Good Evening.

1. Good Evening.

2. Administrative Hiring “Freeze”

3. The Proposal • It is recommended that the Board of Education direct the administration to freeze (or stop) any further hiring of executive professional staff for central administration until this freeze is formally lifted by the Board.

4. The Proposal, cont. • The administration is directed to provide the Board with written documentation to justify any planned administrative hiring by linking those positions directly to student achievement.

5. The Proposal, cont. • The Board further directs that the administration shall seek to provide recommendations to the Board for finding additional resources to redirect to the school buildings, including increasing staff pay. The administration shall have such recommendation within 30 days.

6. The Proposal, cont. • This hiring freeze is not intended to stop the hiring of school building administrators or positions dealing with the bond issue. The freeze does include purple packet and other contractual administrative hires.

7. First • Hiring freeze • of all executive / professional staff • in central administration

8. Questions • Hiring “Freeze” • Add no new positions? • Add no new people? • What constitutes “central administration” • FOTC – Human Resources • Print Shop – Procurement • Technology – Instruction • Business / Payroll

9. Concerns • “Swiss Cheese” effect • Not only affects current openings • But, as people leave, the positions that are left unfilled are based on the “luck of the draw” • In other words, there is no design to the “freeze” / no logic to it – we could lose all of HR, for example, due to retirement or resignation while other departments are left untouched for the time being • Or, technology could lose several programmers or others who keep our network up and running for the whole system – schools included – with no ability to fill those positions • As critically, this leaves the Instruction department (supposedly our core mission) with at least four, present key vacancies

10. Concerns, cont. • No end in sight • People left behind shoulder “double or triple work” • Central staffing is already reduced from previous years’ reductions • Exacerbate the “flight” from these positions • Dramatically affects our service to schools and the classroom • Self-fulfilling prophecy- express expectations of central services, then reduce so we have fewer people to do the same amount of work, quality and quantity decrease, can’t meet expectations, further reductions, and so forth

11. Concerns, cont. • Doesn’t allow superintendent a chance to work with central staff to improve service and consider if service can be provided a better way • Sends a message to central staff that they are unnecessary • Exhibits lack of understanding of the work there is to do to keep the district operating • Don’t know what you don’t know

12. Concerns, cont. • “Freeze” now, ask questions later – without regard for effects on the organization or its ability to perform • Shoot first, ask questions later approach that appeals to a sound-bite, anti-administration bias in all of us (the people we all “love to hate”)… • That is short sighted at best with long-term negative effects from which the District will not soon recover

13. Concerns, cont. • Executive / professional category includes positions like: • Technology (answering schools’ ”help” calls, keeping the network going, trouble shooting the system) • HR (hiring, assisting teachers and principals, addressing schools’ concerns) • Executive directors and others in Instruction (continuing to support teachers and principals, RtI, CQI, accountability, student achievement) • Other • To name a few…

14. Second • All future hires • to be linked • directly to student achievement

15. Questions • How direct is direct? • Payroll? • Technology? • Communications? • Grounds? • Maintenance? • Transportation? • Superintendent?

16. Concerns • Reflects lack of understanding of the need for positions that are indirectly related to student achievement, but necessary due to fulfilling • Support and infrastructure needs  Payroll  Budget • Procurement Hiring • Records  Charter school support  Grants Risk management • Facilities  Maintenance of the network • Transportation  Warehouse  Boundaries • State requirements and reports • Federal requirements and reports • Board requirements and reports • Other … • So the schools can do their job of teaching and learning

17. Concerns, cont. • Basically saying that we will not be able to replace in theses areas because we will not be able to make the case for a “direct link” to student achievement • Central staff perform many, many functions so schools don’t have to and can concentrate on student achievement

18. Concerns, cont. • Most of these support functions are “invisible” to schools, the Board, the public – but, they allow the schools the freedom to do their jobs and concentrate on students and parents • Most efficient and cost-effective way of operation – one central office instead of 65 schools performing each of these operations themselves

19. Third • Within 30 days • Find additional resources • To redirect to schools • Including increasing staff pay

20. Concerns • Supply and other central budgets already reduced • The only real source of revenue is people • Comprises 85% of our budget • So, this is a direction to reduce positions and people at a faster rate than a “freeze” alone would accomplish

21. Concerns, cont. • Again, centralized services take tasks away from the schools that are necessary, but which are indirectly related to student achievement (which flies in the face of the notion that central office positions have to be directly related to student achievement)

22. Concerns • Doesn’t do away with “the work” – must go somewhere • Just shifts who does “the work” • Assume that “the work” shifts to schools • Which means that, instead of (the formerly) central resources going to increase staff pay, it will go to hiring additional staff at schools to do the work that is no longer being performed centrally

23. Concerns, cont. • Terribly inefficient way to do business

24. Fourth • Includes “purple packet” • And “contractual” • Staff

25. Concerns • Typically, temporary hires for specific projects • A hiring “freeze” here affects many, many projects that directly affect the classroom and student achievement like • RtI • Charter school support • Grants • Communications • Other • Again, who does the work?

26. To Be Clear… • Not arguing against being as efficient as possible • Not arguing against providing schools and classrooms the best service possible • But are concerned about how we do things the smart way • Using CQI more systematically at the central level • Aligning ourselves horizontally and vertically

27. To Be Clear… • We are no more a federation of unrelated, independent departments anymore than the schools should be a federation of independent sites • Rather, we are a system – that needs to be aligned, efficient, customer-services based • With all of us understanding our niche in the delivery of services to students and parents

28. On the one hand… Better service to schools Tantalize school staff with promises of better pay by cutting people centrally and “giving” schools the money Demand more communication and other from Superintendent Yet… Cut the people who deliver the services While ignoring the necessity to now use that money to increase school staff to do the work that has previously been performed centrally, but now has shifted to them Taking away the opportunity to have staff who would help meet Board’s demands Concerned about inconsistent messages tonight…

29. Putting forward a plan under the guise of an “administrative” freeze and reduction Putting in motion a site-based plan That is really a move to decentralize the district – is really a full site-based plan When the research overwhelmingly supports a strong, centralized approach to improve student achievement Concerned about inconsistent messages tonight…

30. I have put forward, within the budget, a plan to significantly • Improve student achievement • Align instructional services to schools • Integrate CQI into instruction • Put our money where our mission is • Improve internal and external communications (two-way) including promoting the district • Address customer concerns • Improve human resources functions identified by Board • Maintain current level of service to charter schools • Other

31. Plan is in line with overwhelming research that says that a strong central approach is essential to moving a school district with our demographics forward in student achievement • Not to mention the business efficiencies of centralizing (indirect) services • Which is the opposite direction from that proposed in this motion for a site-based organization

32. We were tasked last time with bringing forth the research that supports a central approach • And for that we have: • Dr. Terry Bishop, Deputy Superintendent • Dr. Jane Armstrong, Education Commission of the States