REGIONAL EDUCATIONAL COLLABORATION

1. REGIONAL EDUCATIONAL COLLABORATION DRAFT Designing a roadmap for hybrid regionalization for Orange, Mahar and Petersham

2. CHARGE OF THE K-12 MAHAR REGIONALIZATION PLANNING COMMITTEE • representing all towns • charged to explore hybrid regionalization model DRAFT

3. (SUGGESTED)GOALS of REGIONALIZATION • Educational • Build educational collaboration to benefit students • Develop shared central office team • Fiscal • Make the best possible use of educational dollars available • Maximize state revenue for education • Avoid duplication of services • Governance • Take initial steps towards possible full regionalization • Maintain local control of elementary schools DRAFT

4. POSSIBLE OUTCOMES OF THIS PROCESS • Hybrid K-12 Mahar Regional District • Orange and Petersham: K-12 • Wendell and New Salem: 7-12 • New Regional District • Orange / Petersham Elementary Regional District • Shared Central Office • Supervisory Union (Orange, Petersham, Mahar) • Supervisory Union (Orange and Petersham) • No change in organizational structures DRAFT

5. HOW WOULD A NEW OR REVISED REGIONAL DISTRICT BE FORMED? • Hybrid K-12 Mahar Regional School District • Required: revised Regional Agreement • Required: majority town meeting votes in Orange, Petersham, Wendell and New Salem • Required: DESE approval • Orange / Petersham K-6 Regional School District • Required: new Regional Agreement • Required: majority town meeting votes in Orange and Petersham • Required: DESE approval DRAFT

6. HOW WOULD A PETERSHAM / ORANGE OR PETERHAM / ORANGE / MAHAR SUPERVISORY UNION BE FORMED? • Required: positive votes of appropriate district school committees (Orange and Petersham, or Orange, Petersham and Mahar) • Would not require town votes • Would not require vote of Union 28 School Committee • Would not require vote of Swift River School Committee • Would not require a revised Regional Agreement DRAFT

7. INCREMENTAL COLLABORATION:designing a process that has multiple options • administrative decisions • sharing of back-office functions • school committee decisions • forming a superintendeny union with another district • hiring a joint SPED Director (or comparable position) • town meeting decisions • joining or withdrawing from a regional school district • regional district decisions DRAFT

8. PARTNERS IN THIS PLANNING PROCESS • Mahar, Orange and Petersham superintendents • Mahar, Orange and Petersham school committees • Mahar K-12 Regionalization Planning Team • W. Mass. Legislative Team • Orange and Petersham town administrators • Massachusetts Association of Regional Schools • Department of Elementary and Secondary Education • Teachers and educational personnel DRAFT

9. ROLE OF MARS • Roadmaps to Regionalization • Changing view of DESE (response to our work!) DRAFT

10. REVIEWING ADVANTAGES • Educational • making better use of educational resources available • able to oversee education of children from K-12 • Fiscal • eliminating duplication of administrative services (multiple state reports etc.) • a larger organization may have increased resilience during on-going budget crisis • possible increased state revenues, grant monies, transition grants, savings on health insurance • Governance • One school committee instead of three • fewer meetings devoted to management, more devoted to educational improvement DRAFT

11. REVIEWING CHALLENGES • Educational • Designing an improved administrative structure • maintaining current significant emphasis on elementary schools • Fiscal • allocating elementary school costs in a fair and consistent way • allocating shared elementary/secondary costs in a fair and consistent way • assessment allocation: ensuring that no town suffers harm • possible increased costs (e.g. salary differential) • Governance • local control / centralization • elementary school governance • school committee composition DRAFT

12. POSITIVE EDUCATIONAL VISION • shared educational leadership for Orange and Petersham (and Mahar) • 6th grade students attend Mahar • Orange moves forward with plans for renovation of existing buildings • back-office functions centralized at Mahar (or other municipality) • maintenance of local educational governance of elementary schools DRAFT

13. NEXT STEPS / KEY QUESTIONS • Educational • What would a shared administrative team look like? • What would happen to School Choice in a K-12 Region? • Should Orange 6th grade classes move to Mahar? • Fiscal • Allocation plan between elementary schools. • Allocation plan between elementary and secondary. • What will we do about health insurance? • What about the Chapter 70 Formula? • Governance • School committee governance. • Elementary school governance. DRAFT

14. TIME AND NEGOTIATION • Not likely to be a quick process • many partners • many obstacles • negotiation takes time • No guarantee of success, but… • the current arrangement is not viable • Solutions can be designed that bridge organizational structures (e.g. new admin structure could be implemented in a variety of ways) DRAFT

15. KEY QUESTION #1:Envisioning a shared administrative team DRAFT What is the ideal configuration for a shared central office team to oversee education at Mahar, Orange Elementary, and Petersham Central?

16. EXISTING ADMINISTRATIVE TEAMS14.2 FTES DRAFT

17. PROBLEMS WITH THE EXISTING ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE • Neither central office nor building level teams are sustainable over time • No office or person is responsible for the K-12 system (and students) as a whole • It’s not the way someone would design a system DRAFT

18. A NEED FOR VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT • curriculum • professional development • programs • increased central office capacity to: • apply for and oversee grants DRAFT

19. THREE NEW SCENARIOS • all three reduce total administrative team size by 1.2 FTEs • all three maintain significant oversight of elementary schools • all three combine two special education director positions into one DRAFT

20. RESULT: INCREASED EDUCATIONAL FOCUS • All three scenarios make better use of existing educational resources • All three create one system-wide administrative team • All three ensure increased consistency, alignment and collaboration DRAFT

21. KEY QUESTION #2:Searching for savings… DRAFT Can an expanded K-12 Mahar Regional School District find significant savings, increased revenues, and/or avoided new costs?

22. SAVINGS, AVOIDED COSTS, INCREASED REVENUES • Would an expanded regional school district be able to obtain health insurance at a reduced cost? • What are the estimated gains from new transportation reimbursement? • Would grant revenues increase because of new central office capacity to seek and win grants? • Would ‘leveling-up’ of salaries outweigh gains from other savings and increased revenues? DRAFT

23. PROCESS FOR EXPLORING HEALTH INSURANCE OPTIONS • Obtain preliminary cost analysis and plan rate comparison (Orange municipal, Petersham municipal, Mahar Regional, GIC) • Estimate net gains (if any) to be had • If sufficient, begin process of negotiations with all associations and with towns • form negotiating team • contract with legal counsel to help lead process DRAFT

24. KEY QUESTION #2:Sharing costs… DRAFT What costs should be shared between the elementary and secondary systems? How should those costs be allocated?

25. PROCESS FOR DESIGNING ALLOCATION PLAN FOR SHARING COSTS BETWEEN ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SYSTEMS • Determine which services will be shared • Dependent upon administrative team model • Dependent upon governance structure (e.g. joint contracting, supervisory union, hybrid region, full region) • Determine appropriate percentages of use (and cost) for each system (elementary and secondary) • Build a spreadsheet to calculate shared costs • Structure a process for periodic review and revision of shared services and costs DRAFT

26. NEXT STEPS: LOOKING FOR GREEN LIGHT FROM PLANNING COMMITTEE, SCHOOL COMMITTEES • Continue to refine new admin team structure • Explore insurance options (would be costs for legal counsel and rate comparison) • Develop allocation plan for new admin team model • superintendents discuss and allocate percentages • K-12 Regional Planning Team reviews • As shared governance structure is defined, similar model is used to share other costs DRAFT

27. YEAR ONE (SY 10-11) - Planning • Planning • Research ideal administrative team configuration for combined Mahar / Orange / Petersham • Research best models and practices for incorporating 6th grade into middle school • Research best use of Orange elementary buildings for preK – 5th grade classes • Research Mahar Central Office assuming school budget and HR functions for Orange and Petersham • Mahar, Orange and Petersham explore sharing SPED Director K-12 • Legislative • pursue DESE approval for differential elementary school funding within a regional school district • Pursue Transition Funding for Regionalization • Implementation • Petersham and Orange share SPED and ELL Director DRAFT

28. YEAR TWO (SY 11-12) - Implementation • Legislative • Planning • Implementation • Shared Central Office administrative team for Mahar, Orange and Petersham • Re-configuration of Orange elementary classes and buildings (6th grade to Mahar) • Formal regionalization of Orange Elementary and Petersham Central in to Mahar K-12 DRAFT

29. YEAR THREE (SY11-12) - ? DRAFT

30. KEY QUESTION #1:Envisioning a shared administrative team DRAFT What is the ideal configuration for a shared central office team to oversee education at Mahar, Orange Elementary, and Petersham Central?

31. A NEED FOR VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL ALIGNMENT • curriculum • professional development • programs • increased central office capacity to: • apply for and oversee grants DRAFT

32. EXISTING ADMINISTRATIVE TEAMS14.2 FTES DRAFT

33. THREE NEW SCENARIOS • all three reduce total administrative team size by 1.2 FTEs • all three maintain significant oversight of elementary schools • all three combine two special education director positions into one DRAFT

34. SCENARIO 113 FTEs DRAFT

35. SCENARIO 1Key changes from existing • Two SPED director positions combined into one • Secondary building level team remains at three • Elementary superintendent position becomes assistant superintendent for elementary schools • Mahar curriculum director position becomes Mahar director of student services • Curriculum coordination is carried out by two positions: director of secondary education, and assistant superintendent for elementary schools DRAFT

36. SCENARIO 213 FTEs DRAFT

37. SCENARIO 2Key changes from existing • Two SPED director positions combined into one • Secondary building level team remains at three • Elementary superintendent position becomes assistant superintendent for elementary schools • Mahar curriculum director position becomes K-12 assistant superintendent for curriculum and accountability • Director of special education also oversees student services DRAFT

38. SCENARIO 313 FTEs DRAFT

39. SCENARIO 3Key changes from existing • Two SPED director positions combined into one • All building principals report directly to the superintendent • One position oversees curriculum and program development for entire system • Separate directors for SPED and student services DRAFT

40. RESULT: INCREASED EDUCATIONAL FOCUS • All three scenarios make better use of existing educational resources • All three create one system-wide administrative team • All three ensure increased consistency, alignment and collaboration DRAFT

41. ADVANTAGES TO ORANGE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS DRAFT

42. ORANGE… •  The newly designed organizational structure of centralized administrative responsibility for district accountability, curriculum, technology, student services, special education, business operations, and professional development would allow for the following opportunities: DRAFT

43. BUILDING SUPERVISION: •  The building principals would be relieved of the district responsibilities to allow for more increased interaction and supervision of teaching and instruction, classroom practices, and district initiatives. DRAFT

44. TEACHING AND LEARNING: •  Principals would have increased time to supervise and support student learning. More time could be focused on student progress monitoring, providing direct feedback to teachers concerning student achievement, at-risk students, instructional strategies, and time on task. There would be improved follow through and support for classroom projects, programs, and targeted instruction. DRAFT

45. CURRICULUM: •  More centralized administrative support would allow principals time to assist grade level teams to improve instructional delivery, assessment strategies, differentiated instruction, and support programs for all students. There would be an administrator with dedicated time to facilitate curriculum and instructional review based on student data and achievement. DRAFT

46. TECHNOLOGY: •  The integration of technology, teaching, and learning would be greatly enhanced through centralized technology administration. Principals would have increased time to support and assess effective instructional practices that incorporate technology, curriculum and student learning. DRAFT

47. BUSINESS FUNCTIONS:. •  Having all business, financial, grants management functions centralized allows principals time for program monitoring, evaluation, and improvement DRAFT

48. PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT: • Teachers would have increased opportunity to collaborate with Petersham teachers to more effectively implement Best Practices in our schools. • Collaboration with Mahar staff would allow for PreK-12activities to better meet the social and emotional needs of children and their families. DRAFT

49. ADVANTAGES TO MAHAR STUDENTS DRAFT

50. ADVANTAGES TO PETERSHAM: DRAFT Principal as educational leader