Budget Development 03-08-12 updated.pptx [Read …...2003/08/12 · 27.9% Class Staff 20.1% Parents & Community 46.1% 6 Summary Survey Data Analysis 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

Budget DevelopmentSchool Board Study Session

March 8, 2012

1

Agenda

• Budget Timeline• Survey Data Analysis• Budget Shortfall Update• Option Guidance• Way Ahead

2

3

End LegislativeSession

Jan 30 Feb 6 Feb 13 Feb 20 Feb 27 Mar 2

House/SenateBudgets

Board Meeting

Board Study Session

Budget Decision Process

Mar 5 Mar 12 Mar 19 Mar 26 Mar 30

Apr 2 Apr 9 Apr 16 Apr 23 Apr 27

Apr 30 May 7 May 14 May 21 May 28 June 1

Today

CFC MeetingBDT Meeting

Events/Key Dates

TimelineAHP Rating

Intro

RequiredRIF

Action

SSSL

Option Guidance

Demo graphic Study

Ed Plan #1Draft Options

Ed Plan #2Options & Rec

Ed Plan #3Draft Letter & Resolution

Ed Plan Final

Letter & Res Approved

LC Meeting

AHPPresent Data

Draft Survey

Survey Data

Final OptionGuidance

Staff/CommForum

Staff/CommForum

“Potential”if needed

TFR Meeting

PotentialRIF

Action

4

ONLINE SURVEY “SUMMARY RESULTS”

5

Summary Survey Data Analysis

7.0%

39.1%

19.2%

8.7%

14.6%

5.5%

3.6%2.5%

Please mark the description that best applies to you:

Community member (not a currentCKSD parent, staff member or student)

Parent with current CKSD student (nota staff member)

Certificated staff member

Certificated staff member and parentwith children attending CKSD

Classified staff member

Classified staff member and parentwith children attending CKSD

Administrator

StudentCert Staff27.9%

Class Staff20.1%

Parents & Community

46.1%

6


0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

All Day Kindergarten

Secondary Interventions forStruggling Students

Small Elementary Class Sizes

On a scale of 1 to 5, how important are these items formerly funded by I-728:

Answer Options(1) Not

Important to Offer & (2)

(3)(4) & (5) Very Important to

OfferNo Opinion Rating

Average

Small Elementary Class Sizes 160 243 829 9 4.01

Secondary Interventions for Struggling Students 124 237 857 23 4.02

All Day Kindergarten 450 218 536 37 3.10

7


0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

CO-CURRICULAR PROGRAM (highschool and junior high athletics and

activities)

LIBRARY PROGRAM STAFFING(student access to libraries and

support)

SECONDARY STAFFING (smallclasses, zero hour classes and current

course options)

The following three items were the most expensive items identified by staff and community as important to fund at a reduced level. Each of theseitems costs the district over $1 million. Are you willing to FURTHER REDUCE these items in order to keep the I-728 items (elementary class size, secondary interventions, all day kindergarten) you rated in the previous question?

Answer Options(1) Willing to reduce further

& (2)(3)

(4) & (5) Not willing to

reduce furtherNo Opinion Rating

Average

SECONDARY STAFFING (small classes, zero hour classes and current course options) 393 269 506 36 3.17

LIBRARY PROGRAM STAFFING (student access to libraries and support) 364 220 611 9 3.38

CO‐CURRICULAR PROGRAM (high school and junior high athletics and activities) 563 171 454 16 2.85

8


0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

Technology

Maint/Grounds

Learning Specialists

Elem Band/Orch

Custodial Staff

The following items were also identified by staff and community as important to fund at a reduced level. Each of these items costs the districtbetween $350,000 to $550,000. Are you willing to FURTHER REDUCE these items in order to keep the I-728 items (elementary class size, secondary interventions, all day kindergarten) you rated earlier?


& (2)(3)


reduce furtherNo Opinion Rating Average

TECHNOLOGY (training and technical support) 312 331 538 12 3.31MAINTENANCE/GROUNDS STAFFING (repairs and preventative maintenance) 435 333 405 20 2.97

LEARNING SPECIALISTS (support for struggling elementary students) 268 226 686 13 3.63

ELEMENTARY BAND/ORCHESTRA (5th and 6th grade program) 503 213 462 15 2.93CUSTODIAL STAFFING (daily cleaning and minor repairs) 384 291 504 14 3.20

9


39.9%

60.1%

Did you attend any of the staff meetings or community budget forums in January?

AttendedMeetingsDid Not

Attend Meetings

10


24.4%

74.6%

22.6%

3.4% 2.4% 1.9% 0.3%5.8%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

Dis

tric

t or

scho

ol w

ebsi

te

Sch

oolM

esse

nger

(au

tom

ated

tele

phon

e ca

ll)

Kits

ap S

un o

nlin

e ad

vert

isem

ent

Cen

tral

Kits

ap R

epor

ter

onlin

ead

vert

isem

ent

How did you hear about this survey? (Please check all that apply.)

Dis

tric

t or

scho

ol e

-mai

l mes

sage

Kits

ap S

un n

ewsp

aper

ad

vert

isem

ent

Cen

tral

Kits

ap R

epor

ter

new

spap

er a

dver

tisem

ent

Oth

er (

plea

se s

peci

fy)

11

Conclusions

• All items are considered VERY important to a large number of respondents

• The disaggregated data parallels the summary data closely• A few areas have a large (and almost equal) number of ardent

supporters and detractors (1’s and 5’s)– Elementary Band and Orchestra– Co‐curricular– All Day Kindergarten

• Very positive support for programs and positions• Most total responses hovered near the middle (3.0)• If greater reductions are needed all programs could/should be

impacted

12

Budget Shortfall Update3‐8‐12

House Senate

Dec 2011 Shortfall $6.3 M $6.3 M

Feb 2012 Supplemental Levy ($2.0 M) ($2.0M)

Subtotal $4.3 M $4.3 M

Proposed State Budgets ($3.55 M) ($3.8M)

Subtotal $0.75 M $0.5 M

Regular Impact Aid Reduction $0.25 M $0.25 M

Updated Budget Shortfall $1.0 M $0.75 M

Considerations:‐ State Conference Budget‐ Federal Adjustments‐ Regular Impact Aid Changes 13

• Community and Staff Survey – Feb 21‐27• Review Board Guidance – Feb 22• Review of Survey Data and Final Guidance – March 8• Presentation of Options – March 14• Community and Staff Forums – March 15, 21• Presentation of Options and Recommendation ‐March

28• Approval of Educational Program and Staffing Plan and

Board Resolution – April 25• Preliminary Budget – June 20• Final Budget Approval – August 22

Way Ahead I

14

Based Upon The Recently Released State Budget And ATentative New Deficit For SY 12‐13 of $1M Or Less:

1. Postpone March Staff And Community Meetings2. Determine More Precisely The New Budget Deficit3. Provide Preliminary Budget Options By April 20124. Consider Staff And Community Meetings In April 20125. By April 2012‐ Present A Priority List Of Programs To Be

Funded And A Future Funding Source Including HIA 6. Present A Draft Concept Plan For SSL 20147. Continue Legal/Congressional Actions To Restore HIA8. Prepare A Communications Plan To Address:

I. Current Budget SituationII. Potential Restoration Of Heavy Impact AidIII. Potential SSSL Tax Cancellation

Way Ahead II

15

Way Ahead III

• Monitor Olympia Special Session (If There Is One) And be Prepared To Adjust Draft Budget Options Review And Adjust Draft Budget Options During The 14 March Study Session

• Continue To Host Staff And Community Meetings On March 15 and 21

Provide A Budget UpdatePresent Draft Budget Options

• If The Budget Deficit remains <$1M – Provide A Prioritized Reduction List For Up To $12M Not Later Than May 2012

16

Funding Priorities: Heavy Impact Aid Restoration• Rebate Levy Dollars To Taxpayers• Restore Heavy Impact Aid (HIA) In Capital Projects Funds

• Restore Federal Contingency Reserve• Redirect HIA In General Fund

– Replace HIA In General Fund With New Revenue Over Time

• Right Size Infrastructure With Enrollment• Readjust (add, modify, reduce) Programs To:

– Maximize Student Achievement– Increase Instructional Time– Achieve As Much Program Equity As Possible Within Existing

Resources17

Other Funding Priorities

• Identify Future Funding Sources For Funding Programs Previously Funded By I728 Funds: Fully Funded All Day Kindergarten Class Size Reduction Interventions

• Identify Future Funding Sources For Funding: Curriculum And Text Book Replacement Technology

• Identify Future Funding Sources For All Programs Formally/Currently Funded By Heavy Impact Aid Funds: Programs Contracts

18

• New K-5 Math Instructional Materials• CKSD Swimming Pool• Reduction in Force

•I-728 Student Achievement FundsAll Day Kindergarten Class SizeInterventions

19Co-curricular Programs

Third Part of the Process Part III

April 14, 2009

Draft Budget Options• Option One (Budget Deficit $1M Or Less)

– Use Formerly Funded I728 Items To Backfill The Projected Budget Deficit of $1M For SY 12‐13

– Identify A Future Funding Source To Sustain Formerly Funded I728 Items For Future School Years Beyond SY 13‐14

– Use A Combination Of Additional “Savings” From The Current School Year And Additional Program Reductions For Next School Year

– Consider The Additional SY 13‐14 SSSL Dollars And Temporary Reductions For SY 12‐13

• Option Two (Budget Deficit $1M Or More)– Use Option One Plus…….– Use The School Board’s Priority List Of Programs In Conjunction With

The Jan and Feb Community And Staff Feedback

20

Additional SlidesBack‐Up InformationNot For Presentation

• Community and Staff Survey Data• School Board Budget Development Guidance

21

Survey Data Analysis – Summary All Staff





Average




0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00





22


0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00


activities)


support)


course options)


& (2)(3)



Average




23



0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

Technology

Maint/Grounds


Elem Band/Orch

Custodial Staff


& (2)(3)

(4) & (5) Not willing to reduce

further

No Opinion

Rating Average

TECHNOLOGY (training and technical support) 176 176 267 2 3.25

MAINTENANCE/GROUNDS STAFFING (repairs and preventative maintenance) 246 168 201 6 2.91


ELEMENTARY BAND/ORCHESTRA (5th and 6th grade program) 315 110 192 4 2.63

CUSTODIAL STAFFING (daily cleaning and minor repairs) 207 143 270 1 3.2024


Survey Data Analysis – Summary Certificated





Average




0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00





25



& (2)(3)



Average




0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00


activities)


support)


course options)


26


Technology

Maint/Grounds


Elem Band/Orch

Custodial Staff


& (2)(3)


further

No Opinion

Rating Average






0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00


27

Survey Data Analysis – Summary Classified





Average




0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00





28



& (2)(3)



Average




0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00


activities)


support)


course options)

29



Technology

Maint/Grounds


Elem Band/Orch

Custodial Staff


& (2)(3)


further

No Opinion

Rating Average






0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

30


Survey Data Analysis – Summary Administrators





Average




0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00





31



& (2)(3)



Average




0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00


activities)


support)


course options)

32



Technology

Maint/Grounds


Elem Band/Orch

Custodial Staff


& (2)(3)


further

No Opinion

Rating Average






0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00


33





Average




Survey Data Analysis – Summary Parent & Community

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00





34


& (2)(3)



Average





0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00


activities)


support)


course options)


35


0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00


Technology

Maint/Grounds


Elem Band/Orch

Custodial Staff


& (2)(3)


further

No Opinion

Rating Average









Average




Survey Data Analysis – Summary Attended Meeting

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00





37


& (2)(3)



Average





0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00


activities)


support)


course options)

38



0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

Technology

Maint/Grounds


Elem Band/Orch

Custodial Staff


& (2)(3)


reduce further

No Opinion

Rating Average




39






Average




Survey Data Analysis – Summary Did Not Attend Meeting

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00





40


& (2)(3)



Average





0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00


activities)


support)


course options)

41



0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00


Technology

Maint/Grounds


Elem Band/Orch

Custodial Staff

Answer Options(1) Willing to

reduce further &(2)

(3)

(4) & (5) Not willing to reduce further

No Opinion Rating Average




42

Guidance• Guidance – Leadership or direction

– Emphasis in broad terms what direction is required– Amount of detail depends upon:

• Time available to accomplish task• Proficiency of leaders and staff that will do the work

– Broader guidance provides more latitude and allows a proficient staff to develop flexible and effective options

• Constraints/Limitations – Something that limits freedom of action – Do This………….– Do Not Do This…………

43

School Board BudgetOption Development Guidance

• Use School Board Priorities as Established by the AHP• Consider Staff, Student, Parent and Community Member Input

– Data Points 1‐3• Provide at Least Three Options• Consider Suspending Some Programs versus Completely

Eliminating or Reducing Programs For 1‐3 Years• Consider The Long‐Term Financial Start‐up Costs of Any

Programs/Positions That Would Be Eliminated• Consider The Impacts of School Reconfiguration Options • Do Not Provide Any Options That Outlines Disproportionate

Reductions Between Athletics and Activities

44

School Board BudgetOption Development Guidance

• Provide Options That Are Flexible Enough To Adjust To Future Increased or Decreased Revenue

• In the Options Provided Explain The Rationale Used That Integrates or Doesn’t Integrate Staff and Community Input

• Provide At least One Option That Doesn’t Include Any Programs Formerly Funded By I728

• Provide at Least One Option That Continues Fully Funding ADK at The Current Levels

• Provide Options That Balances Personnel Related Reductions That Are Proportionate Between Classified, Certificated and Administrators – Consider Past and Future Reductions

45

School Board BudgetOption Development Guidance• Provide Options That Include Programs For Under‐

Represented/Under‐Served Students. Examples Include:– Interventions– Mentoring– Diversity– ELL

• Provide Options That Include Access to a Balanced Co‐curricular and Activities Program

• Do not provide any options that have disproportionate reductions between elementary and secondary academic programs (example: FFADK and Secondary Interventions)

• Maintain a Portion of All Programs (avoid high “start‐up” costs)

46

Priorities For Future Funding

• Reconstitute The Federal Contingency Reserve (FCR) • Restore Capital Projects Funding Levels• Provide Fully Funded ADK For All Schools• Replace Text Books/Curriculum (examples):

– Social Studies Books +18 Years Old– Primary & Intermediate Reading Curriculum

• Technology– E‐books or Tablets or Electronic Textbooks?

• Tax Payer Rebate

47

Questions

• Analysis and Comparison of Additional Parent Costs That Support Programs Like:– Athletics– Music Program – Advanced Placement

48

Documents

Budget Development 03-08-12 updated.pptx [Read …...2003/08/12 · 27.9% Class Staff 20.1% Parents & Community 46.1% 6 Summary Survey Data Analysis 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00