Coast Community College District Meeting of the District Budget Advisory Committee
District Advisory Committee
-
Upload
joan-benjamin -
Category
Documents
-
view
27 -
download
0
description
Transcript of District Advisory Committee
District Advisory Committee
Activity Report and the District Budget Reduction Plan Review
January 20, 2009
DAC Activity Report
School Improvement PlansWinter Forum
School Improvement Plans
“Review and make recommendations to the BoE concerning high, but achievable, goals and objectives for the improvement of education in each
school that are submitted by the School Advisory Councils.”
Learning Improvement Goals Ends Statements & Learning Goals Alignment SIPs Focus Areas Budget Reduction Prioritization Linkage
School Improvement Plans
“Review and make recommendations to the BoE concerning high, but achievable, goals and objectives for the improvement of education in each school that are submitted by the
School Advisory Councils.”
Re-assess SIP Central for Improvements Design a SIP “Ends/LG” Matrix Year to year assessment/trends Formal report to Board of Education in April 2009
2008-2009 Learning Improvement Goals
Reading, Writing & Math…Prominent Focus Learning Goal #2 & CSAP Measurement
Learning Goal #1…Positive Behavior (PBS) Learning Goal #3…Technology Application SIPs are Generally Aligned with End Statement
& Learning Goals
Winter Forum Tuesday, February 10, 2009
“The purpose of the DAC is to encourage and provide opportunities for parents and community members to become informed about and to be
involved in the planning and evaluation of the School District’s instructional program and quality improvement processes.”
Regional Forums Castle Rock Highlands Ranch Parker Area
BoE, DOS & DAC Representatives Hosting Agenda Topics
SIPs Compliance & Best Practices DAC/SAC Relationship & Communication: Defining Roles Post Budget Reduction Priorities: Flexible Funding
District Budget Reduction andPrioritization Plan
“After attempting to consult with the SACs, make recommendations to the Board relative to prioritization of expenditures of school district moneys.”
District Advisory Committee Report Overview Assessment & Due Diligence Conclusions
District Advisory CommitteeOverview
DAC Charge
We interpreted our BoE charge as one of assessing whether or not the District’s Budget Reduction Proposal is “reasonable as presented” along with providing any appropriate comments regarding prioritization and innovative ideas.
District Advisory CommitteeOverview
Criteria We attempted to frame our thinking within the spirit of the
Superintendent’s primary criteria. Maintain a world class educational opportunity Minimize impact on the classroom Ensure the financial strength of the District
Our prioritization work was further defined by the BoE End Statement and District Student Learning Goals.
District Advisory CommitteeAssessment
SAC Engagement DAC members attended approximately 25 SAC meetings
where budget reduction brainstorming was the primary agenda item. We established regional e-mail networks of communication with our SAC/DAC liaisons
Each DAC member has feeder/charters responsibility SAC/community members present at DAC meetings
Common SAC Themes
“We really don’t understand school finance. Just tell us how this impacts our children and the quality of their education.”
Minimize classroom impact Maintain quality: Academic standards and focus on
reading, writing and math The open budget reduction and prioritization process
was applauded Appreciation of early focus on non-academic structural
reductions G&T/Discovery parents were organized
DAC Due Diligence
Criteria BoE End Statement, District Learning Goals,
Superintendent’s themes and DAC Bylaws DCSD Budget Office “big picture” macro
presentation of the operating budget CFO Discussion
Funding streams Initial Reduction Proposal: Structural emphasis
DAC Due Diligence
Criteria Superintendent
Internal engagement Primary criteria for outcome of budget reductions
SACs SAC meeting engagement Feeder templates of brainstorming priorities
Survey Review (5,310 responses as of January 13, 2009)
DAC Final Discussion and Survey
Section A: Reasonable as presented versus criteria? (Yes) Flexible Funding & Local Decision Making (Yes) Structural vs. Programmatic Initial Approach
DAC confirmed this as appropriate and generally consistent with SAC feedback
Committee discussion expressed some concern over class size increases and graduation requirement reductions...areas for potential tweaking
Section B: “Bricks and clicks” Continue the integration of technology in the classroom and distance learning to enhance the efficiency model.
Section C: Untouchables Prioritization
Each committee member was asked to prioritize their top five “untouchables”. This list represents the aggregate conclusion of the committee.
Literacy Intervention K-8 Gifted & Talented High School S.T.A.R. Labs program Elementary Instrumental Music Elementary World Languages
Some debate ensued on the inclusion of World Languages as our SAC experience indicated this was not a high priority for retention. However, BoE ends seem consistent with inclusion on this list.
DAC Conclusions
Thoughtful Approach: The DAC believes this budget reduction and prioritization process demonstrated an inclusive process and a school district focused on the proper priorities to accomplish our ends.
DAC Conclusions
Recommendation: The District Advisory Committee voted unanimously (January 13, 2009…By 6 of the 9 voting members present) to accept the District’s Two Year Budget Reduction Plan as reasonable in its present form for Board of Education consideration.
District Advisory Committee
THANK YOU