line when Cost of Living adjustments are made, or only compared to Northeastern cities, but still trends high
Source: BPS FY15 all funds
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Opportunity to
consolidate ~3050 schools
~$51-85m/yr plus
~$120-200m
one-time
Opportunity to
speed SPED
reforms
~$17-21M in FY16
and ~$63M longerterm annually
Opportunities to
improve
operations
through policy
~$10-33m/yr
DRAFT
Key facts
Superintendent has 18 direct reports, making system goal-setting, alignment and focus difficult
System goals are not tracked systematically, with a deep need for performance management systems to align central
metrics that matter (e.g., students eating lunch, buses on time) with student outcomes and manage staff and system
performance better
If system moves towards right-sizing, up to $27M may be possible through ongoing reductions in support to smaller
footprint
BPS enrollment down 17% over last 20 years and 50% since 1970s
BPS currently has ~93K total physical seats with only ~54K seats filled
The system is overextended with declining dollars stretched over, same number of buildings and declining student
count
Consolidating 30-50 schools could reduce annual spend by ~$51-85M
Building sales could bring additional one-time ~$120-200M, while avoiding additional, unneeded CapEx
Right-sized system would concentrate more dollars in fewer schools, improving quality and breadth of student
resources
Moving Boston in-line with state and national averages is better for students and translates to ~$5M saved for every %
point decline
Outsourcing paras and specialists can reap immediate savings of $15-$20M,but requires discussions with
stakeholders
The move to inclusion, already underway, can serve BPS students significantly better, but comes with substantial
upfront investments whose financial benefits will not begin coming until 4 years out
There is an opportunity to think about inclusion sequencing to get benefits faster and reduce net investments
BPS bus riders average a 0.16 mile walk to their bus stop, 59% of students walk less than a 0.25 mile
Moving the target walk to a 0.25 miles walk would reduce bus stops and could save $6-20M
Moving to district-wide maintenance contract would align incentives with contractor and could save ~$5M in annual
maintenance costs
BPS is currently spending more per pupil on contracted meals, which student taste tests view as lower quality, and can
improve participation, changes in delivery and participation could capture ~$2-8M
Immediate
Immediate opportunities
opportunities for
for savings
savings in
in FY16
FY16 total
total ~$20-40m
~$20-40m ifif real
real focus
focus is
is brought
brought to
to opportunity
opportunity areas
areas
With
With bold
bold decisions
decisions and
and focus,
focus, savings
savings over
over the
the next
next 2-3
2-3 years
years can
can total
total ~$200M
~$200M // yr,
yr, with
with additional
additional one-time
one-time benefits
benefits
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 9|
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DRAFT
4. Silos (30);
Internal Politics (30)
Therefore,
Therefore, BPS
BPS could
could consider
consider
Defining
Defining what
what accountability
accountability looks
looks like
like for
for its
its Central
Central Office
Office
Reducing
Reducing the
the internal
internal politics
politics and
and bureaucracy
bureaucracy currently
currently experienced
experienced
Source: Values and Alignment Survey of BPS central office staff (n=72)
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2 Since 1994, BPS student population has declined 17%, but the
number of schools has remained relatively constant
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
BPS
BPS can
can reduce
reduce
its
its footprint
footprint
based
based on
on the
the
large
difference
large difference
between
between its
its
enrollment
enrollment and
and
its
its capacity
capacity
Projections
Projections
suggest
suggest no
no
additional
additional space
space
will
will be
be needed
needed
in
in the
the future
future
4/27/16
4/27 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/27 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/27
/16 27 27 27 27 27 /16 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 /16
/1 /1 /1 /1 /1
/1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1
With
With6students
students
decreasing,
the
funding
each
student
must
continue
6 6 6 decreasing,
6
6 6 the
6 6funding
6 6 for
6for6each
6 6student
6 6 must
6
6 continue
to
to cover
cover the
the systems
systems fixed
fixed costs
costs including
including the
the buildings
buildings but
but also
also the
the
principals
principals and
and school
school staff
staff which
which are
are present
present at
at each
each location
location
Source: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and
Secondary Education; Internal interviews; BPS data
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Prior cost
Foundation
for school staff
$3.8m
$2.3-2.8m
$1.0-1.5m
$200k
$0
$200k
$166k
$50k
$116k
$191k
$57k
$134k
$260k
$0
$260k
by the school
Average
building
maintenance
Total
1 Assumed
Savings after
closing
Average
custodial
support
Average
utilities
Cost after
closing
DRAFT
$1.7- 2.2m
2 The Massachusetts state average is 13.7:1, while high performing states like Minnesota 15.9:1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2 While the new funds will not be easy to unlock, they can bring
the promise of a better future for BPS
DRAFT
Expanded
Expanded beforebefore- and
and after-school
after-school
programming
programming for
for students
students in
in all
all
schools
schools
~$51-85M
~$51-85M in
in run-rate
run-rate savings
savings
garnered
garnered from
from closing
closing 30
30 50
50
schools
schools
Guaranteed
Guaranteed set
set of
of electives
electives or
or
specials
specials at
at all
all schools
schools (e.g.,
(e.g.,
Physical
Physical Education,
Education, Art)
Art)
Greater
Greater portfolio
portfolio of
of teacher
teacher supports
supports
and
and resources
resources (e.g.,
(e.g., instructional
instructional
coaches,
coaches, first-year
first-year mentors,
mentors,
counselors)
counselors)
~$120M
~$120M in
in one-time
one-time cash
cash from
from
property
property sales
sales of
of 30
30 50
50 schools
schools
Funds
Funds to
to build
build 11 state-of-the-art
state-of-the-art
high
high school
school (~$30M)
(~$30M) and
and 99 state-ofstate-ofthe-art
the-art lower
lower schools
schools (~$10M
(~$10M each)
each)
While
While these
these are
are possibilities,
possibilities, the
the school
school district
district will
will have
have the
the ability
ability to
to choose
choose
how
how itit reinvests
reinvests the
the money,
money, taking
taking into
into account
account the
the tradeoffs
tradeoffs between
between
consistency
consistency across
across schools
schools and
and school
school autonomy
autonomy
Source: BPS data
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3 SPED is ~25% of the BPS spend and 73% of its costs are in 3
areas: classroom staff, transportation and private placements
Total spending $ 265m
School
level
As the biggest
three areas in the
biggest part of the
BPS budget, these
areas are 18% of
total BPS budget
$ 49m
$ 37m
Specialists
(e.g., OTPT,
autism)
$ 24m
Sub/sep
teacher
Sub/sep
aides
$ 64m
$ 23m
Admin. &
superadvisory
$ 13m
DRAFT
Resource
teacher
Compliance
program
support
$ 21m
$ 12m
$ 129m (49%)
$ 3m
Compliance Insurance
Misc. expenses
(e.g., equipment,
inclusion, itinerant support)
$ 9m
$ 2m
$ 2m
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DRAFT
Deeper data dives, at the level of IEP are needed to understand whether students
in these programs are being classified, when they may be over classified
Cultural shifts in the district may be necessary to identify whether classification is
systematically too high, or appropriate, given the student population
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
% FARM
4/27/16
4/27/16
MA Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2013; this includes all 409 districts in MA, many of
which are individual schools; the state average remains unchanged when just traditional districts are considered
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DRAFT
1 Review of Special Education in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts: A Synthesis Report," August 2014
2 Office of Special Education City Council presentation, June 2014
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 17
|
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3 SPED plan for roll-out currently spreads $326M in additional costs DRAFT
over 10 years, with eventual, annual savings reaching $63M, annually
Additional classrooms will add inclusion capacity
# inclusion classrooms added annually
Special education annual budget for classroom teaching will grow by ~$6M
annually at peak of 10 of roll out, with eventual budget shrinking by $65M / yr
$M, SPED classroom budget
The
The Special
Special Education
Education
departments
departments plan
plan for
for inclusion
inclusion
is
phased
in
fully
over
is phased in fully over 13
13
years,
years, calling
calling for
for gradual
gradual
adoption,
adoption, with
with two
two networks
networks (A(AG)
G) beginning
beginning the
the process
process every
every
year
year for
for the
the first
first five
five years
years
By
By the
the final
final year
year of
of the
the roll-out
roll-out
additional
costs
for
inclusion
additional costs for inclusion
will
will grow
grow to
to ~$43M
~$43M annually
annually
As
As critical
critical mass
mass of
of inclusion
inclusion
classrooms
grow,
a
classrooms grow, a tipping
tipping point
point
will
occur
allowing
elimination
will occur allowing elimination
of
of sub/separate
sub/separate classrooms
classrooms
at
an
increasing
rate,
at an increasing rate, beginning
beginning
in
in SY16-17
SY16-17
The
The annual
annual SPED
SPED budget
budget
should
should drop
drop below
below historical
historical
spends
beginning
in
spends beginning in SY17-18
SY17-18
The
The total
total $326M
$326M cost
cost of
of moving
moving
to
to inclusion
inclusion will
will be
be fully
fully paid
paid
for
for by
by the
the final
final year
year (SY26-27)
(SY26-27)
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/164/27/164/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DRAFT
Decisions / actions
Opportunity to
reorganize central
office
Up to ~$27M ongoing
reduction
Opportunity to consolidate 30-50 schools
Decisions around central office alignment with new schools footprint will need to
happen with school closings to immediately align support as befits new district
Transportation savings exist, but the decision would need to be made to lengthen
Opportunities to
improve operations
through policy
~$10-33m/yr
walks to bus stops and not guarantee busing on the current scale
Outsourcing custodial and maintenance services can capture savings immediately,
but may require a reduction in unionized employees
Moving toward in-housing all food services needs to be researched and aligned
with capital planning process
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 19
|
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
System performance
Human Capital
Organization
Appendix
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
Overview of BPS
Overview
Key Insights
Demographics
Student
Outcomes
Finances
Key Issues
DRAFT
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Teacher
Teacher salaries,
salaries,
benefits
and
benefits and other
other
teaching
teaching services
services
comprised
comprised 56%
56% of
of the
the
FY13
FY13 annual
annual budget
budget
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Instructional Materials,
Equipment and Technology 4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
Spending item
DRAFT
Amount
% of FY15 budget
Personnel
$160M
14%
$138M
12%
Transportation
$57M
5%
Operations
Food service
$36M
3%
Facilities management
$26M
2%
Custodial services
$22M
2%
Schools
School administration
$51M
5%
Bilingual education
$24M
2%
$45M
4%
SPED
$41M
4%
$34M
3%
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
Fixed
costs
$ 232m (20%)
$ 1,178m
Variable costs
$ 947m
Non
$ 339m (29%)
instructional
Payments
to out-ofdistrict
schools1
Ops and
maintenance
Admin
$ 134m
$ 47m
$ 30m
Insurance, Pupil
Retirement services
and other
$ 196m
$ 125m
Guidance
,
counseling, etc.
$ 17m
DRAFT
Instructional
Classroom
and
specialist
teachers.
Other
teaching
services
Instructional
leadership
$ 352m
$ 105m
$ 65m
$ 608m (51%)
Profess- Instructional
ional
Develop- materials
ment
$ 53m
$ 33m
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
DRAFT
Amount
4/27/16
Federal funds
(ARRA)
$2.1M
FY15 Lease
purchase
$11.2M
4/27/16
4/27/16
Grants
General funds
$134M
$975M
School
budgets
Total: $1,122M
ARRA
ARRA and
and grant
grant funding
funding generally
generally has
has little
little flexibility,
flexibility, and
and cannot
cannot
be
used
for
purposes
other
than
what
they
were
initially
identified
be used for purposes other than what they were initially identified
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
Health
ins. &
pension
4/27/16
Choice
transport.
SPED
transport.
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/1
6
4/27/16
Custodians
4/27/16
4/27/1
6
4/27/16
4/27/16
Maintenance
Misc.
4/27/16
HQ
equipment
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
ComInsurance
puters &
equipment
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
SPED
resource
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16 4/27/16 4/27/16
SPED Pro4/27/1
itinerant gram
6
support
Counselor
Coor4/27/
dinators 16
4/27/16 Other
4/27/
support 16
personnel
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
It costs BPS $4.6M to run the average BPS school, excluding support
costs from the Central Office or for ELL or Special Education services
DRAFT
Custodial
support
36 teachers
1 principal,
1 secretary,
and others
418 students
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Thousands
4/27/16
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
DRAFT
BPS has an above average per pupil expenditure, partly driven by region
Average per pupil expenditure
$, thousands per student in the state,
2010-2011
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
New England
states
Massachusetts/
Boston
Group
average
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Boston: $17,589
MA Avg.: $14,544
Massachusetts
Massachusetts and
and New
New
England
more
broadly
England more broadlyhave
have
significantly
significantlyhigher
higher per
per pupil
pupil
expenditures
expenditures due
due to
to
historically
historically high
high investment
investment
in
education
in education
BPS
BPShigher
higher per
per pupil
pupil average
average
in
the
state
of
Massachusetts
in the state of Massachusetts
is
is driven
driven mostly
mostly by
by costs
costs of
of
living
in
Boston
living in Boston
The
The per
per pupil
pupil average
average of
of peer
peer
set
set of
of national
national districts
districts is
is
3
$15,755
$15,7553
When
When cost
cost of
of living
living
adjustments
adjustments are
are made
made to
to
national
national peer
peer set,
set, Bostons
Bostons
per
per pupil
pupil spending
spending declines
declines
to
to $12,472,
$12,472, below
below the
the peer
peer
average
average of
of $13,109
$13,109
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
1 NCES 2010-2011
2 MA Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2013; counts just general funds
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
Of BPS per pupil spend, 36% reaches directly into the classroom
DRAFT
4/27/
16
1
4/27/1
6
20% of per
pupil dollars
are directly for
SPED students
Central
Central office
office
support
support functions
functions
capture
a
capture a lot
lot of
of
spend,
and
needs
spend, and needs
updated
updated systems
systems
for
managing
for managing
towards
towards
improved
improved operatoperations
outcomes
ions outcomes
An
An overextended
overextended
BPS
BPS footprint
footprint
stretches
stretches limited
limited
funds
funds over
over aa
large
large number
number of
of
schools
schools
Special
Special education
education
drives
drives per
per pupil
pupil
expenditures
expenditures but
but
only
only reaches
reaches
20%
20% of
of students
students
4/27/16
1 This excludes out of district tuition dollars, as those students are being educated outside of district
2 Boston is more in-line when Cost of Living adjustments are made, or only compared to Northeastern cities, but still trends high
Source: BPS FY15 all funds
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
SPED is ~25% of BPS annual spending and 73% of SPED costs are in
three areas: classroom staff, transportation and private placements
Total spending $ 265m
School
level
As the biggest
three areas in the
biggest part of the
BPS budget, these
areas are 18% of
total BPS budget
$ 49m
$ 37m
Specialists
(e.g., OTPT,
autism)
$ 24m
Sub/sep
teacher
Sub/sep
aides
$ 64m
$ 23m
Admin. &
superadvisory
$ 13m
DRAFT
Resource
teacher
Compliance
program
support
$ 21m
$ 12m
$ 129m (49%)
$ 3m
Compliance Insurance
Misc. expenses
(e.g., equipment,
inclusion, itinerant support)
$ 9m
$ 2m
$ 2m
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
4/27/16
4/27/16
In
In 2005,
2005, BPS
BPS had
had aa per
per
pupil
pupil spending
spending rate
rate of
of
$15,915,
by
2015,
that
$15,915, by 2015, that
same
same rate
rate had
had grown
grown
to
to $20,568
$20,568
Because
Because the
the BPS
BPS
footprint
footprint did
did not
not adjust
adjust
with
with population,
population, the
the per
per
pupil
spend
is
forced
pupil spend is forced up
up
to
cover
fixed
operating
to cover fixed operating
costs
costs
IfIf BPS
BPS had
had maintained
maintained
its
its per
per pupil
pupil spending
spending
rate
rate in
in 2015,
2015, the
the budget
budget
should
have
fallen
should have fallen to
to
$864M,
23%
less
than
$864M, 23% less than
FY15s
FY15s budget
budget
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
(7-10%)
IfIf BPS
BPS were
were to
to decrease
decrease
staff
staff with
with future
future enrollment
enrollment
trends
and
historical
trends and historical central
central
office
office FTE
FTE counts,
counts, BPS
BPS
would
would shrink
shrink by
by ~7-10%
~7-10%
In
In 2009-10,
2009-10, BPS
BPS had
had aa ratio
ratio
of
of 5.5
5.5 students
students per
per FTE,
FTE, by
by
2014-15,
2014-15, that
that ratio
ratio had
had
fallen
to
5.0
fallen to 5.0
IfIf BPS
BPS had
had maintained
maintained its
its
2009-10
student
to
FTE
2009-10 student to FTE
ratio,
ratio, in
in 2014-15,
2014-15, BPS
BPS would
would
have
have 9,875
9,875 FTEs,
FTEs, 902
902 fewer
fewer
than
than six
six years
years ago,
ago, at
at aa
savings
savings of
of ~$60-70M
~$60-70M
By
By operating
operating its
its current
current
number
of
schools,
number of schools, BPS
BPS
cannot
cannot currently
currently bring
bring
school
school staff
staff down
down
commensurately
commensurately
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
SY 20092010
SY 20102011
SY 20112012
SY 20122013
SY 20132014
SY 20142015
The
The ratio
ratio of
of school-level
school-level to
to central
central office
office BPS
BPS
employees
employees constant
constant over
over the
the past
past 66 years,
years, with
with aa
slight
slight uptick
uptick in
in central
central to
to school
school ratios
ratios in
in recent
recent years
years
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/161
4/27/162
4/27/16
4/27/166
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/163
Poverty indicators
% of population in poverty
Students at 185%
of federal poverty
line or below
Households at or below
185% of federal poverty
level for a family of four
BPS students4
City of Boston5
DRAFT
White
White BPS
BPS teachers
teachers
represent
30%
represent 30% more
more of
of the
the
teaching
teaching force
force than
than of
of the
the
city
city of
of Boston
Boston and
and nearly
nearly 55
times
times that
that of
of the
the student
student
body
body
BPS
BPS Hispanic
Hispanic students
students
represent
double
represent double the
the
student
student body
body share
share to
to the
the
Hispanic
share
of
the
City
Hispanic share of the City of
of
Boston
and
four
times
the
Boston and four times the
share
share of
of the
the teaching
teaching force
force
The
The Black
Black share
share of
of the
the
BPS
student
body
is
BPS student body is >50%
>50%
greater
than
the
teaching
greater than the teaching
force
force and
and of
of the
the city
city as
as aa
whole
whole
BPS
BPS teaching
teaching force
force is
is
significantly
more
diverse
significantly more diverse
than
than teachers
teachers nationally
nationally
BPS
BPS students
students are
are in
in
greater
need
than
the
greater need than the
population
population of
of the
the City
City of
of
Boston
Boston
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
BPS has a significantly higher rate of students qualifying for Free and
reduced meals than the state and nation
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
New England
states
Boston: 78%
Massachusetts/
Boston
Group
average
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Locate
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
BPS
BPS outpaces
outpaces
the
the nation
nation and
and
Massachusett
Massachusett
ss districts
districts in
in the
the
percentage
percentage of
of
students
students
qualifying
qualifying for
for
free
free and
and
reduced
reduced meals
meals
BPS
is
more
BPS is more in
in
line
line with
with urban
urban
districts,
districts, where
where
38%
38% of
of these
these
districts
districts have
have
greater
greater than
than
75%
75% of
of
students
students
qualifying
qualifying for
for
free
free and
and
reduced
reduced meals
meals
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Boston
2013 MA Avg.
New England
states
Massachusetts/
Boston
Group
average
Massachusetts
Massachusetts has
has historically
historically
higher
higher SPED
SPED numbers
numbers due
due to
to being
being
aa leader
leader in
in SPED
SPED beginning
beginning in
in the
the
1970s
1970s their
their being
being higher
higher than
than
national
national averages
averages is
is not
not aa
reflection
reflection of
of any
any state
state policies,
policies,
but
but of
of state
state culture
culture
Assuming
Assuming direct
direct labor
labor aligns
aligns with
with
the
number
of
students,
the number of students, BPS
BPS could
could
save
save roughly
roughly $5M
$5M for
for every
every one
one
percentage
percentage drop
drop in
in classification
classification
Aligning
Aligning with
with state
state average
average
could
could translate
translate to
to $10-15M
$10-15M in
in
savings
savings
Aligning
Aligning with
with New
New England
England
average
of
16.2%
average of 16.2% could
could
capture
capture $15-18M
$15-18M
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
DRAFT
4/27/16
Districts
Districts with
with equal
equal or
or
greater
greater FARM,
FARM, but
but lower
lower
SWD:
SWD:
Revere,
Revere, Everett,
Everett,
Brockton,
Brockton, Lynn,
Lynn, Chelsea,
Chelsea,
Springfield
Springfield
Districts
Districts with
with equal
equal or
or
greater
FARM,
but
higher
greater FARM, but higher
SWD:
SWD:
Lawrence,
Lawrence, Fall
Fall River,
River,
Holyoke
Holyoke
AA 2014
2014 Massachusetts
Massachusetts study
study
found
that
low-income
found that low-income
students
students in
in the
the state
state were
were
identified
as
eligible
for
identified as eligible for
special
special education
education services
services
at
at substantially
substantially higher
higher
rates
rates than
than non-low-income
non-low-income
students
students
4/27/16
% students classified with disabilities
SYSTEM OVERVIEW
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/
16
1
4/27/1
6
San 4/27/
Fran- 16
cisco1
4/27/1 4/27/
6
16
1
41%
41% of
of BPS
BPS
students
students now
now
identify
identify as
as
Hispanic
Hispanic
BPS
BPSFY16
FY16
Weighted
Weighted
Student
Student Formula
Formula
allocates
allocates aa
blended
blended rate
rate of
of
$1,677
$1,677 per
per ELL
ELL
student
student
At
At FY16
FY16 rates,
rates,
this
this 10%
10% change
change
would
would add
add
$12.8M
$12.8M to
to
district
district needs
needs
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
System performance
Human Capital
Organization
Appendix
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
Since 2009, BPS momentum has stalled. While it continues to track with
Massachusetts performance averages, the gap it narrowed in the early
2000s, is annually persistent
The achievement gap between black and Hispanic students and their
white peers has not narrowed much in recent years
1 McKinsey and Company, "How the world's most improved school systems keep
getting better," 2010
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
Grade 4 Reading
Average scale scores: 2003-2013
Boston
DRAFT
Large city
Grade 8 Reading
Average scale scores: 2003-2013
4/27/161 4/27/161
4/27/16
4/27/161
4/27/16
4/27/163
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/16
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/163
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/16
4/27/161
4/27/16 4/27/16
1
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27
/16
05
07
09
11
2013
4/27
/16
05
07
09
11
2013
has stalled
Reading scores in particular are beginning to decline
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
Grade 4 mathematics
Average scale scores: 2003-2013
4/27/16
4/27/161
4/27/161 4/27/161
4/27/16
Large city
4/27/162
4/27/161
4/27/16
1
4/27/161 4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/161
4/27/161
1
4/27
/16
4/27/16
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/161
4/27/161
Boston
Grade 8 mathematics
Average scale scores: 2003-2013
4/27/161
4/27/161
DRAFT
4/27/161
1
4/27/161
4/27/161
05
07
09
11
2013
4/27
/16
05
07
09
11
2013
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27 4/ 4/ 4/ 05 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/
/16 27 27 27
27 27 27 27 27 27
/1 /1 /1
/1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1
10th grade
ELA
6 6 6
6 6 6 6 6 6
% of students proficient or advanced
4/
27
/1
6
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/ 4/27
27/16
/1
6
4/ 4/27
27 /16
/1
6
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Source: MA DESE
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27 4/
4/
4/
4/ 4/
4/
/16
27 27 27 27 27 27
/1
/1
/1
/1 /1
/1
10th grade
Math
6
6
6
6
6
6
% of students proficient or advanced
4/27/16
4/27 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/
/16 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27
/1 /1 /1
/1 /1
/1 math
/1 /1in /1
/1
1 MA only started
testing
3rd /1
grade
2006
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
4/27/16
4/ 4/27
27/16
/1
6
4/27 4/
/16 27
/1
6
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/ 4/27
27/16
/1
6
While
While BPS
BPS
tracks
tracks with
with the
the
state,
Boston
state, Boston
consistently
consistently
underperforms
underperforms
state
state
averages
averages
BPS
BPS students
students
are
are narrowing
narrowing
the
the gap
gap by
by 10
10thth
grade,
grade, but
but are
are
starting
starting
significantly
significantly
behind
behind their
their
peers
peers in
in the
the
early
early grades
grades
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/
4/
4/
4/
27
27
27
27
/1
/1
/1
/1
10th grade ELA
6
6
6
6
% of students proficient or advanced
4/
27
/1
6
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/
4/
4/
4/
27
27
27
27
/1
/1
/1
/1
10th grade 6Math 6
6
6
% of students proficient or advanced
4/
27
/1
6
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/
27
/1
6
Source: MA DESE
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/27
/16
4/27
/16
BPS
BPS SPED
SPED
students
students are
are
tracking
tracking with
with
state
state
performance,
performance,
but
but with
with aa
significant
significant gap
gap
in
in perfor-mance
perfor-mance
from
from their
their
Massachusetts
Massachusetts
peers
peers
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/27
/16
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
BPS
BPS ELL
ELL
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/
4/
4/
4/
27
27
27
27
/1
/1
/1
/1
10th grade ELA
6
6
6
6
% of students proficient or advanced
4/
27
/1
6
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/
4/
4/
4/
27
27
27
27
/1
/1
/1
/1
10th grade 6Math 6
6
6
% of students proficient or advanced
4/
27
/1
6
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/
27
/1
6
Source: MA DESE
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/27
/16
4/27
/16
4/27/16
students
students rival
rival
the
the perforperformance
mance of
of MA
MA
ELL
ELL students
students
BPS
BPS ELL
ELL
students
students
scores
scores are
are
consistently
consistently at
at
or
or near
near overall
overall
BPS
BPS perforperformance
mance
4/27/16
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/27
/16
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
BPS has not closed the achievement gap in most areas, with 10th
4/27/16
4/27/16
grade ELA being an exception
4/27/16
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
White
White BPS
BPS
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27 4/ 4/ 4/ 05 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/
/16 27 27 27
27 27 27 27 27 27
/1 /1 /1
/1 /1 /1 /1 /1 /1
10th grade
6 6ELA
6
6 6 6 6 6 6
% of students proficient or advanced
4/27/16
4/27 4/
4/
4/
4/ 4/
4/
/16
27 27 27 27 27 27
/1
/1
/1
/1 /1
/1
10th grade
6 Math
6
6
6
6
6
% of students proficient or advanced
4/
27
/1
6
4/ 4/27
27/16
/1
6
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/ 4/
/16 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27 27
/1 /1 /1
/1 /1
/1 math
/1 /1in /1
/1
1 MA only started
testing
3rd /1
grade
2006
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6
Source: MA DESE
students
students
perform
perform at
at or
or
better
better than
than the
the
state
average
state average
4/ 4/27
27 /16
/1
6
Students
Students of
of
color
color
consistently
consistently
achieve
achieve at
at aa
rate
nearly
rate nearly
half
half that
that of
of
white
white students
students
in
in the
the early
early
grades
grades
4/27/16
4/ 4/27
27/16
/1
6
4/27/16
4/27 4/
/16 27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/ 4/27
27/16
/1
6
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
BPS has a larger SPED share than most MA districts, and its
population performs less well
DRAFT
There
There is
is aa correlation
correlation
in
in the
the state
state between
between
share
share of
of students
students
classified
classified and
and overall
overall
SWD
SWD performance
performance
4/27/16
Boston
Boston has
has aa higher
higher
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
share,
share, but
but its
its SWD
SWD
population
is
population is
performing
performing worse
worse
than
than would
would be
be
expected
expected
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
While having one of the largest ELL shares in the state, BPS ELL
population performs better than correlations would predict
DRAFT
4/27/16
% of ELL proficient or advanced
BPS
BPS has
has one
one of
of the
the
largest
largest shares
shares of
of ELL
ELL
students
students in
in the
the state
state
of
of Massachusetts
Massachusetts
4/27/16
BPS
BPS ELL
ELL students
students
4/27/16
4/27/16
outperform
outperform the
the
expected
expected
performance
performance levels
levels
4/27/16
$ spent per SWD pupil
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
DRAFT
Graduation rates
% of students graduating1
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
While
While on
on the
the
upswing,
upswing, BPS
BPS 4-year
4-year
graduation
graduation rate
rate is
is
significantly
significantly below
below the
the
Massachusetts
Massachusetts
average
average
BPS
BPS does
does track
track
generally
generally with
with
Massachusetts
Massachusetts
graduation
graduation rate
rate
improvement,
improvement, but
but is
is
not
closing
the
gap
not closing the gap
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/
4/
27
27
/1
/1
1 MA DESE 4-year graduation rate
6
6
Source: MA DESE
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/
27
/1
6
4/27
/16
SYSTEM PERFORMANCE
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/
16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/
16
4/27/16
Parents perception of
Avg. score, 1-4 (4being the highest)
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/
16
4/27/16
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
System performance
Human Capital
Organization
Appendix
HUMAN CAPITAL
DRAFT
Year of birth
# of teachers by year of birth
4/27/
4/27/
16
16
Evaluation rating
The average
BPS
teacher is
42 years old
4/27/
16
4/27/
16
4/27/
16
Unsatisfactory
4/2
7/1
6
4/27/16
94%
94% of
of teachers
teachers are
are
licensed
licensed to
to teach
teach in
in
their
subject
are,
their subject are,
compared
compared to
to 98%
98% of
of
teachers
teachers state-wide
state-wide
96%
96% of
of teachers
teachers
with
with evaluations
evaluations on
on
file
file are
are rated
rated
proficient
proficient or
or higher
higher
4/27/
16
# of teachers
No
evaluation
4/27/16
HUMAN CAPITAL
DRAFT
Age of principals
# of principals born in decade
4/27/
4/27/
16
16
Evaluation rating
# of teachers
No
evaluation
The average
BPS principal
is 46 years
old
4/27/
16
4/27/
16
4/27/
16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Principals
Principals rated
rated
lower
lower than
than proficient
proficient
will
will almost
almost always
always
be
be moved
moved out
out of
of the
the
system
system
56% of principals do
not have evaluations on
file
Unsatisfactory
4/2
7/1
6
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
System performance
Human Capital
Organization
Appendix
ORGANIZATION
BPS is within range of peers, but still supports a lower than average
student to non-teaching staff ratio
DRAFT
IfIf BPS
BPS were
were
at
at the
the peer
peer
average,
average, itit
could
could have
have
500
500 fewer
fewer
FTEs
FTEs
ORGANIZATION
The total number of FTEs, across schools and central office has not
declined in line with student population
4/27/16
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
(7-10%)
IfIf BPS
BPS were
were to
to align
align staff
staff
with
future
enrollment
with future enrollment trends
trends
and
and historical
historical central
central office
office
FTE
FTE counts,
counts, BPS
BPS could
could
shrink
shrink by
by ~7-10%
~7-10%
In
In 2009-10,
2009-10, BPS
BPS had
had aa ratio
ratio
of
of 5.5
5.5 students
students per
per FTE,
FTE, by
by
2014-15,
that
ratio
had
2014-15, that ratio had
fallen
fallen to
to 5.0
5.0
IfIf BPS
BPS had
had maintained
maintained its
its
2009-10
2009-10 student
student to
to FTE
FTE
ratio,
ratio, in
in 2014-15,
2014-15, BPS
BPS would
would
have
have 9,875
9,875 FTEs,
FTEs, 902
902
fewer
than
six
years
fewer than six years ago
ago
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
Cross-BPS themes
Framework for RFP 25
RFP areas for possible deep dive
Other RFP areas
Appendix
DRAFT
Progress review
Phase 0:
Data collection and
interviews
Phase 1:
High-level diagnostic
Phase 2:
Deep-dive on priority areas
Phase 3:
Opportunity
development
Duration
Dec 8-19
Jan 5 -23
Jan 26 - Feb 13
Feb 16-27
Activities
Conduct high-level
quantitative and
qualitative analysis across
the 25 areas, including
benchmarking
Review previous reports,
studies, reviews, etc.
Analyze the BPS budget
Collect input on priority
operational areas from
internal and external
stakeholders through
interviews, focus groups,
and other forums
Synthesis of initial
key themes and
learning
Interim workshops as
requested by the City
Detailed diagnostic of
priority areas
Deliverables
Prioritize
improvement
opportunities based
on impact toward
BPS mission and
strategic goals
Identify short term
and long term
actions for
implementation
For priority opportunities, provide
rationale, estimates
of costs and cost
savings, and practical
implementation
guidance
Workshop to align
on next steps for
BPS in capturing
opportunities
Agenda
Executive summary
System overview
Cross-BPS themes
Framework for RFP 25
RFP areas for possible deep dive
Other RFP areas
Appendix
CROSS-BPS THEMES
BPS has a strong talent base, but does not have a long-term strategy DRAFT
Challenge
Stable, with opportunity
Area of strength
to align process and execution
Stable, with opportunity
Overall
Overall
Strengths
Positive inertia and a deep local talent pool sustains a comparatively good urban
system
Largely coasting for a number of years, modernizing and evolving has not been
deliberately and thoughtfully considered
Too large a physical footprint for the number of students currently being served
High caliber people in schools as teachers and principals and in central office roles
Dynamic (but siloed) visions in pockets of central office
Strong approaches to community engagement and technology support
Some key conditions for success put in place across the system (e.g., mutual
consent, weighted student funding)
Absence of overarching vision causes a focus on initiatives vs. system goals, drift
in how different areas move forward and causes an inability to execute/followthrough
Recurring budget shortages as available funds are spread thin across buildings
and programs, many of which are underutilized and under-enrolled
Data not used broadly for decision making
Org. structure reflects personalities, not functional needs or core goals
Lack of coordination and collaboration, as focus rests with where people want it
Challenges
CROSS-BPS THEMES
Challenge
DRAFT
Area of strength
Overall assessment
Academic student support
(i. curriculum, j. SPED, k. student
assignment, q. parent engagement, r.
ELL)
Talent management
(a. personnel policies, b. contracts, c.
hiring, d. responsibility delineation, e.
instructional staff, s. licensing, t.
CORI / SORI)
Performance management
(v. performance objectives and
measurement tools)
Emerging themes
in many areas
system
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
Cross-BPS themes
Framework for RFP 25
RFP areas for possible deep dive
Other RFP areas
Appendix
RFP 25
DRAFT
Analysis of RFP areas and cross-cutting themes identified 12 for
potential deep dive consideration
Cross-cutting theme, not an identified RFP area
From data and interviews, the Steering Committee considered the size of the opportunity in
terms of benefits to students, cost savings, and efficiency
From this approach, 11 areas emerged in two groups as potential Phase 2 targets
Quick wins
Long-term goals
These are areas of high opportunity that will also take time
and a good deal of effort, but are worth it:
5. District overextension
6. ELL
7. Data culture
8. Technology
9. Transportation
10. Special Education
11. Maintenance (of buildings)
12. Performance and quality objectives and measurement
tools
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 63
|
RFP 25
Approach
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
District overextension
ELL
Data culture
Technology
Transportation
External funds
Purchasing
transparency
Instructional staffing
General staffing and
recruiting
Extracurriculars
Security
Licensure
Parent Engagement
School Committee
CORI / SORI
Construction and
renovation
Negotiation
Student assignment
3. Org. structure
4. Finance & accounting
(budget process)
Outputs
Curriculum
Timekeeping
Role delineation
RFP 25
Security
FY14 budget:
$3.9M
Instructional
staffing
FY14 budget: N/A
Current situation
PRELIMINARY
$ Financial opportunity
activities
High-functioning department
Small budget ($2.6M) with small
saving potential
Focus on communities
BPS perceived to be largely safe
by school-based staff
Recent uptick in incidents, after 5year long decline
fresh thinking?
RFP 25
$ Financial opportunity
Curriculum
FY14 budget: $7M
Timekeeping
FY14 budget: N/A
Some opportunities in
Extra curriculars
FY14 budget: N/A
General staffing
and recruiting
FY14 budget: N/A
External funds
transparency
FY14 budget: N/A
Role delineation
FY14 budget: N/A
Current situation
PRELIMINARY
Roles and duties between central Better communication and thought Is there a need to understand,
RFP 25
There are 4 areas with opportunities that are connected to other, PRELIMINARY
e Efficiency opportunity
$ Financial opportunity
parallel process at this time
Area
Construction
FY14 budget:
$26M
Purchasing
FY14 budget: N/A
Negotiations
FY14 budget: N/A
Current situation
$ $3-$4B in current needs
With the capital planning process How will the future footprint be
Good process of collaboration with Student assignment opportunities How much of student
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
Cross-BPS themes
Framework for RFP 25
RFP areas for possible deep dive
Other RFP areas
Appendix
RFP 25
Opportunity type
Food services
DRAFT
FY14: $36M
Summary points
Food services currently runs a significant deficit, where most districts roughly break even
Carrying dual management structure of doing half internally and half through vendor, Whitsons
Delivers meals to students at a rate at the high end of peer comparisons
Challenges
Annual losses at 11% of revenues, district performs low among peers
on this measure, where the average district loses just 1.5% of revenues
Managing internal food services preparation as well as a food services
contract, roughly splitting up the district
Poor management of cafeteria workers between food services and
individual schools lead to failed pilots
High direct labor costs
Low levels of data tracking below the major data points used for
compliance
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
77
101
16
45
26
62
58
25
33
1
56
5
20
19
13
9
67
3
14
52
8
54
34
30
M
39
79
21
28
48
66
37
4
44
41
12
23
57
55
10
35
71
18
47
2
43
7
49
6
20
45
19
33
62
4
13
9
34
79
12
39
21
101
14
10
47
3
28
6
5
56
18
M
16
58
44
8
48
66
55
67
41
1
7
35
43
52
30
71
2
37
57
49
26
54
77
DRAFT
Boston
Districts
Median
BPS is not
getting the
data tracking
it needs to be
successful
and drive
revenues
RFP 25
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY13: $53M in PD
Summary points
Strong teacher performance rubrics, weak central office rubrics with inconsistent application, and little data-driven management
Professional development at the central office level is non-existent, while teachers and principals are deeply dissatisfied with it at school level
Challenges
No regular, central office staff evaluation expectations and rubrics
that do not align with job duties
Professional development is inconsistent and lacks any
coordination as it comes from nearly every central department,
leaving teachers and principals frustrated, but spent $53M1 in FY13
(4.5% of budget)
Boilerplate and rarely updated job descriptions
Outside of IT, no onboarding process for new employees and no
requirements for succession planning
Data systems do not talk to each other (SIS, EDFS, PeopleSoft and
TalentED all exist independently)
Of the 4,500 non-school based employees, only 1,185 have a
review on file; in 13-14, only 15 employees dismissed
RFP 25
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $1.7M
Budget & Finance dept.
Summary points
Challenges
Budget process has no strategic plan on which to anchor and fund or
defund priorities
Schools are under enrolled, requiring soft landings under WSF
BPS has 193 cost centers, over half of the citys, with policy changes
that affect coding and budget tracking, making parts of the budget
difficult to track
Finance and Human Capital systems do not talk, requiring manual
connections and adjustments
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Opportunity type
DRAFT
Summary points
Improved compliance monitoring in wake of DOJ finding, but the office remains compliance driven and struggles to focus on student outcomes
Not well integrated with general education and curriculum
Challenges
Views core work as monitor and supportto meet federal, state and
local mandates, with no clear vision of how to provide exceptional
services
Number of ELL students have doubled since 2010, making it one of the
highest in peer set
Not integrated into general education approach, academics department
has struggled to collaborate with ELL
Teachers do not feel supported by OELL
Data tracking not used to disaggregate factors in student performance
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
4/27/16
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
1
4/27/161 4/27/
16
4/27/1
6
4/27/1
6
1
4/27/
16
4/27/1
6
4/27/1
6
4/27/16 4/2
7/1
6
4/27/16 4/27/1
6
4/27/1
6
RFP 25
Technology
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $11.6M
Summary points
OIT viewed as one of the best run departments by the customers they serve
Data-driven culture used to track customer service metrics and drive performance
Technology at schools are on regular upgrade cycles, leading to decent technological infrastructure in place at schools
Challenges
Boston has second lowest IT spend of peer districts, less than 1/4 of
the median, per pupil and per FTE spends1
No process to align departments and schools on technology has led to
incompatible departmental purchases on software and forced OIT to
buy hardware for BPS departments to use, rather than departments
describing needs first and OIT purchasing
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Median
Boston
DRAFT
4/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
Districts
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
BPS
BPS approaches
approaches peer
peer
averages
for
kbps,
averages for kbps,
despite
despite having
having aa
comparatively
comparatively low
low IT
IT
spend
against
peer
spend against peer
districts
districts
Interviews
Interviews with
with principals
principals
and
teachers
indicate
and teachers indicate very
very
high
high levels
levels of
of satisfaction
satisfaction
with
with the
the performance
performance of
of the
the
IT
department
IT department
RFP 25
Opportunity type
Transportation
DRAFT
FY14: $109M
Summary points
Transportation is a strength of BPS, leveraging data-driven decision making, with results to show for efforts
Opportunities for cost savings are possible with policy changes and efforts around Special Education
Challenges
In 2012-2013 spent $1,255 per student for transportation, 20% higher
than median for peers1; biggest line item in the budget, at $109M
annually, bringing in line with peers could save ~$20M
Required to provide transport for charter schools and provide some
parochial transportation ($2M)
SPED transport costs $51M2 a year 5% of BPS budget
High driver wages and occasional wildcat strikes can cost instructional
time and money
Transition from zone transportation to homebase system has legacy
costs that will be stretched out of 8 year transitions
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Boston
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
12/22
12/15
12/8
12/1
11/24
11/17
11/10
11/3
10/27
10/20
10/13
10/6
9/29
9/22
9/15
4/27/16
9/8
Districts
Median
9/1
DRAFT
Week of
SY2013-2014
Current year
SY2012-2013
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Bostons transportation
4/27/16
SOURCE: Operations department performance management; Council of Great City Schools DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 78
|
RFP 25
DRAFT
Jefferson
Parish
Large
Nashville
Memphis
Size of
district
(sq. miles)
Indianapolis
Chicago
Medium
New
Orleans
RSD
Henry
County
Cleveland
Boston
Sacramento
Spokane
Oak-land
SB
Fullerton
Lawrence MA
FM
Small
Low
Medium
High
RFP 25
Special education
Opportunity type
$
DRAFT
FY14: $263M
Summary points
More than a quarter of the BPS budget, with many difficult regulations and scenarios, but with some real opportunities
Recent focus on moving Special Needs students to inclusive environments in year two of five year implementation, will improve services
Separation of SPED from general academics loosened accountability of general education teachers to keep students in general education
Challenges
Currently 20% of BPS students are identified SWD, of which 43% are not in
inclusionary environments; nationally 15% of SWD are in inclusionary
environments, implying Boston may be over identifying students for SPED
services
Special education funds are more than a quarter of BPS budget
Private placements and transportation account for 15% and 17% of the SPED
budget
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
4/27/16
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/1 Bos6
ton
4/2
7/1
6
4/27/1 Om6
aha
4/27/
16
Oakland
4/27/1
6
RFP 25
Building maintenance
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $48M
Summary points
Facilities department has outdated information on state of buildings, with tracking that has not been updated in at least 5 years
As much as $600M in deferred maintenance and potentially as much as $4B in needed renovations across the system
Challenges
Lost system for tracking assets in 2009 and much of data with it, no
one in the department has a granular understanding of the current
needs and state of building stock
All work orders are tracked by hand on paper and excel, no attempt to
use technology
2009 report estimated $600M in deferred maintenance, but department
gets only $52M annual budget
$20M annually on custodians
12M square feet of citys 16M are in schools
503 employees in facilities management and not a single evaluation on
file
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: N/A
Summary points
BPS has developed adequate systems for tracking school-level data, but does not always use this data to manage for outcomes
BPS uses practically no data internally to manage central office and make strategic and operational decisions
Challenges
Performance office started to begin tracking performance across the
organization, scaled back significantly, lives now only in ops and to date
has only been leveraged for transportation
Non-existent data collection or creation in most central office
departments
KPIs are not developed for chiefs to track internal performance and
there is not regular reporting to the superintendent
Very few, good IT systems for tracking and collecting operational data
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
Cross-BPS themes
Framework for RFP 25
RFP areas for possible deep dive
Other RFP areas
Appendix
Strengths
Challenges
DRAFT
Stable, with opportunity
Area of strength
efforts
ELL focused on compliance, not on improving services and outcomes
Principals work to keep central office out their schools, rather than turn to for
supports
Curriculum is at times confusing and overlapping for principals and teachers
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 85
|
Strengths
Area of strength
Challenges
DRAFT
variable
Undefined roles, responsibilities and hiring criteria
Innovation and modernization needed in support areas
(e.g. contracting, hiring)
High caliber people throughout the organization and schools
Recruiting shifting resource focus to smaller areas BPS has historically been
successful and leveraging technology to track recruits
Reliable (if not always efficient) processes for back office functions
teachers and principals who believe they can design better PD at their
schools
Outdated and restrictive contracts, requiring positions and duties
unnecessary for modern school district
Unclear responsibilities between networks, schools and central departments
under new network structure
Organizational chart designed around personalities
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 86
|
DRAFT
Stable, with opportunity
Area of strength
Challenge
improvements
Rigor of data and evaluation not applied across all operations
Strengths
Challenges
Overall
DRAFT
Stable, with opportunity
Area of strength
Challenge
Strengths
Challenges
No BPS-wide KPIs to align with goals and hold departments and individuals
accountable
Failure to report to the city certain data requests
Data not used to make decisions in majority of operational areas
DRAFT
Stable, with opportunity
Area of strength
Strengths
Challenges
Overall
Challenges
Area of strength
Strengths
DRAFT
on execution
Tension between the role of a superintendent and the role of the committee in
setting strategy can be distracting
superintendent to execute it, may hamstring any future hires and has created
tension in the past
RFP 25
Curriculum
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $7M
Summary points
Curriculum languished until recently, with ELA update recently and process to update outdated Math is now underway, but different curriculums
across different grades and subjects still lacks coherence for principals and teachers
Because of autonomous schools designation, schools are accountable for outcomes, not for fidelity to curriculum
Challenges
Math curricula not updated since 2000
Many different curricula at various grade spans difficult for principals to
align
Teachers feel budget cuts that have eliminated coaches, fewer
resources available to help them implement curriculum
Some schools found to still be teaching off old standards
Difficulty collaborating and integrating general education curriculum with
ELL and SPED
Autonomy practices among low performing schools unclear, causing
concerns about fidelity to curriculum in some pockets
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Student assignment
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $3.4M
Summary points
Student assignment is follows a rigorous assignment algorithm that is fair and protected from tampering
Student assignment process flows quickly, easily and transparently for families
New student assignment patterns were rolled out successfully, but at a cost in legacy transportation
Challenges
As homebase is phased in, some confusion and overlapping zones
will persist
All student files and registration still paper-based systems
Legacy costs for students under old zone system are unquantified, but
are potentially contributing significantly to $40M Choice bussing plans
Transition to SIS system has more than doubled processing time
Enrollment projection process not sophisticated and thusly costs
between $0.1 and $2M annually in added school needs
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Parent Engagement
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $2.6M
Summary points
Engagement department regarded by many stakeholders as strongest BPS department due to expectation setting and relentless focus on
engagement
Systems and culture in place that maximize engagement across the organization
Challenges
Some principal hiring processes were done incorrectly and invited
lawsuits, when circulars were ignored
Principals concerned over a lost connection to the mayors office and
the city with changing of administration
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $N/A
Summary points
Challenges
Teacher contract negotiation planning not yet underway, concerns
about timeline of previous negotiations (1-2 years of negotiations)
should expect negotiations to start soon
Some departments frustrated by previously negotiated union rules
around duties and practices BPS must follow and have untapped
perspectives on new needs
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: N/A
Summary points
Improving processes and pipelines for school-level recruiting through use of historical data, however not a clear strategy for central office recruiting
Challenges
Unpredictable staffing openings in schools with weak communication
around how staffing will change year-to-year
Managerial step changes and pay grades have not been reviewed for
years, leading to inconsistencies in appropriate designations
Under teachers union contracts, principals can make significantly less
than some teachers, lessening interest in principal pathways
Union contracts limit what can and cannot be in job descriptions,
making unique hires difficult
Data on hiring pools and performance not available
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: N/A
Summary points
Belief in varying levels of autonomy has created low-level confusion around who is responsible for what duties
New network structure has created vague structure of accountability with FTEs shared between networks and central office
Central office departments do not collaborate often enough to identify opportunities for shared approaches
Challenges
Principals and central office staff are often unclear about what certain
designations mean (e.g., pilot school) and improvise
Networks now share FTEs with central office, creating accountability
and management problems
Principals unclear about when to reach out to network v. HQ
Central office does not coordinate effectively across offices, missing
opportunities to leverage shared goals and resources (e.g., PD,
employee evaluations, integration of curriculum with SPED and ELL)
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Instructional staffing
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $7M
Summary points
Weighted student formula used to build school budgets provides good framework, could use updating
New open posting policy has improved hiring process for principals as has mutual consent hiring
Wide spectrum of popularity among schools has student to teacher ratios varying across schools and the district
Challenges
WSF is not deeply evaluated for academic outcomes or alignment that
could inform principals about effective (and ineffective) ways to
leverage budget allocations
Student to teacher ratios vary across schools as overall school
populations vary (e.g., K0-5 schools average 13.3, with a range of 10.4
to 17.9)
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
License maintenance
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: N/A
Summary points
Human Capital systems tracks licenses and identifies areas of need, but poor PD and expectations that teachers will self-certify lead to occasional
delays
Viewed as a compliance function, is not fully aligned with producing better student outcomes
Challenges
Because much of this is considered compliance, there is difficulty
getting all teachers to self-certify as needed, resulting in a recent lag in
ELL certifications
Frustrations around some licensure being more driven by compliance
than by what is good for kids
PD is not always aligned and available to aid in getting licensure
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: N/A
Summary points
Attached to hiring process, applicants cannot be hired without satisfying requirement, keeping unapproved out of positions or work, extra vigilance
needed for volunteers
BPS is one of the few (if not the only) City department that still uses a paper-based system of faxing required
Challenges
Any entirely manual, paper-based process, despite the rest of the City
executing these checks online arranged through previous work with the
state
Forms required for volunteer adults in schools who are not employees,
leaving school with responsibility of verifying adult has received
clearance
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: N/A
Summary points
BPS does not have a unified strategy for securing external funds, leaving applications and efforts largely to the department and school level
While most grant funding is accounted for, a less formal process exists for providing transparency for private funds
Challenges
Funds are identified by offices as needed and are applied to on a
departmental or school level, without coordination across the
organization
No unifying view of what BPS should be directing private funds
towards, without alignment to any strategy
Funds accepted for programs or ideas without a formal evaluation
of whether the new programs align with BPS academic strategies
No formal review of grant funding and impacts
Funder strategy:
BPS is potentially leaving money on the table without a clear vision for fundraising and its uses; through aligning fundraising activities with
overall department strategy additional funders can be more easily identified and ultimately solicited
Organizational structure:
BPS has an irregular structure from other districts in that its foundation is run in-house, a legacy structure. A further review of the pros and cons
for this structure may reveal that it is better run as an independent foundation, or should be more tightly interwoven into BPS; in either case the
resulting structure will be a more deliberate decision and will more effectively support BPS activities
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Schoolbased
partnerships
Non-school
based
Program
Outlay
Achievement Network
Alliance for inclusion and
prevention (AIP)
BELL
Blueprint
Boston debate league
Citizen Schools
City Connects
City Year
Communities in schools
Key steps
Talent development
Tenacity
DRAFT
$500
K
$65K
$60K
$223
K
$482
K
$1.2M
$994
K
$2.4M
$50K
$55K
$265
K
$600
$100
K
K
$80K
$200
$100
K
K
$10K
$500
K
$78K
$122
K
$1.2M
$450
Partnerships
Partnerships bring
bring in
in ~$28M
~$28M of
of funds
funds
from
from partners
partners to
to bear
bear on
on system
system
Recently
Recently aa systematic
systematic review
review of
of
these
partnerships
has
begun,
but
these partnerships has begun, but
funding
funding continues
continues to
to be
be granted
granted
centrally
centrally on
on aa relational
relational basis
basis more
more
than
on
a
strategic
basis
than on a strategic basis
At
At the
the school
school level
level there
there are
are
hundreds
hundreds of
of partners
partners (most
(most of
of whom
whom
are
not
receiving
BPS
funds)
who
are not receiving BPS funds) who are
are
also
not
evaluated
for
efficacy,
also not evaluated for efficacy,
process
process for
for central
central evaluation
evaluation should
should
be
mimicked
at
schools
be mimicked at schools
RFP 25
Timekeeping
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: N/A
Summary points
Timekeeping is a process that is still paper-based, requiring sign-in sheets followed by manual keying in of time later
Effective process controls require managers to approve time and department heads to review manager time approvals before time can be entered
Challenges
Time entry is done by sign-in sheets, none of which is automated
Leave of absences have historically not been tracked effectively,
leaving it open for abuse, although recent staff addition and policy
changes have begun to be instituted
Certain types of leave (e.g., medical) have low standards of
verification
Technology:
BPS can transition to a fully automated, electronic system, which would lessen paperwork and potential manual errors
Accountability:
Continuing to implement recommendations for improving verification for various types of leave will likely drive down false leave (both purposeful
and inadvertent) , with a focus on data tracking of trends and building automated processes into technological systems to push accountability
and accuracy
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $N/A
Summary points
Challenges
School and central based staff complain that procurement process
frequently takes too long
Responsible for 50% of citys purchasing transactions, while
representing just over a third of the citys budget
Process mapping:
A fuller understanding of where procurement slows down, from an operations perspective, could unlock capacity and improve customer
satisfaction with procurement functions; the process mapping could identify areas for deeper collaboration with the city
BPS as the largest city agency could drive different procurement practices for the city if opportunities are identified for improved processes
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $26M
Summary points
Rough estimates that current schools stock requires between $3 and $4B in renovation
12M square feet of buildings in BPS system (3/4 of all city square footage), with little scaling back of footprint despite declining enrollment over
decades
Challenges
No facility renewal plan or cycle for buildings or long term vision for
the facilities needs for the academic program moving forward
No data tracking on current state of the buildings at a comprehensive
level, which allows for consideration of usage and utilization of rooms,
buildings and system
Back of the envelope estimates based on perceived state of the
buildings point towards as much as $4B in needed renovation across
nearly 75% of school buildings
Building financing has historically been done through the city,
preventing schools from seeking independent financing for upgrades
District footprint:
The district has lost ~10K students (1/6 of enrollment) in the last 20 years, but still operates the same number of buildings; the master facilities
plan process now underway, can incorporate a strategic academic plan and align on the actual needs of the district for educating the current
population now and into the future
Master plan has to ensure that investments are not being made on buildings that will potentially no longer be part of the BPS portfolio
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Extra-curricular activities
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $N/A
Summary points
Extra-curricular activities are largely managed at the school-level, leaving principals and communities with a great deal of autonomy around what
types of activities are made available to students
Limited accountability for partnerships at district and school levels
Challenges
Very thin data available on available programming no
comprehensive audit of effectiveness and distribution across
schools has been undertaken
Limited oversight on school spending on OST providers and
partners
No policies or expectations around what extracurriculars are
expected to be available to all students
Accountability:
The department of partnerships and the CAO can do a comprehensive audit of extracurriculars currently available and align on KPIs and
metrics to evaluate year to year effectiveness for both partners as well as any programming offered internally at schools;
A more robust accounting for funding of extracurricular activities at the school level would provide an opportunity to see where partners could be
leveraged to maximize multiplier effects of dollars invested at schools
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
Security
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $3.9M
Summary points
Schools are increasingly safe over a 6 year period, with a recent uptick in incidents in school year 2014-2015
Not all schools have been fully trained in active shooter scenarios, due to limits on principal time
Challenges
Recent spike in activity in the 1st semester, incidents up 10% versus
2013-2014 year to date, with spikes in Assault with a Dangerous
Weapon (+83%), Disruption of School Assembly (32%), Possession
of controlled substance (+27%)
Multiple attempts by school security to principals active shooter
trained have failed as principals have not attended workshops
Some district policies are not clearly established or enforced (e.g.,
use of metal detectors)
Assault and battery incidents 2012-2013 three times the rate of peer
average1
Facilities plan:
As part of master facilities plan, school security should be considered and integrated into evaluations of buildings; under-enrolled facilities are
harder to secure and keep students safe, looking at incidents against building capacities and occupancies could reveal certain tipping points in
school security numbers
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
RFP 25
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/
16
4/27/
16
4/27/
16
4/27/
16
4/27/
16
4/27/
16
4/27/
16
RFP 25
School committee
Opportunity type
DRAFT
FY14: $0.3M
Summary points
School Committee has a newer set of folks who are engaged and passionate about community engagement and oversight
In the process of developing a district strategy, which could complicate and discussions with future superintendents who were not involved in
developing the district strategy
Challenges
Lack of clarity around whether school committee sets strategy and
hires superintendent to implement, or whether superintendent sets
strategy and committee approves it
Strategy:
School Committee is developing strategy through conversations with the community, but is not working closely with BPS leadership and without
a permanent superintendent in place, there could be eventual tensions with the new superintendent; School Committee could slow the process
some to involve candidates and not finalize the strategy until a permanent leader has been hired to put her or his final touches to the eventual
vision
Source: Interviews with BPS and City staff as well as BPS data
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Appendix
District
overextension
DRAFT
Deep dive
2 Organization
Special
education
Other operational
areas
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Appendix
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
DRAFT
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
Executive Summary
DRAFT
BPS has a larger footprint than is required of its comparable peers. Since the early 1970s, the
total number of students enrolled in the district has declined by ~40,000, while the number of active
BPS buildings has remained relatively constant. In the next 15 years, student enrollment may
continue to change due in part to a changing population but could change drastically if the charter
cap is lifted, leaving BPS with up to 44,000 seats in excess capacity.
Operating with extra capacity costs BPS. BPS incurs annual expenses of ~$4.6M per open
school in operating expenses, before considering the additional tolls of a large system including
a more dispersed focus for Central Office teams than is truly needed, smaller communities of
support and engagement due to less-than-capacity schools, and an overstretch on programming
budgets (e.g., Athletics or Wellness).
BPS could consider saving money and improve the system by consolidating schools to fill
each school to capacity, theoretically allowing BPS to close ~30-50 schools. This could allow BPS
to capture ~$50-80M in annual opex savings, potential one-time revenue from ~$120-200M in
property sales or long-term leases, targeted Central Office support for a smaller portfolio of
schools, and more robust school communities with larger programming budgets from
reinvestment.
Should BPS choose to proceed in addressing this overextension, deliberate planning will be
required to make the transition the most beneficial to students and least disruptive. Many
districts have experienced school consolidation from which BPS can learn in order to maintain or
improve the academic achievement of every seat while engaging the community productively.
With careful identification of schools and a thoughtful timeline for implementation, BPS can let the
academic vision drive its footprint
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
4/27/16
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
Student population
# of students
Since
Since 1994,
1994, BPS
BPS
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16 4/27/16 4/27/16 4/27/16 4/27/16 4/27/16 4/27/16 4/27/16 4/27/16
has
has lost
lost nearly
nearly
9,000
students
9,000 students
While
While the
the
population
population of
of
Boston
Boston is
is expected
expected
to
to grow
grow by
by over
over
20%
20% over
over the
the next
next
15
15 years,
years, BPS
BPS
current
trend
current trend
suggests
suggests very
very little
little
change
in
student
change in student
population
population
Lifting
Lifting the
the charter
charter
cap
cap can
can have
have
strongly
strongly negative
negative
impacts
impacts for
for BPS,
BPS,
losing
losing another
another
7,000
7,000 students
students
NOTE: This reflects all students in traditional and non-traditional (BPS charter) schools
1 Best case scenario assumes charter cap is maintained and BPS keeps its current share of school-aged students, despite recent decline
2 Worst case scenario assumes BPS continues to lose share at its current rate and loses students to new charters at the same rate as in the
past
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
DRAFT
School programs
# of school programs
4/27/16
Today
Today BPS
BPS has
has
10
10 more
more
schools
schools than
than in
in
1994
1994
Many
Many of
of the
the
2011
2011 school
school
closures
closures were
were
operationally
operationally
consolidations,
consolidations,
limiting
limiting the
the
change
change in
in
schools
schools to
to 99
4/27
/16
4/27
/16
4/27
/16
4/27
/16
4/27
/16
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
DRAFT
School capacities
Number of physical seats
4/27/16
This
This includes
includes
the
the total
total count
count
of
of classroom
classroom
seats,
seats, without
without
counting
counting
resource
resource rooms
rooms
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
The
The average
average
4/27/16
school
school has
has 715
715
seats
seats
4/27/16
The
The total
total
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
capacity
capacity is
is
92,950
92,950
4/27/16
NOTE: This reflects all schools, including BPS charters
METHODOLOGY: Rooms were counted as A or B by the facilities team; A rooms could hold 21-30 students depending on the
school, B rooms can only hold 12 students
Source: BPS Facilities data (2011)
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
The extra seats are mostly well distributed across the district
with an average of 68% utilization
DRAFT
4/27/16%
4/27/16%
4/27/16%
4/27/16%
Half
Half of
of the
the
schools
schools are
are
under
under 2/3rds
2/3rds
utilized
utilized
Some
Some schools
schools
are
are being
being very
very
overutilized
overutilized
based
based on
on
Facilities
Facilities
assessment
assessment of
of
available
available seats
seats
4/27/16%
NOTE: This reflects all schools, including BPS charters
METHODOLOGY: Based on building capacity data from prior analysis; does not take into account student teacher-ratio or use of resource classrooms
Source: BPS Facilities data (2011)
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
4/27/16
4/27/162
4/27/161
4/27/16
DRAFT
Student population
# of school programs, # of students
BPS
BPS could
could
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
reduce
reduce its
its
footprint
footprint
based
based on
on the
the
large
large
difference
difference
between
between its
its
enrollment
enrollment
and
and its
its
capacity
capacity
Projections
Projections
suggest
suggest no
no
additional
additional
space
space may
may
be
needed
be needed in
in
the
future
the future
With
With students
students decreasing,
decreasing, the
the funding
funding for
for each
each student
student must
must continue
continue
to
to cover
cover the
the systems
systems fixed
fixed costs
costs including
including the
the buildings
buildings but
but also
also the
the
principals
principals and
and school
school staff
staff which
which are
are present
present at
at each
each location
location
NOTE: This reflects all students in traditional and non-traditional (BPS charter) schools; assumes an average building student capacity based on
BPS facilities analysis from 2009
1 Best case scenario assumes charter cap is maintained and BPS keeps its current share of school-aged students, despite recent decline
2 Worst case scenario assumes BPS continues to lose share at its current rate and loses students to new charters at the same rate as in the past
Source: Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary
Education; UMass Donohue Institute;
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
DRAFT
While
While BPS
BPS has
has set
set
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
limits
limits that
that would
would
allow
allow class
class sizes
sizes to
to
be
be 20
20 or
or more
more
students,
students, BPS
BPS
operates
operates with
with ~12
~12
students
students in
in aa classclassroom;
room; most
most peer
peer
districts
districts operate
operate
with
with more
more
IfIf BPS
BPS were
were to
to meet
meet
peer
peer average,
average, they
they
would
would carry
carry ~1,300
~1,300
fewer
fewer teachers,
teachers, at
at
aa savings
savings of
of $90$90110M
110M
Peer avg. 4/27/16
1 These numbers include all students (e.g., SPED, ELL), so equally wrong, but comparable; method of choosing peer set in appendix
Source: Common Core of Data
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
DRAFT
4/27/16
Custodial
support
36 teachers
1 principal, 1
secretary, and
others
418 students
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Thousands
1 Does not include benefits; does not separate out SPED or ELL teachers
2 Does not include deferred maintenance, which is estimated to add costs of ~$6m per school
Source: Based on data from BPS Finance and Facilities teams
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
Description
Class room
staff
reduction
DRAFT
$3.8m $2.3-2.8m
$1.0-1.5m
Foundation
for school
staff
$200k
$0
$200k
Average
custodial
support
$166k
$50k
$116k
Average
building
maintenance
$191k
$57k
$134k
$260k
$0
$260k
Average
utilities
Total
1 Assumed
$1.7- 2.2m
2 The Massachusetts state average is 13.7:1, while high performing states like Minnesota 15.9:1
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
DRAFT
Source: Closing Public Schools in Philadelphia - Lessons from Six Urban Districts, the
Philadelphia Research Initiative, PEW Charitable Trusts, October 19, 2011
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
DRAFT
Description
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
~10
~15
~35
~10
4/27/
16
4/27/
16
Bottom ~10
schools in
academics could
be identified in
the first set of
schools
~10 closures
could focus on
the costliest
schools in
maintenance
4/27/
16
Additional ~10
closures could
include schools
that are in lowdemand
4/27/16
The
The buildings
buildings chosen
chosen should
should be
be based
based on
on aa detailed
detailed
analysis,
including
factors
such
as
demand
for
analysis, including factors such as demand for seats,
seats,
academic
academic achievement,
achievement, academic
academic progress,
progress, deferred
deferred
maintenance
maintenance and
and operation
operation costs,
costs, and
and others
others
Numbers are illustrative and kept simple (but within range) as they will vary by school
DRAFT
In
In addition
addition to
to the
the
monetary
monetary value,
value, BPS
BPS will
will
also
gain:
also gain:
AA better-focused
better-focused Central
Central
Office
Office to
to serve
serve students
students
with
with aa path
path forward
forward on
on
direction
direction of
of district
district and
and
the
size
of
the
Central
the size of the Central
Office
Office needed
needed to
to support
support
itit
AA smarter
smarter allocation
allocation of
of
resources
resources with
with wider
wider and
and
deeper
deeper resources
resources
allocated
allocated
to
to narrower
narrower set
set of
of
individual
individual schools
schools to
to
support
support students
students and
and
improve
improve district-wide
district-wide
academics
academics
Schools
Schools reflecting
reflecting the
the
local
local communities
communities with
with
more
more neighborhood
neighborhood
schools
schools and
and reduced
reduced
transportation
transportation complexity
complexity
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
The
The average
average BPS
BPS
elementary
elementary school
school property
property
is
is worth
worth $4.1M
$4.1M
Altogether,
Altogether, ~30
~30 school
school
properties
properties may
may be
be worth
worth
~$120M
~$120M
BPS
BPS also
also has
has two
two properties
properties
which
which have
have exceedingly
exceedingly high
high
land
land value
value (in
(in Fenway
Fenway and
and in
in
Copley)
Copley) which
which could
could also
also be
be
examined
examined for
for aa capital
capital
infusion
infusion
DRAFT
This
This infusion
infusion of
of capital
capital can
can
be
be reinvested
reinvested into
into the
the
system
system to:
to:
Improve
Improve existing
existing schools
schools
in
in need
need of
of maintenance
maintenance
projects
projects
Special-build
Special-build capital
capital
projects
projects to
to improve
improve the
the
programming
programming capabilities
capabilities
of
of existing
existing schools
schools
Build
Build new
new state-of-the-art
state-of-the-art
schools
schools
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
While the new funds will not be easy to unlock, they can bring
the promise of a better future for BPS
DRAFT
Expanded
Expanded beforebefore- and
and after-school
after-school
programming
programming for
for students
students in
in all
all
schools
schools
~$51-85M
~$51-85M in
in run-rate
run-rate savings
savings
garnered
garnered from
from closing
closing 30
30 50
50
schools
schools
Guaranteed
Guaranteed set
set of
of electives
electives or
or
specials
specials at
at all
all schools
schools (e.g.,
(e.g.,
Physical
Physical Education,
Education, Art)
Art)
Greater
Greater portfolio
portfolio of
of teacher
teacher supports
supports
and
and resources
resources (e.g.,
(e.g., instructional
instructional
coaches,
coaches, first-year
first-year mentors,
mentors,
counselors)
counselors)
~$120-200M
~$120-200M in
in one-time
one-time cash
cash
from
from property
property sales
sales of
of 30
30 50
50
schools
schools
Funds
Funds to
to build
build 11 state-of-the-art
state-of-the-art
high
high school
school (~$30M)
(~$30M) and
and 99 state-ofstate-ofthe-art
the-art lower
lower schools
schools (~$10M
(~$10M each)
each)
While
While these
these are
are possibilities,
possibilities, the
the school
school district
district will
will have
have the
the ability
ability to
to choose
choose
how
how itit reinvests
reinvests the
the money,
money, taking
taking into
into account
account the
the tradeoffs
tradeoffs between
between
consistency
consistency across
across schools
schools and
and school
school autonomy
autonomy
Source: BPS data
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
DRAFT
A handful of big-city districts have successfully confronted over-extension
problems to concentrate resources on students
Situation
Resolution
Consolidated 59 schools in
2010 and 70 schools in 2011
to arrive at a district of just 72
schools
Aggressive school
consolidations from the
superintendent and mayor
created savings but process
fostered distrust
1 Chicago
2 Detroit
3 DC
Los
Angeles
While
While these
these
school
school
consolidations
consolidations
were
were tough
tough in
in
the
the short-term,
short-term,
many
many systems
systems
have
gone
have gone on
on to
to
see
see positive
positive
long-run
long-run
academically
academically
and
and fiscal
fiscal
benefits
benefits11
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
Academic
performance
Description
Key analyses
Maintenance
costs
School
demand
DRAFT
Programmatic
offerings aligned with
student needs
Academic
performance data
ranking schools in
multiple dimensions
Ranked list of average
on-going maintenance
needs in all schools
Ranked list of deferred
maintenance needs in
all schools
Ranked list of number
of applications for
spots in every school
in the district
Ranked list of current
school occupancy
levels
Ranked list of potential
school capacities
Combining
Combining
all
all of
of these
these
factors
factors
could
could help
help
the
district
the district
make
make
informed
informed
decisions
decisions
about
about
which
which
schools
schools
might
might be
be
targeted
targeted
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Classroom based drivers
Transportation
Private placement
Inclusion view
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Appendix
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 129
|
SPECIAL EDUCATION
Executive Summary
DRAFT
Classrooms,
Classrooms, transportation
transportation and
and private
private tuitions
tuitions account
account for
for 73%
73% of
of SPED
SPED
budget.
budget. SPED
SPED accounts
accounts for
for ~25%
~25% of
of the
the BPS
BPS budget,
budget, meaning
meaning these
these costs
costs together
together
account
account for
for ~20%
~20% of
of the
the overall
overall BPS
BPS budget
budget
Classroom
Classroom costs
costs are
are driven
driven by
by variability
variability in
in classification
classification and
and non-inclusion
non-inclusion
models.
models. Investigating
Investigating this
this variation
variation will
will give
give BPS
BPS aa few
few levers
levers to
to focus
focus on
on programs
programs
that
that may
may be
be over-classifying
over-classifying students
students as
as ways
ways to
to both
both improve
improve services
services and
and limit
limit
unnecessary
unnecessary costs.
costs.
SPED
SPED placement
placement and
and transportation
transportation decisions
decisions are
are driving
driving BPS
BPS transportation
transportation
costs.
costs. Decisions
Decisions around
around tracking
tracking students
students to
to current
current zone
zone patterns
patterns and
and which
which
students
students are
are getting
getting transportation
transportation as
as part
part of
of their
their IEPs
IEPs are
are contributing
contributing to
to an
an already
already
large
large transportation
transportation line
line item.
item.
Private
Private placement
placement decisions
decisions are
are driving
driving both
both transportation
transportation and
and tuition
tuition costs.
costs.
BPS
BPS has
has an
an opportunity
opportunity to
to direct
direct private
private placement
placement students
students to
to better
better programs
programs while
while
also
also decreasing
decreasing costs
costs associated
associated with
with these
these placements.
placements.
BPS
BPS has
has begun
begun an
an ambitious,
ambitious, 12-year
12-year plan
plan to
to move
move almost
almost all
all SPED
SPED students
students to
to
inclusion
inclusion classrooms.
classrooms. In
In SY13-14
SY13-14 BPS
BPS began
began aa phasing
phasing in
in of
of inclusion
inclusion classrooms.
classrooms.
The
The gradual
gradual phasing
phasing in
in will
will grow
grow SPED
SPED costs
costs by
by up
up to
to $8m
$8m aa year
year at
at the
the roll-out
roll-out peak,
peak,
but
but an
an aggressive
aggressive adherence
adherence to
to phasing
phasing out
out sub
sub // separate
separate classrooms
classrooms can
can capture
capture
~$63m
~$63m annually
annually and
and provide
provide significantly
significantly better
better education
education by
by year
year 12.
12.
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
Special
Special education
education
4/27/16
4/27/16
costs
costs have
have been
been
rising
rising nationally
nationally since
since
the
the 60s,
60s, capturing
capturing aa
continually
continually larger
larger
share
share of
of per
per pupil
pupil
spending,
spending, annually
annually
4/27/16
4/27/16
By
By 2005,
2005, special
special
education
education made
made up
up
21%
21% of
of budgets
budgets
4/27/16
In
In 2014,
2014, actual
actual BPS
BPS
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
1975: passage of
IDEA
4/27
/16
1 Where has the money been going?, Economic Policy Institute, 2010
19
4/27
/16
20
20
4/27 4/27
/16 /16
expenditures
expenditures on
on
special
special education
education
were
were 24%
24% of
of the
the
BPS
BPS budget
budget
SPECIAL EDUCATION
Central
24% of BPS
budget
School
level
$ 136m (51%)
$ 37m
Specialists
(e.g., OTPT,
autism)
$ 24m
Sub/sep
teacher
Sub/sep
aides
$ 64m
$ 23m
DRAFT
Resource
teacher
Compliance
program
support
$ 21m
$ 12m
$ 129m (49%)
$ 3m
Misc. expenses
Admin. &
Compliance Insurance
(e.g., equipment,
superadvisory inclusion, itinerant
support)
$ 13m
$ 9m
$ 2m
$ 2m
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
Classroom-based
Key drivers
Classification Ratios
Staffing model
Sub/separate teachers
$64M
$4/27/16M
Transportation
$4/27/16M
Sub/separate aides
$23M
$4/27/16M
Resource teachers
$21
$4/27/16M
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Classroom based drivers
Transportation
Private placement
Inclusion view
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Appendix
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 134
|
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
Massachusetts/
Boston
Group
average
AA2011
2011 Fordham
Fordham Institute
Institute report
report found
found
Boston
2013 MA Avg.
4/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/164/27/16
that
that Massachusetts
Massachusetts has
has historically
historically
higher
SPED
numbers
due
higher SPED numbers due to
to being
being aa
leader
in
SPED
beginning
in
the
leader in SPED beginning in the 1970s
1970s
their
their being
being higher
higher than
than national
national
averages
averages is
is not
not aa reflection
reflection of
of any
any
state
policies,
but
of
state
culture
state policies, but of state culture
Boston
Boston has
has 19.5%
19.5% of
of students
students in
in special
special
education,
education, slightly
slightly above
above the
the
Massachusetts
Massachusetts district
district average
average of
of
16.5%
and
significantly
16.5% and significantly above
above the
the
national
national average
average of
of 13.1%
13.1%
AAreassessment
reassessment of
of SPED
SPED classification
classification
standards
could
more
accurately
standards could more accurately
classify
classify students
students and
and align
align the
the district
district
with
with peer
peer aveages
aveages
Assuming
Assuming direct
direct labor
labor aligns
aligns with
with the
the
number
of
students,
BPS
could
number of students, BPS could save
save
roughly
roughly $5M
$5M for
for every
every one
one
percentage
drop
in
classification
percentage drop in classification
Aligning
Aligning with
with state
state average
average could
could
translate
translate to
to $10-15M
$10-15M in
in savings
savings
Aligning
Aligning with
with New
New England
England average
average
of
16.2%
could
capture
$15-18M
of 16.2% could capture $15-18M
IfIf we
we believe
believe MA
MAhas
has moved
moved to
to far
far
from
from proper
proper classification,
classification, moving
moving
even
even closer
closer to
to the
the national
national average
average
can
bring
greater
savings
can bring greater savings and
and more
more
accurate
accurate classifications
classifications
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
SWD designation varies little by income statuses of MA districts,
however low income students have a higher likelihood to be classified
A
A 2014
2014 Massachusetts
Massachusetts
study
study found
found that
that lowlowincome
income students
students in
in the
the
state
were
identified
state were identified as
as
eligible
eligible for
for special
special
education
education services
services at
at
substantially
substantially higher
higher
rates
rates than
than non-lownon-lowincome
students
income students
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
% students classified with disabilities
1 MA Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, 2013; this includes all 409 districts in MA, many of which are individual schools; the state
average remains unchanged when just traditional districts are considered
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 136
|
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
The
The top
top 20%
20% of
of BPS
BPS
schools
are
referring
schools are referring
an
an average
average of
of 5.8%
5.8%
of
their
students
of their students
twice
twice the
the district
district
average
average
This
This 20%
20% of
of schools
schools
is
is classifying
classifying 39%
39%
more
more of
of those
those
referred
referred as
as special
special
education
education than
than the
the
BPS
BPS average
average
Moving
Moving the
the top
top 20%
20%
of
referring
schools
of referring schools
into
into alignment
alignment with
with
the
district
the district could
could
save
save $80-90K
$80-90K
annually
annually across
across
those
those 27
27 schools
schools
Investigation
Investigation and
and
training
training at
at these
these
schools
schools could
could move
move
schools
into
schools into
alignment
alignment with
with the
the
district
district
83%
83% of
of referrals
referrals are
are
coming
coming from
from parents
parents
2.8%
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
41%
20%
20% of
of BPS
BPS schools
schools
classified
classified 87%
87% of
of
referred
referred students
students
120
120 students
students
The
The schools
schools with
with high
high
classification
classification rates
rates
also
also are
are referring
referring
3.5%
3.5% of
of their
their
students,
students, 21%
21%
above
above the
the district
district
average
average
Moving
Moving the
the top
top 20%
20%
of
classifying
of classifying schools
schools
into
into alignment
alignment with
with
the
district
the district average
average
could
could save
save $400$400600K
annually
600K annually
across
across those
those 27
27
schools
schools
Between
Between Feb
Feb and
and
Sept,
Sept, the
the 34
34 schools
schools
with
with 0%
0% classified
classified
had
had 216
216 students
students
referred
referred some
some
schools
schools may
maybe
be
under
under classifying
classifying
BPS avg.
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 138
|
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
Schools
Schools that
that refer
refer
higher
higher percentages
percentages
of
of their
their students
students are
are
also
likely
to
also likely to
classify
classify referred
referred
students
students at
at higher
higher
rates
rates as
as well
well
While
While the
the
correlation
correlation is
is not
not
overwhelming,
overwhelming, itit
indicates
indicates that
that there
there
could
could be
be cultures
cultures
of
overreliance
of overreliance on
on
special
special education
education
in
in some
some school
school
communities
communities
4/27/16
% of total student body referred for testing
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
BPS
BPS distribution
distribution is
is mostly
mostly aligned
aligned with
with the
the
state,
with
some
potential
opportunity
in
state, with some potential opportunity in
Intellectual
Intellectual classification
classification
Communication
Communication is
is the
the leading
leading single
single
classification
classification and
and is
is aa disorder
disorder frequently
frequently
applied
applied to
to students
students who
who are
are ELL
ELL or
or have
have
simply
not
received
quality
instruction
simply not received quality instruction
Looking
Looking at
at rates
rates of
of communication
communication
classification
classification at
at various
various schools
schools could
could present
present
opportunities
opportunities to
to reclassify
reclassify students
students or
or move
move
them
them into
into general
general education
education classrooms,
classrooms,
identifying
10%
of
communication
identifying 10% of communication
classifications
classifications as
as misidentified
misidentified cases
cases could
could
save
save $500-700K
$500-700K
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 140
|
SPECIAL EDUCATION
Description
DRAFT
Potential opportunity
Resource
room teachers
Staff to avg.
daily
attendance
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
Area of
opportunity Description
Clerks
SPED
Coordinators
SPED
zone
alignment
Bus
attendants
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Classroom based drivers
Transportation
Private placement
Inclusion view
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Appendix
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 143
|
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
While
While some
some schools
schools have
have
concentrated
concentrated programs
programs where
where
busing
busing is
is likely
likely aa part
part of
of all
all
IEPs,
IEPs, the
the distribution
distribution in
in
variation
variation by
byschool
school points
points to
to
opportunities
opportunities to
to revisit
revisit IEPs
IEPs
for
for needs
needs
Investigation
Investigation and
and training
training at
at
these
schools
could
these schools could move
move
schools
schools into
into alignment
alignment with
with
the
district
the district
At
At an
an average
average of
of $1,500
$1,500 aa
student
student for
for transportation,
transportation,
students
students receiving
receiving door-todoor-todoor
door transportation
transportation represent
represent
$4.5M
$4.5M annually
annually
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
20%of BPS bus routes transport 3% of its student population, while
~60% of students are walking to bus stops less than a quarter mile away
20%
20% of
of BPS
BPS routes
routes have
have
fewer
fewer than
than 55 students
students and
and
those
those routes
routes collectively
collectively
transport
transport 3%
3% of
of the
the students
students
BPS
BPS transports
transports
4/27/16
The
The average
average student
student
receiving
receiving transportation
transportation
has
has 0.16
0.16 mile
mile walk
walk to
to their
their
bus
bus stop
stop
59%
59% of
of students
students are
are
classified
classified as
as bus
bus stop
stop (i.e.,
(i.e.,
not
not door-to-door)
door-to-door) riders
riders and
and
have
have aa walk
walk of
of less
less than
than aa
quarter
quarter mile
mile
59%
59% of
of the
the transportation
transportation
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
budget
budget is
is $67M
$67M
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
78
78 routes,
routes, or
or 96%
96% of
of BPS
BPS
private
private SPED
SPED routes
routes have
have
fewer
fewer than
than 55 students
students and
and
those
those routes
routes collectively
collectively
transport
transport 140
140 students
students
There
There are
are aa number
number of
of
private
private placements
placements with
with poor
poor
reputations,
reputations, an
an effort
effort to
to
concentrate
concentrate private
private
placements
placements in
in quality
quality
programs
programs could
could improve
improve
student
student services
services and
and limit
limit
costs
costs
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Classroom based drivers
Transportation
Private placement
Inclusion view
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Appendix
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 147
|
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
Private placements
$, millions, spent on tuition at each private placement site
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
$37M
$37M11 is
is spent
spent on
on private
private
placements
placements each
each year,
year, on
on 346
346
students,
$107K
per
student
students, $107K per student
Private
Private placement
placement spending
spending
has
a
long
tail,
with
has a long tail, with 89%
89% of
of
sites
accounting
for
50%
sites accounting for 50% of
of
spending
spending and
and 64%
64% of
of
students
students
Many
Many sites
sites require
require private
private
transportation,
a
cost
transportation, a cost of
of $9M
$9M aa
year,
year, with
with 78
78 routes
routes
transporting
transporting just
just 140
140
students
students
Consolidating
Consolidating students
students at
at high
high
quality
quality sites
sites can
can improve
improve
student
student outcomes
outcomes and
and save
save
transportation
costs
transportation costs
4/27/16
1 Includes transportation
Source: BPS data
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
92%
92% of
of placements
placements
are
are from
from DCF
DCF
placements
placements and
and court
court
settlements
settlements
DCF
DCF adds
adds ~$2M
~$2M
annually
annually
Settlements
Settlements add
add
~$1.6M
~$1.6M
Better
Better coordination
coordination
with
with DCF
DCF could
could
improve
improve placements
placements
for
students
for students and
and limit
limit
transportation
transportation and
and
needless
needless tuition
tuition costs
costs
4/27/16
More
More tactical
tactical placements
placements can
can lessen
lessen the
the intensity
intensity of
of transportation
transportation needs
needs
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Classroom based drivers
Transportation
Private placement
Inclusion view
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Appendix
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 150
|
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
1 Review of Special Education in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts: A Synthesis Report," August 2014
2 OESESS City Council presentation, June 2014
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 151
|
SPECIAL EDUCATION
The move towards inclusion at BPS is underway in the current school year
A phasing-in of inclusion by BPS network (e.g., A-G) begins next year with Network
A, with two more networks every year for the following three years
Each phase-in begins at K0 and grows in network every year, over 8 years, until
the network has full, K-8 inclusion; high schools will be phased in on a different
timetable that is still in the planning stages
Costs outlays in the initial years will be substantial, with substantial savings
coming in the out years that will offset and eventually pay for the entire
roll-out by the end of the roll-out
DRAFT
A
A note
note on
on this
this section:
section: The
The Office
Office of
of Special
Special Education
Education built
built costs
costs for
for
SY15-16,
SY15-16, but
but has
has not
not done
done long-term
long-term cost
cost // benefit
benefit analyses.
analyses. This
This
section
section is
is an
an early
early approximation
approximation of
of the
the adoption
adoption of
of inclusion,
inclusion,
performed
performed with
with broad
broad estimates
estimates from
from the
the Office
Office of
of Special
Special Education
Education and
and
other
other experts
experts and
and represents
represents only
only aa rough
rough estimation
estimation of
of outcomes
outcomes
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
Additional classrooms1
# inclusion classrooms added annually
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/ 4/27/
16
16
4/27/16
4/27/ 4/27/
16
16
4/27/ 4/27/
16
16
BPS
BPS began
began moving
moving
towards
inclusion
towards inclusion in
in
SY
SY 14-15
14-15 with
with
wave
wave 1,
1, but
but
recast
recast plan
plan for
for rollrollout
to
network-byout to network-bynetwork
network process
process
beginning
beginning in
in SY15SY1516
16
In
In each
each network
network
the
roll-up
the roll-up will
will
begin
begin at
at K1
K1 and
and
th
th grade
roll
up
to
8
roll up to 8 grade
over
over 88 years
years
4/27/
16
Current
year
1 This roll-out is estimated, as final plans identifying specific classrooms are still in process
Source: Interviews with BPS Office of Special Education staff
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
Additional resources
28 1.0 FTE
paraprofessionals
Costs
$30K each = $840K
10 1.0 FTE
paraprofessionals
Network
Network A
A transition
transition will
will target
target 99 schools
schools for
for full
full inclusion,
inclusion, creating
creating 50
50
new
inclusion
seats,
in
addition
to
students
transitioned
new inclusion seats, in addition to students transitioned
Additionally,
Additionally, 11
11 schools
schools will
will get
get just
just aa grade
grade 11 inclusion
inclusion transition,
transition,
bringing
bringing 135
135 new
new inclusion
inclusion seats
seats on-line,
on-line, in
in addition
addition to
to those
those
transitioned
transitioned
The
The full
full costing
costing of
of inclusion
inclusion has
has not
not yet
yet been
been performed
performed by
by BPS
BPS
SPED
SPED offices,
offices, so
so granular
granular projections
projections of
of costs
costs are
are not
not yet
yet available
available
SY
SY 15-16
15-16 will
will bring
bring
online
online 38
38 new
new
inclusion
inclusion
classrooms,
classrooms, each
each of
of
which
will
require
an
which will require an
additional
additional
paraprofessional
paraprofessional
In
In the
the first
first few
few years
years
of
of inclusion
inclusion
transition,
transition, there
there will
will
be
no
cost
savings,
be no cost savings,
as
as there
there will
will be
be aa
delay
delay in
in BPS
BPS ability
ability
to
to take
take off-line
off-line
sub/separate
sub/separate
classrooms
classrooms
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
4/27/16
Inclusion
specialists
Additional FTEs
# FTEs of each type added per year
1
4/27/16
4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/ 4/27/
$, thous.
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
16
Additional 1,140 2,190 3,210 4,230 4,170 4,050 3,990 2,850 2,550 2,250 1,500
750
para cost
Additional
specialist
cost
Additional
annual
spend
1,410 5,250 6,270 7,290 4,170 4,050 3,990 2,850 2,550 2,250 1,500
750
Total
model
spend
1,410 6,660 12,93 20,22 24,39 28,44 32,43 35,28 37,83 40,08 41,58 42,33
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
As
As the
the number
number
of
of inclusion
inclusion
classrooms
classrooms
grow,
grow, the
the
annual
annual need
need to
to
support
them
support them
will
will as
as well
well
By
By the
the end
end of
of
the
the inclusion
inclusion
roll-out,
roll-out, BPS
BPS
will
will have
have
added
added ~1100
~1100
paras
paras and
and
~115
~115
specialists
specialists to
to
schools
schools
Annual
Annual cost
cost
additions
additions over
over
the
period
the period will
will
average
average ~$3M,
~$3M,
spiking
spiking to
to as
as
much
as
$6-7M
much as $6-7M
in
in SY18-19
SY18-19
1 This roll-out is estimated, as final plans identifying specific classrooms are still in process
Source: Interviews with BPS Office of Special Education staff
SPECIAL EDUCATION
DRAFT
As
As critical
critical mass
mass
4/27/16
of
of inclusion
inclusion
classrooms
classrooms grow,
grow,
aa tipping
tipping point
point
will
will occur
occur
allowing
allowing
elimination
elimination of
of
sub/separate
sub/separate
classrooms
classrooms at
at an
an
increasing
increasing rate
rate
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16 4/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
$, mil.
Annual
sub /
separate
costs
Annual
inclusion
costs
Total
SPED
budget
Impact of
inclusion
4/27/
16
4/
4/
4/
27
27
27
/1
/1
/1
122.0 122.0
122.0
109.8
6
6
6
1.71
1.41
4/
27
/1
98.8
6
4/
27
/1
79.1
6
4/
27
/1
63.2
6
4/
27
/1
50.6
6
4/
27
/1
40.5
6
4/
27
/1
32.4
6
4/
27
/1
25.9
6
4/
27
/1
20.7
6
4/
27
/1
16.6
6
The
The $326M
$326M costs
costs
of
of inclusion
inclusion over
over
13
13 years
years will
will be
be
fully
covered
by
fully covered by
the
the final
final year
year
(SY26-27)
(SY26-27)
6.66 12.93 20.22 24.39 28.44 32.43 35.28 37.83 40.08 41.58 42.33
91.7
83.0
75.8
70.2
66.0
62.3
58.9
1 This roll-out is estimated, as final plans identifying specific classrooms are still in process
Source: Decline in costs scaled to expected decline in classrooms,
determined by interviews with BPS staff and outside experts
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Appendix
Executive summary
DRAFT
BPS has key organizational strengths. At the present, each department is internally wellaligned and works as a team to accomplish its goals; additionally, other than at the top level,
there is a standard manager-employee ratio and generally balanced organizational
structures.
Among peer district BPS has a smaller student to staff ratio. When benchmarked against
other, large districts, BPS still supports a non-classroom teaching staff that is larger as a ratio
than its peers, hinting at further opportunities to streamline
There are also potential areas for improvement that BPS can focus on to be more effective at
serving the students and the city at-large. For example, clear, focused goals could be set from
the top of the district with clarity so that the departments can rally around and support those
goals. Additionally, departments could be sure that KPIs track progress toward goals and are
useful for strategic departmental decision-making. With clearer goals and a KPI structure in
place, each department would be made aware of adjacent goals in other departments, and then
collaboration can be improved. Finally, the Central Office would benefit from a better human
capital system to help on-board, train, develop, meaningfully evaluate, and ultimately retain
its best people.
Improving BPS organization would help to further unlock its Central Offices potential.
The superintendent would have more clarity into the daily performance of the district against its
goals, leading to better accountability. Parents, students, and teachers would have clearer
points of contact for concerns or questions. Collaboration would help ensure that
programming occurs in a more integrated way to better support students.
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
13
4/27/16
4/27/16
40
4/27/16
4/27/16
52
4/27/16
4/27/16
13
119
4/27/16
4/27/16
Observations
BPS has an average of 4.0 direct reports per manager (2-15 across departments)
Departments vary in how many Assistant Directors they have (0-9 per department)
While the pyramid looks mostly standard, there may be too many direct-reports at top level
BPS is within range of peers, but still supports a lower than average
student to non-teaching staff ratio
DRAFT
Moving
Moving BPS
BPS
to
to the
the peer
peer
set
set average
average
could
could reduce
reduce
~500
~500 FTEs
FTEs
of
of district
district
staff
staff
DRAFT
4. Silos (30);
Internal Politics (30)
Therefore,
Therefore, BPS
BPS could
could consider
consider
Defining
Defining what
what accountability
accountability looks
looks like
like for
for its
its Central
Central Office
Office
Reducing
Reducing the
the internal
internal politics
politics and
and bureaucracy
bureaucracy currently
currently experienced
experienced
Source: Values and Alignment Survey of BPS central office staff (n=72)
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/1
6
DRAFT
Strengths
Every department has some form of metrics being tracked and
collected
A few departments can draw a direct link from KPIs to
performance to strategy to diagnose how the department is
doing and make adjustments to better reach departmental goals
Areas for improvement
Most departments, while collecting data, are not collecting data
that would help inform strategic decision-making; even more,
most departments dont even attempt to use that data in their
decision-making
Some departments rely on annual student performance data as
a KPI, despite the low frequency and the lack of defined
causality
Many departments believe avoiding lawsuits is a meaningful
KPI, even though it doesnt help make decisions
Great examples in departments:
OIIT uses dashboards that show real-time performance and
can help diagnose problems and adjust course as necessary
SPED team takes ownership for a collection of metrics and
sets goals based on those metrics
Engagement feedback is collected from constituencies at
every opportunity and used to dynamically improve strategy
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
Decent,
Mostly mentorship
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Employees in my department receive exceptional training
and professional development, number of respondents
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
DRAFT
Strengths
4/27/16
Regular formal evaluations that encourage or redirect
behaviors, number of respondents
4/27/16
I feel like I have never received meaningful feedback and Ive
not once been evaluated since starting my job. Cabinet
Department leader
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
DRAFT
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Food services
Professional development
Transportation
Maintenance
Appendix
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 167
|
BPS has other areas where focus could amount to cost savings
Description
Food
A services
~$5-8M
satellite sites
Highly variable school participation offers
revenue opportunities
Savings
opportunities
$ Millions per year
TBD
~$20-60M
~$1-4M
DRAFT
In
In addition
addition to
to cost
cost
savings,
a
review
savings, a review in
in
these
areas
could
these areas could yield:
yield:
Better
Better food
food options
options
for
for kids.
kids. BPS
BPS
cafeterias
cafeterias perform
perform
better
better in
in taste
taste tests
tests
than
than contractors
contractors
Better
Better PD
PD for
for
schools.
More
schools. More
coherence
coherence at
at less
less
expense.
expense.
Fewer
Fewer BPS
BPS bus
bus lines.
lines.
Fewer
Fewer routes
routes makes
makes
for
for an
an easier
easier system
system to
to
manage.
manage.
Improved
Improved building
building
maintenance.
maintenance. Aligned
Aligned
incentives
with
incentives with
contractors
contractors can
can
improve
preventative
improve preventative
work.
work.
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Food services
Professional development
Transportation
Maintenance
Appendix
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 169
|
ADDITIONAL AREAS
DRAFT
4/27/16
20
45
19
33
62
4
13
9
34
79
12
39
21
101
14
10
47
3
28
6
5
56
18
M
16
58
44
8
48
66
55
67
41
1
7
35
43
52
30
71
2
37
57
49
26
54
77
4/27/16
Boston
4/27/16
4/27/16
Districts
4/27/16
4/27/16
Median
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
BPS is not
4/27/16
4/27/16
getting the
4/27/16
data
4/27/16
tracking it
4/27/16
needs to be
4/27/16
successful
4/27/16
and drive
4/27/16
revenues
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
ADDITIONAL AREAS
78% of FNS budget goes to food and direct labor at school sites
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/27
/16
The
The current
current total
total forecast
forecast for
for 2014-2015
2014-2015 is
is $41M,
$41M, $6M
$6M of
of which
which are
are fixed
fixed
costs
costs and
and so
so shared
shared across
across cafeterias
cafeterias and
and satellite
satellite sites
sites
Current
forecasts
project
$37M
in
revenue
this
year,
Current forecasts project $37M in revenue this year, aa shortfall
shortfall of
of $4M
$4M
Schools
also
pay
$2.6M
for
school-based
lunch
monitor
positions,
Schools also pay $2.6M for school-based lunch monitor positions, not
not
reflected
reflected in
in the
the overall
overall cost
cost
ADDITIONAL AREAS
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
Student
population, by
school type
#, thousands
4/27/16
Cost per
student
population
$
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Whitson
Whitson satellite
satellite
sites
are
sites are less
less
efficient
efficient than
than
cafeteria
cafeteria sites,
sites,
costing
costing 20%
20% more
more
per
student,
per
per student, per year
year
IfIf facilities
facilities were
were
available,
moving
available, moving to
to
cafeteria
cafeteria sites
sites could
could
save
save $1-3M
$1-3M
As
As part
part of
of the
the capital
capital
planning
planning process,
process, aa
cost/benefits
cost/benefits
analysis
analysis should
should be
be
conducted
to
see
conducted to see
how
how investing
investing in
in
new,
new, central
central
cafeterias
cafeterias could
could
save
costs
save costs
ADDITIONAL AREAS
BPS has better participation rates than peers, but still leaves $5M
on the table
Overall meal participation1
% of students in state classified SPED
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Districts
Boston
DRAFT
Median
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/164/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
0.4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
0.4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
0.4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
0.4/27/16
4/27/16
ADDITIONAL AREAS
DRAFT
Lunch participation1
% of students buying lunch
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Next
Next Steps:
Steps:
Investigate
Investigate what
what is
is
driving
high
driving high
participation
participation sites
sites that
that
can
be
pushed
to
low
can be pushed to low
participation
participation sites
sites
What
What are
are ways
ways to
to
incentivize
schools
incentivize schools to
to
get
get rates
rates up?
up?
What
What leverage
leverage is
is
there
there with
with contractor
contractor
to
to drive
drive rates?
rates?
4/27/16
1 BPS Food and Nutrition Services Data, 2013-2014
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 174
|
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Food services
Professional development
Transportation
Maintenance
Appendix
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 175
|
ADDITIONAL AREAS
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27
/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/2
7/1
6
4/27/16
4/27/
16
1
4/27
/16
4/27/
16
9%
9% of
of PD
PD logged
logged in
in My
My Learning
Learning Plan
Plan in
in 2014-15
2014-15 had
had no
no category
category
of
of focus
focus (e.g.,
(e.g., Special
Special Education,
Education, Math,
Math, etc.)
etc.)
27%
27% of
of PD
PD was
was registered
registered as
as having
having other
other as
as category
category of
of focus
focus
1 Miscellaneous areas include: Equity, Adult ed., Social Studies, Science, Health, Early ed.
Source: BPS Office of budget and finance
ADDITIONAL AREAS
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
The average
teacher who used
My LP registered
for 1.5 courses
68% of teachers
registered for
just one class
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Only
Only ~30%
~30% of
of teachers
teachers who
who use
use My
My Learning
Learning Plan
Plan have
have returned
returned for
for further
further professional
professional development
development through
through
the
the portfolio
portfolio of
of options
options
22%
22% of
of courses
courses offered
offered are
are outside
outside of
of the
the traditional
traditional cores
cores set
set of
of academic
academic subjects
subjects and
and training
training functions
functions
and
can
only
be
tracked
as
other
and can only be tracked as other
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Food services
Professional development
Transportation
Maintenance
Appendix
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 178
|
ADDITIONAL AREAS
PRELIMINARY
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16 4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/164/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
Special
Special education
education
drives
drives nearly
nearly 40%
40%
of
of the
the transportatransportation
tion budget
budget
Choice
Choice busing
busing
policies
policies drive
drive the
the
need
need for
for busing
busing as
as
itit is
is now
now
4/27/16
4/27/16
In
In 2014
2014 BPS
BPS operated
operated aa $113M
$113M transportation
transportation
system,
system, over
over one
one tenth
tenth of
of the
the budget
budget
Source: 2014 drill down
ADDITIONAL AREAS
20%of BPS bus routes transport 3% of its student population, while ~60%
of students are walking to bus stops less than a quarter mile away
PRELIMINARY
20%
20% of
of BPS
BPS routes
routes have
have
fewer
fewer than
than 55 students
students and
and
those
those routes
routes collectively
collectively
transport
transport 3%
3% of
of the
the students
students
BPS
BPS transports
transports
The
The average
average student
student receiving
receiving
transportation
transportation has
has 0.16
0.16 mile
mile
walk
walk to
to their
their bus
bus stop
stop
4/27/16
59%
59% of
of students
students are
are classified
classified
as
as bus
bus stop
stop (i.e.,
(i.e., not
not door-todoor-todoor)
door) riders
riders and
and have
have aa walk
walk
of
of less
less than
than aa quarter
quarter mile
mile
59%
59% of
of the
the transportation
transportation
budget
budget is
is $67M
$67M
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
ADDITIONAL AREAS
Area of
opportunity
Description
Parochial
schools
MBTA
passes
DRAFT
1 Due to a number of transportation policy changes this year, Transportation has not been able to isolate exactly how much of savings came from this
policy change
2 Assuming that enough routes are eliminated to capture half of the savings of going from $1,500 a year per student to $260
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 181
|
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
District overextension
Special education
Organizational effectiveness
Other operational areas
Food services
Professional development
Transportation
Maintenance
Appendix
DRAFT Pre-decisional - Proprietary and Confidential 182
|
ADDITIONAL AREAS
Area of
opportunity
FTE
structure
Maintenance
Description
Opportunity
DRAFT
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
Appendix
Before you start the process, the solution space will be bounded by
answers to a few questions
What
What pace
pace of
of change
change to
to the
the new
new footprint
footprint is
is most
most
appropriate?
appropriate?
How
How will
will the
the future
future design
design be
be developed?
developed? Internally?
Internally?
Externally?
Externally? In
In collaboration?
collaboration?
How
How will
will the
the system
system engage
engage the
the community
community
proactively
proactively in
in the
the path
path forward?
forward?
Will
Will the
the overall
overall system
system be
be addressed
addressed all
all at
at once
once or
or will
will
change
change happen
happen neighborhood
neighborhood by
by neighborhood?
neighborhood?
What
What other
other city
city services
services and
and benefits
benefits can
can be
be
brought
brought into
into communities
communities as
as support
support during
during
transition?
transition?
How
How will
will student
student academic
academic progress
progress and
and safety
safety be
be
ensured
ensured through
through the
the process?
process?
DRAFT
DRAFT
A After determining the future state of BPS, the vision for the schools
will best require alignment on approach towards key educational
drivers, including school action guidelines and portfolio strategy
DRAFT
Current enrollment
and mobility
approach
Human capital
challenges
Low levels of
support for receiving
students from lowperforming schools
DRAFT
DRAFT
Data sources
Operations (e.g., school based health
clinics)
Demographics (e.g., enrollment)
Academic performance
Security
ADA accessibility
ESRI and US Census (external, for
population projection)
B The cost-benefit model could provide a critical input and fact base
on financials for decision making
Model outputs
Transportation costs
Communications costs
Open schools
Closed schools
Repurposed buildings
Timing and sequencing
DRAFT
Scenario savings
Scenario costs
Prepare to articulate a
Execute plan
according
to agreed timetable
1 Explicitly
detail the
nature of
the
change
4 Develop
an integrated
stakeholder
engagement
plan
tools/approaches to develop
overall stakeholder plan
Use results of stakeholder analysis
to carefully plan schedule and
agenda of stakeholder interactions
Identify any
5 Execute
Engagement plan
Mobilizing
stakeholders
DRAFT
2 Identify
stakeholders
Analyze and
3
prioritize
stakeholders
individual or group
that impacts or is
impacted by
proposed changes
(e.g., unions, media,
political groups, local
communities, etc.)
Analyze stakeholders
to determine key
needs and interests
and how change will
impact them
Large, formal
meeting
Presentation,
speech
Memo
Channels
Descriptions
Press
conferences
exchange ideas
Workshops/
Small group
seminars
meetings
Video/audio
Town hall
tapes
Voice mail
Web
Informal
2-way communication
Descriptions
DRAFT
Brochure
Bulletin
boards,
posters
meetings
answer
session
Small group
Retreats
dinner
Descriptions
Reach
Message
Frequency
Spectrum of options
Is it appropriate to deliver
tailored, urgent, effective
messages?
Audience response
not critical for
success
Immediate feedback
desired for ongoing
and future
interactions
Effectiveness
Responsivenes
s
DRAFT
Data and
analytics
Policy
decisions
Month 1
Month 2
Month 3
Month 4
July
Data and analytics
Project 10-year
neighborhood
baseline for
student
demographics
Develop initial
financial model
that estimates
costs and
savings
associated with
actions
August
Data and analytics
Refine financial
model and
cost/savings
estimates
September
Data and analytics
Refine financial
model and
cost/savings
estimates
October
November
Data and analytics
Refine 10-year
neighborhood
vision, based on
input to feedback
from BPS team
members and
other key stakeholders, and
build alignment
and ownership
across the team
Finalize financial
model
Policy decisions
Policy decisions
Policy decisions
Align on BPS/
Identify critical
Develop
city approach
participatory
decisions around
towards action
process that
issues such as
and determine
safety,
enables school
annual target
transportation,
actions endorsed
and capacity
budget, policy
by stakeholders
in affected
alignment
Outline potential
policy options
communities
Document set of
around key
reqs for and
issues
constraints to
school actions
Facilitate crossfunctional
dialogue across
key departments/
groups
Month 5
Finalize list of
school actions
Share widely the
results of the
participatory
process
DRAFT
Month 6
December
Finalize 10-year
vision
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
Appendix
DRAFT
Deeper
Deeper data
data dives,
dives, at
at the
the level
level of
of IEP
IEP are
are needed
needed to
to understand
understand whether
whether students
students
in
in these
these programs
programs are
are being
being classified,
classified, when
when they
they may
may be
be over
over classified
classified
Cultural
shifts
in
the
district
may
be
necessary
to
identify
whether
Cultural shifts in the district may be necessary to identify whether classification
classification is
is
systematically
too
high,
or
appropriate,
given
the
student
population
systematically too high, or appropriate, given the student population
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
1 Schools with fewer than 200 student enrollments
Source: Office of Special Education data
DRAFT
Burke High
Middle School Academy1
Excel High
Boston International
Otis Elementary
Henderson 9-121
Community Academy1
Mason Elementary
Comm Acad Sci Health
Edwards Middle
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
1 Schools with fewer than 200 student enrollments
Source: Office of Special Education data
Highest
classifiers
Standardization
DRAFT
Action
Outcome
Interview/observe students in
classrooms to verify proper
placement
Coordinators
Description
Data needed
Tracking student
Student progress
progression/regression in
classification can identify
programs into which more
students should be encouraged
and bring focus to programs
that arent improving student
outcomes
DRAFT
coordinator
in student classifications,
aligned with program
Identify teachers that have
serviced students and align
with their performance evals.
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
Appendix
Short-term
3 months 1 year
Opportunities
Time to realization
Potential to be captured
$300-500K
TBD
$9-11M
$8-10M
TBD
$3-8M
$2-10M
Inclusion
Long-term
1-10 years
DRAFT
for SY 15-16
coordinators
transportation
implementation
Classification
rates
Month 1 + 2
Month 3 + 4
Month 5 + 6
Month 7 + 8
Month 9 + 10
Month 11 + 12
Mar. + Apr.
May + Jun.
Jul. + Aug.
Sept. + Oct.
Nov. + Dec.
Jan. + Feb.
Interview high/
low classifiers
Create school
and student data
from IEP analyses
Develop picture of
drivers of variable
classifications
Identify students
for reevaluation
Develop and
deliver training for
high classifiers
Create school
regression/progre
ssion data from
IEP analyses
Interview
progressing /
regressing
schools
Identify high
regression /
progression sites
Begin to work with
IEP meetings to
move students
where appropriate
Develop and
deliver training
around best
practices
Continue to work
with IEP process
to move students
where appropriate
Continue to work
with IEP process
to move students
where appropriate
Evaluate para.
approach for
SY15-16 through
cost/benefit
Decide on best
approach for para
usage
Negotiate
contracts or begin
adjusting staff as
appropriate for
SY15-16
Implement and
monitor new para
system at schools
Decide on best
approach for
specialist usage
Negotiate
contracts or begin
adjusting staff as
appropriate for
SY15-16
Implement and
monitor new
specialist system
at schools
Create data to
capture universe
of bus attendants
from IEP
Reevaluate
students for bus
attendant needs,
reclassifying
where needed
Monitor any
routes where
attendants have
been removed to
ensure safety
Student
progression
Para
approach
Specialist
approach
Bus
attendant
DRAFT
Continue to work
with IEP process
to move students
where appropriate
Year 2
Year 3-4
Year 5-6
Do analysis of
enrollment #s
in classrooms
Do analysis of
classroom
performance in
feeder
patterns
Identify new,
educationally
appropriate
feeder
Develop
patterns
preferred
feeder schools
Create
process with
DCF for better
placement
Begin closing
classrooms in
alignment with
inclusion
expansion
Continue
class-room
alignment with
inclusion rollout
Complete
class-room
alignment with
inclusion rollout
Begin to align
new bus
routes with
consolidated
placements
Continue to
consolidate
placements
Monitor
placemen
rates
Expand to
Zone A
Expand to
Zones B and C
Begin
identifying
sub/separate
classrooms
that can be
eliminated
Expand to
Zones F and G
Continue
identifying and
eliminating
sub / separate
classes
SPED zone
realignment
Private
placement
& transportation
Inclusion
Expand to
Zones D and E
Continue
identifying and
eliminating
sub / separate
classes
Years 7-8
Years 9-10
Continue
identifying and
eliminating
sub / separate
clases
DRAFT
Continue
identifying and
eliminating
sub / separate
clases
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
Appendix
DRAFT
Smaller top organization increases accountability, focuses priorities, and allow for
more tradeoffs within departments,
rather than across 18 silos
DRAFT
Filter criteria
Relevance
Outcome
ultimately
affects
district
performance
Influencability
Process
owners can
influence
KPIs
Improvement
levers can be
assigned
Availability
Data can be
continuousl
y obtained
Student test
Many BPS departments
scores are not
cite MCAS as a KPI,
useful as an
despite unclear
always available
influenceabilitiy
KPI
KPIs
KPIs could
could be
be
defined
defined for
for all
all
BPS
BPS
departments
departments
along
along relevant
relevant
performance
performance
dimensions
dimensions
such
such as
as
Student
Student
performance
performance
Productivity
Productivity
Quality
Quality
Service
Service
Safety
Safety
4-6 sets of
measures
Source: BPS district interviews
DRAFT
KPIs must be carefully designed using 'smart' guidelines and limited in number
Questions
Simple and
specific
Measurable
Achievable
and agreed
Resultsoriented
Timely
Is it easy to measure?
Can it be benchmarked against other teams/outside data?
Can the measurement be defined in an unambiguous way?
The
The number
number
of
KPIs
of KPIs must
must
be
limited
be limited to
to
help
help focus
focus
BPS
BPS
departments
departments
Organization
Key activities
Amplify superintendents
authority over others in
the system
Ensure forward
momentum toward
aspiration
Typical
challenges
Huge,
complex tasks
Many players
Need for
fundamental
behavior
change
DRAFT
"Minimum
role" of KPI
Team
Potential
additional
roles of KPI
Team
The KPI Team can take the form of any of the three
fundamental setups for a transformation unit
DRAFT
Driver of change
Description
When
does it
work
best
"Existing leader"
Delivery unit"
"Catalytic driver"
Description
Influencing and
Presence and
Problem structuring
Leadership
and
presence
teamwork
listening
Problemsolving
skills
Creativity (able to
Goal orientation
Ethics
Personality
fit
DRAFT
service
different problem
citizens
DRAFT
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
(7-10%)
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
4/27/16
IfIf BPS
BPS were
were to
to decrease
decrease
staff
staff in-line
in-line with
with future
future
enrollment
trends
enrollment trends and
and
historical
historical central
central office
office FTE
FTE
counts,
counts, BPS
BPS could
could shrink
shrink
by
by ~7-10%
~7-10%
In
In 2009-10,
2009-10, BPS
BPS had
had aa ratio
ratio
of
of 5.5
5.5 students
students per
per FTE,
FTE, by
by
2014-15,
that
ratio
had
2014-15, that ratio had
fallen
fallen to
to 5.0
5.0
IfIf BPS
BPS had
had maintained
maintained its
its
2009-10
2009-10 student
student to
to FTE
FTE
ratio,
ratio, in
in 2014-15,
2014-15, BPS
BPS would
would
have
have 9,875
9,875 FTEs,
FTEs, 902
902
fewer
than
six
years
fewer than six years ago
ago
Contents
Executive summary
System overview
Appendix
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
Level 1
(excellent)
4/27/16
Level 2
(good)
Level 3
(probation)
4/27/16
4/27/16
under-demanded schools
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
Under the leadership of emergency financial managers, DPS closed schools due to:
50% decline in student population over the last decade
Growing budget deficit
In 2009 2010, closed 59 schools in a compressed time frame:
Announced first round of closure candidates in March 2009
Final decisions made in April 2010
In 2011, announced plans to close an additional 70 schools by 2014, which will result in a district with only 72
schools
Approach
Approach highlights
highlights
Clear data-driven decision
matrix that included
Clear community
communications
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
In 2012
facilities to operate in
Schools applying for the temporary space do
not have a permanent home
DISTRICT OVEREXTENSION
Pittsburgh
6-7
2006
2007-12
Washington D.C.
2008
2009
Kansas City
2009
2012
2010
involvement
Officials believe they should have allocated extra time for feedback
Potential state takeover if it did not reduce spending gap
Enrollment down 42% between 2000 and 2010 school years
Kansas City actively made case for closures
Secured support of groups such as Civic Council, who paid for an
informational campaign for closings
Residents had input criteria for closures
Local teachers union agreed that schools need to close
Boston Public Schools can benefit from the support of many parents and community leaders for working to
improve the academic situation of every child and trying to create community engagement for local, neighborhood
schools; BPS needs to create this community engagement and not be too aggressive in planning these moves
Source: Closing public schools in Philadelphia. The Pew Charitable Trusts;
New York Times, Local school districts.
HIGHLY
DRAFT PRELIMINARY
Description of
files/metric
Initial
consideration set,
NCES 2010-111
BPS
Number of
peer districts
18,840
Newark
District of
Columbia
Cleveland
Total student
enrollment
between 40-70k
Location:
Large city
~56k
Large city
74%
428
91
34
28
13
Columbus
Atlanta2
San Francisco
% of students
qualifying for free/
reduced lunch >50%
Wichita2
Oakland
Tucson
Number of
students/ school
300 600
Sacramento
Tulsa2
Omaha2
Oklahoma City
List of interviewees
Name
Area
Name
Area
Melissa Dodd
Eileen de los Reyes
Ross Wilson
Eileen Nash
Antonieta Bolomey
Tanisha Sullivan
Michele Brooks
Kamal Chavda
Sam DePina
Kim Rice
Lee McGuire
Mark Racine
Erika Giampietro
Chris Guilani
Linh Vuong
Elaine Ng
Jaime Racanelli
Barry Kaufman
Paul Sloan
Jon Sproul
Shakera Walker
Nate Kuder
Melissa Partridge
Mary Skipper
Margarita Ruiz
Ann Chan
Kavita Venkatesh
Khadijah Brooks
Jonathan Steketee
Jerry Burrell
Carleton Jones
Jon Barrows
Emily Qazilbash