It's hard to say what we will use this year, but I think given the level of -- the reprogramming of federal dollars, Geroff money is really going to fully -- for this program is really going to fully impact us next year rather than this year because of the budget cycles. So in order for us to participate this year, we have to scrape together what Geroff funds we have not committed to our traditional college-bound programs, and that's probably going to come to about $2 million.
I think the number -- well, no, I mean right now we feel with 2200 -- assuming we get maybe 3000 students who participate with an average -- you know, 2 million, 2 million or more, or slightly more than that, should be able to cover us, particularly if we got some additional money from the city. Again, we feel that we could be covered this year in this program with about $4 million, 2 million from us perhaps at the very least and 2 million from the City and that would cover us. I know that what has been talked about publicly is the City providing $4 million. Again, I don't think we would need more than $2 million of that to cover the scholarship, to cover those who are signed up for the program today.
-- because I know how strongly you feel about this. One final comment I want to make is I think this program is important. I think it's well thought out. I think it is something that we need 66 to do for these kids, all of these kids, and I guess the thing that's most upsetting is that the core of people we are talking about who are being excluded, those families, made a conscious decision to remain in Philadelphia when many of their peers, many of the same families, the same structure families, were moving into Washington Township, Delaware County, Montgomery County, and going to public school out there. These parents made a conscious decision to stay in the city and to be loyal to it, only to be told that their kids and their needs are not going to be met or are going to be excluded as a reward for staying in the City of Philadelphia.
No, no. Again, I preface all of my remarks by saying I understand your personal opinion, but I want to make sure it's clear as time goes on and the clock ticks, we are getting to the point where it is not even going to be effective for some of these kids to apply because the time frame is going to be gone.
So there is absolutely no 67 confusion, you bring me here, you expect me tell you the facts. The bottom line is we feel that we won't need any more than $2 million from the City to fund the program the first year and we don't think we will need more than million in our Geroff money, which we have to scrape together. million should cover it based on our assumptions about the average tuition subsidy that they would need, and the enrollment to date. We are anticipating, obviously, that we may approach 3000 by the time we are over, but for that year -- for this year we think 4 million can cover it. And, again, we have two million in Geroff and of course we would not need the full amount that the Council has -- that was in the original budget that was presented to the Council. So I mean that is just a fact. You know, we don't have the enrollment that we anticipated. Next year it will be a different story, but next year we will have more Geroff money freed up. We think it's a good program. I can't argue with your points. I think when it comes to these type of programs, all of the children should participate. And let me 68 point out that our numbers include charter school children too, so we have a responsibility to provide those services or that type of subsidy to the charter school kids too.
I'm very glad to hear that the head of our School District agrees with us that this should be shared with --
Apparently there are a lot of people that are agreeing, but nothing is being done.
We are going to have to -- something has to be done very, very shortly in the next few days.
We have been debating this issue since the early part of April, and we were led to believe that there would be an extension for the applications. I just have one simple question, and then, Councilman, you can have all the time you want.
Whose decision 69 is it to make certain that the parochial school children and the private school children do have an opportunity for this program?
That is the City Council. I mean us. Right now we have federal Geroff money, and we have to use the federal Geroff money as provided by state -- by federal appropriation. We have to it use it for public school kids, but if the City decides to, say, split the money that was in the original budget proposal and provide half for nonpublic school children, we can certainly extend the date and --
What was the purpose of extending the deadline date?
Yes. Look, the earned income credit. We go crazy trying to get people to sign up for the earned income credit. Sometimes even when the money is out there, you are not going to get that level of participation, so we have had to do a lot of outreach. Right now we think we can 70 do this program with no more than 2 million from the City. If the City elected to allocate the balance of what was put in the original budget -- I believe it was 4 million -- we could extend the application date a little longer and wait for the Archdiocese to submit their prescreened list of qualified students, and we could have a nice first year of the program. We can then sit back and assess who participated and what the actual costs were and then we can go back and see whether or not there is ways to improve the program next year, for that matter to secure additional funding for what is truly a very worthy program. So if the Council elected to allocate a portion of the money to nonpublic schools, we could extend the application deadline to accommodate the Catholic and parochial schools and private schools. We could do that for --
Time is of the essence right now, Madam President, because it is obvious that there is a willingness by the superintendent of our School District to move on ahead and make this happen for nonpublic school students. There has to be a will from the 71 administration, and they have publicly stated here and I have been told that this will be worked out. It is just that now time is of the essence. We are running out of time, and the numbers that Mr. Vallas has given us and Mr. -- I'm sorry.
-- Williams indicates that even if 2000 of our children from public school system got the maximum of $3000, it would be a $6 million program, so it is obvious, and the research that I have done again coincides with the comments of Mr. Vallas in the first year. There is not an overabundance of kids that would be applying. It will be a sad day in Philadelphia if we limit this and not enough children applied for the scholarships when we have so many of them that need the money, that can use the money to further their education. So I am glad to hear from the superintendent that he is with us on this and that we are going to have to act on this and act on this very, very soon. Thank you, Madam President.
Madam President, just a point of information for purposes of clarifying. We project the average grant to be about $1,500. So it is really -- when we look at our 2200 students, we are multiplying 15,000 times 2200 students, and that is how we get to that figure that I have talked about. That's why we think it is affordable. The program allows for the grants to be as high as 3,000, but many of our kids are going to go to state schools, which means 85 percent of our children are eligible for either full or at least substantial aid, college aid. So we feel that the average grant will be about $1,500. If there is more children who sign up, we can always prorate the scholarship. We can always prorate the subsidy for the first year. So that certainly gives us an option should we have a rush of applicants before the end, before the deadline date is over. But I think the principal is -- it's a good program and I think it should be extended to everybody, and we certainly have no problems sharing resources with the parochial and private schools on this issue. 73
Thank you, Mr. Vallas. The Chair recognizes Councilwoman Blackwell.
Thank you very much. Mr. Vallas, I mentioned yesterday that I was the guest speaker for the mathematics, civics and science charter school annual scholarship program. I assume -- at that affair they had some of the students who were graduating. They must have had there, who all came up and named the college 14 they would be attending in the fall, so I assume 15 then for that charter school they have already made 16 application. They are trying to stay on top of 17 things. 18
I am sure they have, 19 absolutely. We do aggressively promote this program 20 in the charter schools. Knowing Veronica Joiner the way I do, she probably submitted every single application.
I just wanted to get 74 in one last question with regard to the scholarship issue. You mentioned that the Archdiocese apparently already has prescreened some students. Do they have a list, the Archdiocese?
We don't know what the Archdiocese does in particular as they prepare their children to prepare for their FASB, but it is a normal process.
FASB, which is the total financial aid package that a young person has to fill out to apply and to be awarded financial dollars to go to college. Literally every school district, every high school, has some kind of mechanism in place where there is a counselor or some other body that helps young people get prepared.
Let me understand this. If there is going to be a resolution to this issue, if -- you talk about deadlines being extended, coordinated efforts. Who is going to do that and how will the nonpublic school parents 75 access the program? Put the timing issue aside. You can extend the deadline as long as you want. At what point do the parents and the students get information that says, one, you can apply, your name gets on some list somewhere, and then when the adults get finished playing around, trying to figure out what the adults should be doing on behalf of the kids, how does it get resolved?
I believe once it is approved that a portion of the allocation can be awarded to the private and parochial schools, we will immediately with the Core Philly group meet with the parochial schools and get information out to them immediately. The general application is already formatted, which simply means it could be adopted within a day's time and sent out to the schools.
Well, today is May 17. School is over in what, a month?
So every day that goes by is another day lost, is another piece of information that somebody doesn't get and everyone is waiting for some answer to drop down from the 76 sky. I mean, what about a more proactive approach that at least works towards the belief that something different is going to happen, that a resolution is going to take place, that people will have an application, go through a process. They understand upfront that there's still some details that need to be worked out, but you capture all of the information in the current environment because they are all going to disappear at some point in time. I mean this is an exercise that would lead the cynical to believe that all that is going on here is an effort to run the time off the clock and that somewhere in the course of the summer they will say, oh, you know, we resolved it, but now they have gone to the four winds of the universe. Why don't you get resolution on all of the details, and if we ever figure out, because it is real simple how to figure it out, that the money is going to be available, then you have established a contact and you have an application, you know who the kid is, and you can track him down. We only have a month to do this, and from your perspective you will say you are not in control of the process, 77 right?
Look, we have no problem with that. We will contact the Archdiocese this week and ask them to prescreen their people. If the Council does decide to allocate a portion of what has been budgeted, then the prescreen will be done.
Do the part you can do. We'll do, hopefully, what we're supposed to do, but I don't want to get caught in a situation where we proclaim at some point in time we have resolved all of the issues, agreements have been made, funding is available, and then we say, "Where are the kids? Oh, they are gone.
I think it is an excellent idea, and there is plenty of time to get all of the eligible students who are interested in the program signed up. We will call the parochial school superintendent's office and we will notify some of the other private schools and ask them to do some prescreening so we can move expeditiously should the 78 Council do that.
I'm only going to ask you to do one other thing. As you take those steps, if you could keep us informed through the President's office as to what is going on --
If anything is going to happen, it is all going to happen in the course of the next month literally. We are out of session on June 17. Today is May 17. There are a lot of things that have to happen in the course of the next 30 days. This is one of them.
We will give you an update on Friday. We will update the Archdiocese and the private schools within the next couple of days, so we can reach out to all the private schools.
What I'm saying is there is not going to be -- I'm not going to have a problem notifying all of the parochial schools, but there are many independent little private schools out there, so what I'm saying is give me two days to get 79 everybody notified, but the Archdiocese will be the first to know.
And the process will be this: We will ask them to put together a prequalification list in anticipation of this program being put together and we will ask them to give us a date on when they can get the prequalified list to us and we will inform the Council of that, and then we will give you a status report on Friday or before the end of the week.
Thank you. Are there any other questions for members of the committee? Councilman Ramos.
I just want to make myself available to you because I have gone back and forth with the Archdiocese on this issue, and if I can be of any help to speed this up, and I'm sure Councilman Kenney and those of us here on City Council, Madam President, all of us have been involved to make sure that this is a fair program 80 across the board. I don't want to speak on behalf of my colleagues, but I will say we want to get this done and I'll be available to you.
Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounded like the School District was going to be finished in a second, or was it my understanding that we have other people from -- we have representatives from the PFT who are going to testify and then the School District is coming back?
No, no. It's my understanding that Mr. Ted Kirsch is here. He would like to testify now, and at 4:30 we are going to have public testimony. And as far as I know, today is the last of it for the school district.
I understand, Madam Chair. I guess I was under the previous impression that we were basically taking a break for Mr. Kirsch and possibly Mr. Jordan, and that the District was going to come back.
That's fine. If that is your desire, we can do that.
We will be more than happy to come back. In fact, we won't go far.
No, please don't. Good morning. Please identify yourself for the record and proceed with your testimony.
Good morning, Council President Verna, Councilwoman Blackwell and City Council members. I am Ted Kirsch, president of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers. By my side is Mr. Jerry Jordan, who is vice president of the PFT. I wanted to thank you for the opportunity to speak on behalf of the 21,000 members of the PFT this morning. S. Supreme Court's Brown versus the Board of Education ruling, which ended legal segregation in the nation's public schools. In Philadelphia we have seen a rapid 82 succession of changes in the past two years including the institution of a standardized curriculum, new after school and summer programs, expansion of alternative schools for disruptive students, intensified professional development, and a capital improvement program to modernize Philadelphia's aging schools. During the many years that the PFT has been engaged in a dialogue about education with the District and the City Council, we have advocated for these and other important educational reforms to help raise student achievement. While Philadelphia's children have begun to make academic progress, there are several education reforms that have yet to be completed. We believe these are essential to transforming every school in Philadelphia into an excellent high-achieving school. Our number one item: Safety, order and discipline. In spite of the District's efforts to address student misconduct, the daily barrage of verbal and physical abuse of staff, students, and the property by some students continues to be the number one concern voiced by PFT members. Simply 83 stated, PFT members say that administrators often fail to provide consistent and effective support for discipline. PFT members report increasing numbers of children who present serious discipline challenges from elementary through high schools. Disruptive, threatening and sometimes violent student behavior is a persistent problem. We applaud the expansion of alternative schools like the three community education schools which have provided some relief. However, in high schools, new teachers, some only a few years older than their students, are often overwhelmed by the disrespectful, uncivil, and at times threatening behavior they encounter. I believe we can improve the learning environment by holding students to strict standards of behavior and enforcing those standards fairly and consistently. Further, I urge the Council to work with the District to put uniformed, on-duty Philadelphia Police Department officers in troubled high schools. And I might add that when I began my career in the Philadelphia public school system at Overbrook High School we had a full-time officer on duty, and that 84 officer was not just maintaining the security of the building but was a community liaison, someone that knew what was happening in the community, and many times there were difficulties with youngsters in the community that did not spill over into our schools. It was a program that worked. In New York City recently they have added police officers to the most unruly schools, 10 and we have found that since January, when these 11 officers were put into the schools, that there was a 12 steady decline of approximately 9 percent where the 13 difficulties and reports of incidents took place. 14 Last week The Public Agenda, a 15 nonpartisan education research group, published a 16 report entitled "Teaching Interrupted" which concluded that student conduct is derailing learning particularly in urban schools across the country. At a time when we are desperate to recruit and keep qualified teachers, one in three teachers said they have seriously considered quitting the profession or know a colleague who has left because student behavior problems have become unmanageable. 85 percent of veteran teachers agree that new teachers in particular are not equipped to 85 tackle serious behavior problems and are more likely to leave teaching because of out-of-control student behavior.
Discipline is not a problem that any one group can tackle alone. It must be a community effort that draws support from the District, City Council, the police, school employees, community groups and, most important, parents. We urge the Council to help the District develop a program that does place uniformed, on-duty police in troubled schools. In addition, I would like to add my support to those who have asked City Council and the District to find money in this budget to install appropriate traffic signals, flashers and signs around every school in the City beginning with elementary schools. One child injured by a vehicle on the way to school is too many, and I hope you will do everything in your power to prevent another senseless injury or death of a child walking to or from school. Our second item of concern is having real class size reduction. Again this year we urge our friends in City Council to continue to fight for 86 real class size reduction in Philadelphia public schools. Philadelphia has been creative in its use of federal money to develop the literacy intern program to increase the ratio of adults to children in the lower grades. That program, however, will only take us partway to closing the achievement gap. Class size research, which began in Tennessee years ago, showed significant and 11 long-lasting gains in reading, math and science 12 scores for children who are in classes with 15 to 17 13 students and one certified teacher from kindergarten 14 through third grade. By the eighth grade those 15 children are one grade level ahead of their peers in 16 regular classes of 25 students for classes of 25 17 students and a classroom assistant. The gains made 18 in small K to 3 classes are sustained through high 19 school where students are more likely to take 20 advanced placement classes, college entrance exams, and graduate on time. In Philadelphia, classes in kindergarten to third grade contain 30 students, and with literacy interns there can be as many as 34 children in a classroom. That is too many for effective 87 teaching and learning. If we truly want children to leave the third grade performing on grade level, we can no 5 longer ignore 20 years of solid educational research that proves that classes with no more than 17 children are the springboard of a lifelong learning success. Our third issue is the issue of retention of qualified teachers. No one disagrees that students do better when taught by certified teachers who have mastered their subject area and know how to convey the material to children. Research shows that college-educated, certified teachers improve student achievement. Without certified teachers students lose out. There are several steps we must take to improve the chances that qualified teachers hired by the District will stay and help us develop the core of experienced, qualified teachers that every school needs. Research shows that teachers leave Philadelphia public schools for a variety of factors. Among those are low pay and a lack of tuition reimbursement, which is standard in many of 88 our surrounding districts, as well as overcrowded classes, lack of professional support, persistent discipline problems and shortages of critical resources such as books, supplies and technology. The District's new teacher coach program is helping new teachers develop important skills and learn effective teaching strategies, and the new districtwide curriculum is providing a roadmap for new teachers to follow. But at a time when competition for good certified teachers is fierce, we will have to do more to help retain our talented staff across the City. Qualified teachers are more likely to remain in the District if their schools have strong leadership, small classes, good working conditions, competitive salaries, good benefits, support for discipline, and incentives such as the aforementioned tuition reimbursement. College loan forgiveness and housing incentives will also help recruit teachers.
These initiatives can and should be pursued. And, finally, our fourth major objective is to have equitable and adequate resources. S. Supreme Court decision was 89 handed down, and I quote, In the field of public education the doctrine of separate but equal has no 4 place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal, end quote. The promise of Brown and the civil rights movement has been achieved in one respect: Access. People are no longer segregated or excluded from public facilities based on race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation. This is a significant achievement that should be celebrated. Unfortunately, a new system of segregation is emerging in cities across the nation. According to a January 2004 study by the Civil Rights Project of Harvard University, resegregation is a major concern in urban areas where there is less and less racial and ethnic diversity. More important, in the years since the Brown versus Board decision was handed down, we have learned that access does not guarantee equality, and in this Commonwealth there is much work ahead to guarantee that all children have equal access to high-quality education programs and services. The future of the children who attend the public schools in Philadelphia can only be 90 assured if we renew our commitment to providing children equal educational opportunities. One year ago Congressman Chaka Fattah introduced a student bill of rights that would hold each state accountable for providing equal and adequate educational resources to all its students. It would require all children to have qualified teachers, a challenging curriculum, modern textbooks and materials, small classes, guidance counselors, librarians, technology, and appropriate facilities. This kind of educational equality is long overdue. In too many Philadelphia schools today budget cuts are robbing our children of educational opportunities that students in other neighboring districts take for granted. School libraries are closed. Music and art programs have been dismantled, and sports programs are decimated. In short, the programs that motivate students and enrich education are gone. School budgets may well be balanced, but they have been balanced on the backs of our children. Those of us in leadership positions must not let another 50 years go by before we change government funding formulas to provide what is 91 needed to make our schools work for all students. I urge you to join us in this goal because the children of today cannot afford to wait 50 years for educational equality. Thank you.
Thank you very much. Are there any questions of our witnesses? Seeing none, I thank you. Thank you very much.
Mr. Vallas, if you would come back to the witness table, please. Councilman Nutter, did you want to be recognized at this time?
Thank you. Last week when we were together we talked a little bit about issues like art and music and sports and library services at the various schools and some of the concerns that have been raised, at least with regard to a couple schools in my district; other conversations that we have had, Mr. Vallas, as regarding some other schools. Is there any update on issues 92 surrounding the standards for art and music and library services and physical education and those kinds of issues, the kinds of choices and decisions that some of the principals have to make? You did put on the record that there are changes in a variety of formulas, whether it's special education, Title 1, and desegregation money. Any additional information in that regard?
No. Well, first of all, the schools in question, the schools that I was directed to look at predictably lost money because of two things: Number one, they lost enrollment and, number two, they were affected by the change in the minimum funding provision concerning Title 1. Just to summarize, two years ago school districts -- every school district was guaranteed a minimum of $75,000 in Title 1 money, and last year we raised that to $250,000, in part because we felt we were giving schools so much additional money, close to 80, $90 million in textbooks and class size reduction and a number of other things, that we felt that this was a time that we could change the Title formula and provide a higher minimum funding level. 93 It also reflected the fact that we were getting an additional, I think it was, or $8 4 million -- I'm sorry -- $15 million in Title 1 5 money. So, in other words, the federal government 6 actually increased Title 1 funding for two 7 consecutive years by a substantial amount, and so we felt that this was the time to raise the hold harmless. We were challenged -- or we were threatened with a lawsuit, and we were challenged by a coalition of groups who felt that we didn't have the right to do that, so as a compromise we decided to lower the hold harmless and we worked out an agreement whereby the hold harmless dropped from 250,000 to, I believe, $175,000 minimum. The effect of this was schools that had seen a big bump in their Title 1 because of this minimum hold harmless formula suddenly saw a decline in their Title 1, not -- you know, they still have close to a hundred thousand dollars more than they have gotten in the past because of the minimum funding guaranty, but, nevertheless, obviously if you budget from year to year and you get $175,000 increase one year and a $75,000 decline the next 94 rear, obviously the next year is the year that is going to impact you. And there may have been a number of schools that went out and budgeted -- they funded certain things or they expanded certain things, but the bottom line is those schools are still a big winner because that minimum funding guaranty is higher than it has been in the past. I also want to make one final comment. Every year when we change the funding formulas -- the funding formulas change because population changes and the number of poverty children change, or, in the case of the special education formulas, those formulas are being revamped so that money follows the kids, but we provided all of the schools with a hold harmless so we would minimize their aggregate losses from any of these categories. So, indeed, at least a couple of the schools that you cited, that you made reference to, not publicly but privately were schools that lost because the hold harmless was adjusted and because they lost population. That's simple. The money follows the kids, believe it or not.
I understand that. 95 There may have been one where the population increased, but we can talk about that later. The other schools in question, a couple of them are Daroff and Blueford, and then I have got apparently a resurgence of what seems to be an annual or every-couple-of-year issue with regard to Shawmont and their music program, which appears to be under distress or possible attack. I would like to get an update from you on those issues, not at this moment, but at least I want to have them recognized.
I was going to mention, only because the comment has been made about music and art and athletics, indeed over the past decade or so, those programs have been cut. Last year when we presented our first budget we stemmed those cuts. We just stopped eliminating those positions, and we have actually begun to do some limited add-backs in terms of creating new positions. But what we have also done beyond that is we have invested a considerable amount of new money in athletic equipment, gym and athletic field renovations, and last year, and now including this year, a considerable at of money for the purchase of 96 new musical instruments and things of this nature, last year $400,000, this year over a million dollars, so we are working our way back. It's not anywhere near where it should be, but we are beginning to inch our way back.
But, for instance, why would there be a cut in a music program?
Well, not during -- well, schools decide to expand their own programs. For example, we don't fund elementary school librarians. That is something that has to be taken out of the local school district's Title 1 budget. I don't remember when the board eliminated funding for librarians. We restored central office high school librarians to the budget, but we couldn't afford to pick up the cost of all the elementary school librarians, and that was left up to the local schools. Many schools have elected to have a librarian or hire a LIMA, which is a less expensive librarian where other schools have decided to reduce class size even further and not hire that librarian. Same thing with music. We provide -- and Wayne Harris is here. He could probably explain 97 to you how we fund our music and our teachers, but there are schools that decide to support larger art and music programs, and if they lose their Title 1 money, they may elect to cut those programs.
Therein lines the issue in what I have tried to get back to both today and last week. If we have certain standards for what kinds of programs and activities we believe should be in a school, then I think some of these issues just -- they are not options. I mean, you can have music, but maybe you don't have a librarian. You can have art, but you don't have music. I mean, I think you know me well enough to know and certainly in my many go-rounds with Mike Harris, you know, I'm not either naive or Polyannaish about any of these issues, but it's not like the principal has the option to say, "Well, we are going to have math but not English." I mean, you have to have both. That is part of the standard operation of the school. And what I'm suggesting to you is unless there were some community outcry or every parent in the school said, "I don't want my kid to even be exposed to music or art or library," short of that, 98 which would be a rather insane situation, these choices that are being made -- I know you are saying they are at the local level. Principals can get what they want. They can take it from the shelf or have it or not have it, and what I'm suggesting to you is English, math, science, geography, somewhere in the midst of all the other things that are a standard part of the curriculum, art and music and library should be on a list of things that you just don't really get to touch at some level. Now, if you want to have an orchestra, that may be a different story.
I think what I'm saying is I will get you the specific requirements, what specific minimum requirements, we impose on the schools for art and music both at the elementary and high school level. Right off the top of my head I can't tell you what that is, but I will get you the background, or I will get you an explanation of that. I think what I'm saying is a couple things: First of all, on the issue of librarians, I feel every classroom should be a library, and rather than have a 50 or $60,000 librarian, if you can 99 reduce class sizes and put a classroom library in the every classroom and hire a LIMA, which is a --
It's called a LIMA, which is a library technician. It is not a full-blown degreed librarian. They can do a very effective job at elementary schools.
No; they still operate under the library, but they are not the traditional union title librarian with the pay and the status and all the things that librarians are --
I need to get you an explanation of what the requirements are. Right off of top of my head, it's --
I think what I'm saying right now, though, is at the elementary school level some choices are made. There's supposed to be music and art instruction at every level, but it is certainly not at the degree we would like to get it 100 to. So school districts take it upon themselves to use their discretionary money to enhance their programs. Now, how are we going to get at the issue of art, music enrichment? In the following ways: First thing we are going to do is -- first thing we are doing is we haven't cut our art and music teachers, number one. Number two, we are beginning to hire back. We are beginning to supplement. We are working with the various universities and art institutes so we can get part-time music teachers and music majors and music teacher student majors working in the schools so we can supplement our staff. The next thing we are doing is replacing all of the hardware. In the area of sports we are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in new sports equipment. In the area of music we are purchasing more musical instruments. I have problems in schools where I have a music teacher and I don't have any musical instruments in that school. So we are beginning to replace the materials that were lost to us over the past few years. 101 And now the third thing that we are doing is one of the five core curriculum areas that we are standardizing is the music and arts curriculum. Our goal here is to provide all of the teachers, particularly the elementary school teachers, particularly those primary grade teachers who obviously have to be multidisciplinary, with basically a music and art curriculum that can be incorporated into the general curriculum. The arts curriculum, the arts standardized curriculum, is probably about a year away from completion. For obvious reasons we focused on language, art, math, and this coming year on social studies and sciences. So I think through those three things, not cutting what is there and beginning incrementally to add back, tapping into the university system and into the art community so that we can get part-time musicians and artists -- our partnership with Joan Golden, for example, that we are negotiating is to enhance art in the schools by bringing Joan and her considerable leadership and resources into the schools so we can have programs -- purchasing new equipment, new materials, replenishing our supplies, upgrading our athletic 102 fields -- I mean in the capital plan we have literally five supersites in the planning stage, and we are going to, within the next five years, revamp at least of our athletic fields -- and then 6 fourth is to basically provide a standardized 7 curriculum for every elementary school teacher 8 because most of the music and art that is taught at 9 the elementary schools is not only taught by the 10 music and art teacher. A lot of times that art 11 teacher is doing more coordinating than teaching. A 12 lot of times at kindergarten, first grade, second 13 grade, third great level, at those younger grade levels, it is those teachers that have those interdisciplinary skills teaching in more than one area.
Why don't we do this: Can you provide to us through the Chair a listing for each school, whether they have art, music, physical education, library services, and whatever level of sports that school has available?
Just go school by school. Let's go back to the capital program. 103 When you were last up, I was asking you but this company URS, who is your program manager for the capital plan, and you said they are out of San Francisco and they operate nationally or internationally. They have a $24 million over-three-year contract. Who else is involved in this project?
Yes, sir, they have -- they have subcontractors that are also under their contract. There are five subs that they use. Among all of the subs and the prime, they would have 37 employees. And you has asked before --
Hold on one second. So you have URS and five subs. Is that correct?
And what is the total amount of all of those contracts?
25. And what are 5 the individual contracts for the other five subs? 6
Did you want the contract 7 breakdown? I can get that for you later. What I 8 have is the employee breakdown. 9
I will take that, 10 but I would like the contract breakdown as well. 11
We were going to send you 12 that as well. 13 URS, 13 people; Polotnik 3; Gingully, 7. 14
I'm also planning on sending 17 it to you as well. 18 Polotnik, 3; Gingully, 7; McKissock, 9; 19 Contract Compliance, 3. 20
Yes, it is, sir. 22 S & G, 2; URS itself, 13. 23 The other thing that I wanted to mention 24 is proportionality. The contract itself over three years has a work base of 1.1 billion in 105 construction. The value of the contract is approximately 2.5 percent of construction.
The overall work is 1.1 billion, the contract is 2.5 percent, which is the million? 7
Yes, sir. 8 Mr. Vallas had also mentioned that we 9 used construction managers as well. Construction 10 managers per our SRC in aggregate are to come in on 11 projects at 3.75 percent. 12
We have preapproved 14. We 18 are negotiating with the 14. It will probably be 19 fewer than 14, but what we have done is, per the 20 SRC, we have capped the number of aggregate 21 administrative fees to 3.75 percent of the total 22 construction package. 23
That is on top of the 1.1. 106 1.1 billion is the construction base.
Let me point out in picking these percentages, we are really using national and regional bench marks, so that the percentage allocations are not only consistent with those bench marks, but historically they are low.
In a $1.1 billion school construction program or any sort of construction program, you are going to spend --
I am not making any commentary. I'm quickly trying to just do the math.
For the total CM fees it is probably going to come to $25 million also. It depends on what we finally negotiate, but to say we will spend $25 million on construction manager fees -- wouldn't you say, Karen?
3.75 and 1.1 billion -- it is close to 4 percent of a billion. Sounds 107 like -- sounds like 40?
Councilman, the District has always used construction managers on its projects even in the past before this new program, and the fee range for your CM at that point was easily 6 to 7 percent rather than a smaller amount.
Yeah. To be honest with you, having no real base of comparison, I don't know whether it's a low number or high number. So for the moment you don't have to justify the number. I just want to make sure I understand the math. At a later point when I actually learn something about this, then we will have a different discussion.
I think just as a correction, when I say million, that is the 19 authorization. The authorization is 3.75, and the 20 CM contracts will be for no more than 25 million. 21 That doesn't mean it is on the total 1.1. The 22 bottom line is our objective was to bring in a lot 23 of construction managers because there's a lot of 24 companies in the area that are very good and they 25 were all competing, and what we would do is over the 108 next year or two is we would weed out those that were least effective and continue those that were most effective. So, you know, when I say once the CM contracts are completed, it will probably translate into another $25 million commitment, that's where that is coming from.
You don't have to go through the preapproved, okay. 14 Let's go back to the construction side. You have URS, who has the overall responsibility. You can get us information with regard to the five subcontracting firms --
That will be in your packet on Wednesday along with a financial allocation on how that contract -- how the subs will be contracted -- how the subs will be compensated within the 25 million. 109
Let me jump back to an earlier topic very briefly. Can you tell me what are the eligible uses for Title 1 money?
It will probably be easier to tell you what it can't be used for.
Title 1 is a very nice -- I'm Wayne Harris, budget director. Title 1 is a very nice, flexible grant. The key is that the vast majority of it needs to be distributed to the schools and the schools are empowered to decide how to spend the money with just a few restrictions. The money needs to be distributed in such a way that the schools with the highest concentration of poverty receive the largest amount down to the schools with the lowest concentration of poverty -- the largest amount per student down to the schools with the lowest concentration of poverty getting less. The schools are required to spend either 5 percent or 10 percent depending on whether or not 110 they are in corrective action, which is part of the No Child Left Behind Law, more if they are in correction action, on professional development for their teachers. They are also required to spend 1 percent for parent involvement. Outside of that, there are very few restrictions on what they are allowed to do with Title 1.
So upwards of 11 percent may actually be specifically designated for some use, but the other 89 percent at least you can pretty much do whatever you want?
Also, we are required under the No Child Left Behind to earmark I think it is roughly about 5 percent of the Title 1 money for supplemental education services. This is the after school extended day tutoring that is part of the subject, but other than that --
Essentially we are required to have three 5 percent set-asides, one for after school tutoring, 5 percent for after school tutoring, 5 percent for improvement of teaching, to 111 get teachers fully qualified, and percent for school choice.
We can get you an aggregate 5 breakdown on just how the schools use most of their money, but from experience and from personal knowledge, most of the money goes to hire teachers so that is always priority number one. The overwhelming majority of the Title 1 money goes to hire either classroom teachers or some of these supplemental teachers or instructors like librarians or art teachers or music teachers.
Let me talk about the older students. I'm going to shift. Last week I made a note to myself based on something you said, Mr. Vallas. Can you tell me a little bit about what kind of contact we have with the business community regarding curriculum issues, how well our students are prepared to enter the work force, and any discussions or emphasis with our business leadership about how they carry a message hopefully on behalf of the district to their employees, which may get into a slightly touchy area, on making sure that they pick up report cards, work with their child on 112 their education issues, the issue of taking off time, if they have to, for parent/teacher conference, any of those kinds of things that help to carry a message from the District to the employers and ultimately to parents who may be employees of these companies that education is really important to the business community, that business leaders want parents to be actively involved and actively engaged in their child's education, that if they need time off, you know, other than contractual obligations and the like, they really are sending a message down through the ranks that education is important, and if you need time, that it is going to be given, and it's emphasized by the companies. Do we ever have those conversations?
Yes. One of the things that we did as a result of a task force that was established a year and a half ago in partnership with the Chamber of Commerce, one of the recommendations as a result of that task force was to establish business community councils. To date we have established eight of those councils, one representing each of the following state recognized 113 career areas or areas of occupation such as business, health, industry, construction and so forth. Those individuals meet on a monthly basis to talk about work readiness and what they could do in terms of recommendation to curriculum, what they could do in terms of helping prepare internships, and overall what they could do to help with the soft skills or provide recommendations to the School District as it relates to soft skills. As a result, this relationship has afforded us the opportunity to meet with industry leaders representing those fields on a monthly basis to make sure that we are making them aware of the changes that we are making in curriculum, all of the upgrades we are doing as it relates to education and to the programs.
This is being done through the task force or through someone's office or --
The recommendation was the task force. Now we are fulfilling the recommendation through our office of secondary education. 114
So your office is responsible for all the high schools?
And I'm going to assume that this is an office or a division of the district that has always existed.
Actually, no; this is a division of the District that literally started with Mr. Vallas' administration.
Before Mr. Vallas arrived, we had one person in the School District who basically assisted high schools in whatever her limited capacity could be. Once we came in, we started an entire division, which meant we added offices to deal with particular areas as it related to high schools.
We have seven major divisions, perhaps maybe about 30 people in our downtown office, and obviously we have a field representative such as educational coaches that go 115 to high schools to work along with teachers and students in implementing the new core curriculum.
Seven divisions, 30 people. Some are at the District and the rest are where?
Maybe about 30 in the district, a little over 30 in the District.
Yes. And those are school-based representatives. They don't come out. They stay in the school.
All of the schools from the K to 8 schools to the 9 to 12 schools have coaches. With the move towards the standardized curriculum, 116 we have standardized professional development and we put coaches in all of the schools, literacy coaches, math coaches.
At the elementary school level they work with the principals and the teachers. They are there to provide at the local level local professional development because in the new curriculum instructional models it is important to have -- a premium has been placed on the training of the teachers on how to match to the models. It is the same thing at the high school level. We have coaches. We have language, arts, and mathematics coaches. Eventually we will probably have science coaches. The objective here is to have professional trainers at the local school level who are basically ensuring the implementation of the curriculum. Let me point out that these are not like new positions added to existing positions. One of the things that we did in the high schools was we jettisoned a lot of the what we felt were 117 ineffective and wasteful positions. For example, when we added well over a hundred new AP, honors, and advanced placement courses this past year, we did it by eliminating well over 300 totally irrelevant courses that the high schools had been offering students that had no relevancy to what was required to graduate or had no relevancy for students who were college bound or, for that matter, even on a career track. It is the same thing on the local school side. You go to the high schools and they would have department heads. They would have small school coordinators. There were like four or five -- it is not uncommon to go to a high school and find or 16 teachers in nonteaching positions in that school. 17 So when we -- as part of the high school reorganization we created a number of -- we eliminated a number of positions to free up money in the high schools for the other reforms, but we also created a number of new positions that replaced eliminated positions and put them under the direct control over the high school division so that we could focus on such things as curriculum instruction and professional development. 118
I'm sorry. This division -- the department is called what, Office of Secondary --
The entire high school budget, roughly it's about to $20 million. Wayne 10 is going to get some exact figures for you. 11
That is the programmatic 13 money, grants and everything, yes, sir. 14
What do the 30 15 people who are at the District do? 16
The offices are divided into seven different departments, and roughly I will tell you about each of them. The first department is our physical education and sports division, actually which handles physical education and sports for the entire district, K through 12. So there is an extension of more than just high school for that particular office. That office oversees all of the sports programs, all of the physical education, all of the 119 health programs, and the newly implemented drivers education program. The second office is the music office, which you talked about, performing arts office, and this particular office, the performing arts office, strictly focuses on performing arts, music, as it relates to ninth through twelfth grade. We have another office that focuses on instructional delivery. That is the office that the coaches report to. That is the office where we make sure that the new curriculum is being implemented. We have another office of curriculum development. They are responsible for developing the entire new high school curriculum that we have in place. We have another office of career and technical education, which are our vocational programs that are spread throughout the entire School District. What did I forget? We have an office of ROTC, which is the junior office of reserve training program in our high schools as well. We have the college and career awareness 120 office that deals with scholarships and readiness for college, all of the SAT and PSAT test taking and all of those things.
Did you say earlier there was a career in technology, education division? What did you say about that?
Career and technical education, which is a form of vocational education.
So it is career and technical education, and then there is a college and career awareness?
Let me point out so that there is no confusion, these offices and divisions have always existed, but they were scattered within the bureaucracy. So, in other words, technology would be somewhere, vocational ed would be somewhere. There was no focus on curriculum instruction, at least from a central office standpoint. So one of the things that we did was we took all of high school's functions and we pulled them out of individual departments and we consolidated them into a single office, obviously not only for purposes of articulating the division 121 and implementing the program but also for accountability purposes. And, for example, we have now begun to do something similar in this year's budget for our middle grades initiatives because in the past no one has been responsible for middle grades. The middle grade functions are scattered among multiple departments. So the objective here was to take all of the high school programs from technology to career ed to honors to advanced placement to magnet programs to professional development, the academy programs, which were out there by themselves, almost a quasi-independent entity, and to consolidate them into a division of high school programs with a director of high school programs. I just wanted to point that out.
I think my initial reaction to some of this is to just at least raise the issue of whether or not the central office is -- I mean, is it flattening out, or is it starting to rise again in terms of we seem to have a lot of people doing a lot of things that at least directly don't seem to have a whole lot to do with children and their direct education, and I'm just raising the 122 question that it seems that we have a lot of -- a significant number of people checking on what other people are doing.
No, not at all. If you are going to have vocational ed, you need somebody to monitor and maintain the quality of those vocational ed programs. The School District had wiped out its AP honors and advanced placement courses in all of its high schools. Now we have honors and advanced placement. Somebody needs to be responsible for that. Most of these functions have always been in the school districts. They have been scattered among the individual departments. Let me point out that at least every year in the least three years the central office has been downsized. This year is no exception. We are now down to 1100. I think the central office had how many positions three years ago? I will give you the number. But the central office continues to decline and it will also continue to decline. But as part of that declining, we are not just cutting for cutting's sake; there also needs to be some radical organizational structure -- there needs to be some rational organizational structure, how the 123 office is set up. So having all of your high school functions decentralized among multiple agencies and among multiple departments is just not logical. There is no efficiency.
So you are bringing them into one location and they are all under one roof?
First of all, they were scattered, but Let me give you an example. The high school reforms have been funded through a combination of $15 million in new monies we programmed for the high school budget and $15 million in savings. The high school reforms are costing the District $30 million. What are those reforms? The revamping of vocational ed, the restoration of honors and advanced placement programs, the curriculum instructional forms, the capital instructional models themselves, putting professional development coaches at the local school level, but the bottom line is we had to reprogram 15 million in existing budget resources and then cut 15 million in order for the high school office and the division of high schools and the high school 124 programs to be effectively funded. So it has been a combination of budget cuts and budget reprogramming, but these functions the District already did. They simply were scattered among multiple departments and agencies.
Why don't we do this: Maybe you can give me on a spreadsheet or whatever works, as long as you don't get Mike Harris and company to do it the same way as the budget book was put together. Why don't you show us over the past three years what the administrative costs have been, what the positions have been, and where these savings are? Now, do we have a set number on the Office of Secondary Education in terms of the budget of that office?
His office is 6 million, okay, in the budget, but that is not exclusively positions. But I will ask Wayne Harris to break that out for you, but when you add the reforms like the AP honors, advanced placement, professional development, the capital, obviously the number gets a lot larger, but in terms of his immediate office I 125 think it is $6 million. I will get Wayne to break those out into personal services, contractual services, and things like that, and I will get you that.
Okay. If you can just get it to me. Let me try to focus on two of the areas here. You have career and technical education and college and career awareness. What are we doing in the career and technical education area, and who is responsible now for what I guess used to be vocational education, and what programs are we actually offering to students?
Currently we have had an opportunity to come in and to restructure career and technical education based on the Perkins guidelines, which are established by the State. The programs that have been established in career and technical education include construction, business, health, transportation, communications and technology as well. We have approximately 179 of those programs spread throughout our high school district. In the 42 schools I guess that will give you an average of 126 maybe two or three programs per school. Obviously we have a number of schools that focus solely on career and technical education. We have four of those schools where the vast majority of the programs within those schools are career and technical education. Part of our philosophy of what we have attempted to do is to establish quality career and technical education within neighborhood schools. The current four to five career and technical education high schools simply cannot accommodate the number of kids who would like that training and/or who need and want that training. So within each of the high schools they have an opportunity to open career and technical education programs based on the guidelines that are established by career and technical education. And the umbrella of those programs are the ones that are included -- that I indicated to you. Under each one of those umbrellas -- for example, on the transportation --
Construction, business, health, transportation, communication and technology.
Yes. So under each of those areas there are a certain number of programs. As an example, under transportation obviously there is auto body, automotive mechanics, and in some cases there could be diesel. We are trying to establish a diesel. So under each one of the broader categories there are a number of programs and the school elects those programs.
So who is in charge of this office, the seven areas? Who decides what the curriculum is and how it is spread out whether it is 179 programs, 42 schools? Who is in charge of that?
Generally it involves, as we indicated, the division of career and technical education is headed by Roosevelt Brown. In that office we have established a policy, a program 128 approval policy. Any school desiring a career and technical education program makes application to the office to establish the program. In order to establish the program, the school has to meet certain criteria. Number one, they have to have certified staff. Number two, they have to have a dedicated room or laboratory for the respective program that they are inquiring about and, number three, they have to have established an advisory council, an advisory council which is made up of neighborhood businesses or businesses that may not be in the neighborhood but however are reflective to that individual career area. Once they meet those three criteria, we then will make sure that the program is up to speed, the program is up to date, that the equipment is ordered and the supplies are there, and that all of the components for it to meet state certification are in place. We have had an opportunity to come in and restructure that program over the last year and with that we had to obviously close out some programs that were obsolete but, on the flip side, to open some programs that are a little more up to 129 date.
So you are saying all of the teachers involved in these programs are certified in their area?
Yes; they have to be industry certified in their particular area.