EDLD 5342 Week 2

Week TWO Part 1

Goal Driven Budgets are designed to address the Needs Assessments which are conducted annually as preparation of District and Campus Improvement Plans. These DIP’s and CIP’s are compared to the District’s Vision, Mission and Goals as the basis for allocating funds to match goals. Goal Driven Budgets are sometimes referred to as Outcome-Focused or Mission-Driven budgets. These formats focus on identifying the results and the desired outcomes prior to committing to resource allocation. In theory, if a goal is not identified, it receives no funds. Goals are identified by campuses, departments, the Board, SBDM’s and stakeholders based on personnel, data, transportation and facility needs within the district.

Improved Graduation Rate or Cohort Completion Rate are goals that receive funding in the form of Optional Flexible Year Program, Credit Recovery, Attendance Initiatives and other local programs.

Student Achievement is also a goal of most schools. Even schools that are doing well have room for improvement. With the changing demographics come challenges in maintaining AYP and AEIS standards of Recognized and Exemplary Ratings. Dual Credit, Advanced Placement along with Inclusion and Mainstreaming students with special needs are efforts to maximum the potential of students at all levels. These programs require additional funding and are a part of Goal Driven Budgets.

During the video for week 2, Goal Driven Budget was described as the alignment of shared vision from the Board to the classroom for the purpose of distributing revenue provided through federal, state and local governments. There has previously been an apparent disconnect between what the Board has identified as goals and what the classrooms and campuses see as goals for the district. The Budget Retreat is an important step in articulating the perceived goals and their connection to the district’s goal identified by the Board.

Week TWO Part 2
My initial wiki posting was in response to Lee Moses and is as follows:
I agree with your November, March and August dates.
I feel the January meeting of the Executive Team to review formulas and budget development and the March -April review to analyze budget input are critical as well as the items you listed above.
I chose these two items due to the importance of analyzing formulas and budget input prior to finalizing the actual budget. Formulas take into account the property rates and the WADA to estimate the starting revenue to prevent expenditures from exceeding revenue.

Items that were debated were the Budget Retreat in May which Lee explained will cover the same things that the March-April review will address.

Postings of the Top Five List of Events of the Budget Development calendar varied between wiki group members. The discussion resulted in a clarification of the following as the most important dates:
November: Create Budget Development Plan and present District Improvement Plan to the Board
March: Budgets due from Campuses, Directors, and Coordinators
May: Budget Retreat for analysis of formulas, revenue and actual budget development.
June: Budgets are presented to the Board
August: Budget is approved by the Board.

We feel the May Retreat is critical for analyzing revenue, WADA, and proposed expenditures from the District Improvement Plan as it is aligned with the Campus and Department Improvement Plans.

Week TWO Part 3
In every sector of society the word budget evokes emotions from dread to confusion. Budgets require the analysis of current assets prior to developing a plan for savings, investments and expenditures. This is no different for school districts and superintendents. There is a wide variety of types of budgets. Some of them include the Zero-Based Budgeting, Performance Budgeting, Outcome-Focused Budgeting, Line-Item Budgeting and the Site-Based Budgeting. Each type of budget has its own challenges and critics. Many of the budgets begin with a needs assessment to define the specific concerns of the organization. Many budgets start with identifying the results desired prior to planning goals to reach the desired result.

Texas school districts primarily use Outcome-Focused Budgeting with District Improvement Plans which define the district’s vision, mission and goals and the resources that will be used to finance the goal. District Improvement Plans are designed to identify needs or desired results, the strategies used to achieve the results, the person(s) responsible for completing the strategy and the formative and summative evaluation measures and the resources utilized to achieve the goal. Goals are aligned with the Board’s identified vision for the district.

Week 2 Part 4

The role of the Superintendent is to be the go-between for the School Board and the personnel of the district and stakeholders. He/She is the manager of public fund and the key public relations person for the district. During the interview with my superintendent Thomas Collins, I was intrigued by the passion he exhibited for the students, staff and constituents of the district. As we discussed his role in the budgeting process he spoke of staying current on matters before the legislature and knowing intimately the fiscal needs of Waxahachie ISD. Mr. Collins reminded me that the number one priority in the budget process is to keep the Board informed throughout the process. Budget workshops, presentation of the District Improvement Plan, and getting input from the Board are vital to keeping the communication lines open and gaining the trust of the Board. Superintendents who do not have the Board’s support, do not have the support of the community served and thus are putting their tenure at risk.

Mr. Collins reminded me that the largest part of the budget, approximately 80% is spent on personnel salary and benefits. This fact can create tension within the district due to the need for budget cuts which will ultimately affect teacher to student ratios and overall staffing percentages. We reflected on Dallas ISD’s recent lay-off and Reductions in force where staff were terminated using a seniority formula.

We also discussed building the budget based on 95% of the October snapshot date enrollment to ensure money is available for unexpected expenses. Our Tax Rate has been the same $1.04 since 2005 and per pupil allocation has been $5700/student for the last 7 years. Enrollment has increased; therefore the district budget has increased as well. The superintendent is the gate-keeper and must serve as the protector for the taxpayers’ trust and treasure along with the Board.



Week 2 Part 5


The superintendent receives information for the District Improvement Plan and Budget Development for central staff and the District Improvement Committee through a series of forums and department action plans. Principals provide campus input through the submission of the Campus Improvement Plans and Principal Meetings where the needs of the district as a whole are discussed and strategies are identified. The Site Based Committee provides information which is part of the CIP’s. The Board submits their budgetary decisions based on the district’s vision and constituent’s input.

District Improvement Plan Comparison

In this age of accountability with standardized testing, pay for performance and budget deficits the District Improvement Plans are utilized to justify expenditures and regain the confidence of constituents and taxpayers. The management of federal, state and local funds is paramount in the operation of most cities/town’s largest employer-the local school district. Everyone watches intently to see how their tax dollars are spent for the education of the local children. Positive results are expected and sometimes demanded in student achievement.

   The Austin Independent School District’s (AISD) Goal and Desired Result listed on the PBMAS portion of the District Improvement Plan involve increasing each Cohort’s Graduation Rate through Credit Recovery and Drop-Out Prevention Initiatives that provide additional support for students and tutorials for test preparation. For AISD the SCE desired results include ACCESS (Austin Community Collaboration to Enhance Student Success) with key funding sources from Title I and SIP ARRA funds. Additional funding will be provided through Title IIA, Title III, Title V funds and 21^st Century grants.

   For Waxahachie Independent School District (WISD), the Desired goals are 1) to prepare a viable curriculum, 2) manage and further develop of financial resources, 3) recruit, retain personnel and provide professional development, 4) maintain facilities and conduct an audit of facilities and quality programs, 5) enforce policies to provide a safe and orderly environment and 6) family engagement. All goals will be funded with one or more funding sources which include Title I, II and III, ARRA, Technology, and State and Local funds.

   Similar to most districts AISD and WISD include student achievement initiatives and state and federal funding sources in their District Improvement Plans. However differences are in the details of the two plans. WISD’s plan is more specific stating 6 major goals and the strategies used to achieve the goals. AISD’s plan is more general and has ACCESS as the umbrella that encompasses all academic, and community programs.

Equality, Equity and Adequacy

Equality- Each student in each school should receive the same amount of money to fund their education. Examples include “Robin Hood” and Per Pupil expenditures for each district.

Equity-Each student in each school should receive the same access to the same educational resources. Providing the same opportunities for a Free Appropriate Education may require special education or 504 services for students.

Adequacy- Providing the needed funding for students to achieve on comparable levels with students across the state.  No Child Left Behind provides some adequacy funds through AYP initiatives. Other students may need Title I support to bridge the educational achievement gap in Math and Science.

State of Texas Funding Issues

Three major issues impacting Texas State Funding Formula Due to the economic downturn districts have been hit with elements that effect state funding. 1) Property Tax Values decreasing and the large number of foreclosures have reduced the amount of revenue the state has for public education. Public education has found that it too is subject to the strains of the economy. 2) Keeping up with inflation for teacher and staff salaries and benefits including rising health care costs, has also put a strain on state funding. Mandates for district and state contributions for health care have also impacted state funding. 3) The shift in demographics within the state requires additional professional development for teachers including bilingual programs, Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP), multiple languages within districts. Some districts have students whose home languages cover more than 20 languages. Students of poverty also move from one area to another increasing services needed to close the achievement gap and increasing the number of students served by Title I.

The History of Texas School Finance

Many historical events contributed to the current Texas School Finance policies. In my opinion the following three events have made the most important impact.

The new Texas Constitution of 1845 provided for the establishment of free schools and called for one-tenth of the state revenue (Permanent School Fund) to support education. This critical action illustrated the dedication of the Texas legislature to quality education.

The equalization of funding provided under the Robin Hood Plan designated districts as Chapter 41 (wealthy) or Chapter 42 (poor) to provide a way to equally distribute funds to districts despite the property value inequalities from district to district. Districts with lower property values received a distribution from affluent areas to provide equity in educational services and technology.

The 1945Legislative Session produced the Gilmer-Aikens Laws of Texas Education which began to set standards of operation with the state’s supplement to local taxes to provide funding for public education in addition to the reduction of the number of districts, teacher salary increase, formalization of the school year calendar, and new guidelines for the State Board of Education and employment of the Commissioner of Education.

All of the above changes occurred in the past 200 years in Texas Public Education have served to scaffold the financial foundation of Texas Education for the 21^st century.