Easton Public SchoolsFinancial Overview

Easton School Committee October 5, 2015

Current Spending Breakdown….

Need for Closer Scrutiny?

• Staff salaries (79.1%) are negotiated contractually

• Out of District Tuitions (5.0%) – Mandated by law and will be audited as part of Coordinated Program Review (CPR)

• Maintenance is shared between schools and DPW (4.9%) – Considered cost effective approach that is envy of other communities - reduces duplication of efforts – Share in costs

• Equipment/Supplies/Technology (2.5%) – Purchases are done through state bid list for lowest rates

Need for Closer Scrutiny? (Continued)

• Regular Education Buses (3.1%) – Contract goes out to bid to secure lowest price – Recently negotiated three year agreement

• Sped Out of District Transportation (2.1%) – Currently being audited

• Sped Services (1.5%) – Will be audited through CPR• Professional Development (.9%) – Expenditures are

low in comparison to other districts. Easton University has allowed for cheaper alternatives.

• Administrative Expenses (.8%) – System is lean and lacks infrastructure

Other Audits Recently Conducted or to be Conducted in Near Future…

•Energy Audit – Resulted in Esco project•Student Activities Audit – Scheduled for this year•Food Services Audit – Conducted in spring 2015•Copier and Printers Audit – Conducted spring 2015•Business Office Audit – Being conducted currently•Coordinated Program Review – Intensive audit of entire special education program conducted by Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE)

Other Audits (Continued)

• Security Audit – Conducted 2014-15• Phone Service Audit – Conducted spring 2014• NEASC (New England Association for Schools and

Colleges) Audit for accreditation – Conducted fall 2014

• Special Education Transportation – Being conducted currently

• Audit of facilities – Conducted by Dore and Whittier -2014

… A Word about the Strategic Plan

Goal Number Three…

Internal Approaches Listed in SP that will lead to our Being More Efficient…

Cost Saving – Always a Goal!!

Some Important Examples…• A comprehensive review of our food service

program, a change in vendor and a reorganization of staff have resulted in immediate and projected savings

• Moving to electronic collection of fees has reduced hours of time spent accounting for and collecting money. Likewise we are using EZ ticketing to assist in revenue collection and can now better track performing arts money (no cash).

Some Important examples (Continued)

• Point of Sale System in cafeterias has reduced hours spent counting cash, allowed for better efficiency, and improved customer service.

• We have negotiated a lower rate for home/hospital tutoring (mandatory depending on child’s circumstances). Previously $27/hour to 24.06/hour (for home tutoring) and previously $46/hour to $31.58/hour (for hospital tutoring).

• We have consolidated purchasing of supplies for special education programs and increased accountability and oversight.

Areas that could be reviewed more closely?• Technology – Current state of technology and analysis of

expenditures (Part of equipment and Supplies (2.5% of overall budget)

• Professional Development (PD) – Assessment of expenditures and effectiveness of program (.9% of overall budget)

• Regular Education Transportation – Analysis of effectiveness of model, routes, and expenditures (3.1% of overall budget)

QUESTION: Cost in Time and Funds VS Benefit to System???

A case for needed additional funding• Class sizes are statistically high in Easton – 88 sections

over 25 students at OA (at least 10 over 30). 79 sections over 25 at the middle school – This negatively impacts our students and is linked to funding

• Class sizes are key basis of school rankings (See Boston Magazine 2015) There is a direct link to expenditures and rank (See Top 20 B.O.B) According to DESE, out of 322 communities, Easton is listed as 26th from the bottom in per pupil expenditures

• Even among “like” communities we lag in spending• Rankings are likely considered and held against our

students in the college application process

A case for needed additional funding (cont.)

• Because of our large class sizes our students are being deprived of individualized instruction and focused attention

• A child in need of social emotional support will be less likely to receive it in a large class and may not even be identified

• Teacher morale has been proven to suffer in schools with larger class sizes (Glass, 1982)

• Most importantly, research indicates that there is a direct link between small class size and high achievement (Glass, 1982, Whitmore Schanzenbach, 2014)

It’s not just about test scores…

• We have to limit offerings in order to staff “major” courses. Our art offerings, for example have suffered in comparison to neighboring communities

• We are limited in our foreign language offerings to three (French, Spanish, and Latin) and are unable to offer at elementary levels

• For the 2015-16 school year, a concerning, 41 students left the district after grade 8. 9 students left after grade 6.

Important Data…

The following is factual data demonstrating how Easton students are performing in comparison to like districts. Is this where we would like to be? Could any of our areas of underperformance be attributed to our larger class sizes and/or below

average school funding?

BURLINGTON

MANSF

IELD

MARBLE

HEAD

PEMBROKE

WALP

OLE

WILM

INGTON

AVERAGE

FOXBORO

MANSF

IELD

TEWKSB

URY

WEST

WOOD

EASTON

SHARON

STATE

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

7

2722

2732

22

14

3340

31

12

2224.2727272727272

38

3943

4645

42

38

453745

35

4741.1818181818181

MCAS 5th Grade Score, 2015: Science(D. Colton comparable towns)

PROFICIENTADVANCED

Perc

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

Another Important Consideration Regarding the Cost of Education

• Sandra Black, Boston, MA, 1999: a 5% increase in test scores = 2.1% increase in housing price. (Controlled for the impact of “better” neighborhoods)

• John Wilson, Durham, NC, 2009: 10% increase in elementary test scores or an 11% increase in middle school test scores = 11% increase in housing price. A 10% increase in high school test scores= 5% increase in housing cost.

Questions? Comments?