Phase II: Operational Efficiency Audit Comprehensive Report · Phase II: Operational Efficiency...
Transcript of Phase II: Operational Efficiency Audit Comprehensive Report · Phase II: Operational Efficiency...
Phase II: Operational
Efficiency Audit –
Comprehensive Report for Hillsborough County Public Schools
2016
PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY:
1 Contents
Contents
Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3
Background ............................................................................................................................................... 3
Report Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 6
Methodology ........................................................................................................................................... 10
Organization of Report............................................................................................................................ 12
Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration ............................................................................................. 13
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 13
Board Governance .................................................................................................................................. 13
District Administration ............................................................................................................................ 25
Chapter 2 – Financial Management ............................................................................................................ 41
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 41
Financial Management, Accounting and Reporting ................................................................................ 45
Budgeting ................................................................................................................................................ 50
Procurement ........................................................................................................................................... 54
Accounts Payable .................................................................................................................................... 67
Payroll Operations .................................................................................................................................. 76
Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management .............................................................................................. 83
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 83
Human Resources Operations ................................................................................................................ 91
Health Insurance ................................................................................................................................... 106
Chapter 4 – Technology Management...................................................................................................... 113
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 113
IT Strategy and Governance .................................................................................................................. 118
IT Application and Infrastructure .......................................................................................................... 122
IT Security .............................................................................................................................................. 125
IT Operations and Continuity ................................................................................................................ 130
Chapter 5 – Transportation Management ................................................................................................ 133
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 133
Recommendations ................................................................................................................................ 138
Fleet Management ................................................................................................................................ 149
2 Contents
Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management ............................................................................................ 161
Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 161
School Size and Configuration .............................................................................................................. 163
School Conditions and Capital Planning ................................................................................................ 168
Facility Asset Management Planning .................................................................................................... 172
Maintenance Operations ...................................................................................................................... 175
Custodial Services ................................................................................................................................. 195
Grounds Management .......................................................................................................................... 200
Energy Management ............................................................................................................................. 204
Appendix A – Recommendations and Fiscal Impacts ............................................................................... 213
Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status ........................................................................................ 219
3 Introduction
Introduction
In December 2015, Hillsborough County Public Schools (HCPS) contracted with Gibson Consulting Group,
Inc. (Gibson) to conduct an Educational and Operational Efficiency Audit to assess the efficiency and
effectiveness of the district’s major operations and programs over a 14-month period. This work is taking
place over three phases, as described below:
Phase I: Operational Audit, Major Cost Savings (January – April 2016)
Phase II: Operational Audit, Comprehensive Review (January – September 2016)
Phase III: Academic Management Audit (June 2016 – February 2017)
This report presents the results of Phase II, and incorporates applicable recommendations from Phase I
that relate to operational areas.
Gibson wishes to express our appreciation to the HCPS management and staff for its responsiveness in
providing us the needed information to perform this important work, and the cooperation and willingness
to assist us during our site work.
Background
HCPS is the eight largest school system in the U.S. with 207,442 students enrolled in 2015-16. As depicted
in Figure 1 student enrollment has increased in each year since 2011-12, and 6.8 percent over the five-
year period.
Figure 1. HCPS Student Enrollment, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Source: Florida Department of Education
The HCPS budget is divided into “funds” that represent funding sources. The General Fund is the district’s
primary operating fund and is supported by state and local revenues. Other major funds include Federal
Funds (e.g., Title I, student nutrition), Debt Service Funds, Capital Funds (e.g., construction, school buses),
194,197 197,530 198,823 202,284 207,442
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
4 Introduction
and Internal Service Funds (e.g., health insurance, workers compensation). Figure 2 presents the expected
distribution of HCPS funds for the 2016-17 budget.
Figure 2. HCPS Projected Revenue by Fund, 2016-17
Source: First Public Hearing of 2016-17 Budget, August 2, 2016
The district operates with a total budget of almost $3 billion, with $1.7 billion being incurred through the
General Fund. Table 1 presents a five-year history of General Fund actual expenditures for 2011-12
through 2015-16. During this time total General Fund expenditures increased 16.4 percent, or just under
4 percent annually on average. The largest percentage increase (8.1 percent) was between 2013-14 and
2014-15.
Table 1. HCPS General Fund Expenditures by Type, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Expenditure Type (Object) 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
(Unaudited)
100 Salaries $927,033,356 $928,224,593 $982,290,892 $1,059,397,964 $1,061,859,991
200 Employee Benefits $230,255,688 $223,956,894 $251,351,846 $275,671,926 $285,201,347
300 Purchased Services $145,180,414 $163,755,958 $188,555,479 $212,823,931 $225,766,012
400 Energy Services $47,185,321 $47,186,192 $45,636,656 $43,549,290 $37,271,456
500 Materials & Supplies $54,160,581 $58,411,876 $49,226,606 $58,256,112 $38,116,414
600 Capital Outlay $19,771,004 $15,494,563 $19,520,658 $16,982,920 $14,880,861
700 Other $19,021,885 $20,758,193 $22,259,052 $13,371,477 $16,947,316
900 Transfers $38,354 $33,348 $26,980 $5,269,882 $25,933
Total $1,442,646,602 $1,457,821,617 $1,558,868,168 $1,685,323,501 $1,680,069,331
Source: HCPS Five-Year Financial and Staffing History
Table Note: May not sum to total due to rounding
General Fund, 64%
Federal Funds, 12%
Capital Outlay, 9%
Internal Services, 7%
Debt Service, 8%
5 Introduction
On a per student basis, General Fund expenditures have also increased over the past five years (see Figure
3). Expenditures per student increased from $7,429 to $8,099, or 9 percent, during this time period. The
largest annual percentage gains (6.3 percent) occurred in 2013-14 and 2014-15; in 2015-16 the district
experienced a drop of approximately 2.8 percent.
Figure 3. General Fund Expenditures per Student, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Source: HCPS Five-Year Financial and Staffing History
Table Note: 2015-16 expenditures are unaudited
Approximately eighty cents of every General Fund dollar HCPS spends is allocated to staffing costs for
teachers, instructional support staff, school and district administrators, and auxiliary staff. Staffing costs
include salaries, wages and benefits. Compared to its Florida peer districts, HCPS has higher staff levels
relative to its student population. Figure 4 compares the ratio of students to full-time equivalent (FTE)
employees to four Florida peer districts: Duval County Public Schools (DCPS), Palm Beach County Schools
(PBCS), Orange County Public Schools (OCPS) and Pinellas County Schools (PCS). Generally, the lower the
ratio, the higher the number of employees relative to the student population. However, other factors,
such as outsourcing of major functions, can affect the comparability of data.
$7,429 $7,380$7,840
$8,331$8,099
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
$7,000
$8,000
$9,000
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
6 Introduction
Figure 4. Ratio of students to FTE employees, HCPS and Florida Peer Districts, 2014-15
Source: Florida Department of Education, 2014-15
One of the major factors that prompted this efficiency audit was the decline in the district’s fund balance.
A district’s fund balance represents the difference between total district assets and total liabilities, and
reflects the financial health and stability of a school system. Fund balances have declined precipitously
since 2010-11. From June 30, 2011 to 2015, the total General Fund balance declined from $361 million to
$146 million, or almost 60 percent. Because of the district’s cost control measures implemented in 2015-
16, the June 30, 2016 fund balance (unaudited) is expected to be similar to the prior year. While current
fund balance levels meet the state minimum requirements, bond rating agencies may desire higher fund
balances to support higher bond ratings. Higher bond ratings are desirable in that they reduce bond
interest costs, among other advantages.
Other major changes have occurred. The board hired a new superintendent during 2015, a major
reorganization at the district level has occurred, and a teacher incentive pay program is being modified as
an $80 million grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation has expired.
In the context of these changing events, The HCPS board and district leadership sought an outside review
to evaluate operational efficiency and improve the financial stability to levels it achieved in years past –
without sacrificing student learning. The following provides an overview of the Phase II report
recommendations to help the district achieve this goal.
Report Summary
This report contains five commendations on operating efficiency, and 55 recommendations to improve
efficiency and management effectiveness in HCPS operational areas. The district is already moving
forward on some of these and other initiatives. Once fully implemented, the recommendations will result
10.4
8.48.1 8
7.7
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
DCPS PBCS OCPS PCS HCPS
7 Introduction
in savings, net of identified investments, of $46,873,053 per year. However, several investments (facilities,
transportation) cannot be quantified at this time.
Applicable recommendations from the Phase I report (clerical, custodial and transportation) have been
incorporated into the respective operational area analysis in each chapter. Accordingly, savings and
investments presented in this report are cumulative. Fiscal impacts from recommendations made in Phase
I are noted in this report.
The Phase II work identified several best practices in place at HCPS. These include the following:
HCPS has applied best practices in the development of a long-range Strategic Plan. HCPS board
members were consistent in their praise for the strategic planning process and the results. The
review team also believes this document is an excellent starting point to guide the district through
the next five years, particularly because of its focus on what’s important and the establishment
of measureable objectives to hold the district accountable.
The district’s written teacher recruiting plan is both productive and creative. The Applications
and Recruitment unit in Human Resource’s Personnel Services Department annually conducts a
recruitment season review which assesses results and informs the strategic recruiting plan for the
subsequent recruitment season. In the 2015 recruitment year, the successes of recruitment
planning showed that over 5,000 teacher applications were received, increasing applicant volume
by 55 percent over the prior year. The Applications and Recruitment unit was able to build a pool
of approximately 3,000 active candidates, and 1,324 teacher vacancies and been filled by the first
day of school.
The Program to Attract and Train High (PATH) quality and exceptional teachers for students
with disabilities has become a major source for HR’s filling special education vacancies. Project
PATH is an alternative certification training program funded by a Transition to Teaching grant from
the U.S. Department of Education. The grant provides financial assistance and support for
Exceptional Student Education (ESE) teachers from non-traditional backgrounds who teach in a
high needs school while earning their professional certification through HCPS’ Alternative
Certification Program.
The Procurement Department utilizes a robust management software for Procurement Card (P-
Card) transactions. The Department has been able to maintain strong internal controls over P-
Card transactions and has achieved highly efficient and effective processes. The software is
configured to the district’s bank files so purchases made on P-Cards are automatically loaded into
the system. As a result, bookkeepers only need to enter a few additional details, including item
descriptions and account strings, in order to expense the transaction.
The Accounts Payable Department implemented an E-payables program in FY 2008. In addition
to electronically streamlining vendor payments and reducing the number of days to pay vendors
8 Introduction
(earning discounts in some cases), the district earns rebates from the program. In 2014-15, total
revenues generated from the program were $574,118.
During the Phase II work several cross-cutting themes emerged. Several recommendations made in this
report are common to multiple chapters. These are discussed briefly below:
Upgrade job descriptions.
Several HCPS division leadership positions do not require technical experience, training, or
licensure in the function overseen. The operational leadership positions are generic, and state a
preference for teaching or general public administration experience instead of specific technical
requirements. In the maintenance area, most maintenance positions are Multi-Trade workers and
the job requirements do not include licensure in specific trades. HCPS job descriptions need to be
upgraded to ensure that the positions require the technical expertise and experience needed to
execute the job duties.
Develop division and department level performance measures.
The district’s strategic plan identifies specific Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that will help hold
the school district leadership accountable for reaching strategic goals. These KPIs, however, have
not yet led to the creation of specific division- and department-level measures in all operational
areas. Sample measures are provided in each operational chapter of this report, and tracking
these will help ensure the long-term efficiency and effectiveness of these areas.
Streamline processes and increase the use of technology (all areas).
HCPS invests in application software to support efficient operations, but many of these
applications are outdated or underutilized. This results in the proliferations of many manual,
paper-intensive tasks that are not efficient. The district needs to upgrade its financial and human
resources software, purchase and integrate additional software, and re-engineer processes to
maximize the use of technology and become paperless.
Reorganize certain divisions and departments.
In several chapters, departmental restructuring is recommended (Human Resources Division,
Accounts Payable Department). A separate recommendation is also made to improve the way
HCPS develops, reviews, and approves organizational charts. Organizational charts are important
in that they establish the chain of command and support accountability. The recommendations in
this report provide specific guidance to certain areas and general recommendations that will
improve long-term organizational efficiency and effectiveness.
9 Introduction
Other major recommendations in this report include the following:
Expand the scope of internal audit function
Develop a decision-making framework for the central office, area offices and schools
Consider converting current employee health insurance plan to a self-funded program
Implement changes to the HCPS health insurance program structure
Conduct health insurance dependent eligibility audit
Develop a facilities management plan
Improve facilities preventive maintenance program
Implement additional energy conservation measures
Make changes to the district’s account codes to support more effective cost control and
financial reporting
Develop supplemental annual budget report to improve clarity and transparency
Require all hourly employees to report hours worked
The Phase II Information Technology (IT) assessment focused on the district’s implementation of 126
recommendations made through a prior comprehensive study conducted in 2013. Based on the review
team’s assessment, 48 percent of these recommendations have been fully implemented. There are
several key recommendations from that report that are critical to IT’s long-term success. These
recommendations and their status are discussed briefly below:
The district has implemented several high priority recommendations including establishing
various IT governance councils, reorganizing the IT department, and developing an educational
data warehouse to establish a single accessible and highly available data source to store and link
student and employee data.
There are several high priority recommendations that the Department is in the process of
implementing. Perhaps the most important is adopting an IT service model which embraces
commercially available software or software as a service (SaaS) for core district systems. The
district has developed customized software in-house that resides on aging technology platforms.
In order to support aging software and platforms, the Department must utilize staff with skillsets
that are increasingly difficult to find (COBOL programming). Additionally, the Department cannot
easily leverage staff knowledge in other more current software and platforms. The Department is
working to replace in-house aging systems with commercially available software.
Another key recommendation that is in process is to create a formal project management office
(PMO).The district hired one project coordinator position under this function and selected project
portfolio management software to manage projects. Considering the size and the number of
projects for the district, the Department is planning to add more staff and resources to this
function.
The recommendations contained in this report can be implemented over the next five years (2016-17
through 2021-22), although the implementation timing may vary based on individual recommendations.
10 Introduction
Once fully implemented, these recommendations will result in net annual savings of $46,873,053 by 2019-
20 (Phases I and II combined1). If fully implemented, recommendations contained in this report will
require one-time investments of $28,805,000 and additional investments in subsequent years. Appendix
A lists all recommendations made as a result of the review, by operational area, along with estimated
savings, investments, and net fiscal impacts.
It is important to note that savings identified through Phase I and Phase II recommendations need to be
used to support investments – primarily in facilities and technology, and some of these investments
cannot yet be quantified.
For those recommendations involving position reductions, average pay for that position was applied in
calculating savings. Depending on the district’s projected financial situation, it is expected that some if
not most of these positions can be eliminated through attrition. A benefits rate of 28 percent was applied
in calculating gross savings from position reductions.
Methodology
Phase II work began in January 2016, the same time as Phase I. Data collection efforts for both phases
began at that time. The review team efforts were focused on Phase I major cost savings opportunities
through March; the Phase II site work was in April. Below is a description of the methodology applied
during Phase II of the efficiency audit.
Data Collection
To conduct a comprehensive efficiency audit of HCPS, the review team used a variety of data collection
and analysis approaches. This comprehensive review of HCPS’ non-instructional areas included the
following data collection approaches:
Existing HCPS data
Interviews with district staff
School site visits
Focus group sessions
Florida state average and peer data
National peer data
Existing HCPS Data
To provide proper context for the review, Gibson requested from the HCPS a broad spectrum of data and
documents related to the operational areas under review. Gibson collected over 1,000 pages from HCPS,
the Florida Department of Education, and other sources. The purpose of this data request and subsequent
analyses was to gain a deeper understanding of HCPS operations and provide background and context for
the review. In addition, these data and documents were utilized to help formulate questions for the
1 Total fiscal impact excludes teacher scheduling recommendation from Phase I
11 Introduction
interviews and focus group sessions held with district administrators, department heads and staff, school
administrators and staff, and teachers. Data analyses, discussed later, were conducted to determine levels
of efficiency within the organization.
Interviews with District Staff
To ensure that the review team had a complete and thorough understanding of district processes,
procedures, operations, and issues, interviews of key staff involved in day-to-day operations in the HCPS
were conducted in April 2016. Interviews included board members, district leadership, department heads
and staff, operational leads, and support staff, among others.
Since some preliminary data analyses were completed prior to the site visit, interview time was dedicated
more to understanding performance trends, in addition to learning about system processes and staff
responsibilities. Through these interviews and focus groups, the review team was able to develop a better
overall understanding of district operations and clarify any data questions that arose during preliminary
analysis, including investigation of possible causes of unfavorable variances, current efficiency or
performance measurement systems, current plans and initiatives, current approach to cost savings,
recent cost savings or cost cutting measures, decision-making frameworks, and additional areas of
concern for the staff.
School Site Visits
A sample of HCPS schools was selected for site visits based on school type and geographic location within
the district. The review team selected and conducted site visits to HCPS elementary, K-8, middle, and high
schools. The purpose of the school visits was to gather information on school operations, facilities, and
staff members’ perceptions of the services provided by the central office.
Focus Group Sessions
Focus groups are an effective way of obtaining more in-depth information from staff than a one-on-one
formal interview or other data collection instruments. In addition, the dynamics of a focus group often
stimulate the expression of ideas that might otherwise go unstated. The project team conducted focus
group sessions with varying groups of stakeholders (e.g., principals, teachers, operational area leads,
departmental and school staff). These focus groups were conducted during the April 2016 site visit.
State and National Peer Data Analysis
Gibson used the most recent state expenditure and staffing reports to compare HCPS to state and peer
averages. These reports are available annually; the most recent reports available at the time of this study
contained actual expenditure and staffing data through the 2014-15 school year. Unaudited actual
expenditure data for 2015-16 was also included.
For national comparisons, Gibson used the Council of Great City Schools Managing for Results – an annual
survey of Key Performance Indicators (KPI) that are self-reported by major U.S. school systems including
Hillsborough County. The most recent report is dated October 2015 and contains 2013-14 comparative
data.
12 Introduction
Analysis
Data Analysis
As discussed previously, existing HCPS data were requested and analyzed to provide background and
context for this review. During the assessment phase of this project, each functional area was reviewed
individually to determine whether efficient financial and operational management practices were in place.
The analyses included trend and peer analysis of expenditure data, staffing data and operational
performance measures, as well as process, document (e.g., job descriptions) and organizational analysis.
Interview and Focus Group Data
Qualitative interview and focus group data were analyzed by functional area leads conducting the focus
group sessions to determine common trends across the various stakeholder groups (e.g., district
administration, school leaders and staff, department heads and staff). Other sources of input (e.g.,
observations, district data, and industry best practices) were also included in analyses.
Organization of Report
The remainder of this report is organized into the following:
Chapter 1 – District Organization and Management
Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Chapter 3 – Human Resources
Chapter 4 – Technology Management
Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Chapter 6 – Facilities Management
Appendices
13 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Introduction
The effective and efficient education of students depends on a district’s governance structure,
administrative management, and planning processes. The role of the school board (board) is to set goals
and priorities, establish policies, and to approve the plans and funding necessary to achieve district goals
and objectives. The superintendent is responsible for managing district operations, recommending
staffing levels, and preparing a plan for spending financial resources in order to carry out the board’s goals
and objectives. Department and school administration executes the plans and measures performance
against established targets that are aligned with the district’s goals and objectives. Each component of
this system of governance and administration helps ensure that goals and objectives are in fact achieved,
and that departments, schools, and the individuals that oversee them are held accountable for results.
Hillsborough County Public Schools (HCPS) is the eighth largest district in the nation with approximately
207,000 students (in 2015-16). HCPS is the largest employer in Hillsborough County with more 25,000
employees. The district has over 270 school sites, including 141 elementary schools (K-5), 43 middle
schools, 27 high schools, 5 K-8 schools, and 47 charter schools. HCPS also provides many distinct learning
programs including Magnet, International Baccalaureate, Career and Technical Education, Advanced
Placement, and Dual Enrollment. Other services offered include 11 adult programs, 4 technical colleges,
4 Career Centers, and 9 Exceptional Centers. Approximately 36.2 percent of students are White, 33
percent Hispanic, 21.3 percent Black, and 5.5 percent Multi-racial. Approximately 62 percent are
economically disadvantaged and 15.7 percent are English language learners.
This remainder of this chapter provides commendations and recommendations related to board
governance and district-level management and administration.
Board Governance
The HCPS school board is responsible for the organization and control of the district’s public schools and
is empowered to determine the policies necessary for the effective operation and the general
improvement of the school system. The school board is a public corporate entity and can take action only
when the board is meeting in official public session and a quorum is present.
HCPS is governed by a seven-member school board, representing the seven districts in HCPS. The board
members have staggered terms to support continuity. Table 1.1 presents the HCPS current board
members, the district they represent, and the number of years of service on the board.
14 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Table 1.1. HCPS Governing Board Members
School Board Member Title District Years on Board
April Griffin Board Chair 6 10
Cindy Stuart Board Vice Chair 3 4
Susan Valdez Board Member 1 12
Sally Harris Board Member 2 2
Melissa Snively Board Member 4 2
Doretha Edgecomb Board Member 5 12
Carol Kurdell Board Member 7 24
Source: HCPS website, http://www.sdhc.k12.fl.us/doc/list/school-board/board-members/97-418/.
Regular board meetings are held once a month in the School Board Auditorium in downtown Tampa.
Separate board workshops are also held monthly. Other recognition and special board meetings occur
throughout the year. Formal board meetings are aired live on the Tampa Bay Arts & Education Network.
Board meeting agendas and supporting information are posted online through the district’s school board
website. These meetings are also open to the public.
Operating expenditures for the school board for the past five years are presented in Table 1.2. The school
board expenditures include board member compensation as provided by state law. Other expenditures
include board member professional development, travel expenditures, and costs for secretarial staff and
communications. Since 2011-12 board expenditures have risen by an average of 7 percent annually,
mostly due to increases in benefit costs.
Table 1.2. HCPS Board Expenditures, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Expenditure Type (Object) 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
(Unaudited)
100 Salaries $290,641 $286,685 $297,171 $298,158 $298,309
200 Employee Benefits $87,201 $79,813 $146,397 $179,988 $180,860
300 Purchased Services $53,405 $47,980 $58,203 $58,144 $75,670
500 Materials & Supplies $2,000 $2,479 $2,068 $2,468 $6,730
600 Capital Outlay $200
700 Other $21,813 $89,301 $21,358 $10,151 $29,448
Total $455,061 $506,458 $525,197 $548,910 $591,016
Source: HCPS Five-Year Financial and Staffing History - Site code 9110 (Board Members)
Table Note: May not sum to total due to rounding
The board office includes four secretarial support staff who are shared among two or more board
members.
15 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
The HCPS board policy manual is located on the district’s web site and includes legally required and locally
adopted policies for the district. Policies are differentiated from administrative regulations and operating
procedures in that they must be approved by the board. District administrative regulations – which
provide additional guidance – may be approved by the Superintendent. Departmental operating
procedures may be approved by department leaders.
The HPCS Board Policy Manual includes the following major sections2:
0000 Bylaws
1000 Administration
2000 Program
3000 Instructional Staff
4000 Support Staff
5000 Students
6000 Finances
7000 Property
8000 Operations
9000 Community Relations
Policies are updated at least twice per year. HCPS also has a tab on its web site for Administrative
Procedures. Currently, administrative procedures exist for the policy sections on Finances (6000),
Property (7000) and Operations (8000).
The scope of the board governance review encompassed the following areas:
Planning and Accountability
Board Information Needs for Decision-making
Board Meetings
Internal Audit
Board Communications
Commendation 1-1: HCPS applied best practices in the development of its Strategic Plan.
The Hillsborough County Public Schools Superintendent and School Board began the development of a
new strategic plan in spring 2015. Guided by the district’s vision, “Preparing Students for Life”, and
mission, “To provide education and the supports that enable each student to excel as a successful and
responsible citizen”, four strategic priorities were created.
2 HCPS Web Site: http://www.sdhc.k12.fl.us/policymanual/index
16 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
These priorities are:
1. Increasing graduation rates
2. Communicating with stakeholders
3. Building culture and relationships
4. Foundation of financial stewardship
For each strategic priority, key performance indicators (KPIs) were designated with appropriate measures.
HCPS will regularly assess these measures to ensure that is on track for achieving its strategic goals. KPIs
for Increasing Graduation Rates include kindergarten reading readiness, student attendance, and
graduation requirements. Family engagement, student communication, and district website usage are
measured for communicating with stakeholders. Employee engagement, student experience, and
workforce diversity are including in strong culture, and bond rating, audit results and fund balance are
KPIs for ensuring financial foundation strength.
The Strategic Plan objectives are organized through a Balanced Scorecard framework, including each
strategic priority and its accompanying objectives. To give the plan structure, Goal Areas were identified
for Student Learning, Talent Management, Culture & Relationships, and Processes & Financials.
Through the strategic planning process, HCPS developed a unique organizational philosophy – an inverted
structure whereby students and families served are at the top of the structure and support at every level
in the organization is directed towards students and families. The key belief in servant leadership brought
about this culture shift. Figure 1.1 displays the organizational philosophy displayed in the district’s
strategic plan.
Figure 1.1. HCPS Organizational Philosophy
Source: HCPS Strategic Plan 2015-2020
17 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
HCPS board members were consistent in their praise for the strategic planning process and the results.
The review team also believes this document is an excellent starting point to guide the district through
the next five years, particularly because of its focus on what’s important and the establishment of
measureable objectives to hold the district accountable.
Recommendation 1-1: Consider options to improve the efficiency of board meetings.
The review team analyzed board meeting minutes and durations, and also observed several board
meetings. Board members receive board packets in advance of each meeting, and each agenda item has
a cover sheet with standard pieces of information about the item. Board members are allowed to submit
questions about the board packet in advance of the meeting so that items may be addressed prior to
board meeting discussion or action.
There are four types of board meetings – regular meetings, workshops, recognition meetings, and special
meetings. All meetings are subject to the same legal requirements for postings, notices, and access by the
public. Board workshops provide a more interactive venue for in-depth discussions of future agenda
items. Recognition meetings acknowledge and celebrate student and staff achievements. Both the board
workshops and the recognition meetings increase the efficiency of the regular board meetings. Special
meetings may be called for any special purpose and may include one or more agenda items.
Between June 2015 and June 2016 the average board meeting time for regular board meetings was 3
hours and 55 minutes.
The review team’s assessment is that several other opportunities exist to improve the efficiency and
ultimately effectiveness of the board meetings. These opportunities are discussed below.
Timed Agendas for Regular Board Meetings
Only the Recognition meetings have timed agendas. Time agendas help establish reasonable expectations
for the length of discussion. The times do not need to be strictly adhered to, but their existence will help
limit the discussion of an item to the targeted time.
Eliminate Paper Copies of Board Packets
While the board packets are provided electronically and posted on the district’s web site, paper copies
continue to be provided to each board member. This creates unnecessary costs and effort to photocopy,
organize, and distribute the board packet. As the board continues to support investments in the district’s
technology to eliminate paper, their actions should also reflect this philosophy.
Formally Adopt and Consistently Apply “Way of Work” Guidelines
The Board created a document entitled “Way of Work”, containing a comprehensive list of guidelines and
procedures to ensure that the board is committed to governing as a professional board of directors. The
procedures and norms of meetings in this document include the following effective practices:
18 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Members will avoid surprises by articulating specific concerns about agenda items in advance
Members will…avoid negative and personal comments
Members will not hold sidebar conversations (during the meeting)
Members will demonstrate respect for diverse opinions
Special circumstances, such as how to handle pending litigation meetings, termination hearings, and
pulling agenda items, are also addressed in the Way of Work.
During interviews with the review team, Board members generally agreed that these guidelines are not
consistently followed or enforced. Since valuable time was incurred to develop them, and they contain
excellent guidance, the board should formally adopt these guidelines and enforce them. By doing so, more
productive time in board meetings could be achieved.
Develop Guidelines and Standards for Staff Presentations to the Board
While board members stated that staff presentations generally met their expectations, the review team
analyzed several presentations and observed others during board meetings and noted that the format
and length of presentations vary by department. While each presentation is unique, the following
suggestions will help improve the efficiency, delivery, and impact of staff presentations:
Presentation format guidelines. Establish maximum number of words on a slide and minimum
font size – to support readability and focus on key messages. Graphics standards should also be
established. A standard color scheme should be applied to presentations, along with the inclusion
of the HCPS logo. This will help the support a consistent branding of HCPS quality.
Presentation length guidelines. Establish maximum number of slides for a presentation, which
will have a direct impact on the presentation length, and help manage the agenda item to
established time targets.
Presentation coaching. Major presentations should be subject to a trial run before the meeting
with the executive team and the Communications Department. As needed, HCPS department
heads should receive videotaped public speaking training.
Implementation status dashboards. Create dashboards that are updated quarterly, or other
frequency defined by the board, to report status of district initiatives such as the implementation
of the strategic plan activities or internal audit recommendations. Use of dashboards would
automatically provide the board with the most recent status report, allowing them to drill into
specific projects or activities that is of interest to them. This would likely reduce the amount of
time district administrators would need to present a status report. Figures 1.2 and 1.3 present
sample screen shots from of an internal audit implementation status dashboard.
19 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Figure 1.2. Sample Implementation Status Dashboard, Global View
Source: Gibson Consulting Group, Inc.
Figure 1.3. Sample Implementation Status Dashboard, Detailed View
Source: Gibson Consulting Group, Inc.
20 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Consider Establishment of Board Committees
The HCPS board does not currently have any standing committees. The Way of Work contains a provision
for the establishment of such committees, recognizing that not all of the board’s work can be
accomplished at regularly scheduled meetings of the entire board. The creation of standing committees
for key district functions, such as instruction, facilities, and finance/audit may help the board dedicate the
necessary time to these functions without consuming board meeting time. These committees are advisory
in nature, and cannot make decisions on behalf of the board. No more than three board members may
serve on any individual committee, as by doing so would constitute an official board meeting with a
quorum.
Consider Florida Master Board Certification Program
Florida’s Master Board Certification program is a tailored training for school boards and superintendents
to strengthen the team’s ability to work effectively, efficiently, and collectively. The training curriculum
concentrates on student achievement through the four elements of the Florida School Boards Association
(FSBA) Governance Model: Vision, Structure, Accountability and Advocacy. Some of the skills and
knowledge learned through the curriculum are team development, strategic planning, problem solving,
and self-assessment. To complete the certification program, members must complete 22 training hours.
There are currently 21 Florida school districts who have achieved this certification.
During the 2001-02 Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability (OPPAGA) Efficiency
Review conducted by Gibson Consulting Group, Inc., HCPS had its master board certification. The district
originally received its master board certificate in 1993.
Each board member interviewed during the OPPAGA review stated that this certification program was a
key to their success in working together as a board. Several board members were not initially supportive
of the idea, but after going through the training and realizing the benefits they became ardent supporters
of the process. One of the principle benefits noted at the time was that differences in board member
views were resolved during the certification process, saving valuable board meeting time by avoiding the
repeated discussion of those differences.
The HCPS board should consider this as a strategy to improve their effectiveness as a board and to increase
the efficiency of board meetings.
Recommendation 1-2: Increase breadth of coverage of internal audit to maximize effectiveness.
Internal audit is an independent and objective assurance and consulting activity that informs leaders how
well systems and processes are working. Audits result in findings and recommendations to improve
processes and mitigate the risks surrounding those processes. Internal audit is different from an external
audit, which expresses an opinion on the reasonableness of the district’s financial statements within
materiality limits. Internal audit focuses on processes and whether or not they are compliant, effective,
and efficient.
21 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
HCPS maintains a district auditing team and an audit committee (the entire board). The mission of the
district auditing team is to provide assurance that the district is maintaining the highest standard of
stewardship while utilizing public resources efficiently and effectively.3 According to the HCPS audit
committee charter, the entire school board functions as the audit committee in order to “promote,
maintain, and enhance the independence and objectivity of the internal auditing function of the District by
ensuring broad audit coverage, adequate consideration of audit/review reports, and appropriate action
on recommendations.” The audit charter also states that the district is required to conduct a periodic
district-wide risk assessment as a basis for recommending future audits. Currently, the district risk
assessment is comprised of expenditure comparisons from the past two years.
Duties and responsibilities of the audit committee include:
Approving the internal audit charter
Reviewing and approving the audit work plan
Reviewing audit reports
Allowing for budgeting special unplanned audits required under board’s Investigation policy
Holding meetings with the Chief Auditing Officer quarterly
Quality assurance audits are also required to be conducted every five years, budget permitting, to assure
the board and Superintendent that the internal auditing activities conform to the Institute of Internal
Auditors’ Code of Ethics and Standards. In prior years, the district auditing team reported to the
Superintendent. Currently, this unit reports jointly to the Superintendent and the board. Florida state law
allows internal auditing functions to report to the board or the board’s designee.4
HCPS incurs approximately $1 million annually in operating costs for its audit function. Table 1.3 presents
the internal audit expenditures for the past five years, reflecting virtually no growth in spending during
this time.
3 HCPS Web Site: http://www.sdhc.k12.fl.us/doc/list/auditing/about/3-7/ 4 Florida Education Code 1001.42
22 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Table 1.3. HCPS Audit Expenditures, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Expenditure Type (Object) 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
(unaudited)
100 Salaries $739,883 $747,469 $735,700 $792,662 $745,357
200 Employee Benefits $177,508 $178,437 $190,154 $206,894 $195,643
300 Purchased Services $14,383 $10,522 $13,037 $8,364 $12,913
500 Materials & Supplies $2,626 $2,866 $2,784 $4,045 $2,750
600 Capital Outlay $9,109 $5,174 $2,494 $1,273 $5,334
700 Other $0 $0 $150 $0 $0
Total $943,510 $944,468 $944,319 $1,013,237 $961,996
Percent Change - 0% 0% 7% -5%
Source: HCPS Expenditure Data Extract
Table Note: May not sum to total due to rounding
Approximately 83 percent of the non-administrative District Auditing Team staff are dedicated to two
types of audits – Student Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) audits for attendance reporting and Student Activity
Fund audits. The internal audit function also has two administrative positions. Figure 1.4 presents the
distribution of the 12 non-administrative audit staff by function.
Figure 1.4. Distribution of HCPS Non-Administrative Auditing Staff by Function
Source: HCPS Auditing Team Organization Chart
Activity Fund, 8
Student FTE, 2
Other, 2
23 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Annual Student Activity Fund audits are required by state law.5 Full-time equivalent audits are not
required by Florida law; however, the Auditor General conducts FTE audits every other year. The last
adjustment made by the state of Florida was $220,000 (decrease), based on an audit of 45 schools.
The district also provides an anonymous information reporting system for anyone to report violations that
may include issues such as gross mismanagement, gross neglect of duty, and violation of state and federal
law. The auditing team monitors this reporting. Based on interviews, HCPS board members expressed
general satisfaction with the district’s internal audit function, and found the audit reports to be useful.
The current scope of coverage by the HCPS auditing team is very limited, and does not reflect the intent
of the audit charter to ensure “broad audit coverage.” This is not uncommon in public education, but this
approach does not adequately address all the risks faced by HCPS. The universe of audit projects should
include every functional and program area of the school system, and a comprehensive risk assessment
should be conducted for all areas every five years. Figure 1.5 is an example of a more comprehensive risk
assessment. Each auditable area (left side) receives a numeric score based on nine risk areas (across the
top).
Figure 1.5. Sample Risk Assessment Scoring Matrix
Source: Gibson Consulting Group, Inc.
Table Note: Does not reflect actual HCPS data
5 Florida Administrative Code, Rule 6A-1.087
24 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Risk areas include the risk of fraud or theft, the risk of non-compliance, the risk of failure to meet
objectives, the risk of litigation, and the risk of negative publicity. Factors that could influence the risk
assessment of an area might include:
Excessive management or staff turnover in the area
New information systems recently implemented
Not subject to an audit during the past five years
Recurring lawsuits
Recurring negative publicity
Significant changes in spending or staffing
The regulatory complexity of the area
The size of the area in terms of budget and/or staffing
Through a detailed analysis of data from each auditable area and interviews of area leaders, an
independent and complete risk assessment profile can be developed. This, in turn will support a more
robust internal audit plan. In the figure above, these scores are color coded based on the level of risk, with
red reflecting higher risk areas and green reflecting lower risk areas. Generally the higher risk areas are
audited first.
HCPS should broaden the scope of its internal audit function to include the following areas:
Financial Management (internal controls, purchasing, payroll, grants, activity funds)
Administrative Operations (human resources, insurance/risk management)
Auxiliary Operations (maintenance, transportation, food service, safety and security)
Academic Program Management (General Education, Special Education, Bilingual/ESOL, Career
and Technology Education)
Bond Program/Construction Management
Technology and Information Systems
A broader risk assessment will result in a broader and more impactful internal audit function. Many
internal audits identify cost savings, help avoid misappropriations of assets, or reduce the risk of expensive
litigation. The investment in a comprehensive internal audit function typically sees a return on the
investment that exceeds the cost.
Fiscal Impact
A one-time investment should be incurred for an outside firm to conduct a comprehensive risk
assessment. This one-time investment is estimated to be $100,000.
Based on the audit needs identified through the risk assessment, additional in-house or external resources
will be needed, as the scope of the internal audit function is expected to be significantly broader. While a
better estimate can be provided after the risk assessment is completed, it is estimated that the annual
25 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
internal audit budget would need to be doubled, to approximately $2 million a year, beginning in fiscal
year (FY) 2017-18. This may include additional HCPS audit team staffing and contracted services.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Conduct risk assessment ($100,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Increase internal audit
resources $0 $0 ($1,000,000) ($1,000,000) ($1,000,000) ($1,000,000)
Total ($100,000) $0 ($1,000,000) ($1,000,000) ($1,000,000) ($1,000,000)
Note: Costs are negative. Savings are positive.
District Administration
This section addresses district level administration, which includes the Superintendent and the direct
reports to the superintendent position. School administration, which includes principals, assistant
principals, and other school-level administrative staff, will be addressed in Phase III of the Educational and
Operational Efficiency Audit. District administration also includes management and performance
reporting at the high levels of the organization, as well as administrative regulations adopted by the
Superintendent and district level communications.
The Superintendent, as provided by law, is the Secretary and Executive Officer of the school board. The
board appoints the Superintendent, and the current superintendent, Jeff Eakins, assumed responsibilities
in June 2015. Prior to serving as Superintendent, Mr. Eakins served as Deputy Superintendent for HCPS
and prior to that served as the district’s Director of Federal Programs.
According to Florida Statutes 1001.51, “the organization of the district shall be designed to meet objectives
set by the Board to ensure clear lines of authority and responsibility. Positions should also be defined with
clarity. Responsibility should flow clearly from the Superintendent through the administrative staff to the
operational personnel.” Figure 1.6 presents the district’s organizational structure as of August 2016. Under
the prior organization, many senior management positions reported directly to the Superintendent. Now,
under a Chief of Staff organizational model, all management positions report to the Chief of Staff, who
reports directly to the Superintendent. This allows the Superintendent to focus more on the board and
external demands of the position. The Chief of Staff model is not uncommon large school systems. Under
the new organizational structure, all schools report up through the chief of schools position, and a deputy
superintendent position oversees Workforce Connections, Academic Support and Federal Programs,
Strategy Management, Student Services, and the Teaching Tools Store. The remaining core functions,
including business, facilities operations, human resources and technology, report directly to the Chief of
Staff.
“Staff” functions, or functions that support the entire district (such as attorney services, internal audit,
and diversity) appear in red on the organization chart and are differentiated from the “line” functions
described above.
26 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Figure 1.6. HCPS District Organizational Structure
Supterintendent
School Board
Chief of Staff
School Board Attorney
Chief OfficerDiversity
Chief OfficerGovernment
Relations
Department Manager Auditing
Chief of Schools Administration
Deputy Superintendent
General Manager Information &
Technology
Chief Officer Community
Relations
Chief OfficerBusiness Services
Assistant Superintendent Student Services
Chief OfficerOperations
Chief Officer Human Resources
Assistant Superintendent
Educational Leadership and PD Assistant
Superintendent Academic Support
& Federal Programs
General ManagerStrategy
Management
Executive OfficerCompliance
Area Superintendents (8)
OfficerWorkforce
Connections
Chief OfficerTeaching and
Learning
Assistant Superintendent
Outreach/School Improvement
DirectorVirtual Schools
District Attorney
Teaching Tools Store
Chief Officer School Security & Emergency
Management DirectorLow Performing
Schools
DirectorChoice / Magnet
Schools
General DirectorCharter Chools
DirectorAdministration
Source: HCPS Organization Chart, August, 2016
Expenditures for district administration fall under the function “General Administration” as defined by the
state reporting requirements. In 2015-166, the district incurred $5.7 million in General Administration
expenditures, with $4.8 million or 84 percent relating to personnel costs. Figure 1.7 compares HCPS
General Administration Expenditures as a percentage of the total budget to six Florida peer districts for
2013-14, the most recent year comparable data are available. HCPS had the lowest percentage of General
Administration Expenditures among its peers. Because of recent organizational changes, this percentage
is expected to increase in subsequent years.
6 2015-16 expenditures are unaudited
27 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Figure 1.7. General Administration Expenditures as a Percentage of Total Budget, HCPS and Peer
Districts, 2013-14
Source: Florida Department of Education Data Extract
Recommendation 1-3: Develop administrative regulations for all applicable policy areas.
The district maintains Administrative Procedures and publishes them on its web site. These procedures
are actually administrative regulations that provide additional operational guidance – beyond board
adopted policies – that are approved by the Superintendent.
Administrative regulations provide additional administrative guidance on “what” is to be done. They are
typically aligned under the same table of contents as the board policy manual and HCPS organizes the
administrative regulations they do have in this way. Procedures, on the other hand, provide information
on “how” activities are to be done and by “whom.” Operating procedures are under the responsibility of
functional and program areas leaders.
HCPS currently has administrative regulations for only three of the board policy manual’s nine sections:
Finances (Section 6000), Property (Section 7000) and Operations (Section 8000). All board policy sections
should be evaluated and administrative regulations should be added for each as needed.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
0.00%
0.05%
0.10%
0.15%
0.20%
0.25%
0.30%
0.35%
0.40%
Hillsborough Pinellas Broward Duval Dade Orange Palm Beach
Hillsborough Pinellas Broward Duval Dade Orange Palm Beach
28 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Recommendation 1-4: Establish administrative guidelines for the development of district
organizational charts.
During this operational efficiency audit, HCPS provided the review team organizational charts for the
central office and for each department. The review team concurs with the recent change to a Chief of
Staff model at the district level (discussed in more depth previously in this chapter). Departmental
organizational charts are assessed under separate chapters of this report.
The development of organizational charts are very important to an organization in that these charts define
the chain of command and accountability, and depict the level of importance of individual positions. They
also drive budget responsibility reporting.
HCPS organizational charts provided by the district in April 2016 did not follow key best practice
guidelines. These are discussed briefly below:
Dual reporting responsibilities – in several instances, the district showed positions reporting to
multiple supervisor positions. This splits accountability and confuses lower level management on
who their boss is. The only position that should be allowed to have two supervisors is the district
internal audit team, which reports jointly to the Superintendent and the board. This alignment of
internal audit is allowed by state law.
Leveling – leveling is the positioning of similar positions at the same horizontal level on the
organizational chart. HCPS has several supervisory positions that are ranked lower than others,
but appear at a higher positioning on the organizational chart. For example, a director position
should not be presented at the same horizontal level as a general manager; the higher ranking
position should be higher on the organizational chart. The lack of appropriate leveling conveys
mixed messages about the seniority of the position. Particularly at the higher organizational
levels, leadership positions (General Manager, Director, Officer) should each be positioned
equally on the organizational chart, reinforcing the seniority of the position. Figure 1.8 shows a
sample organizational chart reflecting positions at the same horizontal level with proper leveling.
29 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Figure 1.8. Sample Organizational Chart
Chief Officer
General Manager General Manager
DirectorDirector
SupervisorSupervisor Supervisor Supervisor
Source: Gibson Consulting Group, Inc.
Figure Note: Sample only; this does not reflect current HCPS positions or alignment
Position titles – some HCPS departmental organizational charts do not specify titles, only
functions. This may also contribute to confusion about reporting responsibility and accountability.
Each box on an organizational chart should reflect a position title.
Centralized management – as of April 2016, departmental organizational charts were prepared
by the respective departments and there was not centralized guidance, review, or quality control.
The HCPS Human Resources Division should “own” the organizational charts (as it does job
descriptions), maintain the guidelines for developmental and review, and serve as the quality
control mechanism to ensure that organizational charts are accurate and consistently presented.
The process does not diminish the importance of the district and department leader’s
involvement in the development of organizational structures.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
Recommendation 1-5: Reduce clerical staffing7.
Compared to its Florida peer districts, HCPS has more clerical staff relative to the student population. The
review team analyzed HCPS clerical staffing levels and formulas and compared clerical staffing to four
Florida peer districts – Pinellas County Schools (PCS), Palm Beach Schools (PBS), Duval County Public
Schools (DCPS), and Orange County Public Schools (OCPS). As reflected in Figure 1.9, HCPS is the largest
of the five school systems.
7 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS.
30 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Figure 1.9. HCPS and Peer District Student Membership, 2014-15
Source: Florida Department of Education – Average Salaries for Select Support and Technical Staff, 2014-15
According to the Florida Department of Education8, in 2014-15 HCPS had 1,589 clerical employees which
consists of bookkeepers, secretaries, clerk/clerk typists, and data entry operators. State peer data for
2015-16 are not yet available; however, HCPS data shows that the number of clerical staff at the district
remained relatively unchanged for 2015-16. Figure 1.10 presents the number of clerical employees in
HCPS, OCPS, PCS, PBS, and DCPS for the 2014-15 school year.
8 Source: Florida Department of Education’s “Average Salaries for Select Support and Technical Staff” report under the category “clerical staff”
103,768
186,598
128,070
191,599
207,453
-
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
PCS PBCS DCPS OCPS HCPS
31 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Figure 1.10. Clerical Staff, HCPS and Peer Districts, 2014-15
Source: Florida Department of Education – Average Salaries for Select Support and Technical Staff, 2014-15
The same state staffing report shows declining numbers from two of the peer districts over the past five
years, while HCPS and other peer clerical staff counts have remained constant over the same time period.
Figure 1.11 presents the five-year trend of total clerical staff counts for these five districts.
717
1,004
1,104
1,293
1,576
-
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
PCS PBCS DCPS OCPS HCPS
32 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Figure 1.11. Clerical Staff, HCPS and Peer Districts, 2010-11 through 2014-15
Source: Florida Department of Education – Average Salaries for Select Support and Technical Staff, 2010-11 through
2014-15
Table 1.4 presents ratios of students to clerical staff and total employees to clerical staff for HCPS and the
peer districts, along with the data used to calculate these measures. The lower ratio, the more clerical
staff relative to the respective population. HCPS has the lowest clerical staff ratio on a student basis and
the second lowest clerical staff ratio on a total staff basis compared to the peer districts.
Table 1.4. Clerical Staff Ratios, HCPS and Peer Districts, 2014-15
Measure PCS PBCS DCPS HCPS OCPS
Student Membership 103,768 186,598 128,070 207,453 191,599
Total Staff 12,962 22,091 12,371 27,000 23,667
Total Clerical Staff 649 978 914 1,589 1,302
Student to Clerical Staff Ratio 159.89 190.80 140.12 130.56 147.16
Total Staff to Clerical Staff
Ratio 19.97 22.59 13.54 16.99 18.18
Source: Florida Department of Education – Average Salaries for Select Support and Technical Staff, 2014-15
Central Office Clerical Staff
Of the 1,589 clerical positions in the district, 468 or 29 percent are located in central office (non-school)
locations. Based on interviews with the district staff and observations made while on site, several factors
appear to be contributing to these levels of clerical staff at the HCPS central office:
Voicemail systems are underutilized
There is a proliferation of manual processes for time and attendance reporting and payroll
processing
-
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
DCPS HCPS OCPS PBCS PCS
33 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Clerical job descriptions and related work processes have not changed with technology
developments
Elimination of clerical support tasks for all but the top three layers of supervisory positions (e.g., answering
phone, reading emails, and typing) and automation and re-engineering of manual and labor intensive
processes (e.g., timekeeping, payroll) will reduce the demand for clerical staff work. This will in turn allow
the district to reduce clerical staff positions to levels similar to those of its peer districts relative to the
respective student populations.
As of September 2016, HCPS began implementation of this recommendation by eliminating 50 central
office clerical positions.
School Clerical Staff
According to staffing data provided by HCPS, there are 1,130 clerical staff in schools throughout the
district.9 HCPS applies a staffing formula to allocate clerical staff to schools based on the school type and
the number of students. The middle school and high school formulas appear to be reasonable based on
current work demands, but these formulas should be revisited after the district’s finance and human
resource information systems are upgraded. The elementary school formula provides the same number
of clerical staff for a 200 student school as for an 849 student school. This is an unusually wide range for
the same staffing. Not until a school gets below 200 students are fewer than three staff allocated. Table
1.5 presents the clerical staff allocation for HCPS elementary schools.
Table 1.5. HCPS Current School Clerical Staffing Formula, Elementary Schools
School Enrollment Clerical Units
1 to 199 students 2
200 to 849 students 3
850 to 999 students 4
1,000 to 1,249 students 5
1,250+ students 6
Source: HCPS, spring 2016
The district should change their elementary school clerical formula to provide two clerical positions for up
to 499 students, as reflected in Table 1.6.
9 There is a 9 FTE difference between the state and district data that could not be reconciled.
34 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Table 1.6. Recommended School Clerical Staffing Formula, Elementary Schools
School Enrollment Clerical Units
1 to 499 students 2
500 to 849 students 3
850 to 999 students 4
1,000 to 1,249 students 5
1250+ students 6
Source: Gibson Consulting Group, Inc.
Fiscal Impact
The total estimated annual savings from clerical position reductions in elementary schools and the district
central office combined is $6,143,760. The position reductions increase the HCPS student-clerical staff
ratio to 146.71 and also increase the HCPS total staff to clerical ratio to 19.09.
After implementing other elements of this recommendation, HCPS should evaluate the need to upgrade
the clerical staff job descriptions and revisit pay levels for these positions. This may offset some of the
savings.
The average salary for HCPS clerical staff based on the state data is $26,086. Adding 28 percent for benefits
brings the total average compensation to $33,390. If the district reduced central office clerical staff by 33
percent (156 positions) this would yield annual savings of $6,143,76010.
Changing the elementary school clerical staffing formula would result in the district eliminating 28 clerical
positions across all elementary schools11, yielding annual savings of $934,92012.
The fiscal impact in the table below assumes a two-year phase-in approach.
Recommendation
One-Time
(Costs)/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Reduce the number of central
office clerical staff positions. $0 $2,604,420 $5,208,840 $5,208,840 $5,208,840 $5,208,840
Reduce the number of
elementary school clerical staff
positions.
$0 $467,460 $934,920 $934,920 $934,920 $934,920
Total $0 $3,071,880 $6,143,760 $6,143,760 $6,143,760 $6,143,760
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
10 (156 x $33,390 [average salary and benefits]) 11 28 elementary schools have between 200 and 499 students 12 (28 x $33,390 [average salary and benefits])
35 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Recommendation 1-6: Increase use of district’s complaint tracking system.
Policy 1139 of the HCPS board policy manual addresses complaints against administrative staff. The policy
states that “any complaint against an administrator which comes to the attention of the Board shall be
referred to the Superintendent.”
Complaints against instructional staff are handled differently, in accordance with policies 3139
(Complaints Against Instructional Staff Members) and 9130 (Public Complaints). These complaints must
meet the legal definition of a complaint and be reported to the district Office of Professional Standards in
the Human Resources Division. Other complaints about instructional staff, if not addressed directly by the
instructional staff, generally go to the school principal, then the Area Superintendent, then the Chief of
Schools, then the district Superintendent.
The board office receive calls from parents regarding complaints. The Way of Work defines procedures
for handling all calls or emails to board members. All complaints or concerns received in the board office
(by board secretaries) are forwarded to the Superintendent (or designee). During interviews with board
members, several stated they also receive calls directly from parents. While there is no formal policy or
procedure established, board members generally ask if the parent has gone through the channels above
with their complaint. In many of the instances when they are called, the parent has attempted to go
through the channels but was either unsatisfied with the response or did not get a response. For the latter
situation, this is indicative of a communication system that is not working effectively.
HCPS does not have a districtwide complaint tracking system. Only one school, the Choice School, uses
software to track and monitor the communication and resolution of parent complaints. The Office of the
Chief of Schools receives, on average, 25 calls per day. For approximately 50 percent of the calls, the
parent has not yet gone through the proper channels. The nature of complaints received by the Chief of
Schools Office varies throughout the year, and include complaints about:
Grades, graduation, promotion to next grade
Student suspensions
Change of educational placement
Student disciplinary matters
Lack of responsiveness from school administrators or area superintendents
Absent a system to track these calls/complaints, callers are requested to call back if the complaint is not
addressed. In some situations, the school administration or Area Superintendent’s office will notify the
Chief of Schools that a complaint has been resolved. The lack of a system also prevents the establishment
of an audit trail of complaints, the related communications, and the resulting resolution of the complaint.
A complaint tracking system can facilitate the necessary communications, establish an audit trail, and
provide reports that show district effectiveness and/or point to possible problem areas that need to be
addressed by the district, area or school administration.
36 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
HCPS should evaluate the existing complaint tracking software in place at the Choice School, and if it is
determined to meet district needs, implement the software districtwide. Implementing this
recommendation will help support the district’s strategic goal of “Communicating with Stakeholders.”
Fiscal Impact
Some additional licensing costs may need to be incurred, along with staff training, but these costs are not
expected to be significant. This recommendation can be implemented with existing district resources.
Recommendation 1-7: Develop a decision-making framework for the central office, area offices and
schools.
The Florida Education Code Section 1001.42(19) addresses local-level decision making for Florida schools.
This section states that boards are to “adopt policies that clearly encourage and enhance maximum
decision making appropriate to the school site. Such policies must include guidelines for schools in the
adoption and purchase of instructional materials, the implementation of student health, staff training,
school advisory council member training, student support services, budgeting, and the allocation of staff
resources.” This law is reinforced through HCPS board policy 2120.
Over the past 25 years, decision making in most public school systems has become more decentralized,
allowing principals and site-based planning committees more latitude in making school-level decisions. In
many school systems, decentralization created inefficiencies. Different schools apply different curricula,
remedial programs, and technologies to address school needs. The burden for central office functions
often became greater, requiring the support, maintenance, and training of a larger number of programs.
These factors have prompted many school systems to re-think their decision-making framework and to
apply more standards to promote consistent learning and efficiency while not overly constraining the
creativity and flexibility needed at the school level.
At HCPS, the decision-making process is more complex because of the area superintendent offices. HCPS
currently does not have a decision-making framework or any single document that defines decision-
making authority between the central office, the area offices, and the schools.
The job description for principals outlines the following essential duties and responsibilities:
Ensure conformance to state, national and school board standards
Develop and coordinate educational programs
Develop and administer educational programs for students with mental or physical disabilities
Confer with teachers, students, and parents concerning educational and behavior problems in
school
Establish and maintain relationships with colleges, community organizations, and other schools
to coordinate educational services
37 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Requisition and allocate supplies, equipment and instructional material as needed
Direct preparation of class schedules, cumulative records, and attendance reports
Walk about school building and property to monitor safety and security
Plan and monitor the school budget
Plan for and direct building maintenance
The area superintendent job description includes the following essential duties and responsibilities:
Supervise, develop and evaluate principals to improve student achievement
Gather and utilize data to drive professional development
Develop a team of support-providers and problem-solvers to address stakeholder concerns
Inspect and analyze regularly the operations within the area…and take action to continuously
improve
Recommend hiring, transfer, and termination of school principals
Neither of these job descriptions fully define the decision authority of the position. This is not uncommon,
but can lead to confusion and inconsistent decision making throughout a school system. For example, who
can make decisions on professional development and under what circumstances? Who can make
decisions on what type of technology to purchase at schools? Who has the authority to establish lunch
schedules? The HCPS policy manual provides guidance on some decisions, but there is no single source
for principals, area management, or district management to reference in making decisions.
The review team identified examples where the lack of a decision-making framework was contributing to
inefficient practices, and expects to learn more in Phase III of this efficiency audit in fall 2016. Below are
two examples learned during Phases I and II:
Custodial services. While not documented in their job description, HCPS school principals have
decision authority over custodial services at their schools. However, principals are not trained in
the operation of a custodial function. Certain decisions relating to equipment, scheduling,
cleaning frequencies, and custodial supplies should be made by positions that are trained in such
matters. While a central office custodial function exists, it serves only in an advisory and support
role and does not have the authority to make decisions. As noted in Chapter 2 – Facilities
Management of this report, the decentralized approach to custodial services has contributed to
an inefficient and overstaffed operation.
Technology. HCPS area superintendent offices are being provided more latitude in making
technology decisions for their area. This creates complications for the district’s IT Department in
that multiple service platforms might need to be supported. This is less efficient and less effective
for the district as a whole.
38 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
Some decisions, such as curriculum decisions, should be made or guided centrally in order to provide
consistent application and efficient operations at the school, area and district administration levels. Other
decisions, such as differentiation of instruction for individual students, can and should be made at the
school level. Documentation of a single decision-making framework will help ensure that all principals and
area and district administrators understand the criteria for making certain decisions. Adopting a decision-
making framework will ensure its consistent use by all positions involved in decision making. At a
minimum, decisions should be identified in the following four categories:
1. Site-based decisions not requiring district administration approval. These are decisions that can
be made or approved independently by principals or their designees without intervention or
approval by district administration. These decisions might include teaching strategies used and
assignments of special projects to staff.
2. Site-based selection from a list of district-provided options. Examples of selection lists might
include computer and instructional software available for purchase. Schools can be provided
choices of computer brands and software as long as they meet minimum specifications
established by district administration’s technology function. Purchasing items that are not on the
approved list could result in the inability of the technology function to effectively support the
hardware or software. Selecting from a list provides decision-making flexibility within a
framework that helps ensure districtwide efficiency and effectiveness.
3. Site-based decisions requiring district or area office approval. Certain decisions, such as hiring
or terminating school staff, should require the approval of area and district administration to
ensure compliance with state and federal laws and board policy.
4. District or area office decisions. There are certain decisions that should be made by district
administration and enforced at all schools. A single standardized curriculum and the school bell
schedule are examples of decisions that should be established, or standardized, by district
administration. In making these decisions, however, district administration should elicit input
from schools and area offices to ensure that decisions make sense for the schools, as well as the
district.
In developing a site-based decision-making framework, the authority, using the four options above, should
be defined for the following types of decisions:
Curriculum / curriculum guides
Academic program decisions
Ability to re-allocate instructional and/or non-instructional staff to meet needs identified by
school
Response to Intervention
Assessment / Benchmark testing development and scheduling
Course offerings (secondary)
Identification of professional development needs
39 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
School calendar
School bell schedule
Class size
Bus routes
Cafeteria schedule
Authority over custodians and how they spend their time
Authority over food service workers and how they spend their time
Work schedules for any categories of staff
Number of work days per year for any categories of staff
Block scheduling (secondary)
Terminating school staff
Establishing staffing needs
Establishing non-staff budget needs
School facility renovations
Student discipline – code of conduct
Student activity funds – software / processes
Class rank determination / computation
Purchasing decisions as they relate to teachers’ or principals’ authority to select vendors, versus
using the district administration purchasing department or only pre-approved vendors
Computers / servers
Instructional software purchases
Hiring school staff
In implementing this recommendation, the district administration should first conduct a brief online staff
survey to gauge perceptions of decision-making authority based on the list of decisions, and any additional
decision areas desired by district management. A committee of school principals, area assistant
superintendents, and district leaders from all program and operational areas should be convened to
review the survey results and develop the decision-making framework.
Job descriptions for all affected instructional and school administrative positions, area superintendent
positions, and central office leadership positions should reference the decision-making framework.
Fiscal Impact
The district is expected to need outside assistance ($50,000 in consulting or contractor fees) in
implementing this recommendation. This is based on an estimated 250 hours of facilitation and advisory
services at an hourly rate of $200. In addition, school, area and district administrators will need to dedicate
approximately 20 hours each to the development of the framework and modification of job descriptions.
40 Chapter 1 – Governance and Administration
The outside consultant/contractor will serve as an independent facilitator for the committee and be
primarily responsible for developing the decision-making framework materials.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-1 2019-20 2020-21
Develop site-based
decision-making
framework
($50,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Note: Costs are negative. Savings are positive.
41 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Introduction
In order to maximize the effectiveness of financial resources and plan for future needs, school districts
must rely on sound financial management. An effective financial management function ensures timely
and accurate financial reporting, adequate internal controls, efficient accounting operations that
maximize the use of technology, and sound financial decision making.
This chapter provides commendations and recommendations related to five aspects of financial
management of HCPS:
Financial Management, Accounting, and Reporting
Budgeting
Purchasing
Accounts Payable
Payroll
Financial Overview
At Hillsborough County Public Schools (HCPS), financial management is a major undertaking, as the district
manages a budget of more than $2.8 billion (all funds).13 School districts in Florida are funded through the
Florida Education Finance Program (FEFP). School boards must impose an established tax rate to generate
a required local share of funds in order to obtain the state share of funding for their respective districts.
District budgets are divided into “funds” that represent funding sources. The General Fund is the district’s
primary operating fund and is supported by state and local revenues. Other major funds include Federal
Funds (e.g., Title I, student nutrition), Debt Service Funds, Capital Funds (e.g., construction, school buses),
and Internal Service Funds (e.g., health insurance, workers compensation). Figure 2.1 presents the
expected distribution of HCPS funds for the 2016-17 budget.
13 Anticipated budget for 2016-17 based on First Public Hearing of Budget on August 2, 2016; presentation located at http://www.sdhc.k12.fl.us/docs/00/00/01/38/1617FYFirstPublicHearing.pdf.
42 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Figure 2.1. HCPS Projected Revenue by Fund, 2016-17
Source: First Public Hearing of 2016-17 Budget, August 2, 2016
According to the Operating Summary for the 2015-16 school year, the HCPS General Fund budget was
$1.68 billion, reflecting a decrease of $5 million or 0.3 percent over the previous year. Table 2.1 presents
a five-year history of General Fund actual expenditures for 2011-12 through 2015-16. During this time
total General Fund expenditures increased 22 percent, or just over 5 percent annually on average. The
largest percentage increase (8.1 percent) was between 2013-14 and 2014-15.
Table 2.1. HCPS General Fund Expenditures by Type, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Expenditure Type (Object) 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
(Unaudited)
100 Salaries $927,033,356 $928,224,593 $982,290,892 $1,059,397,964 $1,061,859,991
200 Employee Benefits $230,255,688 $223,956,894 $251,351,846 $275,671,926 $285,201,347
300 Purchased Services $145,180,414 $163,755,958 $188,555,479 $212,823,931 $225,766,012
400 Energy Services $47,185,321 $47,186,192 $45,636,656 $43,549,290 $37,271,456
500 Materials & Supplies $54,160,581 $58,411,876 $49,226,606 $58,256,112 $38,116,414
600 Capital Outlay $19,771,004 $15,494,563 $19,520,658 $16,982,920 $14,880,861
700 Other $19,021,885 $20,758,193 $22,259,052 $13,371,477 $16,947,316
900 Transfers $38,354 $33,348 $26,980 $5,269,882 $25,933
Total $1,442,646,602 $1,457,821,617 $1,558,868,168 $1,685,323,501 $1,680,069,331
Source: HCPS Five-Year Financial and Staffing History
Table Note: May not sum to total due to rounding
Personnel related costs (salaries and employee benefits) represent 80 percent of the district’s total
General Fund expenditure. If $17 million in substitute costs are included (part of the account codes 300
and 700 above) the percentage is above 81 percent.
General Fund, 64%
Federal Funds, 12%
Capital Outlay, 9%
Internal Services, 7%
Debt Service, 8%
43 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
The large percentage increase in purchased services relates primarily to the district’s charter schools
growth.
On a per student basis, General Fund expenditures have also increased over the past five years (see Figure
2.2.), but decreased 2.8 percent in 2015-16 (unaudited), largely because of the district’s cost cutting
efforts. Since 2011-12, expenditures per student increased from $7,429 to $8,099, or 9 percent. The
largest annual percentage gains (6.3 percent) occurred in 2013-14 and 2014-15.
Figure 2.2. General Fund Expenditures per Student, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Source: HCPS Five-Year Financial and Staffing History
Table Note: 2015-16 expenditures are unaudited
Table 2.2 presents the distribution of General Fund Expenditures by Function, such as instruction, general
administration and maintenance of plant. This information shows that HCPS spent a higher percentage on
instruction (65.5 percent) in 2015-16 compared to 2011-12 levels (63.6 percent).
Table 2.2. HCPS General Fund Expenditure Distribution by Function, 2011-12 and 2015-16
Expenditure Type (Function) 2011-12 2015-16
(unaudited)
5000 Instruction 63.55% 65.53%
6100 Student Personnel Services 3.84% 3.87%
6200 Instructional Media Services 1.37% 1.26%
6300 Instruction & Curriculum Dev. Services 1.33% 1.74%
6400 Instructional Staff Training Services 2.16% 1.47%
6500 Instructional-Related Technology 2.12% 1.87%
7100 Board of Education 0.09% 0.15%
7200 General Administration 0.27% 0.39%
7300 School Administration 6.01% 6.05%
$7,429 $7,380$7,840
$8,331$8,099
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
$7,000
$8,000
$9,000
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
44 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Expenditure Type (Function) 2011-12 2015-16
(unaudited)
7400 Facilities Acquis & Construct 0.22% 0.07%
7500 Fiscal Services 0.42% 0.38%
7600 Food Services 0.02% 0.02%
7700 Central Services 1.56% 2.44%
7800 Transportation Services 4.65% 3.74%
7900 Operation of Plant 7.57% 6.56%
8100 Maintenance of Plant 1.92% 1.61%
8200 Administrative Technology Services 0.04% 0.02%
9100 Community Services 2.84% 2.80%
9700 Transfer of Funds 0.00% 0.00%
Total 100.00% 100.00%
Source: HCPS Five-Year Financial and Staffing History
The primary impetus for this efficiency study was the decline in General Fund balances over the past five
years. The General Fund balance, which has several components, represents the difference between the
district’s assets and liabilities, and is similar to net worth. Some of the fund balances may be restricted for
specific uses by the source of funds; other balances may be assigned based on district decisions. Any other
amounts represents the “unassigned” fund balance.
The Florida Department of Education (DOE) requires minimum balances for the unassigned balances in
the General Fund as a percentage of total operating expenditures. Section 1011.051 of the Florida
Education Code states that if the unassigned fund balance level is projected to fall below 3 percent of the
district’s annual General Fund revenues, the superintendent must provide written notification to the
school board and the Commissioner of Education. HCPS’ unassigned fund balances have exceeded 5
percent of General Fund revenues in each of the past five years, thereby meeting the legal requirements.
However, HCPS board policy 6210 requires the district to maintain an unassigned fund balance of “at least
30 days of total operating expenses,” which is above 8 percent. HCPS is not meeting this requirement, but
through implementing recommendations contained in this report, the district should be able to restore
the unassigned fund balance to the board established target.
Total fund balances have declined precipitously. From June 30, 2011 to 2015, the total General Fund
balance declined from $361 million to $146 million, or almost 60 percent. The district’s most recent
estimate for the June 30, 2016 fund balance (unaudited) is $146 million, reflecting virtually no change
from the prior year. While current fund balance levels meet the state minimum requirements, bond rating
agencies may desire higher fund balances to support higher bond ratings. Higher bond ratings are
desirable in that they reduce bond interest costs, among other advantages. Figure 2.3 presents the HCPS
General Fund balances since 2010-11.
45 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Figure 2.3. HCPS General Fund Balance, 2010-11 to 2015-16 (unaudited)
Source: HCPS General Fund – Fund Balance, Comparison across Fiscal Years, 9/23/2016
The decline in General Fund balances has been due – in the simplest terms – to the excess of General Fund
expenditures over revenues during this time period. The HCPS board seeks to reverse this trend.
Financial Management, Accounting and Reporting
HCPS Business Office
The HCPS Business Office is led by a Chief Business Officer and includes the functions of accounting
services, budget/cash management services, payment services (accounts payable and payroll),
procurement services, and unit allocation. Figure 2.4 presents the Business Office organizational chart,
which reflects a reorganization that became effective summer 2016. In an effort to save costs and reduce
the span of control to more reasonable levels, this unit consolidated several management positions and
the Chief Business Officer now has five direct reports instead of eleven (excluding secretarial staff). This
is a more effective organizational structure for the division.
Figure 2.4. HCPS Business Office Organizational Chart
Chief Business Officer
Payroll/Payment Services
Budget/Cash Management
Services
Procurement Services
Accounting Services
Planning and Related Services
Source: HCPS Business Office
$361.1
$298.6
$269.3
$229.6
$146.0 $146.1
$0.0
$50.0
$100.0
$150.0
$200.0
$250.0
$300.0
$350.0
$400.0
2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16(unaudited)
46 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Other changes included the movement of “unit allocation” from another HCPS division to the Business
Office. The review team endorses this move. Unit allocations are staffing formulas for virtually all school
level positions, and this unit is responsible for maintaining and updating them.
The Chief Business Officer is the lead financial executive in the district. The position responsibilities for
the Chief Business Officer include the following:
Plans, organizes, controls, and directs the operations, activities and services within the business
unit.
Supervising the preparation of the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and required reports
to the Florida Department of Education and School Board,
Monitor compliance and financial indicators, such as the general fund balances and class size
ratios
Establish and maintain effective and sound internal controls
Preparation of annual and capital budget.14
Financial Information Systems
The financial function uses enterprise resource planning (ERP) software to support its operations. The
current ERP system, which also supports human resources, is Infor (formerly Lawson). Infor has specific
modules for purchasing, accounts payable, payroll, and general accounting, and also has reporting and
other tools. This system – which is discussed in greater detail in Chapter 4 – Technology of this report – is
significantly outdated because the district has not kept up with the current versions of the software. The
district’s current use of the Infor financial system and other supporting information systems are described
throughout this chapter.
Each year, the district must undergo an external audit of its financial statements. A “clean” or unqualified
opinion by the external auditor is the most desired, as this opinion states that the financial statements
are reasonable within materiality limits. HCPS has consistently received clean audit opinions on its
financial statements, and this is a good indicator of sound accounting practices.
HCPS posts online its Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports, which includes the auditor’s report and
many other schedules containing or explaining supplemental financial and operating information. HCPS
has consistently received the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting from the
Government Finance Officers Association on its annual financial reporting. The district’s Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report must meet specified requirements to be eligible for this award.
The Accounting Services Team is responsible for the above reporting responsibilities as well as all general
accounting functions. The Accounting Services Team also oversees four other major accounting areas:
14 HCPS Chief Business Officer job description.
47 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Student Nutrition Services Accounting, Program Cost Accounting, Property Control Accounting, and
Special Revenue Accounting.
Recommendation 2-1: Consider implementing more robust closing procedures to ensure the accuracy of
monthly financial statements.
Monthly, the district prepares internal financial statements that contain budget to actual comparisons. In
most school districts, the process to close the books at month-end and prepare financial statements takes
weeks. At HCPS the financial statements are prepared on the first day of the following month – less than
24 hours. HCPS does not delay the preparation of financial statements for reconciliation of sub-ledgers,
reconciliation of bank statements or other activities commonly performed by school districts to ensure
the accuracy of month-end financial statements. Any adjustments resulting from these activities are
reported by HCPS in the following (current) month instead of the prior month. The primary advantage of
this approach is that the district is able to view monthly financial statements virtually in real-time. The
disadvantage of this approach is that the quality of monthly financial statements may be sacrificed.
The district should consult with Infor and its external auditor to determine a proper course of action, as
there may be some functional limitations in implementing this recommendation immediately. Best
practices suggest more rigorous closing procedures, and a closing checklist, to ensure that the monthly
financial statements are accurate and can be relied upon by the board and district and school
administrators. Once implemented, the financial statements should be able to be produced within 10 to
14 days after month-end.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
Recommendation 2-2: Make changes to the district’s account codes to support more effective cost
control and financial reporting.
Account codes are used to assign definition to an expenditure item. A district’s chart of accounts is a
complete listing of the account codes. An account code structure is typically broken into segments, with
each segment explaining a different type of expenditure. Account codes are extremely important in that
they should provide adequate definition for expenditure control so that accountability for spending can
be achieved.
Below are the major elements of the HCPS account code structure:
Fund –the funding source, such as the General Fund.
Function – the school district purpose for the expenditure, such as instruction, administration, or
transportation.
Object – the type of expenditure, such as salaries, supplies, or contracted services.
48 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Program – relates to specific academic or other defined programs, such as Basic Education for
Grades K-3 and Exceptional Student Education (ESE).
Site – relates to a district organizational unit, such as a school or administrative department. At
HCPS, several departments may comprise a division such as Human Resources.
Project – this code is used in theory to meet temporary project accounting needs, most commonly
grants.
While the district’s account code structure is compliant with state requirements, the review team noted
several weaknesses that adversely affect the district’s ability to budget and control specific expenditures.
These are discussed briefly below:
Insufficient Object Codes
The state code structure does not provide sufficient object codes to effectively track expenditures, leaving
it up to the districts to establish their own supplemental codes. For example, there are no object codes
for basic types of supplemental pay, such as overtime or stipends. As a result, the only way to obtain this
information is through the payroll system. In another example, only one object code is used to track
“professional and technical services.” It cannot be determined from the accounting system which services
are consulting services, legal services, auditing services, or other types of professional services.
Since these important line items do not appear on a financial statement or on a budget, budgets – the
primary control mechanism for expenditures – cannot be established for these types of expenditures.
HCPS should develop a complete inventory of the types of costs (object codes) it needs to track for
effective cost control, and add those accounts to the object code listing.
Improper Use of Project Codes
Project codes are established for specific projects, such as grants. Other non-grant projects, such as
construction a district initiative, can be set up through the use of project codes. The defining characteristic
of a project is that it has a beginning and an end that may not correspond to the district’s fiscal year.
Currently there are 2,313 project codes listed in the HCPS chart of accounts. Most of these accounts relate
to grants or projects. However, of these project codes, 412 have the exact same name of “School Supply
Budget.” No two account codes should have the same name.
Further, “school supplies” are not a project but a type of expenditure (object code). Various types of “fees”
are also inappropriately listed as a project code. By embedding object codes into project codes, the
integrity of the account code structure is compromised. This complicates the reporting process and
expenditure control by having two types of codes that are used for the same purpose. More detailed
object codes should be established as such, or as what are referred to as “sub-object” codes providing
lower level details.
49 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Project codes should only be used to define projects, and controls should be implemented to ensure their
proper use. All requests for new project codes should be approved by Accounting Services based on
specific criteria constituting a project.
Lack of Hierarchy or Roll-up to HCPS Division Level Codes
The state account code structure prescribes function codes, such as Basic Education, School
Administration, Fiscal Services, and Food Services. In some cases, such as Fiscal Services, this function
aligns with the HCPS organizational structure. In other instances they do not. For example, Human
Resources is a division in HCPS, but does not have a defined function code by the state; it rolls up into
another higher level account code. The only way to view a Human Resources aggregate budget report is
to generate “site” code reports for the eight departments in the Human Resources Division.
The district’s chart of accounts should be structured whereby financial information can be easily reported
at the department level and aggregated at the division level. Division leaders cannot be expected to
monitor their overall budget without adequate reporting to do so. During the review team’s interviews
with division leaders, several could not cite their overall budget responsibility.
HCPS should modify its account code structure to eliminate or at least minimize the impact of the above
issues. The district’s external auditor should also be consulted. Business Services should work with the
software vendor (Infor) and the HCPS Technology Department to determine what changes can be made
within the current system limitations of the chart of accounts. If the district decides to move to another
ERP system, requirements for the chart of account structure should be specified so that both state
requirements and local reporting and expenditure control needs are met. An improved account code
structure will improve the budget development process, the reporting process, and the analysis of actual
to budgeted expenditures for cost control.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be accomplished with existing resources.
Recommendation 2-3: Upgrade the education, experience, and certification requirements in the Chief
Business Officer job description.
The Chief Business Officer job description contains the following requirements for education, work
experience and certification:
Education: A master’s degree. Degree in Educational Leadership or Administration/Supervision
preferred.
Experience: Three years of increasingly responsible experience in classroom teaching preferred,
with three years of related management or supervisory experience required. Experience in public
school administration, public school district administration, or other large diverse organizations
required.
50 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Certificates/Licenses/Registration: Florida Professional Education Certificate. Educational
Leadership, School Principal, or Administration/Supervision preferred.15
These requirements do not speak to financial or accounting degrees, experience or certification. This is
highly unusual for the financial management function of the eight largest school district in the U.S.
By way of comparison, below are requirements for the Chief Financial Officer position of Orange County
Public Schools:
Master’s degree in Business Administration, Public Administration, or Educational Administration.
Training and experience in budgeting, accounting, and related technology or CPA required.
Eight years of business and finance management experience (five years in school district
administration).
Experience as a Chief Financial Officer preferable.16
While the current Chief Business Officer meets the Orange County requirements, the risk is that with the
current HCPS job description, the next Chief Business Officer may not. HCPS should upgrade its
requirements for financial management education, experience and certification.
Budgeting
Section 1011.035 of the Florida Education Code states the Florida school districts should “provide budget
transparency to enable taxpayers, parent, and education advocates to obtain school district budget and
related information in a manner that is simply explained and easily understandable.” Because of the
timing of the state’s legislative session, school district budgets are not adopted until the budgeted year
begins. Section 1011.08 states that between July 1 (beginning of the fiscal year) and the date the budget
becomes official, “district boards are authorized to approve ordinary expenditures, including salary
payments, which are necessary for the approved school program.”
The HPCS Budget process begins in January of each year. According to the materials provided at a board
budget workshop on April 28, 2015, the following calendar reflects the series of events and other
important dates in the development of the 2016-17 budget:
January – Governor’s Budget
February – Unit (staffing formula) review and allocation for the year
March – Legislative session begins
April – Review and Plan
May – End of Legislative Session (First Calculation)
15 HCPS Chief Business Officer job description; https://www2.sdhc.k12.fl.us/jobdescrs/PDF/10102_Chief_Business_Officer.pdf 16 Orange County Public Schools Chief Financial Officer job description; https://www.ocps.net/es/hr/compensation/jobdesc/JobsAdministrative/ChiefFinancialOfficer%2011-07-2014.pdf
51 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
June – School Board Workshop
July – Property Appraiser’s Office, Department of Education
August – 13th month closure
September – Final Public Hearing
October – Financial Audit
In addition to the unit allocation calculation spreadsheets, other templates are provided to schools and
departments to identify additional spending needs. This information is reviewed and aggregated by the
Business Office.
In addition to budget development, the Business Office is also responsible for monitoring the budget,
approving and executing budget transfer requests, and conducting budget analysis. Certain budget
transfer requests must be approved by the Board. The review team analyzed several months of budget to
actual reports developed by the Business Office. These reports contained thoughtful analysis of spending
variances. Beginning in 2015-16 the district included more data, graphs, charts, and analysis of revenues
and expenditures.
Figure 2.5 presents the organizational chart for the Budget/Cash Management Services Team.
Figure 2.5. Budget/Cash Management Services Team Organizational Chart
Budget / Cash Management Services Team
Asst. Dept. Manager, Cash
Mgmt. Analyst, Sr. Fiscal Analyst, Sr. Fiscal Accountant 4
VACANT, Accountant 4
Business Process Specialist
Accountant 1
Clerk 3, Accounting
VACANT, Clerk 3 Accounting
VACANT, Secretary 2
Clerk 3, Accounting (2)
Clerk 2, Accounting
VACANT, School Bookkeeper 2- TSA
VACANT, Accountant 1,
PMOE
Source: HCPS Business Office
Recommendation 2-4: Develop supplemental annual budget report to improve clarity and transparency.
The Florida DOE establishes the format for reporting of the annual budget. Table 2.3 presents a summary
of how this information was presented for the 2015-16 General Fund Budget.
52 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Table 2.3. HCPS District Summary Budget, 2015-16
Item Amount
Section II
Revenues $1,628,193,031
Other Financing Sources $18,372,429
Fund Balance $146,022,868
Total Estimated Revenues, Other Financing Sources
and Fund Balance $1,792,588,328
Section III
Appropriations (Expenditures) $1,641,680,932
Other Financing Uses $4,000,000
Fund Balance $146,907,396
Total Appropriations, Other Financing Uses and Fund
Balance $1,792,588,328
Source: Florida DOE Finance Data Base; http://cdn.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/7507/urlt/d29.budget1516.pdf
The review team understands that the district must meet state reporting requirements and also provide
this same information to the board. However, this information is somewhat misleading and may confuse
rather than inform board members and other public stakeholders. Further, the above format is not
consistent with how the district’s audited financial statements are presented, and these are not provided
until the following year after the budget year is complete.
What is not obvious from the state budget presentation format is that the district projected an operating
deficit for 2015-16 of $13.5 million (total revenues – total expenditures). For 2014-15, the deficit was
$69.8 million. These operating deficits, while they can be calculated using the information available, do
not appear on the budgets adopted by the board.
The district should implement supplemental reporting of budget information that more closely
corresponds with the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report at year-end. Table 2.4 presents the district
summary budget information in the proposed format.
Table 2.4. Proposed Supplemental Budget Reporting
Item Amount
Revenues $1,628,193,031
Expenditures $1,641,680,932
Excess (Deficiency) ($13,487,901)
Other Financing Sources and Uses $14,372,429
Net Change in Fund Balance $884,528
Fund Balance – Beginning of Year $146,022,868
Fund Balance – End of Year $146,907,396
Source: Gibson Consulting Group, using format summary from the Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and
Changes in Fund Balances, HCPS Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2015
53 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
There are other ways the budget document can be improved. Nothing in the state budget format speaks
to efficiency or includes efficiency or other performance measures. For each HCPS department budget
and aggregated division budget, key performance measures should be included to provide context to the
budget, proving to the board and the public that the district is either operating efficiently and effectively
or moving in that direction.
Providing a five-year history (as opposed to projected budget year only) on an aggregate and per-student
basis would also provide important contextual information regarding expenditure and performance
trends. The most recent years’ measures could also be compared to other Florida peer districts or national
benchmarks such as the Council of Great City Schools’ (CGCS) annual performance measure comparison
report. All of this information would provide a more transparent picture of what is going on behind the
budget numbers, and put the Superintendent and the board in a better position to evaluate and approve
the annual budget.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be accomplished with existing resources.
Recommendation 2-5: Start budget process earlier.
Last year, the HCPS budget was adopted on September 8th. This year the budget is expected to be adopted
September 6th. Both dates are more than 2 months after the fiscal year begins (July 1st). The timing of the
Florida legislative calendar adversely affects the timing of district planning and budgeting, as well as union
contract negotiations.
This notwithstanding, HCPS should begin its budget process much earlier. For many large school systems,
the next year’s budget process starts the day after the current year budget is adopted. Analysis of prior
year expenditures and measures and current year budgeted amounts can support a more informed
budget process, and these activities can begin much earlier.
HCPS should begin the budget development process in October instead of January, and develop multiple
high-level scenarios for state funding expectations.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be accomplished with existing resources.
Recommendation 2-6: Document new budget process.
This year the budget development process began to change at HCPS. In addition to the account code
issues and reporting limitations discussed earlier in this chapter, other concerns were expressed by
division leaders about the budget process in prior years:
54 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Several felt that they were obligated, if not instructed, to keep the prior year budget even though
it did not reflect intended spending.
When expenditures were identified during the year and budgeted funds were not available,
money had to be moved between budget line items to cover the overrun.
In February 2016 a new Budget Committee was created by the Chief of Staff, and meetings were held
monthly to develop more thoughtful budgets that reflected actual spending. HCPS is going the right
direction with these changes and should continue with this new approach and fully document the new
process. With other recommendations in this chapter regarding additional and earlier budget and
performance measure analysis, an improved account code structure, and budget reporting
enhancements, the combination of these changes in a single, documented manual will help the district
achieve a “best practice” budget process.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be accomplished with existing resources.
Procurement
The mission of HCPS’ Procurement Department is to contribute to the delivery of a low cost education by
enabling schools and other departments to obtain quality equipment, goods and services at the best
possible value on the basis of competitive bids considering cost, quality, suitability, service, and delivery.
School districts in Florida must abide by federal and state laws, rules, and procedures pertaining to
purchasing. Districts must comply with the purchasing policies in 6A-1.012 of the Florida Administrative
Code. These policies outline the requirements for the purchasing rules established by school districts.
Included is the requirement that competitive solicitations be requested from three or more sources for
the procurement of any goods or services exceeding $50,000. HCPS’ policy 6320 sets forth additional
procurement thresholds, outlined in Table 2.5.
Table 2.5. Procurement Thresholds
Requirement Threshold
No written quotes required $0 - $5,000.00
Minimum of three (3) telephone quotes $5,000.01 - $10,000.00
Minimum of three (3) written quotes (i.e. Invitation to Quote (ITQ)) $10,000.01 - $50,000.00
Formal solicitation $50,000.01+
Source: Board Policy 6320
In addition, policy 6320 sets forth approval authority to department heads and school principals, outlined
in Table 2.6.
55 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Table 2.6. Approval Thresholds
Approval Threshold
Site Administrators $0 - $5,000
School Principals $0 - $5,000
School Principals (purchases of commodities paid from the internal funds of the school) $0 - $10,000
Superintendent (consultant agreements) $5,000 - $10,000
School Board (consultant agreements, and Agreements for Technical Services) >$10,000
School Board >$50,000
Source: Board Policy 6320
Procurement Overview
Procurement encompasses the processes and procedures for acquiring all goods and services. Many of
these purchases are authorized through purchase orders (POs), although HCPS can make direct payments,
such as utilities payments, without purchases orders. These are called non-purchase orders (NPOs). The
volume and dollar amount of purchase orders and NPOs processed from fiscal year (FY) 2012 to 2016
(through 4/30/2016) are shown in Tables 2.7 and 2.8.
Table 2.7. Purchase Orders Processed FY 2012 – 2016 (through 4/30/2016)
Fiscal Year PO Count PO Amount
2012 50,025 $214,932,563
2013 45,645 $167,723,241
2014 48,812 $285,838,564
2015 46,378 $196,469,715
2016 (through 4/30/2016) 35,338 $208,019,191
Source: Purchase Order Detail FY 2012 – 2016 (through 1/31/2016)
Table 2.8. Non-Purchase Orders Processed FY 2012 – 2016 (through 4/30/2016)
Fiscal Year NPO Count NPO Amount
2012 120,235 $500,697,451
2013 119,736 $507,154,615
2014 122,523 $530,170,318
2015 116,896 $586,307,232
2016 (through 4/30/16) 97,741 $488,902,151
Source: Non-Purchase Order Detail FY 2012 – 2016 (through 4/30/2016)
The HCPS Procurement Department has implemented a P-Card Program to facilitate the purchasing of
small-dollar, reoccurring goods and services. The volume and dollar amount of P-Card purchases from FY
2012 to 2016 (through 4/30/2016) is shown in Table 2.9.
56 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Table 2.9. P-Card Purchases FY 2012 – 2016 (through 4/30/2016)
Fiscal Year Purchases Count Purchases Amount
2012 119,166 $35,893,149
2013 112,447 $35,089,007
2014 120,248 $40,218,187
2015 124,567 $42,214,872
2016 (through 4/30/16) 109,293 $33,563,997
Source: P-Card Transaction Detail FY 2012 – 2016 (through 4/30/2016)
As required by the Florida Administrative Code 6A-1.012, the procurement of goods and services over
$50,000 are required to be competitively bid through a formal solicitation. The volume17 of HCPS formal
solicitations from FY 2012 to 2016 (through 4/30/2016) is shown in Table 2.10.
Table 2.10. Formal Solicitations FY 2012 – 2016 (through 4/30/2016)
Fiscal Year Contract Count
2012 68
2013 64
2014 74
2015 75
2016 (through 4/30/16) 76
Source: Formal Solicitation Detail FY 2012 – 2016 (through 4/30/2016)
HCPS is a member of the CGCS that launched a Performance Measurement and Benchmarking Project to
establish a common set of KPIs in various school operations, including procurement. Table 2.11 presents
several Procurement performance indicators with the HCPS metric and the corresponding CGCS quartile
of the district. Compared to other urban public school systems, HCPS is highly efficient with regards to
costs per purchase order, strategic sourcing, and P-Card purchasing. In addition, HCPS has a high
percentage of Procurement staff with professional certificates. The district is less efficient in the
processing of formal and informal solicitations (e.g., obtaining quotes over the phone), and falls behind
other districts in procurement savings and costs per $100k revenue.
17 The review team was not able to obtain the dollar amount of formal solicitations from FY 2012 through FY 2016.
57 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Table 2.11. CGCS Managing for Results – Procurement Performance Indicators (FY 2014)
Performance Indicator HCPS Metric CGCS Quartile
Procurement Cost per Purchase Order $27 Best
Procurement Costs per $100k Revenue $76 Median
Procurement Savings Ratio 2.1% Median
Strategic Sourcing Ratio 83.3% Best
Competitive Procurement Ratio 80.5% Median
Cooperative Purchasing Ratio 2.9% Worst
P-Card Purchasing Ratio 9.3% Best
PALT18 for Requests for Proposals 100 Median
PALT18 for Invitations for Bids 55 Median
PALT18 for Informal Solicitations 15 Worst
Procurement Staff with Professional Certificate 32% Best
Source: Council of the Great City Schools Managing for Results report 2015 (Results from FY 2014)
Department Organization
The HCPS Procurement Department is comprised of 25 positions as shown in Figure 2.6. This department
is organized into five teams: Maintenance Support Team, District Support Team, Education Support Team,
Contract Support Team, and P-Card Support Team. The maintenance, district, and education support
teams are mainly responsible for informal solicitations, contract administration, end-user support, and
the processing of purchase orders for their assigned commodity types. The contract support team
processes all competitive solicitations, and the P-Card support team oversees the processing of all
purchases made on procurement cards.
The General Manager directs procurement policies, procedures, and activities and oversees the day-to-
day operations of the entire Procurement Department. The General Manager is supported by three Senior
Procurement Officers, one Senior Procurement Officer II, and one Manager that lead the five support
teams. Each team is comprised of two to five Officers, Assistants, Analysts, Accountants, and/or
Accounting Clerks.
18 Procurement Administrative Lead Time
58 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Figure 2.6. Procurement Department Organizational Structure
General Manager Procurement
Executive Secretary (Vacant)
Sr. Procurement Officer
(Maintenance Support Team)
Sr. Procurement Officer (District Support Team)
Sr. Procurement Officer (Education
Support Team)
Sr. Procurement Officer II (Contract
Support Team)
P-Card Dept. Manager
Procurement Officer
Procurement Assistant
Accountant II
Procurement Officer (3)
Procurement Assistant (2)
Procurement Officer (2)
Procurement Analyst
Accountant II
Procurement Officer (3)
Procurement Assistant
Accountant I
Accounting Clerk III (Vacant)
Source: HCPS Procurement Department
Commendation 2-1: The Procurement Department utilizes a robust management software for P-Card
transactions called Resolve, powered by Solvit.
Through using Resolve, the Department has been able to maintain strong internal controls over P-Card
transactions, and has achieved highly efficient and effective processes. The Resolve software is configured
to the district’s bank files so purchases made on P-Cards are automatically loaded into the system. As a
result, bookkeepers only need to enter a few additional details, including item descriptions and account
strings, in order to expense the transaction. Custom workflows are set up within the system based on the
account string to ensure the transaction is routed to the appropriate individuals for approval, and controls
are in place preventing expenditures unless budgeted funds are available.
In addition, based on the key performance indicators reported by the CGCS, HCPS’ FY 2014 P-Card
purchasing ratio put the district in the best quartile compared with other urban public schools systems.
Recommendation 2-7: Establish a plan for the Procurement Department, including specific goals,
objectives and KPIs.
The HCPS Procurement Department has established a vision, mission, and high level department wide
goals, listed above, and is currently in the process of creating more specific goals and objectives. The
Department also tracks several performance measures through the annual submission of data to the
CGCS; however, this information is not used to inform decisions, set targets, or plan for the upcoming
year.
59 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
The Procurement Department should create a plan that serves as a detailed vision for the Department
and should include the following:
Established goals and objectives for each support team of the Department
Planned initiatives and projects to achieve established goals and objectives
Priorities for established projects
Specific action items for each project
Estimate of effort necessary to complete the action items
Assignment of responsibility
Start and end dates
Progress reporting plans
Measurable outcomes of completion and success, including KPIs
Approach for reevaluating and updating the plan for changes in goals and objectives
The goals should include specific and measurable objectives and performance indicators. For example, a
goal for the Contract Support Team could be to become more efficient, the objective could be to reduce
the time it takes to administer request for proposals (RFPs) to no more than 50 days, and the performance
indicator could be the average number of days to administer RFPs and the number of RFPs administered
in more than 50 days. It is important that each goal have at least one objective and performance indicator
so that the progress can be measured and tracked. The specific objectives should include timelines by
which completion is expected. For example, all RFPs starting August 1st will be administered within 50
days. Additional examples of KPIs for the Procurement Department are listed below.
Procurement cost per $100k spend
District full-time equivalents (FTEs) per Procurement FTE
Cost per Procurement FTE
Number of purchase order processed per purchasing FTE
Average dollar value of purchase orders processed
Number of purchase orders processed electronically vs. manually
Number of purchase orders processed after receipt of the invoice
Number of non-purchase orders
Time to process purchase orders
Time to evaluate and award vendors for competitive procurement
Number of P-Cards per district FTE
Number of P-Cards issued each fiscal year
By creating a plan the Procurement Department will be able to set priorities, focus effort and resources,
strengthen operations, ensure collaborative work toward common goals, communicate intended results,
define success, and assess and adjust the Department’s direction in response to changes within the
Department.
60 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Fiscal Impact
Establishing a department plan can be accomplished with existing resources.
Recommendation 2-8: Maximize the use of district resources and accounting systems to increase the
efficiency of the Procurement Department.
The utilization of accounting software and systems is critical to achieving efficiency and effectiveness of
operations. The Procurement Department has implemented numerous automated processes in efforts to
become more efficient, however, the Department has not achieved full maximization of the three main
systems used within the Department (Infor, VendorBid, and RightFax). In addition, there is another district
system that is not being utilized within Procurement, IBM Content Manager. The recommended ways to
utilize and maximize these systems are explained below.
Infor Enterprise Resource Planning System
The requisition and purchase order process through the Infor system is mostly automated; however, there
are additional opportunities for automation and maximization of the system. Recommendations for how
to better utilize the system to increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the Procurement Department
are listed below.
Add warehouse items to the procurement shopping cart and incorporate the shopping cart into
the Infor system. The Procurement Department maintains a shopping cart that lists all bid items
that are available for purchase from a competitive solicitation. Employees use this shopping cart
to select items for purchase and provide this information to campus bookkeepers for requisition
entry. This shopping cart is maintained outside of the Infor system. The district should add the
shopping cart to Infor so that individual items can be selected from the list and populated into a
requisition. In addition, the Procurement Department should add warehouse items to the
shopping cart so that employees can see what items are available from the warehouse and easily
select them.
Establish an acceptable percentage variance for the three-way match and automatically release
these invoices for payment. The Infor system performs a three-way match between the amounts
on the purchase order, invoice, and receiving report. This requires an exact match between all
three amounts (i.e. differences of $0.01 or more are considered non-matches). Senior
Procurement Officers run reports to identify and investigate those purchases without an exact
match. Due to the large volume of purchases in the district, investigating each of these non-
matches can be time consuming. The district should select a percentage variance, such as 5
percent, whereby any invoices with differences of 5 percent or less would be automatically
released for payment. This will allow some of the current time spent investigating to be refocused
on more valuable purchasing functions.
61 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Automate the numbering of bid items in the Infor system. Once a bid has been awarded the bid
items are entered onto a spreadsheet, assigned numbers (Infor item numbers), and uploaded into
the system. In order to determine the next available Infor item number a master spreadsheet of
bid items is maintained on a district shared drive. The new bid items are added and the numbers
are assigned chronologically. The Procurement Department should configure the Infor system to
auto number new bid items with the next available Infor number. This will eliminate the need to
manually maintain a master spreadsheet, and reduce the time it takes to upload bid items into
Infor.
Use system workflow capabilities to automate the processing of manual forms in Infor. Both
non-purchase order forms, and P-card applications, are hard copy documents that are completed
and manually routed for approval. The Procurement Department should research ways to create
these forms within the Infor system so that they can be electronically filled out and routed for
approval by the appropriate individuals based on established business rules.
VendorBid
HCPS uses the online vendor registration system, VendorBid. With this system the district can upload, and
make available to the public, all bid information. Vendors can access VendorBid at no cost, create an
account, update company information, and select commodity codes based on their type of business. The
system will send automatic notifications to vendors of new bids that match their selected commodity
codes, so they can select the bids they would like to respond to. Currently, all vendor responses are
submitted via mail. This can cause delays in the contract process, and requires vendors to prepare and
send responses several days prior to the deadline, in order to ensure it arrives on time. If there is inclement
weather or courier delays a vendor’s response may not be delivered in time, and as a result the vendor
will not be considered for the contract. In addition, there is an inherent risk with hard copy files of
misplacing or losing the documents.
As noted in Table 2.11 in the Procurement Overview section above, the procurement administrative lead
time (PALT) for RFPs, Invitations to Bid, and Informal Solicitations is longer than that of other urban public
school systems. Based on the CGCS Managing for Results report, HCPS was in the median or worst quartile
for these three key performance indicators in FY 2014. The manual receipt of vendor responses can have
a large impact on the lead time between receiving the requisition and issuing the contract, and reduces
the efficiency of the procurement process.
The district should research ways to electronically receive all vendor responses, starting with the current
VendorBid and Infor systems. If these systems are unable to receive electronic submissions, or the
submissions cannot be uploaded in a format desired by the district, other systems with this capability
should be explored. Electronic submission will not only reduce the time to receive vendor responses, but
will also help ensure that all documentation is received securely.
Quotes submitted by vendors are received by the district through fax or mail. The district should also
explore opportunities to receive these documents electronically through existing or new systems.
62 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
RightFax
The district utilizes the RightFax system to automate the faxing of purchase orders to the vendors that are
set up with fax numbers within the system. Every night the approved purchase orders for these vendors
are automatically faxed. Not all vendors have been set up to receive these automatic faxes. The purchase
orders for these vendors are manually faxed or mailed. Out of the 6,746 vendors paid19 in FY 2016 (through
4/30/2016), 327 (5%) do not receive these automatic faxes.
The district should obtain the missing fax numbers and set up all vendors to receive automatic faxes of
purchase orders through the RightFax system. Although these vendors only make up a small percentage
of total vendors, electronically streamlining all of the manually sent purchases orders will increase the
efficiency of the Department.
IBM Content Manager
The Procurement Department is currently maintaining hard copy files for all documentation pertaining to
vendor bids, proposals, and quotes. Some of these documents have also been digitized and stored on the
district’s Microsoft SharePoint, however, the paper files are still maintained. In addition, at the campus
level all receipts for P-Card transactions are stapled to statements that are printed and signed by
bookkeepers and site administrators. These packets are retained in hard copy files. The district has
purchased the IBM Content Manager system that enables end users to electronically house and manage
documents. The Accounts Payable Department has utilized this system to become a more paperless
department, however, the Procurement Department has not taken advantage of this system’s
capabilities.
As part of the effort to become more efficient through the maximization of district resources and
accounting systems, the Procurement Department should utilize the IBM Content Manager system. All
paper files should be scanned and electronically managed within this system. The IBM Content Manager
system is integrated with Infor, and therefore all vendor and P-Card documentation can be shared and
maintained within the Infor system as well.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation will help increase the efficiency and effectiveness of the Procurement Department
which could in turn provide opportunities for savings through a reduction in staffing levels. In addition, as
this recommendation can be implemented with existing resources the district would not occur additional
costs.
19 This vendor count does not include vendors paid through internal or zero payment methods.
63 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Recommendation 2-9: Implement a more robust and intelligent spend analysis reporting tool.
A spend analysis is a powerful and critical tool for developing and achieving strategic goals in the
Procurement Department. The HCPS Procurement Department performs periodic spend analyses and
prepares an annual spend analysis report for the Board. The periodic analyses consist of the following:
During the daily entry and approval of requisitions and purchase orders, procurement personnel
will run reports within the Infor system, as needed, to identify the year to date spend for a
particular vendor.
On a monthly basis, the P-Card Manager runs a transaction detail report to identify the year to
date spend on P-Cards for a particular vendor. This report is made available to Procurement
Officers and is reviewed by the General Manager.
These periodic reports are primarily developed to identify non-competitive purchases made to a particular
vendor that are approaching or exceeding a given threshold. On an annual basis the Procurement
Department runs reports from the Infor and Resolve systems to prepare the spend analysis that is
presented to the Board. This analysis is performed to determine if the district is in compliance with Florida
Statutes and district purchasing policies. All annual payments are reviewed to identify the following:
The percentage paid to small business enterprise vendors as compared to total competitive
expenditures
All payments made by vendor classification (e.g. textbook vendor, employee benefits,
governmental agencies, etc.)
The breakdown of prime and construction expenditures that could be competitively bid (prime
expenditures are purchases from vendors that are directly paid by the district to supply goods and
services)
Total construction competitive expenditures
Aggregate expenditures for prime vendors greater than $50,000
All payments made, by vendor, to the top 25 prime vendors
The Procurement Department is currently performing these spend analyses based off reports run from
the Infor and Resolve systems that are downloaded and analyzed in excel spreadsheets. Extracting,
consolidating and summarizing information using spreadsheets can be very time consuming.
Spreadsheets are also insecure and highly susceptible to errors increasing the risk of data integrity issues.
In addition, the periodic spend analyses performed are minimal. Reports are run on an as needed basis to
track the spend per vendor during the requisition and purchase order review process. There is only one
report that is consistently run and it only covers the spend per vendor on P-Cards. The annual spend
analysis, although more extensive, is still only focused on certain expenditures by vendor. More can be
64 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
analyzed with district expenditure data. A few examples are listed in the automated spend analysis reports
section below.
There are additional district resources that could be utilized to produce more complete, secure, and
reliable data and perform a more in-depth and detailed analysis on-demand. The district should utilize all
available resources and implement a more robust and intelligent spend analysis reporting tool.
An effective spend analysis should include the following steps. By working with the IT Department these
steps can be accomplished through an ETL20 (Extract, Transform, and Load) process and the use of a
business intelligence tool.
1. Identify and collect data: The first step is to identify and understand which systems and sources
within the district contain the required data to create a complete spend record (e.g. Infor and
Resolve). IT personnel can extract data from all sources and, with assistance from the
Procurement Department, review it for completeness and accuracy.
2. Clean and categorize data: The collected data should be cleaned to remove any duplicates or
errors, and to group and categorize vendors and commodities. This will ensure there is an accurate
correlation of spend data and enable targeted analyses. IT personnel can transform the data to
accomplish this.
Categorization of vendors: the Procurement Department analyzes purchases by vendor
class. During the transform stage, IT personnel can categorize vendors into specified
classes (e.g. textbook vendor, employee benefits, governmental agencies, etc.).
Categorization and grouping of commodities: the National Institute of Governmental
Purchasing (NIGP) has developed standardized commodity codes. These NIGP codes, or
similar district developed codes, should be assigned to all goods and services purchased
by the district. In addition, commodities could be grouped into categories, such as
maintenance, district support, and education, so that purchases can by analyzed by
individual procurement support teams. See below for further information regarding
commodity codes.
3. Create repeatable processes: HCPS owns and uses SAP Crystal Reports, a business intelligence
and analytics tool. After extracted data are transformed it can be loaded into this tool to generate
detailed automated reports based on the needs of the Procurement Department. These reports
can be available on demand or auto generated weekly, daily, or even hourly. See below for further
information and examples of automated spend reports.
20 ETL refers to a process in database usage that extracts data from multiple sources, transforms the data for storing it in the proper format or structure, and loads it into a reporting tool for the purposes of querying and analysis.
65 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
4. Analyze data: frequent analysis of spend data is vital to ensure compliance with Florida Statutes
and purchasing policies, inform management decisions, and oversee vendor relationships. These
spend reports should be made available to all members of the Procurement Department, and
should be reviewed on a daily basis by all senior level procurement personnel.
Commodity Codes
The only commodity codes assigned and utilized in the Procurement Department are for bid items in
Vendor Bid. These codes are set up so that vendors can select the ones for their type of business and
receive notifications when the district is competitive procuring those commodities. The Procurement
Department does not use these, or any other commodity codes to track and monitor classes of items
purchased to ensure compliance with state procurement statutes. HCPS' Procurement Department does
review purchases to monitor thresholds, but this review is performed manually, which relies on each
individual buyer's memory of recent items purchased, or the running of individual spend reports. When a
systematic analysis of purchases is not performed, the district runs the risk of violating competitive
bidding rules. Florida Statute 6A-1.012 states, “Districts may not divide the procurement of commodities
or contractual services so as to avoid this monetary threshold requirement.” Therefore, for example,
several individual purchase orders for athletic equipment may not individually amount to the threshold,
but in the aggregate, may exceed it.
In addition to monitoring compliance, assigning commodity codes can aid the Procurement Department
in standardizing purchases. The Department can identify the number of vendors used to purchase the
same types of merchandise. Not only will this reveal purchases required to be competitively solicited, but
for aggregate purchases less than the required threshold, the Procurement Department can limit
purchases to one vendor to take advantage of potential discounts by buying in large quantities. In
addition, this will ensure all campuses throughout the district are receiving merchandize of equal quality
and price.
Standardized commodity codes like those produced by the National Institute of Governmental Purchasing,
Inc. (NIGP) can be purchased and used by any entity. The commodity codes are a set of numbers that
identifies the commodities and services purchased. The code contains four series of digits to denote class,
item, group and detail, plus a check digit. The check digit (optional) is a computer formula to verify the
code number. The code quickly identifies the commodity or service purchased and the purchase history
for each for various time periods. This is important information for management and aids in making better
purchasing decisions.
The district should purchase and implement standardized commodity codes, or develop and assign
commodity codes for all purchased goods and services. These can be assigned within the Infor system, or
assigned during the transform phase of the spend analysis. If assigned in Infor, a commodity code drop
down should be added to the requisition screen, and the Procurement Department should distribute a list
of commodity codes to schools and departments to be used when entering requisitions.
66 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Automated Spend Reports
The SAP Crystal Reports tool can be used to create on demand or auto generated detailed reports based
on the requirements specified by the Procurement Department. The Department should identify all
information that is to be tracked and develop specific criteria for the corresponding reports. Below is a
list of sample spend analysis reports:
Spend by vendor class
Spend by commodity code
Spend by commodity category
Number of vendors by commodity code
Savings potential: this report can display the total spend by commodity code, average invoice unit
price, minimum invoice unit price, invoice quantity, and the savings potential (if all purchases
were made at the minimum price)
Historical trend analyses
Reports can also be run to calculate key performance indicators for the Department. This will enable
management to set targets and track progress towards achieving established goals and objectives.
Benefits of Spend Analysis
A few examples of the benefits that can be achieved through the implementation of a well-designed spend
analysis are listed below.
Improve processes
Manage risks
Reduce duplicate suppliers and duplicate purchases of similar commodities
Achieve standardization of purchases
Improve compliance with Florida Statutes and district purchasing policies
Increase part reuse
Identify savings opportunities
Obtain information necessary to perform benchmarking with similar size districts
Track progress towards KPIs
Improve communication and transparency within the Procurement Department
For example, by analyzing the number of vendors used to purchase the same type of commodity, based
on the assigned commodity codes, the district can identify opportunities to standardize purchases.
Utilizing only one vendor for a particular commodity can enable the district to receive high volume
discounts, which would in turn save the district money.
67 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Fiscal Impact
While there may not be an initial fiscal impact, an effective spend analysis will help management identify
opportunities for savings that were previously unknown. Using a well-designed reporting tool will enable
the Department to track the reduction in costs and savings achieved over time. The only potential cost
would be the purchase of NIGP’s standardized commodity codes, however, the district can implement this
spend analysis reporting tool with existing resources.
Recommendation 2-10: Require bookkeepers and secretaries to attend ongoing training on the
purchasing process.
Bookkeepers and secretaries must attend a total of three days of training when hired, with one day
dedicated to the purchasing process. The complete session includes training on the budget (e.g. chart of
accounts, transfer of funds), training on requisition entry, and training on the receiving process. Due to
the vast nature of the topics covered it can be difficult to retain all the presented information. In addition,
learning about a process and performing the tasks oneself are very different. While working on the job
employees will inevitably encounter situations not discussed during training and numerous questions will
arise. Subsequent training classes are offered quarterly, however attendance is voluntary. As a result few
bookkeepers and secretaries participate and it is common for these employees to reach out to
Procurement personnel when a question arises, or the employees may just perform the process based on
their limited understanding. This can be time consuming for employees in Procurement as they will have
to stop what they are working on to respond to inquiries, or they will have to spend time to correct errors.
Through interviews conducted with district personnel, the review team discovered that employees within
the Procurement Department have experienced instances of incorrect requisition or receiving entry on
the part of bookkeepers and secretaries, and there is a perception that these employees would benefit
from additional training.
The district should offer periodic training for bookkeepers and secretaries that are not new to the district,
in order to address questions and concerns that arise through the day-to-day processing of transactions.
Attendance for these trainings should be required to ensure that all of these employees are given a
designated time to ask their questions and receive proper responses. This will reduce the risk of errors
and will increase the efficiency of the purchasing process.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be accomplished with existing resources.
Accounts Payable
The HCPS Accounts Payable Department has undergone several initiatives to increase the efficiency of the
Department and generate revenues for the district. Most notably, in 2008 the E-payables program was
implemented, which streamlined electronic payments to vendors and earned the district rebates. In
addition, the Department has made great strides towards becoming paperless through the use of IBM
68 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Content Manager to digitize all invoices and supporting documentation. However, there are still
opportunities for increased efficiency through automation. Some examples include the increased
utilization of electronic invoice entry and payment methods, as well as the creation and approval of
vendor requests. Other opportunities for improvement include the establishment of detailed goals,
objectives and key performance indicators, as well as the restructuring of the Department to create a level
of middle management and reduce the span of control of the head of Accounts Payable.
Introduction
The goal of the Accounts Payable Department is to provide accurate and timely payments for all approved
invoices. In addition, it is important that the Accounts Payable Department maintain full legal compliance.
School districts in Florida must abide by federal and state laws, rules, and procedures pertaining to vendor
payments. Districts must comply with the payment policies in the Florida Statute Title XIV, Chapter 218,
see excerpt below.
Accounts Payable Overview
The HCPS Accounts Payable Department is responsible for paying vendors for all goods and services that
are not purchased on a district P-Card, through schools’ internal accounts, or purchased for construction
projects. In addition the Accounts Payable Department is responsible for all employee travel payments.
Table 2.12 shows the breakdown of vendor payments and employee payments from FY 2013 through FY
2016 (through 4/30/2016).
Florida Statute Title XIV, Chapter 218 218.74 (2): The payment due date for a local governmental entity for the purchase of goods or services other than construction services is 45 days after the date specified in s. 218.73. 218.73: The time at which payment is due for a purchase other than construction services by a local governmental entity must be calculated from:
1) The date on which a proper invoice is received by the chief disbursement officer of the local governmental entity after approval by the governing body, if required; or
2) If a proper invoices is not received by the local governmental entity, the date: a) On which delivery of personal property is accepted by the local governmental entity; b) On which services are completed; c) On which the rental period begins; or
d) On which the local governmental entity and vendor agree in a contract that provides dates relative to payment periods; whichever date is latest.
69 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Table 2.12. Vendor and Employee Payments FY 2013 – 2016 (through 4/30/2016)
Fiscal Year Vendor Payments
Count Vendor Payments $
Employee Payments
Count
Employee
Payments $
2013 44,922 $785,320,723 11,217 $1,172,395
2014 43,561 $797,104,490 12,103 $1,272,075
2015 33,041 $600,231,015 14,620 $1,385,347
2016 (through 4/30/16) 34,117 $605,136,342 12,110 $902,123
Source: Listing of disbursements FY 2012 – 2016 (through 4/30/2016)
The Accounts Payable Department processes payments through four different methods: ACH direct
deposits; the E-Payables program; wire transfers; and checks. Table 2.13 presents the breakdown by
payment type for all payments made in FY 2015. The majority of payments (87.8%) are processed through
ACH or check.
Table 2.13. Payments by Type FY 201521
Payment Type Number of
Payments
% of Total
Payments
Number of Vendors
Paid
% of Total Vendors
Paid
ACH 28,805 50.1% $202,286,123 21.8%
E-Payables 6,758 11.8% $29,185,806 3.1%
Wire Transfer 227 0.4% $377,583,811 40.7%
Check 21,653 37.7% $317,896,587 34.3%
Total 57,443 100.0% $926,952,327 100.0%
Source: Accounts Payable Progress and Statistics FY 2015
Prior to submitting payments the Accounts Payable Department enters invoices into the Infor system
under four different methods – manual, modified electronic, site entry, and electronic. Manual entry
consists of the individual entry of each hard copy invoice that is received. Modified electronic entry is the
mass entry of hard copy invoices into a spreadsheet for upload into the Infor system. Site entry is the
individual entry of hard copy invoices at the site level (for travel and postage invoices). The last method,
electronic entry, is a process in which vendors send invoice details in a spreadsheet to Accounts Payable
via email. This spreadsheet is reviewed and uploaded into the Infor system. Table 2.14 presents the
breakdown by entry method for all payments made in FY 2015. The majority of invoices (56.9%) were
entered electronically; however these represent a smaller monetary amount than manually entered
invoices.
21 Table of payments by type does not include internal and zero payments.
70 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Table 2.14. Invoice Entry Methods FY 2015
Entry Method Invoices Count % of Total Invoices Invoice Amounts % of Total Invoice
Amounts
Manual 76,361 31.9% $549,593,857 59.2%
Modified Electronic 6,595 2.7% $4,049,650 0.4%
Site Entry 20,322 8.5% $84,335,336 9.1%
Electronic 136,300 56.9% $290,991,947 31.3%
Total 239,578 100.0% $928,970,790 100.0%
Source: Accounts Payable Progress and Statistics FY 2015
The Accounts Payable function is also included in the CGCS’ Managing for Results report. Table 2.15
presents several Accounts Payable performance indicators with the HCPS metric and the corresponding
CGCS quartile of the district. Compared to other urban public school systems HCPS is highly efficient in
the processing of invoices and has achieved very low costs per $100k revenue as the district falls over $10
lower than the best quartile of $36.10. The district is in the top 5 out of over 50 urban public schools for
each of the first four indicators in the table below. The Department is in the median quartile with regards
to the percentage of invoices past due at the time of payment.
Table 2.15. CGCS Managing for Results – Accounts Payable Performance Indicators (FY 2014)
Performance Indicator HCPS Metric CGCS Quartile
AP Cost per $100k Revenue $25 Best
AP Cost per Invoice $1.67 Best
Invoices – Days to Process 8.2 Best
Invoices Processed per FTE per Month 2,240 Best
Invoices Past Due at Time of Payment 7.99% Median
Source: Council of the Great City Schools Managing for Results report 2015 (Results from FY 2014)
Department Organization
The HCPS Accounts Payable Department is comprised of 11 positions as shown in Figure 2.7. The previous
Manager over the Accounts Payable Department recently retired and the Accountant II is now overseeing
this function. The remaining 10 positions in the Department report to the Accountant II, who is responsible
for managing and training team members to assist with reporting and electronic processing, managing
new projects and program development, as well as payment processing. The Account Managers are
responsible for the accurate and timely payments to vendors, the Vendor Manager enters and maintains
vendor information in the Infor system, the Accountant I assists with reporting and technical tasks and
identifies opportunities to increase revenue streams in the Department, the Accounting Clerk IIIs process
payments that require alternate approval (e.g. non-purchase orders) and assist in the completion of
special projects, and the Accounting Clerk IIs distribute, enter and image invoices, and provide customer
service.
71 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Figure 2.7. Accounts Payable Department Organizational Structure
Accountant II
Accounting Clerk III (2)
Accounting Clerk II (3)
(1 Vacancy)Accountant IVendor Manager
Account Manager (3)
Source: HCPS Accounts Payable Department
Commendation 2-2: The Accounts Payable Department implemented an E-payables program in FY 2008.
This program replaces check or other payment methods with a VISA credit card account. Each vendor that
signs up with this program is notified through email and the Intersect system of a unique one-time credit
card number to use for each payment. This account number is funded at the time of payment and the
vendor receives a remittance advice. In addition to electronically streamlining vendor payments and
reducing the number of days to pay vendors, the district earns rebates from the program which has
enabled the Accounts Payable Department to generate revenue. At the start of the program in FY 2008,
the Department generated $16,290 in revenue. This amount has steadily increased every year as a result
of the growth in the program and an initiative to seek early payment discounts from vendors. In FY 2015
the district partnered with VISA and Regions Bank in a campaign to increase the E-payables program. This,
in addition to early payment discounts, resulted in total revenues of $574,118 in FY 2015 (an 83% increase
from the FY 2014 revenues of $313,557).
The Accounts Payable Department also utilizes the IBM Content Manager system to digitize all invoices
and supporting documentation in efforts to become a more paperless department. This system is
integrated with Infor so that all scanned invoices are linked to the corresponding purchase order in the
system. This, in addition to the implementation of the E-payables program, has increased the efficiency
of the Department. This is evidenced by several of the key performance indicators reported by the CGCS.
Based on Table 2.15 in the Accounts Payable Overview section above, HCPS was in the best and most
efficient quartile for the following KPIs in FY 2014, as compared with other urban public school systems:
AP Cost per $100k Revenue
AP Cost per Invoice
Invoices – Days to Process
Invoices processed per FTE per month
72 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Recommendation 2-11: Establish a plan for the Accounts Payable Department, including specific goals,
objectives and KPIs.
The goals should include specific and measurable objectives and performance indicators. For example, a
goal for the Accounts Payable function could be to become more efficient, the objective could be to
reduce the time it takes to pay vendors to no more than 30 days, and the performance indicators could
be the average number of days to pay vendors and the number of payments made in more than 30 days.
It is important that each goal have at least one objective and performance indicator so that the progress
can be measured and tracked. The specific objectives should include timelines by which completion is
expected. For example, all invoices received from August 1st on will be paid within 30 days. A few
additional examples of KPIs for the Accounts Payable Department are listed below.
Accounts Payable cost per $100k spend
District FTEs per Accounts Payable FTE
Cost per Accounts Payable FTE
Average dollar value of invoices processed
Number of invoices received electronically vs. manually
Number of invoices paid electronically vs. manually
Average time to approve from receipt to payment
Discounts captured as a percentage of discounts offered
By creating a plan with all the items listed above, the Accounts Payable Department will be able to set
priorities, focus effort and resources, strengthen operations, ensure collaborative work toward common
goals, communicate intended results, define success, and assess and adjust the Department’s direction in
response to changes within the Department.
Fiscal Impact
Establishing a department plan can be accomplished with existing resources. While implementing a this
plan may not have an initial fiscal impact the increased communication, transparency, and efficiency
achieved within the Department as a result can shift efforts to more impactful analyses, directly adding
value to the Department.
Recommendation 2-12: Maximize the use of district resources and accounting systems to increase the
efficiency of the Accounts Payable Department.
As stated in the Procurement section above, the utilization of accounting software and systems increases
the efficiency and effectiveness of operations. Although the Accounts Payable Department has made
great strides towards becoming paperless there are additional opportunities for automation through
several existing department resources, including Infor, Vendor Bid, as well as electronic payment and
invoice entry methods. The recommended ways to utilize and maximize these resources are explained
below.
73 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Infor Enterprise Resource Planning System
In order to request a new vendor employees currently complete a form in the email based Vendor Request
System that is electronically sent to Accounts Payable. The Vendor Manager reviews these forms for
completeness and looks the vendor up in the Infor system to verify that it does not already exist. The form
is then printed and taken to Procurement to approve. Once approved, the Vendor Manager enters all of
the vendor information into the Infor system. This can be a time consuming process as the request system
is not integrated with Infor resulting in the need for several manual processes. The Accounts Payable
Department should explore the Infor system functionalities regarding the creation of vendors. In an ideal
scenario, employees would submit a request directly into the Infor system that would be routed for
approval by the appropriate individuals. If the vendor already exists the employee would be notified,
eliminating the need for the Vendor Manager to look up each requested vendor. Once the request was
approved the system would automatically create a new vendor record.
VendorBid
As VendorBid is a separate system outside of Infor, all new vendors that are awarded within VendorBid
have to be added to the Infor system. In order to do this employees must first complete a form through
the Vendor Request System, explained above. Since the vendor has already been selected and awarded
the form does not need to be approved and therefore the only purpose for the form is to provide the
Vendor Manager with the information needed to create the vendor in the Infor system. In order to
increase the efficiency of this process the Vendor Manager should run reports in VendorBid periodically,
or at the time of award, to obtain the information needed on awarded vendors. This information can then
be used to create the vendor record within the Infor system, eliminating the need to complete a vendor
request form.
Electronic Payment Methods
As mentioned in the commendation above, the Accounts Payable Department has established an E-
payables program that facilitates electronic payments while providing the district with rebates. Although
this program has grown since it was first implemented in 2008, only 11.8 percent of payments in FY 2015
were made under this method (see Table 2.13 in the Accounts Payable Overview section above). The
Department utilizes ACH and wire transfer methods as well, however, over 30 percent of payments in FY
2015 were still processed through checks. The district should expand its use of electronic payment
methods. Efforts should be focused on the continued growth of the E-payables program, however,
vendors that do not want to participate in this program should be set up with the alternate ACH and wire
transfer payment methods.
Electronic Invoice Entry Methods
All invoices that are received by email are currently printed and stacked with those received by fax or mail.
When multiple invoices are received from one vendor these are entered into a spreadsheet that is then
uploaded into the Infor system, this is called the modified electronic entry method. All other invoices from
74 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
this stack are manually keyed into the system one by one (i.e., the manual entry method). As presented
in Table 2.14 in the Accounts Payable Overview section above, there are two other methods for invoice
entry. Travel and postage invoices are manually keyed into the system one by one at the site level (i.e.,
the site entry method). The last method, electronic, is the receipt of invoice details in a spreadsheet
directly from vendors via email that is then uploaded into Infor. This method is most commonly used for
large vendors that deliver a high volume of invoices to the district. Based on Table 2.14, 56.9 percent of
invoices, and 31.3 percent of the total dollar amount of invoices in FY 2015 were entered through this
electronic method. The Accounts Payable Department should increase the use of this entry method for
smaller sized vendors. All other invoices received for those vendors that decline this method should be
entered into spreadsheets prior to the upload into Infor. This would eliminate the need to navigate
through various screens within Infor to enter the details of each invoice one by one.
The Accounts Payable Department currently utilizes IBM Content Manager to maintain all invoices
electronically. As invoices received by mail and fax are scanned and saved to IBM Content Manager the
Accounts Payable personnel should utilize this system to pull up invoice details for entry into
spreadsheets. Creating stacks of hard copy invoices and manually flipping through them as they are
entered is not necessary, and only increases the risk that invoices will be misplaced. In addition, the
invoices received by email should be saved to IBM Content Manager where they can be accessed for data
entry, there is no need to print each of these invoices.
Fiscal Impact
Achieving increased efficiency in a department usually presents an opportunity for savings through
reduced staffing levels. The Accounts Payable Department, however, already has a lean organizational
structure. In addition, according to interviews performed with district personnel, the Accounting Clerk II
position vacancy will not be filled due to the current efficiency of the Department. While this
recommendation may not provide additional savings for the district, it can be implemented with existing
resources and therefore will not increase department costs.
Recommendation 2-13: Re-align the creation of vendors under the Procurement Department.
The creation of vendors in the Infor system, as well as the maintenance of vendor profiles, is performed
in the Accounts Payable Department. This presents a segregation of duties risk given that the Department
also processes payments to vendors, thus increasing the risk that a fictitious vendor could be created and
paid. Although the one position dedicated to vendor management, the Vendor Manager, is not
responsible for paying vendors, these two functions should not be performed within the same
department. HCPS should re-align all vendor creation and management functions under the Procurement
Department. This would properly segregate the creation and modification of vendors with the processing
of payments to those vendors.
75 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Fiscal Impact
As there is one position whose sole responsibility is the management of vendors within the Infor system,
the movement of this position under the Procurement Department can be performed with existing
resources.
Recommendation 2-14: Re-structure the organization of the Accounts Payable Department.
The review team analyzed the organizational structure of the HCPS Accounts Payable Department for
proper alignment of functions, reporting structure, and span of control. Through this analysis Gibson
identified the following findings and recommendations:
As noted in Recommendation 2-13, vendor management is not properly aligned under the
Procurement Department. The organization chart of the Accounts Payable Department should be
updated once this function is re-aligned.
As stated in the Department organization section above, the previous Accounts Payable Manager
retired. At this time the Accountant II began overseeing the Department; however, this title was
not changed to Accounts Payable Manager. In addition, the Accountant II position was not re-
established as an open position. As a result, the Accountant II is managing the Department, and
performing the Accountant II duties. The Accountant II roles and responsibilities should be
delegated to the other Accounts Payable personnel.
The current job titles of the Accounts Payable personnel do not accurately reflect the actual duties
performed by the position. Through interviews conducted with district personnel, the review
team discovered that the Department is planning to modify several of these job titles, as indicated
below:
The Accounts Payable Manager position title will be re-instated (i.e. the Accountant II
position title that is currently over the Department will be changed to Accounts Payable
Manager).
The Accountant I job title will become the Accounts Payable Analyst
The Accounting Clerk II job title will become the Accounts Payable Specialist I
The Accounting Clerk III job title will become the Accounts Payable Specialist II
These four changes will properly reflect the roles and responsibilities of each position. In addition,
the review recommends modifying the Account Manager job title to Accounts Payable
Coordinator. These employees perform several high level Accounts Payable functions and are not
responsible for managing other Accounts Payable personnel. Therefore their titles should reflect
the type of work performed, as well as the level of these positions. Figure 2.8 presents the
recommended Accounts Payable Department organizational chart, including the structural and
job title changes listed above.
76 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Figure 2.8. Recommended Accounts Payable Department Organization Chart
Accounts Payable Manager
Accounts Payable Analyst
Accounts Payable Coordinator (3)
Accounts Payable Specialist I (2)
Accounts Payable Specialist II (2)
Source: Gibson Consulting Group, Inc.
Fiscal Impact
As the district budgeted for and incurred the costs of an Accounts Payable Manager prior to the retirement
of the previous Manager, the re-instatement of this position title will not increase district expenditures.
As such, this recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
Payroll Operations
The Payroll Department is responsible for the processing of paychecks to more than 29,000 employees
every two weeks. The HCPS Payroll Department performs this important function through 23 staff
members, including 3 Call Center Representatives, 9 Accounting Clerks, 7 Accountants, a Secretary, an
Office Network Specialist, a Payroll Supervisor, and a Payroll Manager. The Payroll Manager oversees the
Department and reports to the Chief Financial Officer.
According to the Payroll Manager Job Description, the role of the Payroll Manager is to supervise, direct,
and oversee the process of payroll production and required reporting in accordance with Federal, State,
and other laws. Specific duties include:
Develop and control all tasks necessary to accomplish payroll processing objectives.
Create and monitor improvements/modifications to payroll system.
Continuously review policies and procedures in order to make recommendations to improve upon
and standardize the process.
Regularly inspect and analyze operations within the area of assignment to take action to
continuously improve procedures, services, and support to schools and work locations.
77 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
For 2015-16, total expenditures for the Payroll Department were approximately $1.26 million, reflecting
a 9.7 percent decrease from the prior year. The Department’s largest expenditure is for Support Personnel
Salaries. The Department’s second largest expenditure is in Health Insurance, followed by Retirement and
Social Security. Non-personnel costs for the Payroll Department represent less than 1 percent of total
expenditures. This has been consistent for the past three years.
Table 2.16. Payroll Department Expenditures, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Expenditure Type (Object) 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
100 Salaries $942,350 $980,221 $1,019,243 $1,087,547 $983,076
200 Employee Benefits $238,044 $244,581 $274,333 $294,985 $266,739
300 Purchased Services $1,223 $2,987 $8,391 $3,752 $227
500 Materials & Supplies $6,520 $5,152 $7,925 $6,602 $6,313
600 Capital Outlay $6,248 $375 $31,807 $1,134 $2,155
700 Other $324 $988 $921 $951 $1,203
Total $1,194,708 $1,234,304 $1,342,622 $1,394,971 $1,259,713
Source: HCPS Five-Year Expenditure and Staffing Data
Table Note: 2015-16 expenditures are unaudited
Four HCPS payroll efficiency measures were analyzed in comparison to the CGCS annual survey22:
Payroll cost per $100,000 spend
Payroll cost per paycheck
Paychecks processed per FTE per month
Percentage of paychecks that are direct deposit
For 2013-14 (the most recent data available) HCPS was in the lowest (best) quartile for the first two
measures, and was in the second best quartile for the third and fourth measures. Since 2013-14, HCPS has
increased the percentage of paychecks paid via direct deposit to 99 percent.
Payroll Processing
Currently the district is on a bi-weekly payroll schedule, however, payroll is also processed the last day of
the fiscal year. The current payroll processing schedule was adopted during the implementation of Infor,
the district’s ERP system, and has not been altered since. Currently full-time hourly employees, such as
custodians and bus drivers, are paid as salaried employees and report exceptions to the 40-hour week as
permitted by the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Part-time hourly employees, such as substitute
custodians and after-school child care workers, are paid by the hour and report actual time worked. The
22 Managing for Results, October 2015, Results from Fiscal Year 2013-14, Council of Great City Schools
78 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
time-keeping system currently being utilized is Kyle’s Time System Software, or KTS, and was developed
in house.
Payroll processing begins on Wednesday night of the off-week when scheduled time is pushed and
adjustments are made the following morning. Full-time salaried and full-time hourly employees are
required to fill out time exception forms, whereas part-time hourly employees complete time sheets.
Some time sheets are approved by direct supervisors, but not all. After supervisor approval (if required),
the timesheet/exception form is forwarded to the Principal for approval. After Principal approval,
timesheets must be entered by the Principal’s secretary by noon on the following Monday.
Principals and secretaries both verify and approve before submission and the payroll specialists ensure
that reports come in on time. On Monday evening, time records are imported into Infor by the IT
Department. After all records are imported, reports are generated and analyzed, including exception
reports, however, no comparison to prior payroll is made. Exceptions must be resolved by Tuesday at
3pm. A personnel action history report is also generated and manually compared to Payroll. Payroll is
processed Tuesday afternoon and takes approximately 10 hours to run. Check runs are made Wednesday
morning, however, payroll is about 99 percent direct deposit. Final payroll reports are reviewed
Wednesday to identify potential errors. Although errors are not tracked each pay period, the Payroll
Manager estimates about 45 errors per year, or an average of less than two per pay period. Pay stubs are
posted to the employee portal on Wednesday afternoon.
The current payroll process is presented in Figure 2.9. Included in this map are numerical references where
the review team identified inefficiencies or control weaknesses. Each of these referenced items is
discussed further below the process map.
79 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
Figure 2.9. HCPS Current Payroll Process
Time or ExceptionForm
Employees complete time (or exception)
form
Secretary enters time data into
system
Supervisor Approval
Required?
Principal approves online
Payroll Department validates time
report submission
Payroll Department runs timekeeping
reports
Payroll Department analyzes and
resolves issues
Payroll Department imports into Lawson
Supervisor approves
onlineYes
KTSKTS
Hard copy reports
Payroll Department Runs Payroll Tests
Missing time report?
YesNotify
Secretary
KTSLawson
No
KTS
1
1 4
5
4
Payroll Department Runs Payroll
2
3
Source: Gibson Consulting Group, Inc. based on interviews with HCPS Payroll staff.
Process Assessment:
1. Manual timesheets. Currently employees complete hardcopy forms for reporting time and/or
leave. These forms are not consistent across employee groups. Further, the use of hardcopy forms
increases chance for error because the information is entered twice – once on the form and a
second time into the timekeeping system. This process also creates additional work in the payroll
process, as the secretary is performing duplicative entry of the same information as the employee.
2. Inadequate timekeeping systems. Both of HCPS time reporting systems, KTS (and TTS for
Transportation employees), are outdated. HCPS attempted to purchase a more current
timekeeping system, but after years of contract disputes this option was abandoned. Neither of
the current timekeeping systems interface with the Infor payroll system and are not directly
utilized by employees for entering time. This is a major process inefficiency that is contributing to
unnecessary work demands on the district’s clerical staff.
3. Inconsistent approvals. Currently some timesheets are required to be approved by Supervisors,
but not all. Supervisors should be consistently approving timesheets for all employees they
manage.
80 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
4. Late identification of exceptions. Currently exceptions are identified after all timesheets are
approved and entered. If last minute changes do occur, approvals typically do not occur.
Exceptions should be identified earlier in the payroll process through an integrated timekeeping
system (see 2 above) that alerts the employee, therefore saving time and leaving less margin for
error.
5. Hard copy reports. After all timesheets are entered, hard copy reports are generated and manual
analysis is performed by the payroll staff. Much of the analysis, and more analyses, could be done
electronically. For example, the current manual reports analysis does not include comparing the
current payroll to the previous payroll for reasonableness. The use of automated reports and
analysis combined with an integrated time system would allow for more efficient and effective
reporting and analysis.
Recommendation 2-15: Require all hourly employees to report hours worked.
Currently full time hourly employees are only responsible for reporting time exceptions. While this is
allowed by law, it does not represent an effective control for time management. Utilizing an active time
reporting system for hourly employees will provide more accurate time reporting, decreasing the
probability of incorrect reporting and over-accrual of time.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be accomplished with existing resources.
Recommendation 2-16: Purchase software to streamline time reporting.
HCPS should purchase a single time reporting system that integrates with its payroll system. The KTS
timekeeping system was developed in-house, is written in an outdated programming language (COBOL)
and is poorly documented. The TTS timekeeping system is also home-grown. Both of these systems are
outdated should be replaced with a single system that interfaces with Infor. This will help streamline time-
keeping and payroll processing. Implementing a new timekeeping system will also allow HCPS to eliminate
the use of manual forms and reports.
Fiscal Impact
HCPS is planning to either upgrade its current Infor system or purchase a new ERP system. The cost of a
timekeeping system, including implementation costs, will be included in this procurement.
Recommendation 2-17: Implement additional controls over payroll review process.
Currently reports are analyzed before payroll is finalized and several important tests are performed.
Additional tests, such as the comparison of the current payroll to the previous payroll, is not performed.
This analysis and other analyses could be performed electronically to improve the quality and efficiency
of the payroll preparation process. Comparing current payroll to prior allows for tests of reasonableness
81 Chapter 2 – Financial Management
and accuracy. These additional analyses will decrease the likelihood of errors found in payroll before the
process is finalized.
Figure 2.10 presents a proposed payroll process, and assumes the purchase of a new integrated time
keeping system. Under this streamlined process, no paper forms are prepared as employees enter time
directly into the system. (Only salaried employees enter exceptions under the new process; all hourly
employees enter direct time.) Completed timesheets are electronically routed through the system for
approvals, and if time is not reported, notices are automatically sent to the employee to enter their time.
More analysis and more efficient analysis of timekeeping payroll reports can also be performed through
the use of current and integrated information systems.
Figure 2.10. Proposed Payroll Process
Employee enters time in the system
System sends notification for
missing time
Employee finalizes and signs online
Supervisor approves online
Principal approves online
Integrated Timekeeping
System
Payroll Department analyzes time data
Payroll Department resolves exceptions
Payroll Department imports time data
into Lawson
Payroll Department performs tests of
payroll
Lawson
Payroll Department runs payroll
Source: Gibson Consulting Group, Inc.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be accomplished with existing resources.
82
This page intentionally left blank.
83 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Introduction
This chapter focuses on the review of the organization, management, and operations of the Hillsborough
County Public Schools’ (HCPS) Human Resources (HR) division and the involvement of its staff in meeting
critical personnel needs. Also included in this chapter are several recommendations related to the
district’s health insurance program, which is managed by the HR division.
Elementary and secondary education in all respects is a labor-intensive undertaking. While most public
and private organizations and businesses have 35 to 40 percent of their budgets tied to personnel and
benefits, the comparable number in public schools is, on average, more than double, between 80 and 85
percent23. Consequently, human capital management (HCM) or human resources is a critical function for
a school district. To be effective and efficient, school districts must hire the right number of employees
with the right qualifications and credentials to fill each position in the district. Further, employees must
be adequately compensated, given opportunities for training, and must have access to benefits and
services, including grievance and conflict resolution provisions, to ensure that morale and productivity
remain high.
The terms “personnel, human resources, and human capital management” are often used
interchangeably. Personnel management was historically limited to the performance of administrative
processes and procedures such as hiring and maintaining employee records. Today, personnel functions
have evolved into a broader category of services that are provided under a variety of complex
employment laws. HCM, the newest concept, is an approach to employee staffing that perceives people
as assets (human capital) whose current value can be measured and developed and whose future value
can be enhanced through investment.
At HCPS, the investment in human resources represents more than $1.3 billion or 80 percent of the
district’s 2015-16 General Fund actual operating expenditures. The district has more than 27,000 full-
time-equivalent employees, more than one-half of which are teaching positions, and more than 60
percent that are instructional positions.24
The district’s overall ratio of students to staff was 7.78 to 1 in 2015-16, increasing from 7.42 to 1 in 2011-
12. This shows that HCPS has fewer employees relative to its student population than it did five years ago.
Figure 3.1 presents the district’s student to staff (full-time equivalent (FTE)) ratio for the past five years.
23 Noelle, E. AASA White Paper: School Budget 101. Retrieved from http://www.aasa.org 24 HCPS five-year staffing and expenditure history
84 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Figure 3.1. HCPS Student to Staff Ratio, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Source: HCPS five-year staffing and expenditure history
Compared to its Florida peer districts, however, HCPS has more employees relative to its student
population. Figure 3.2 compares the HCPS total student to staff ratio to Pinellas, Palm Beach, Duval, and
Orange County School districts for the most recent year available. Again, the lower the ratio, the more
employees a district has relative to its student population. It is important to note that there could be
factors, such as the level of outsourcing or use of contracted services instead of employees that affect
these comparisons.
Figure 3.2. Student to Staff Ratio Comparisons, HCPS and Florida Peer Districts, 2014-15
Source: Florida Department of Education – Average Salaries for Select Support and Technical Staff, 2014-15
The Phase I report issued in spring 2016 showed three areas where HCPS had more staffing than either
industry standards or its Florida peers – clerical staff, teachers, and custodial staff. These areas likely affect
the HCPS overall ranking above among its peer districts.
7.42 7.32 7.14 7.68 7.78
-
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
7.00
8.00
9.00
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
8.018.45
10.35
8.17.68
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
Pinellas Palm Beach Duval Orange Hillsborough
85 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
The responsibility for human resources management at HCPS falls under the Division of Human Resources.
The budget for this division is spread among multiple responsibility centers, described as site codes (94xx)
in the district’s accounting system. Table 3.1 presents a five-year expenditure history of the HCPS HR
organization. Division expenditures (excluding other expenditures charged to the HR Division) have
increased from $9.6 million to $11.5 over the past five years, an increase of 19.6 percent. The largest
increase is from 2013-14 to 2015-16 of 12.6 percent. Most of the 2014-15 increase in spending for both
Personnel Services and Personnel Services ISC is attributed to the partial funding of the salaries of the 160
peer evaluators.
Table 3.1. HCPS Human Resources Expenditures, General Fund, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Site Description (Responsibility
Center) 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
2015-16
(unaudited)
9410 CHIEF HR OFFICER $578,117 $644,517 $729,090 $638,198 $591,137
9415 SERVICE & SUPPORT DEPT $500,616 $605,224 $671,321 $732,652 $572,455
9425 PERSONNEL SERVICES $1,757,935 $1,894,555 $1,739,235 $2,251,444 $2,530,809
9427 PERSONNEL SERVICES ISC $345,447 $1,463,451 $1,774,715
9430 PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS $2,324,853 $2,487,480 $2,629,496 $2,299,888 $2,667,809
9440 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS & RISK
MGT $2,332,509 $1,982,082 $1,817,750 $1,860,224 $1,427,228
9443 SAFETY OFFICE $2,150,653 $2,018,954 $2,110,537 $2,080,038 $1,978,788
9450 EMPLOYEE RELATIONS DEPT $6,910 $9,132 $22,459 $10,741 $2,148
Total $9,651,594 $9,641,944 $10,065,335 $11,336,637 $11,545,090
Source: HCPS Five-Year Expenditure and Staffing History
Table Note: May not sum to total due to rounding
Cost efficiency measures for the HR area were compared to the Council of Great City Schools (CGCS) data
reported from other large urban school districts in the U.S for the most recent year available. Figure 3.3
presents the HR Cost per District FTE averages for the lowest and highest quartile, and the overall median.
HCPS, at $504 per FTE, is close to the median spending level.
86 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Figure 3.3. HR Cost per District FTE, HCPS and CGCS, 2013-14
Source: Managing for Results in Americas Schools, Council of Great City Schools, 2015
The HR Division administers three negotiated employee union contracts with three organizations: The
Hillsborough County Teachers Association (HCTA), the instructional union the Education Support
Professional (ESP), the para/clerical union and the Hillsborough School Employees Federation (HSEF),
referred to as the Blue Collar Contract for auxiliary personnel. Certain provisions of these agreements,
such as compensation and benefits, are negotiated annually. Contract terms are negotiated less
frequently.
HR regularly monitors compliance with federal and state legal requirements, especially in regard to
Affordable Care (ACA), medical leave, wage and hour compliance, unemployment compensation,
discrimination, and equal employment. For example, ACA compliance is audited monthly through
cooperation with HCPS Information Technology to identify employees who have met criteria based on
required measurement periods. Unemployment compensation is monitored through a contract with
DeGroot Management Services. Employee Benefits collaborates with Aon Consulting Group and with the
Florida Educator Risk Management Association (FERMA) for updates on federal and state legal
requirements. The district also has contracted with KPMG for audit, tax, and advisory services as well as
industry insight to help negotiate risks. There have been no recent inquiries or audits from either U.S. or
Florida governmental entities.
Teacher Pay Programs
HCPS has been on the forefront of teacher performance pay among Florida school districts for 15 years.
Despite the loss of private grant funding at the end of 2016, plans are to continue teacher performance
pay. At the time of this report, the draft handbooks for both the instructional employee performance pay
for 2016-17 and the teacher evaluation handbook had not been finalized through negotiations with the
teacher’s union nor approved by the HCPS Board.
$378
$647
$514 $504
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
$700
CGCS Low CGCS High COGCS Median HCPS
87 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
In 2010-11, the Florida Department of Education began transforming its teacher evaluation system
requiring that Florida Districts use systems of educator evaluation that included student achievement
growth measures as well as some teacher performance pay plan. The 2011 Florida legislature passed a
law requiring that teachers in Florida be evaluated using student achievement data. Thus began Florida’s
teacher evaluation reform efforts. Two years earlier, in 2009, HCPS was chosen for a Bill and Melinda
Gates Foundation seven-year grant for implementing a locally-designed program called “Empowering
Effective Teachers” (EET) which sought to pay teachers for performance instead of longevity. Over the life
of the grant, which ends in 2016, HCPS received $80 million from the Gates Foundation.
Work began in 2010 to use the grant in developing and implementing EET which local leaders, teachers,
principals, and the district’s union leaders believed to be superior to Florida’s ultimate evaluation reform
package and requirements. A year later, after HCPS launched its project, the Florida Legislature through
Senate Bill 736 phased out teacher tenure and tied pay to supervisor evaluations and student test scores.
Hillsborough County was given partial dispensation by the FDOE because EET program was already
underway, and, unlike the state program, EET had a third component – peer evaluation. In 2015-16, the
District had assigned 160 peer evaluators.
While the initial intent of ETT was to pay teachers based on performance instead of seniority, the actual
Hillsborough pay plan does both. According to the published teacher compensation plan, teachers move
up on their base salary schedule every three years, and, if they score high enough in the ratings system,
they also get bonus pay. HCPS’ new schedule (P &Q) moves teachers up the pay scale only after they earn
an effective or a highly effective evaluation score.
The peer evaluation component, as it turns out, has caused the most controversy among teachers and
other school and district leaders. Peer evaluators who came from the teaching force to serve two-year
assignments before returning to the classroom often have stayed on in that role for three or four years.
In focus groups, teachers told the review team of their perceptions that these peers, because of these
long-term assignments, were functioning more as administrators than peer teachers. Some
administrators, on the other hand, claimed that the longer experience made them better peer evaluators.
District leadership believed that improved achievement of both teachers and students would result from
revamping the peer evaluator model. In October 2015, the HCPS superintendent formed a committee of
teachers, district leadership and union membership to design a transition away from the Gates program
to a new initiative that is within available or projected funding.25 The charge that the Superintendent gave
to the committee included:
Review all components of our current evaluation and teacher support system.
Develop possible models for teacher support to include:
Non-evaluative systems of support by colleagues.
25 HCPS
88 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Fully-released intensive system of support for teachers who need it the most such as brand new
teachers, new teachers to HCPS, and struggling teachers
Job-embedded professional development.
Site-based Teacher- Talent Developers (at 58 sites) who support both students through great
instruction and teachers through timely observations and feedback.
Model and/or Demonstration Classrooms where our most effective teachers can share best
practices with other colleagues.
Identify a Peer and Mentor from the committee to serve as a liaison between Peers/Mentors and
the committee.26
As a result of the work of the committee (Teacher Talent Development Committee), the draft plan for
performance pay for HCPS includes both FDOE requirements as well as local, additional incentives. The
focus according to the plan is teacher talent development and job embedded professional development.
The changes also removed 265 peer evaluators and mentors and created 115 new positions known as
“instructional mentors,” whose assignment is to provide full-time assistance to new teachers and
struggling teachers. The changes also created 101 “teacher talent developers” or “teacher leaders” who
spend half their work day as classroom teachers and the remaining time working with teachers. Many of
the former peer evaluators and mentors applied for one of the new assignments.27
The expected outcomes of this new plan include:
To understand the clear and compelling district vision for developing a culture of professional
learning in every school that capitalizes on teacher leadership as a driving force behind capacity
building.
To learn ways to determine the greatest professional learning needs and wants of teachers based
on the needs of their students and their own learning goals.
To develop a common language of best practices, strategies, and models of job-embedded
professional development and high quality professional learning that will yield the greatest results
in each school.
To develop a system of support and a clear plan that will provide fluid and “just in time”
professional learning for staff using the strengths-based resources in each school.
Actual compensation and the total fiscal impact of the revised plan for performance pay have not been
finalized by HCPS because of ongoing negotiations with the teachers’ union.
26Ibid. 27 Draft of 2016-17 Instructional Employee Performance Pay Handbook
89 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Commendation 3-1: The district’s written teacher recruiting plan is both productive and creative.
The Applications and Recruitment Department in HR’s Personnel Services annually conducts a recruitment
season review which assesses results and informs the strategic recruiting plan for the subsequent
recruitment season. The plan:
Uses data and analyses of past results as well as projections of future vacancies.
Incorporates the district’s emphasis on recruiting and hiring a diverse work force.
Provides district executive recruiters and principals the ability during job fairs to bind (or to get a
signing commitment) teachers, especially in high needs areas, to ultimately be contracted to teach
in HCPS.
The Applications and Recruitment Department updates and maintains data in its own website, a sub-
section of the district’s website: TeachinTampa.com. Teach in Tampa is the marketing brand and theme
used in all of its publications, advertisements, banners, and other media including social interactive feeds
such as Facebook and Twitter and video presentations on YouTube. The Teach in Tampa website, launched
in November 2014, provides a teacher-focused recruitment portal that markets Tampa and Hillsborough
County as an attractive place to teach. The results of a new-hire survey of teachers shared with the review
team revealed that 75 percent of respondents heard about HCPS from internet postings or employee
referrals.
In the 2015 recruitment year, the successes of recruitment planning showed that over 5,000 teacher
applications were received, increasing applicant volume by 55 percent over the prior year. The
Department was able to build a pool of approximately 3,000 active candidates by the first day of school
and 1,324 teacher vacancies and been filled by the first day of school despite last minute resignations and
broken contracts.28
The Recruitment Season Review, published by the HR Division in September 2015, shows that the
demographics of new hires in the 2015 hiring season more nearly match that of current teachers and
moved the district closer to the demographics of its students. To reduce attrition of teachers and to ensure
the applicant pool is reflective of the diversity of HCPS students, the adjusted recruitment plan showed
that the 2016 recruiting season would be:
Focusing on attending career fairs across Florida and immediately surrounding states.
Strengthening partnerships with local teacher education programs and those programs providing
alternative routes for teacher certification.
Investing in tools that maximize the cost per applicant ratio.
Over representing in media and marketing schemes the already diverse teachers and students in
HCPS.
28 Statistics excerpted from a PowerPoint presentation to the HCPS Board, September 25, 2015
90 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
The Recruitment Season Review lists specific successes of new recruitment strategies that include:
Posted and maintained over 250 job advertisements on university career and employment
websites.
Coordinated a series of Twitter feeds and Facebook announcements to publicize application
deadlines and recruitment events.
Coordinated cultivation phone calls with prospects and candidates in high need subject areas.
Implemented prospect tracking systems to measure the effectiveness of recruitment efforts.
Also included in the 2015-16 Recruitment Plan are the Diversity Recruitment Strategic Plan and the 2015-
2016 Teacher Recruitment Marketing Plan, authored in cooperation with HR by the district’s Strategic
Marketing Department.
Additional success can be attributed to the use of HR Partners, generally former HCPS principals, as
primary recruiters at out-of-district job fairs. After interviewing and identifying acceptable candidates, the
Partners have the ability to give commitment letters (contract to follow upon actual assignment) on behalf
of the district to bind applicants to a job in HCPS.
Commendation 3-2: The Program to Attract and Train High (PATH) quality and exceptional teachers for
students with disabilities, although housed in Professional Development, has become a major source
for HR’s filling special education vacancies.
Project PATH is an alternative certification training program funded by a Transition to Teaching grant from
the U.S. Department of Education. The grant provides financial assistance and support for Exceptional
Student Education (ESE) teachers from non-traditional backgrounds who teach in a high needs school
while earning their professional certification through HCPS’ Alternative Certification Program (ACP). In
short, Project PATH:
Impacts significantly the availability of ESE teachers for hire through Human Resources.
Recruits individuals with non-education degrees and facilitates certification for ESE teachers.
After signing a commitment or promissory note declaring their willingness to complete the program,
participants selected for Project PATH receive two financial incentives. The first is a scholarship to cover
the ACP fees paid in advance upon acceptance into the program. The second is awarded after participants
complete the three-year requirement in ESE in an HCPS high needs school. This award is designed to
reimburse participants for the cost of taking and passing each state certification exam.
In 2015-16 PATH had 15 participants in the HCPS paraprofessional to teacher program where they earn a
bachelor’s degree. Potentially 13 of them will be ESE teachers of record in the 2016-17 school year. Also,
45 teachers that are enrolled in or have completed the PATH program are teaching in HCPS. There will be
23 scheduled to begin teaching in 2016-17 and another 17 are interviewing for ESE positions to begin in
August, 2016.
91 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Commendation 3-3: The HCPS Employee Benefits Department provides individual, one-on-one
counseling to employees who are considering retirement.
Long-time support employees assigned to HCPS Employee Benefits help employees to understand their
options and the procedures to follow in electing to retire. Other information shared includes retirement
benefits, requirements for retirement, and assistance with completing and submitting paperwork with
local and state retirement agencies. On a regular basis, HCPS employees eligible for retirement are
scheduled for group meetings conducted in the Benefits building. After a general orientation, those
attending are scheduled to meet one-on-one with an in-house retirement advisor. These individual
meetings generally last for about one hour. These retirement-election meetings are offered in addition to
those conducted regionally by the Florida Retirement System.
Considering that, for example, 652 HCPS employees retired in 2014-15, the individualized counseling and
assistance provided for retirees are beyond expectations or requirements.
Human Resources Operations
The Division of Human Resources is led by a Chief Human Resources Officer (CHRO) who reports directly
to the district’s Chief of Staff. At the time of the review, HR had 132 FTE positions. Except for three
vacancies, all the allocations were filled. The current HR organizational structure (excluding secretarial
staff) is presented in Figure 3.4. The numbers in parentheses display the number of positions at that level
or beneath that level in the organizational structure.
92 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Figure 3.4. HCPS Division of Human Resources Organizational Chart
Chief Human Resources Officer
Prof Stds Investigator (2)
Manager/InvestigatorProfessional Standards
Prof. Stds. 3 Comm Investigator
Prof Stds Investigator (2)
General Manager Employee Relations
Manager Services & Support
(8)
Dept. Manager Services & Support
(2)
General Manager Professional Standards
Personnel Analyst II Certification (7)
General Manager Professional Standards
General Manager Professional Standards
Head Custodian II ISC Facilities (8)
Clerk I (2)
General Manager Employee Benefits/
Insurance
Accountant IV (1)
Risk Mgmt Analyst II (1)
Dept. Manager (8)
General Manager Personnel Services
Customer Service Manager (23)
Customer Service Manager Applications/
Recruitment (9)
Customer Service Manager Applications/
Recruitment (2)
Customer Service Manager (1)
HR Partners (6)
Fingerprinting (6)
General Manager Performance
Evaluation
SupervisorPerformance
Evaluation (1)
SupervisorPerformance
Evaluation (1)
Instructional Mentors (125)
Director Safety & Risk Mgmt
Asst. Mgr Enviro Inspector (6)
Safety Specialist I-Claims (6)
Occupational Health Nurse (2)
Safety Specialist I-Transp (4)
Safety Tech I (1)
Safety Tech II (1)
Source: HCPS HR Division
93 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
The Office of Employee Relations in the HR Division administers three negotiated employee union
contracts with two organizations. The Hillsborough County Teachers Association (HCTA) is responsible for
the teacher contract and the Education Support Professional (ESP) contract. The Hillsborough School
Employees Federation (HSEF) is responsible for what is referred to as the Blue Collar Contract for auxiliary
personnel. Certain provisions of these agreements, such as compensation and benefits, are negotiated
annually. Contract terms are negotiated less frequently.
HR regularly monitors compliance with federal and state legal requirements, especially in regard to
Affordable Care (ACA), medical leave, wage and hour compliance, unemployment compensation,
discrimination, and equal employment. For example, ACA compliance is audited monthly through
cooperation with HCPS Information Technology to identify employees who have met criteria based on
required measurement periods. Unemployment compensation is monitored through a contract with
DeGroot Management Services. Employee Benefits collaborates with Aon Consulting Group and with the
Florida Educator Risk Management Association (FERMA) for updates on federal and state legal
requirements. The district also has contracted with KPMG for audit, tax, and advisory services as well as
industry insight to help negotiate risks. There have been no recent inquiries or audits from either U.S. or
Florida governmental entities.
Recommendation 3-1: Reorganize the Human Resources Division.
The current HCPS HR organization structure does not represent a logical alignment of functions, the span
of control at the CHRO level is excessive, and position titles and responsibilities vary widely among second
line management positions.
In terms of an organizational design for HR, logical alignment of functions speaks to whether the
aggregation of responsibilities makes sense and can be suited to the particular skill sets of leadership
positions. A review of the current HR organization (see Figure 3.4 above) shows that all but two of these
carry the rank and title of General Manager, and the compensation scheduled for the position are
generally the same. One position, currently held by a non-educationally certificated individual, is assigned
the title of Director (shown at the same horizontal level on the organizational chart) as the General
Manager positions. Another direct report is Manager – Professional Standards Investigations, a rank
below that of General Manager.
Nine positions are direct reports to the CHRO yet three of the positions carry the same position title and
their job responsibilities are essentially the same. This span of control is larger in number than what is
typically found in companies or school districts with thousands of employees. Although no perfect ratio
exists, span of control is critical in understanding organizational design and the behaviors within an
organization, such as the approach used to interact with employees and the effectiveness of
communication between each level with an organization. A wide span of control increases the number of
94 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
interactions between the CHRO and her direct reports, an approach which could cause the CHRO to
become overwhelmed but can also provide more autonomy.29
Table 3.2 shows the current primary responsibilities and HR functions of each HR executive position. Some
functions assigned to one position should properly be assigned to another. For example, educator or
teacher certification management and oversight is assigned to a position whose responsibilities are mainly
employee discipline. Certification generally is a critical function of personnel services.
Table 3.2. HCPS Executive HR Positions and Primary Responsibilities – April, 2016
Executive HR Position Current Primary Responsibilities
Chief Human Resources Officer HR executive leadership team
Formal investigative team
Professional Standards team reviews
Litigation involving districtwide employees
Employee terminations, non-re-nominations
Administrative trainings
Teacher Pipeline training to become administrators
General Manager, Employee Relations Chief negotiation and contracts for three employee unions
Salary settlements, if challenged, for administrators and non-
represented employees
Employee work calendars, negotiated work days, and
paid/non paid holidays
Facilitation of formal grievance process
Lawsuit resolution log
EEOC charges of discrimination
ADA requests for accommodations
General Manager, Professional
Standards (3)
Employee disciplinary procedures and hearings
Reception of Initial reports of employee misconduct
Educator certification
Ethics, progressive discipline, and professional standards
training for district leaders
General Manager, Employee
Benefits/Insurance
Employee insurance and enrollment
Retirement plans and programs
Insurance carriers, vendors, and products
Unemployment compensation
Wellness program
General Manager, Personnel Services Departments within Personnel Services:
Applications and Applitrack
Teacher Recruiting
New employee on-boarding and processing
Fingerprinting
Personnel Services
29 Span of control: What factors should determine how many direct reports a manager has?, April 25, 2013, downloaded from www.shrm.org
95 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Executive HR Position Current Primary Responsibilities
Pools, surpluses, transfers, supplemental pay
Leaves, FMLA
Florida Department of Education reporting
HR Partners
Kelly Services for teacher substitutes
Employee contracts
Employee handbook
Employee work attendance
In-service training related to personnel services for
administrators
General Manager, Performance
Evaluation
Professional employee evaluation systems
Talent development initiative
Instructional mentors
Support for instructional positions new to the district
Administrators’ training for evaluation systems
Performance Pay system management
Teacher Induction Program (TIP)
Administrative Calibrations
Administrative Trainings – “Providing Effective Feedback”
Director, Safety and Risk Management Safety policies and programs for safe, accident-free
workplace
OSHA and other state and local compliance
District’s self-insurance and other risk management
programs
Workers’ compensation
District Fire Marshal
Industrial accident investigation of causes
Safety inspections
Manager, Professional Standards
Investigator
Formal investigations of employee misconduct
Review of arrest records of prospective employees
Training staff who conduct formal investigations
Liaison with local law enforcement agencies
Source: Gibson Consulting Group - Compiled from job descriptions, interviews, and onsite observations
Although this chart does not show the number of individual positions, there are four reporting directly to
the CHRO that are titled “Professional Standards” – three General Manager positions and one Manager
(investigator) position. The fundamental responsibility – employee discipline – of the three General
Managers is the same.
A review of the primary responsibilities and functions of each of the HR executive positions (listed above)
shows that some positions carry more work load, require the supervision of more HR assigned employees,
and oversee more sub-departments. The responsibility and impact for critical decisions are also greater.
For example, the position of General Manager – Personnel Services, oversees five areas and supervises
directly or indirectly the work of 32 employees. On the other hand, one of General Manager for
96 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Professional standards supervises one employee, a secretary position. Another General Manager for
Professional standards has six custodial positions (ISC) reporting to it and a secretary.
Other executives are currently assigned responsibilities unrelated to their positions, job titles and job
descriptions. In one case, an executive who moved to a different position because of promotion kept part
of the responsibilities from the old job. The job description for General Manager – Professional Standards
does not list overall district educator certification and renewals as a responsibility, yet one of the three
positions is assigned that responsibility.
In addition to overseeing the work of the General Managers, the Director of Safety and Risk Management,
and the Manager of Investigations, the CHRO accepts individually the responsibility of reviewing and
approving decisions and recommendations made by the Office of Professional Standards team and
investigators. The CHRO also does not designate responsibilities involving personnel or employee-related
litigation, terminations, non-re-nominations, and administrative trainings which includes teachers who
are in track to become administrators.
The current organization of HR places the Department of HR Services and Support, a department whose
responsibilities are clearly personnel services oriented, under the supervision of the General Manager –
Employee Relations. The principle work of the Department is employee records, both electronic and
paper; verification of employment; electronic data management systems and development of new HR
technology; and correspondence with other districts and the Florida Department of Education in regard
to transferring work experience. None of this actual work is commonly associated with Employee
Relations.
Figure 3.5 presents the recommended organizational structure. The major elements of the organizational
realignment are described below:
Reduces the span of control of the CHRO from nine (9) direct reports to five (5) and balances the
level of responsibility under second General Manager and Director positions.
Realigns Professional Standards, Investigations, and Performance Evaluation under Employee
Relations; positions downgraded from General Manager to Manager.
Redefines manager positions under Employee Benefits.
Redefines manager positions under Personnel Services.
Removes ISC custodial positions from HR (see related recommendation in Chapter 6 – Facilities
Management regarding the proposed management approach for all district custodians).
Removes the instructional mentors from the HR organizational chart (already planned by HCPS).
97 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Assigns a minimum of two current and appropriate HR executive staff members experienced in
work flow processes and mapping to an HR Systems Development unit with a Team Leader (see
related recommendation later in this chapter).
Other HR positions may need to be redefined and realigned under the proposed management positions.
The shaded boxes (blue) below represent positions that have either been realigned and/or redefined.
Figure 3.5. Proposed Organizational Alignment for HCPS HR
Chief Human Resources Officer
General Manager Employee Relations
Manager - Professional Standards (2)
Manager Performance
Evaluation
General Manager Employee Benefits/
Insurance
ManagerCustomer Services
Insurance
ManagerCustomer Services
Leave, Unemp. Comp.
General Manager Personnel Services
ManagerOperations
Manager Services and
Support
ManagerHRIS and IT Support
Manager - Applications, Recruiting and
Onboarding
HR Partners (6)
Fingerprinting (6)
Director Safety & Risk Mgmt
Asst. Mgr Enviro Inspector (6)
Safety Specialist I-Claims (6)
Occupational Health Nurse (2)
Safety Specialist I-Transp (4)
Safety Tech I (1)
Safety Tech II (1)
ManagerInvestigations
HR Systems Development Team
Leader
Source: Gibson Consulting Group, Inc.
98 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Table 3.3 provides more detail of the realigned duties and responsibilities of each HR administrative
position.
Table 3.3. Recommended Duties and Responsibilities of Re-Organized Administrative Positions
Administrative Position Recommended Re-Organized Responsibilities
(Not ranked by importance)
CHRO Oversees four direct reports
Litigation involving districtwide employees
Employee needs forecasts and plans
Personnel Policies
Training on new laws and administrative
codes
Other administrative training
General Manager, Personnel Services Employee recruitment
Interviews, selection, onboarding,
fingerprinting, and orientation
Employee retention and exit interviews
Transfers and resignations
Employment verification
Employee records
Florida Department of Education reports
Educator certification and re-certification
HRIS and IT systems and Applitrack
Partners
General Manager, Employee Relations Labor Negotiations
Compensation Plan
Employee complaints and grievances
EEOC, 504, Title IX, and other compliance
issues
Professional Standards adherence
Investigations
Employee Performance Evaluations
Pay for Performance Program
Job Descriptions
Teacher attendance at work issues
Employee Handbook
Personnel Policies Input for Board Review and
approval
General Manager, Employee Benefits Employee Insurance
Retirements and retirement accounts
Leaves/Absences/FMLA
Worker’s Compensation
Employee Wellness
Director, Safety and Risk Management Accident-free work place
Safety inspections
99 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Administrative Position Recommended Re-Organized Responsibilities
(Not ranked by importance)
Risk assessment and management programs
OSHA
Occupational Health
District fire marshal
Source: Gibson Consulting Group, Inc.
This reorganization will help current HR planned efforts and goals to:
Streamline current operations and procedures.
Eliminate redundancies in transactions.
Reduce the number of positions needed by HR.
Facilitate more effective interaction and transactions among HR’s largest customer/consumer
groups, i.e., principals, transportation, student nutrition services, IT, and payroll.
Facilitate addressing high turnover areas among support staff assigned to provide customer
services.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation includes not filling three current vacancies and eliminating the positions entirely:
Supervisor, Performance Evaluation
HR Partner (1 position)
Customer Services Manager, Services and Support
It also recommends eliminating one executive level position:
General Manager – Professional Standards
Additionally, it recommends downgrading three General Manager positions to Manager:
General Manager – Professional Standards – two current positions
General Manager – Performance Evaluation
100 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Table 3.4. Estimated Savings from Reorganizing the HR Division
Savings Factor Positions Salary Fiscal Impact
Not Filling Current Vacancies and Eliminating the Positions
Supervisor, Performance Evaluations 1 $86,164 $86,164
HR Partner 1 $119,930 $119,930
Customer Service Manager, Services and
Support 1 $72,875 $72,875
Subtotal 3 $278,969
Eliminating One Executive Level Position
General Manager, Professional Standards 1 $116,221 $116,221
Subtotal 1 $116,221
Downgrading General Manager Positions to Manager1
General Manager, Professional Standards 2 $34,132 $68,264
General Manager, Performance Evaluation 1 $34,132 $34,132
Subtotal 3 $102,396
Grand Total 7 $497,586
Sources: HCPS data spring 2016 (expenditure data; staffing data)
Table Notes: 1 Salary calculation is the difference between HR General Manager position salaries (average $116,221)
and Manager position salaries (average $82,089); May not sum to total due to rounding; Excludes benefits;
Not filling the three current vacant HR positions would save the district approximately $278,969.
Eliminating one General Manager position would save about $116,221. Downgrading three General
Manager positions to Manager would save approximately $102,396.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Reorganize the HR Division. $0 $0 $497,586 $497,586 $497,586 $497,586
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Recommendation 3-2: Upgrade HR management job descriptions to require HR experience and
certification.
None of the HR management job descriptions, including the CHRO, require HR experience or HR
certification. As a result, among the 13 current HR leaders and executives, none had prior professional
work experience in HR organization and management before they were selected for their current
positions; however, both the CHRO and the General Manager, Personnel Services, are currently working
on SHRM Certification at the University of South Florida. Virtually all of them came to the division’s
executive positions directly from assignments as principals, peer evaluators, or other key leadership
positions in other HCPS divisions. Collectively, the average length of time these executives have been
assigned in their current position is less than 2.5 years.
101 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
The current job description requirements for all HR management or executive positions are very similar:
Education: A master’s degree. Degree or formal training in Educational Leadership preferred
Experience: Ten years of increasingly responsible experience in human resources or
administration of educational programs, with three years of related management or supervisory
experience required. Experience in public school administration, public school district
administration; or other large diverse organizations preferred
Certificates/Licenses/Registrations: Florida Professional Educator Certificate: Educational
Leadership, School Principal, or Administrator and Supervision
The preferences for educational leadership over human resources leadership and experience does not
reflect best practice. Best practices for the HR leadership positon would typically include a master’s degree
in human resources management, professional HR certifications and licenses such as SPHR or SHRM-PM30,
and at least 10 to 12 years’ experience as an executive in the HR department of an educational or other
organization. Other key management positions should also require HR experience and HR certification.
Upgrading the HR management positions to require previous HR management experience and
professional HR certifications would provide several benefits to HCPS:
Attract candidates who will not require excessive “on-the-job” training once they have been hired.
Recognize professional HR expertise as an asset for more effective HR functions and operations.
Reduce reliance on HCPS as a sole source for its HR executives.
Provide fresh ideas and suggestions for HR operations, functions, and HR technology needed for
achievement and success.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
Recommendation 3-3: Re-engineer HR systems and procedures.
The Human Resources Division uses a large amount of paper and manual processes.HR employees are
more comfortable with paper, and therefore, they have done little to change the status quo with regard
to how information travels throughout the district and the extent to which all stakeholders in critical
decision making are involved or need to be. The HR team is working to move from a paper based manual
system to a more automated system. For example, Applications and processing have within the last year
moved to a totally automated system. Paper-based systems are hugely inefficient, as they require more
energy to move, to manipulate, to analyze, and to archive. The review team estimates that 35 to 40
30 Senior Professional in HR (SPHR) or Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) Certified Professional SHRM-CP
102 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
percent of the HR administrative workload is wasted on the inefficiencies inherent in paper-based
systems. Until recently, some electronic forms, such licensed personnel applications and employee
beneficiary declarations, were printed from the system, routed for manual processing and approvals, and
filed away in file cabinets and archival boxes.
Further, too little time has been spent analyzing and assessing HR functions that are duplicative among
top HR administrators’ responsibilities. Often an HR executive internal transfer or promotion within the
division means that some responsibilities of the old position move with the administrator to the new
assignment. As a result, some positions have more daily transactional responsibilities than others.
HCPS uses paper forms, called “yellow cards” – to organize teacher information and track assignments.
Similarly, employees declaring benefits and requesting payroll deduction agreements previously had to
use paper forms. HR moved to an automated benefits and beneficiary system approximately 5 months
ago. Sending teacher experience documentation to other school districts is also a paper intensive process.
At the time of the onsite review, HR was beginning to implement a process by which principals and other
hiring managers can transmit their recommendations for hire to HR electronically.
Becoming paperless and completely digitizing all employee records are long-term goals of the division.
However, there is no written plan, project implementation, or deadlines that would lead the way toward
achieving it. Going paperless is a planned process that takes time and effort, and requires dedicated staff
resources, and all current HR staff members are consumed with daily transactional responsibilities.
HCPS should create an internal development team by creating three new positions to be filled by certified
HR career professionals to lead this effort as well as any other HR process initiatives. Designed to serve as
the transformational arm of the CHRO, rather than a transactional function, the HR development team
should be comprised of three newly-hired, outside-the-district HR system analysts with career HR
experience and certification working as executive leaders in large public and private HR organizations.
These new positions will need to be posted both locally and nationally. The focus of this development team
should include:
Mapping critical HR functions.
Integrating effective business processes into digital and electronic data management systems.
Writing a plan containing the steps and deadline dates when HR will become at least 95 percent
paperless.
Ensuring that goals and strategies identified in the HR strategic or long-range plan are data-driven,
realistic and that accomplishments are reported.
Designing and implementing an HR performance measures plan to identify targets and goals and
consistently to gather data and report results.
103 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
The development team’s work schedule should regularly involve meetings with designated lead persons
among the district’s principals, Information Technology (IT), Lawson HRIS, and other appropriate
stakeholders from Transportation, Maintenance, and Student Nutrition Services as the Development
Team explores and develops work flow processes for critical HR functions.
The structural analysis of an HR process flow (such as a principal’s recommendation to hire cycle),
distinguishes how work is actually done from how it should be done and what transactional functions a
system should perform from how the function should be built to perform those functions. The resulting
graphic representation allows all users and observers to “walk-through” the whole process and see it in
its entirety.
Fiscal Impact
The base salary of each of the three positions should be posted at close to $120,000 annually in order to
attract the most capable and experienced candidates.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Hire an HR Development
Team $0 $0 ($360,000) ($360,000) ($360,000) ($360,000)
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Recommendation 3-4: Develop and analyze HR performance measures.
The new 5-year HCPS Strategic Plan developed during 2015 contains a goal area related to “Talent
Management.” Underlying objectives relate to teacher effectiveness, leader effectiveness, teacher
retention, leader retention, professional development, and diversity. Through a Balanced Scorecard
approach, performance measures will be tracked to evaluate progress against the objectives.
The Talent Management goal area in the Strategic Plan lists two objectives and eight performance metrics
that relate to the goal and mission of the HR division. The objectives are:
Recruit, support, and retain a highly effective and diverse work force
Develop, recognize, and reward employees
The metrics listed that intend to support the objectives are:
Teacher effectiveness
Leader effectiveness
Teacher retention
Teacher vacancies/fill rate
Professional development
Diversity in school staff
Employee empowerment
104 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
However, the Plan itself does not include the details, resources, or tools to be used in reporting these
measurements or metrics.
Historically, the HR Division of HCPS has not consistently tracked, monitored, or reported performance
measures. This responsibility should be assigned to the new HR Development Team. Beyond those
measures developed for the strategic objectives, the HR Division should develop additional measures to
evaluate efficiency and effectiveness in all areas of their operation. Development of these performance
measures will prompt the development of performance targets, which can be used to continuously
improve HR operations. Measures can be qualitative (survey response rates regarding customer
satisfaction) as well as quantitative (ratio of total employees to HR employees, average time between
manager/principal recommendation date and hire date). Performance targets and actual performance
against those targets should also be a component of HR management performance evaluations. Following
are examples of HR performance measures that HR should consider:
Number of district employees per FTE human resources employee
HR Department cost per district employee (FTE)
Number of employment applications processed per FTE
Average days from position vacancy to recommendation by hiring manager
Average days from recommendation by hiring manager to start date
Non-certified teachers as a percentage of total teachers
Turnover rate for teachers by campus
Teacher vacancies unfilled on the first instructional day for students
New teacher turnover rate (one year or less)
Turnover rate for non-teachers
Low income/high minority campuses compared to teachers’ experience
Percentage of customers extremely satisfied with HR customer service
Percentage of teachers by ethnicity, compared to percentage of students by ethnicity
Teacher absentee days per year, by campus
Substitute costs per year, by campus (dollar amount and percentage of salaries and wages)
Benefits cost as a percentage of total salaries and wages
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
105 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Recommendation 3-5: Modify the districtwide performance evaluation system for non-educationally
certificated employees to align actual job duties with performance measures.
The performance evaluation system currently in use for non-teacher employees is limited to each HCPS
clerical, technical, and manual employee meeting with his or her immediate supervisor or principal and
reviewing the rating or ranking of evaluation items on a standard and uniform printed document during
the month of April of each year. The review team saw no evidence that performance planning (i.e., pre-
evaluation conferencing at the beginning of the evaluation year and subsequent ongoing coaching, follow-
up, measuring progress, self-assessment, and feedback) was a characteristic of the evaluation system for
HCPS support personnel. In limited instances some supervisors ask employees to provide a written self-
assessment of their work to be shared during the April evaluation conference. Since the HCPS evaluation
instrument itself is uniform or similar in specific content for all support employee work groups, seldom is
there a correlation between the duties and responsibilities listed in the employees’ job descriptions or the
actual work that is done and the rated items on the evaluation form.
A major goal of performance planning is the supervisor and the employee to explicitly identify the link
between the employee’s job performance and the objectives and mission of the Department/school and
district. Such alignment helps the supervisor and employee prioritize the employee’s work and establish
performance standards specific to the job that will be monitored through the evaluation year.31
Generally, the components of an effective Performance Plan cycle include:
Performance and development planning conference
Goal setting
Establishing parameters of success in achieving the individual goals
Coaching and ongoing feedback
Mid-year review
Self-assessment and input from stakeholders/customers served
Self-assessment discussion
Written review of performance32
At the beginning of the evaluation or appraisal period, the supervisor and employee in a conference
review the job responsibilities as outlined in the job description, identify performance objectives and
district/school/departmental objectives, decide upon projects, and discuss standards of performance.33
31 How to Establish a Performance Improvement Plan, 9/16/2015. Society of Human Resource Management. Downloaded from www.shrm.org. 32 Note that standard formatted or pre-printed evaluation instruments or appraisal tools are not compatible with this specific component; a separate individual written account is required instead. 33 ibid.
106 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Successfully linking the evaluation system with the actual duties and responsibilities required of a job will
require:
Modifying all job descriptions for all jobs in the district to include specificity in regard to actual
work or hands-on tasks that is required for an employee in specific jobs or positions.
Involving both departmental supervisors and work line individual employees currently working in
the job in writing the duties and functions to ensure that they are specific, accurate, reflective
and up-to-date.
Matching job codes with job descriptions.
Removing all archaic or obsolete job descriptions from data bases.
Eliminating standardized or formatted evaluation forms and formats.
Structuring individual job evaluation reviews so that performance measures are tied directly to
the work the job requires.
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
Health Insurance
HCPS offers health insurance to its employees. Under the program, employees may choose one of five
programs through Humana. One of the plans is offered free of charge to the employees; four other plans
require employee contributions. Table 3.5 presents a summary of the insurance programs available to
HCPS employees.
Table 3.5. HCPS Health Insurance Programs and Enrollment, 2015
Program 2015 Enrollment
(employee count) Employee Contribution?
Humana Staff – PPO 4,413 Yes
Humana HMO Select 2,210 Yes
Coverage 1st (Local) 10,258 No
Coverage 1st (National) 2,558 Yes
HDHP NPOS Network 48 Yes
Total Employees Participating 19,487
Total Employees
Percentage Participating
25,170
77%
Source: HCPS spring 2016
107 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Out of all 25,170 employees in the district, 19,487 or 77 percent participate in one of the above health
insurance programs.
In FY 2016, the district incurred $147.8 million for health insurance from all funding sources with $126
million supported by the General Fund. Figure 3.6 presents a five-year history of the district’s health
insurance expenditures.
Figure 3.6. HCPS Health Insurance Expenditures, 2011-12 through 2015-16 (in $ millions)
Source: HCPS Five-Year Expenditure and Staffing History
Table Note: 2015-16 expenditures are unaudited
The responsibility of the district with respect to health insurance programs falls under the Chief Human
Resources Officer. The district uses a health insurance consultant to assist with the bidding and evaluation
process for health insurance, claims analysis and reporting, and advising district management on health
insurance strategies and plans.
Each of the major union agreements (The HCTA Teacher and Support Professional contracts and the Blue
Collar contract) have provisions for providing health insurance to union members.
Recommendation 3-6: Consider converting current employee health insurance program to a self-funded
program.
HCPS has a fully-insured health insurance program available to its employees. Under a fully-insured
program, the insurance carrier takes on all the responsibility for claims, administrative costs and the
program’s risk. HCPS periodically goes out for bid for its fully-insured program, and Humana has been the
carrier running the program for HCPS since 2012.
Under a self-funded health insurance program the employer provides health insurance to employees with
its own funds. In a self-funded health program, the employer assumes the direct risk for payment of the
$125.0 $122.7 $123.7
$136.5
$147.8
$0
$20
$40
$60
$80
$100
$120
$140
$160
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
108 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
claims for benefits. The terms of eligibility and covered benefits are set forth in a plan document similar
to those found in a typical group health insurance policy. Unless exempted, such plans create rights and
obligations under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA).
There are several advantages of a self-funded health insurance program:
Lower cost of operation. Employers often find that administrative costs for a self-funded plan
through a Third Party Administrator (TPA) are lower than those being charged by a carrier under
a fully-insured program.
Elimination of carrier profit margin and risk charge. The standard profit margin and risk charge
of an insurance carrier are eliminated for the bulk of the plan.
Cost and utilization controls. A TPA may have available several programs (i.e., hospital bill audits,
large case management, preferred provider networks (PPO), and detailed reports) that an
insurance carrier would not be able to provide.
Increased cash flow. The employer's cash flow is improved when money formerly held by the
insurance carrier in the form of various reserves is now available for use by the employer.
Control of plan design. The self-funded employer has the flexibility in the design of the benefit
plan. State regulations mandating costly benefits are avoided because self-funded programs are
subject to (or protected by) ERISA. Employers also are excluded from some of the requirements
of the Affordable Health Care Act with respect to required coverage.
Administration tailored to the employer's needs. The employer has the choice of third-party
administrators, each of whom can design a service plan to meet the employer's needs.
A self-funded plan should be more cost-effective than a fully-insured plan due to the elimination of many
expenditures associated with a fully-insured plan and the potential of direct savings to the employer from
better than expected claims experience. However, it is possible self-funding may not reduce costs at all.
In this context, the employer must also consider the following potential disadvantages:
Risk assumption. The employer assumes the risk between the expected claim level and the Stop-
loss coverage level.
Provision of services. The employer must provide for the services an insurance carrier would
normally provide. This is accomplished by contracting with a TPA.
Asset exposure. The employer's assets are exposed to any liability as a result of legal action
against the self-funded plan.
Claim fluctuation. Monthly claim costs can vary, verses fixed monthly premiums on a fully insured
case.
109 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Employers may mitigate the financial risk of self-funding claims under the plan by purchasing Stop-loss
insurance from an insurance carrier or through a TPA. These policies typically provide for risk retention
limitations both on a specific claim and aggregate claims basis, thus limiting the organization’s financial
risk. An important aspect of self-funded group health plans lies in the requirement that the employer
remain liable for funding of plan claims regardless of the purchase of Stop-loss insurance.
One of the factors limiting the ability of HCPS to evaluate this option is the lack of sufficient claims data
analysis. While reports are obtained from the insurance consultant, they are not at a sufficient level of
detail to support the necessary analysis to evaluate the feasibility of a self-funded program. If the district
proceeds with a self-funded program, more in-depth analysis will need to continue (by the consultant and
by district staff) since HCPS will be liable for claims. HCPS should direct its insurance consultant to evaluate
the potential cost savings of a self-funded program, including a comprehensive analysis of claims data.
Fiscal Impact
The fiscal impact cannot be determined at this time although savings are anticipated. The feasibility study
conducted by the district’s insurance consultant should include a cost-benefit analysis.
Recommendation 3-7: Implement changes to HCPS health insurance programs.
There are several changes recommended to the current health insurance program. These are listed below.
Some of the changes may require negotiation with the employee unions.
Reduce number of health insurance plans offered to employees. HCPS has one program – the
HDHP “high deductible” plan – that has only 48 employees participating in the program. Many of
the costs of administering the program are fixed and are not reduced because of lower program
participation. HCPS should consider eliminating this program and allowing employees to select
from one of the other programs.
Evaluate and communicate the effectiveness of the wellness program. HCPS uses the Vitality
Program offered by Humana as its wellness program. It is not effectively communicated
throughout the district, participation is not tracked, and the potential savings that could be
achieved is neither known nor calculated. Humana has contractually committed to give HCPS a
$4.5 million bonus annually if the district achieves 35 percent participation in the wellness
program. HCPS needs to be much more proactive in defining and communicating its wellness
program to its employees, and track the participation in order to be eligible for the bonus.
Implement patient advocate. A patient advocate is an employee or contractor who assists
employees and their dependents with health insurance matters. For example, patient advocates
can be used to find the best service provider and “shop” expensive medical services, such as an
MRI, to save money for both the employer and employee. The industry estimate for return on
investment in a patient advocate is 2 percent to 5 percent of health insurance costs which
translates into $2.7 million to $6.8 million annually. However, in a fully insured plan, the actual
110 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
savings would not be realized by HCPS. A comprehensive analysis would need to be completed to
determine savings based on the type of program and possible utilization by employees.
Eliminate payments to employees for opting out of the health insurance program. HCPS pays
$900 annually to those employees who do not select one of the five available insurance programs.
This is significantly less than what the district would pay if they did participate (minimum annual
employer cost on the default plan is $6,636). Employees opting out are required to spend the
amount on specific voluntary pre-tax insurance products or a Flexible Spending Account. If the
credit placed in the FSA is not used during the year that money is forfeited back to the district. In
FY 2015, 4,037 employees opted out, resulting in an additional cost to the district of $3.6 million
(4,037 x $900 = $3,633,300). Further, the district’s insurance consultant earns commissions on the
voluntary benefits, but not the FSA funds (See separate recommendation in this section regarding
consultant contracting.) HCPS should phase out payments to employees over the next three years.
These payments are not required in the 2016 employment contracts.
Convert payment mechanism to insurance consultant from a fixed fee plus a commission to a
fixed fee only. HCPS currently has consulting agreements with AON to provide insurance
consulting services to the district. The consultant model is an effective model for both finding the
best providers and for controlling costs, in that broker commission expenses are reduced or
eliminated. Under the existing contracts for voluntary benefits, AON is paid a percentage of the
total premium. Under the voluntary benefits contract, AON receives a 10 percent fee based on
the total premiums for dental and vision coverage. These commissions are paid out from
employee contributions and not incurred by HCPS. Through its next procurement of insurance
consulting services, HCPS should require the compensation to the insurance consultant to be
based on a fixed fee only. This will eliminate any real or perceived bias towards a particular
insurance carrier by the consultant.
Fiscal Impact
For several of the above strategies, estimates of cost savings or financial benefits are provided. To be
conservative, the lowest end of the cost savings range is applied. The following financial benefits can be
estimated at this time:
Wellness Program: $4,500,000 annually
Opt-out Payments: $3,633,300 annually
Total: $10,833,300 annually
111 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Savings are assumed to begin during the 2017-18 school year.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Implement changes to the
current HCPS health
insurance program.
$0 $0 $10,833,300 $10,833,300 $10,833,300 $10,833,300
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Recommendation 3-8: Conduct dependent eligibility audit.
The district’s health insurance program covers HCPS employees and eligible dependents. However, in the
past five years, no audits have been conducted to verify the eligibility of dependents participating in the
district’s health plans. Such audits would ensure that overpayments due to claims by ineligible claimants
are not being incurred. Ineligibility may occur due to employees not dropping their dependents when they
reach age, adding dependents when they are born, or changes in marital status. Based on industry
experience, a dependent eligibility audit could save the district up to 5 percent of health insurance costs,
or approximately $6.8 million. The district should conduct these audits every three to four years. Many
vendors bill for these audits based on a percentage of savings, so the district would not need to go out of
pocket for the cost of the audit.
Two approaches can be applied in conducting these audits, a negative confirmation and a positive
confirmation. These are explained below:
Negative confirmation – communications are sent to employees and updates are requested, or
confirmation that nothing has changed.
Positive confirmation – proof of eligibility is of all dependents is required.
The negative confirmation is less aggressive and should be employed in the initial audit since an audit has
not been conducted recently. In subsequent audits a positive confirmation can be applied.
112 Chapter 3 – Human Resource Management
Fiscal Impact
A 5 percent savings (of the $6.6 million premium paid currently for dependents), or $330,000 can be
achieved. It is assumed that the dependent eligibility audit will occur during 2016-17 and that savings will
be achieved beginning the following year. Companies providing these services typically charge a
percentage of the savings, so no out-of-pocket cost will need to be incurred by the district.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Conduct dependent
eligibility audit. $0 $0 $330,000 $330,000 $330,000 $330,000
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
113 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
Chapter 4 – Technology Management
Introduction
The use of technology has enabled school systems to enhance operational, instructional, and business
efficiency and effectiveness. Technological advances in hardware and software, combined with
increasingly affordable pricing, allows school systems of all sizes to use information systems to perform
vital functions. An effective information system provides many benefits, including more efficient
operations through speed of processing, increased management information and analysis to support
decision making, the ability to more seamlessly integrate programs, and provide highly efficient
communications systems. The importance of and subsequently the investment in technology is increasing
with technologies such as cloud computing, wireless, mobile, and smart devices.
In Hillsborough County Public Schools (HCPS) the Information Technology (IT) Department serves the
district’s instructional as well as operational technology needs. The Department is managed by the
General Manager of IT and this position reports to the Chief of Staff. IT has the following teams to support
the district.
IT Compliance – Provides oversight for all aspects of compliance within the Department
IT Security & Privacy – Provides accountability and governance over the district’s IT security and
privacy
IT Architecture & Integration – Designs IT systems architecture while ensuring proper alignment
with the district’s operational and business strategy
IT Business Solutions – Maintains and supports the district’s core and line-of-business
applications
IT Infrastructure & Shared Services – Maintains and supports the district’s IT operations including
the responsibilities of Customer Service and Support and the Data Center
IT Instructional Technology – Coordinates with Curriculum and Instruction and the district’s
schools
IT Web Applications & Data Analytics – Develops, administers, and supports the technologies
that enable data-driven decision-making within the district
The Department serves more than 200,000 students in 250 schools. It supports more than 14,000
classroom instructional staff and overall a staff of 26,000 with approximately 190 IT Department
employees.
114 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
Figure 4.1 shows the IT Department’s general fund expenditures from 2011-12 thru 2015-16. The
technology expenditures include the following budget sites:
Assessment and Accountability
Chief Information and Technology Officer
Technology Call Center
Information Services
Technology Repair
Closed Circuit TV and Local Area Network
Figure 4.1. IT General Fund Expenditures (in $ millions), 2011-12 through 2015-16
Source: HCPS five-year staffing and expenditure history with site codes 9359 Chief Info &Technology Officer, 9314
Assessment & accountability, 9367 Technology call center, 9750 Information services, 9837 Technology repair, and
9841 CCTV/LAN
Table Note: 2015-16 expenditures are unaudited
The biggest increase was from $21.2 million to $25.7 million in 2014-15.The increase in 2014-15 was
primarily due to the following:
A $1.6 million increase for computers and devices purchases with State Digital Classroom Plan
funds
Approximately $1.4 million spent on student assessment software and platform
Increased staffing expenditures based on technology assessment recommendations made in a
consultant report
Figure 4.2 shows technology expenditures as a percentage of overall district general fund expenditures
over the past five years.
$23.88
$21.40 $21.23
$25.77$24.14
$0.00
$5.00
$10.00
$15.00
$20.00
$25.00
$30.00
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
Mill
ion
s
115 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
Figure 4.2. IT Department Expenditures as a Percentage of Overall Expenditures, 2011-12 – 2015-16
Source: HCPS five-year staffing and expenditure history with site codes 9359 Chief Info &Technology Officer, 9314
Assessment & accountability, 9367 Technology call center, 9750 Information services, 9837 Technology repair, and
9841 CCTV/LAN
Table Note: 2015-16 expenditures are unaudited
One benchmark available for comparison of technology expenditures as a percent of overall expenditure
is the Council of Great City Schools (CGCS), a national organization representing the needs of large, urban
public schools. The member school systems have student enrollments ranging from 35,000 to 700,000
students. A 2015 CGCS report, which used data from the 2013-14 school year (the most recent available)
included key performance measures and the results from 61 member school systems in various areas,
including information technology. According to that report school system technology expenditures as a
percentage of overall expenditures ranged from 0.5 percent to 6.8 percent of the operating budget with
a median measure of 1.7 percent. The HCPS level of 1.4 percent ranks in the lowest quartile of the results.
This shows that HCPS spends less on technology than the average urban school district.
In order to establish better transparency and to improve overall IT operations and security, the HCPS IT
Department was subjected to an independent assessment by an outside technology consulting firm –
Sunera. This assessment was conducted in 2013 and resulted in 126 recommendations, covering all major
technology areas. These areas included IT Governance, Application and Infrastructure, Security, and
Operations and Continuity.
Since a thorough assessment was already conducted, the review team did not want to replicate this work
but rather verify the status of the Sunera report recommendations. In order to gather information and
determine the status of each recommendation, the review team reviewed documents, interviewed key
staff members, and made on-site observations to obtain evidence related to implementation of each
recommendation. In addition to determining the status of each recommendation, the review team
highlighted the key recommendations from this report that are key to the Department’s future success.
1.66%
1.47%1.36%
1.53%1.44%
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
116 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
The major areas covered by the Sunera report were:
IT Governance – includes IT alignment, resource management, IT value delivery, risk
management, and performance measurement.
IT Application and Infrastructure – includes application portfolio analysis, application and
infrastructure performance sustainability and availability, change management, and system
development life cycle.
IT Security – includes network, server, application, data and physical security, user administration,
anti-virus, threat, vulnerability and password management, security awareness, and data disposal
and destruction sections.
IT Operations and Continuity – encompasses system and data backups, incident and problem
management, audit logging, incident response, disaster recovery, and IT asset management areas.
The 2013 Sunera report contains 126 findings and recommendations. The original report assigned high,
medium, and low priorities to each recommendation. HCPS has made progress on many of the
recommendations, but still has much work to do. Further, some of the recommendations from the Sunera
report are sound in principle but may not be feasible considering the fiscal impact of implementation and
HCPS’ current budget situation. These recommendations include implementing a district wide virtual
desktop infrastructure and a dedicated quality assurance function for data security and development.
Figure 4.3 presents the priorities and the review team’s assessment of implementation status of all 126
recommendations as of April 2016. It is important to note that the Sunera recommendations were
scheduled for a three phased implementation approach starting in fiscal year (FY) 2014-15
117 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
Figure 4.3. Recommendation Implementation Progress by Priority
Source: Sunera IT assessment Report, December 2013; Gibson Consulting Group, Inc., April 2016
Figure 4.3 shows that the Department has completed 48 percent of the recommendations from the
Sunera report while actively working on 34 percent. Approximately 18 percent of the recommendations
have not been acted on. While the majority of recommendations have been implemented or are in
process, there remains a significant amount of work ahead to fully implement the recommendations from
this report.
Based on the review team’s assessment, there are several key recommendations from the Sunera report
that are critical to IT’s long-term success. These recommendations and their status are discussed briefly
below:
The district has implemented several high priority recommendations including establishing
various IT governance councils, reorganizing the IT department, and developing an educational
data warehouse to establish a single accessible and highly available data source to store and link
student and employee data.
There are several high priority recommendations that the Department is in the process of
implementing. Perhaps the most important is adopting an IT service model which embraces
118 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
commercially available software or software as a service (SaaS) for core district systems. The
district has developed customized software in-house that resides on aging technology platforms.
In order to support aging software and platforms, the Department must utilize staff with skillsets
that are increasingly difficult to find. Additionally, the Department cannot easily leverage staff
knowledge in other more current software and platforms. The Department is working to replace
in-house aging systems with commercially available software.
Another key recommendation that is in process is to create a formal project management office
(PMO).The district hired one project coordinator position under this function and selected project
portfolio management software to manage projects. Considering the size and the number of
projects for the district, the Department is planning to add more staff and resources to this
function.
Other key recommendations in process include:
Establishing and publishing a formal IT service catalog
Developing a formal change management process
Establishing Key Performance Indicators (KPI) , scorecards, and dashboards to evaluate
the performance of IT at a strategic and tactical level
One important recommendation that the Department has acted on is to communicate internal
Service Level Agreements (SLA) to departments and staff.
Since each organizational unit within IT was responsible for implementation of recommendations
applicable to their respective area, there was not a single source of up-to-date information about the
status of each recommendation during this review. The review team recommends that the IT Department
create a project and assign a project manager or single contact within the IT Department responsible for
updating the status of all recommendations made in the Sunera report and report back to an IT steering
committee and key stakeholders at least quarterly.
The remainder of this report provides more information on the status of all recommendations made in
the Sunera report. The report numbered the recommendations based on phase, priority, and major area.
Since the suggested implementation phase dates have passed, the review team grouped the
recommendations based on major area. As a result, the recommendation numbers in the remainder of
this report are not sequential.
IT Strategy and Governance
There are total of 35 recommendations made in the Sunera report regarding the IT governance area. Out
of these 35 recommendations 26 were identified as high, eight medium and one low priority. The review
team’s observations and documents show that the district has completed 16 of the recommendations.
While 13 recommendations are in progress, the work has not started on six recommendations. Table B.1
119 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
in Appendix B lists all recommendations made in the IT Strategy and Governance area and provides the
assigned priority, status at the time of this review, and the district’s response and timeline for completion
of each recommendation.
The Sunera report grouped IT governance recommendations in the following sections:
IT Alignment
IT Resource Management
IT Value Delivery
IT Staffing and Skill Sets
IT Performance Measurement
IT Risk Management
Each is discussed in more detail below.
IT Alignment
The HCPS IT Department made progress in this area. Not only did the IT Department align their IT strategy
and plans with district strategic goals but also established various councils charged with increasing
transparency, communication, and accountability among department divisions and IT stakeholders. The
district should continue to fill the empty council seats and communicate the value and the function of
these councils to participants outside the IT Department participants.
The Sunera report found IT operations to be deficient in several areas, and as a result it recommended
that the district outsource its core systems (i.e., Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)), using “Software as
a Service” model. The Department has adopted the service model recommendation with refinements and
is in the process of implementing it. They are working with their current ERP systems vendor, Infor, to
eliminate system customizations so the Department can upgrade the system and possibly have the vendor
host the application for them. The Department bid out the bulk student scheduler application and is
considering a hosted solution for the application as well.
One of the key high priority recommendations made in the Sunera report was establishing, defining, and
publishing a formal IT service catalog. The district has created a draft IT service catalog and is planning to
fully implement this recommendation in the 2016-17 school year. This is a high priority recommendation
and the resulting value it will generate will go beyond IT and benefit the HCPS community as a whole. The
IT service catalog should include not only services that IT provides but also tools, applications, and
software that the district has. The service catalog should be published such that users can access the
services and tools by category or by user type. For example, a student or a teacher can browse the IT
service catalog and discover the services and tools that the district’s IT Department offers to them (e.g.,
wireless device support, available instructional technology, etc.).
120 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
IT Resource Management
Based on the recommendations from the Sunera review, the district has reorganized the IT Department,
defined pay scales, and adjusted departmental salaries. The Department also started developing and
implementing an internal IT training program for its staff employees.
As part of the districtwide new budgeting process initiative, the IT Department was developing its budget
to ensure that departmental expenditures are aligned with the HCPS’ overall strategy.
The review recommended a formal IT resources planning process for the Department so that it transforms
itself from a reactionary/“putting out fires” mode to a more proactive mode. The key components of an
IT resource planning process include project portfolio, technology infrastructure, operational support, and
maintenance and staffing. These components should drive the IT resource planning process. At the time
of this review, the Department had not started implementing this recommendation. Adequate staffing of
the PMO office is needed to fully implement this recommendation as the Department has one project
coordinator.
The Sunera report indicated that the Department has an aging workforce and it is critical that they develop
succession plans in order to retain skillsets, competencies, and capabilities within the organization. While
evidence shows that the Department is working to rectify this. Switching and using applications that are
not heavily customized, using hosted application solutions, and the consolidation of technology platforms
will make sustainable succession planning possible for the Department.
One recommendation that the district has not started in IT resource management is re-evaluating the re-
adjustment of the balance allocation between instructional and operational IT funds. The Sunera report
found that the funds for instructional IT is proportionally larger than operational IT. The operational IT
function provides infrastructure that is the foundation for the successful implementation of instructional
technology. By allocating appropriate funds to operational IT, the district will be able to support
technologies like cloud based computing, personalized learning environments, and robust network
bandwidth for secure digital curriculum. In return, this will make instructional technology more effective
and help improve academic success for students.
IT Value Delivery
IT Value delivery is one of the IT governance focus areas that looks at the values and benefits that IT is
delivering to the district. Below are the statuses of the Sunera report recommendations regarding this
area.
The district changed the title, function, and the staff of the previous business process improvement
function which was one of the recommendations of the review.
The Sunera review made several high priority recommendations regarding portfolio project management.
The review team also views this as a critical and high priority need for the district. The district has created
a project management office group in the organizational structure under the IT Department; however the
121 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
district has not filled positions for this group with the exception of one project coordinator position. As
the Sunera review indicated, most IT projects are managed by individual IT divisions without following a
standard portfolio project management methodology which makes managing, prioritizing, and assigning
resources to projects that span across multiple division and departments very difficult. The newly created
project coordinator position is working on developing a formalized portfolio project management
approach and prioritizing all current projects but efforts are in the early stages and far from complete.
Through the newly created IT Governance councils, creating, changing, prioritizing, and evaluating IT
projects would bring visibility and ownership of these projects beyond IT to all aspects of the district. The
district should assign the necessary resources to implement all portfolio project management related
recommendations in the Sunera review. These recommendations are critical to the success of HCPS
especially considering the district is looking at a major enterprise resources planning system upgrade or
implementation in the near future.
The Sunera review recommended that the IT Department define and communicate formal Service Level
Agreements (SLAs) for all its services to district staff. The Department has not started implementing this
recommendation. This should also be a critical component of the IT service catalog and IT’s key
performance indicator to measure the performance of the Department. While developing SLA’s, each
division within the IT Department should work with its customers in the district so the SLA is a
collaborative effort of IT divisions and their customers. However, it is important to consider the available
resources the IT division has before developing and committing to an SLA.
IT Staffing and Skill Sets
While the Department made changes to the employee job descriptions to accurately reflect job
requirements and qualifications, they have not started the implementation of the recommendation
regarding creating and using IT position-specific performance evaluation forms to enhance the employee
evaluation process in the Department. The IT Department should work with the Human Resources
Department to create and implement department-specific employee evaluation forms.
The Department has not started implementing the recommendation regarding adopting a time
tracking/portfolio management application to account for IT personnel utilization. This recommendation
will be an important component of the formal portfolio project management effort. It will provide critical
data on who in the IT Department is spending how much time on which project.
The Department is making various levels of progress on the remaining recommendations in IT staffing and
skill sets. All IT-related purchases have started to be reviewed by the Instructional IT and Architectural
Review councils.34 The Department is using staffing companies to fulfill hard to find IT positions with a
“contract to hire” method with a favorable financial impact to the district. As the Department is utilizing
all available methods such as training, transitioning, and outsourcing for IT personnel needs, this is an
ongoing process for the Department. Lastly, the recommendation regarding re-distributing and re-
34 Though not directly related to staffing and skill sets, this recommendation appeared in this category in the Sunera report.
122 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
purposing full-time equivalents in the IT Department will be achieved when and if the district successfully
eliminates various aging technology platforms, which is discussed in the “IT Alignment” section of this
chapter.
IT Performance Measurement
The Sunera review report recommended establishing formal Key Performance Indicators (KPIs),
scorecards, and dashboards to evaluate the performance of the Department from a strategic and tactical
level. The Department has been tracking certain KPI’s that are part of the annual data the district reports
to the Council of Great City Schools (CGCS). Although these KPI’s are typical IT industry KPI’s, they are not
specific to the HCPS IT Department’s operations or district strategic goals. The district is in the process of
developing KPIs that are tied to specific strategic objectives of its departments. This effort, combined with
those for reporting to the CGCS will generate KPIs, scorecards, and dashboards that will help the
Department measure and improve its performance. Finally HCPS should communicate these KPIs,
scorecards, and dashboards to other HCPS departments for increased transparency.
IT Risk Management
The Department has developed a computer security incident response plan which includes
legal/regulatory requirements to define and document data breach and communication procedures.
In addition to the district’s information security-related policies, the Department has developed,
documented, and distributed procedures regarding information security which was included as a
recommendation in the previous review.
The Department has created a security audit checklist which includes information that all new and re-
negotiated information systems and security service related contracts will have explicitly defined SLAs and
“a right to audit “clause.
The last recommendation in this section was for the district to conduct an enterprise–wide IT risk
assessment an annual basis. Based on interviews with departmental staff, they are reviewing and planning
the necessary resources to be able to conduct an assessment during the 2016-17 school year.
IT Application and Infrastructure
The Sunera review of IT application and infrastructure resulted in 26 recommendations. Ten were
classified as high priority recommendations, 14 were medium priority, and two were considered low
priority. The current review team concluded that the district has fully implemented 13 recommendations
while nine remain in progress. The district is either still considering whether or not they will implement
and/or has not started work on the remaining four recommendations in this area.
Table B.2 in Appendix B lists all recommendations made in the IT application and infrastructure area and
provides the assigned priority, status at the time of this review, and the district’s response and timeline
for completion of each recommendation.
123 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
The report grouped IT application and infrastructure recommendations into the following sections:
Application Portfolio Analysis
Application and Infrastructure Performance
Change Management and Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC)
Each is discussed in more detail below.
Application Portfolio Analysis
The Sunera report recommended that the district develop and implement an application portfolio
management (APM) program and restructure the current application portfolio to better align with the
district’s strategic vision and service model. The district indicated that the newly formed governance
councils are reviewing these recommendations and developing an action plan for 2016-17. The decision
will be affected by the direction and steps the district and the Department take regarding the IT service
model and the technology platforms they support.
As discussed previously in the IT governance area regarding the IT service model, the Department is
working on converting on-premise applications and their technology platforms to vendor hosted or
“software as a service” solutions, as suggested in the Sunera report.
The report also recommended adopting a virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) in conjunction with bring
your own device (BYOD) initiatives to provide more devices to the hands of HCPS students and staff. The
district completed a VDI proof of concept project and concluded that a VDI solution is not a cost effective
solution considering the low cost of devices that can be purchased with educational discounts. The
Department should continue to research alternative ways to get more devices into the hands of students
in cost effective ways as changes in this technology are happening rapidly. The report did not include a
fiscal impact related to this recommendation so it is not possible to compare the IT Department’s
conclusion with Sunera’s recommendation in terms of cost.
Regardless of how HCPS acquires devices for its students, whether through VDI, BYOD, or district
purchased devices, it will involve setting a robust secure wireless technical infrastructure for the entire
district and extensive teacher training on delivering curriculum in a device agnostic environment. HCPS is
making progress in this regard but does not have a comprehensive districtwide project with milestones,
deliverables, and dates to indicate when this initiative will be complete. The Department should work with
other involved departments, through councils, to define and create a detailed project plan to provide
HCPS’ students greater access to devices that they can use anytime and anywhere.
Application and Infrastructure Performance
The Sunera report recommended that the data center cabling be reorganized. Instead of reorganizing the
existing data center’s cables, HCPS moved to a new data center where cables are organized. The district
also procured and implemented a secondary core switch to reduce the load on the current core switch
and to provide redundancy.
124 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
The report also recommended that HCPS modernize or replace the district’s existing email system, First
Class, due to issues with its mobile platform operating system. The district moved the First Class email
application from one that was in-house to a managed cloud service provider’s under the premise that it
will be backed up and maintained with redundancies. The district should define the email application
requirements, including operation system and neutral mobile access, and evaluate the application that
best fits their need in the future.
The Department is evaluating the utilization and performance of the mainframe to determine capacity
and processing requirements as the Sunera report recommended. The IT Department is looking for ways
to eliminate applications or functionalities that the mainframe provides and move to a cost effective cloud
based or on-premise server based solutions. At the time of the current review, the Department was in the
process of evaluating student bulk scheduling cloud and on-premise server based software solutions to
reduce the need for the district’s mainframe.
One of the high priority recommendations made in the report was to establish a single, authoritative,
accessible, highly available data source to store and link student and employee data. The district is
addressing this recommendation with their educational data warehouse staffed with dedicated staff and
outside consultants. The district’s educational data warehouse currently operational but like all other data
warehouse projects, it will never be complete as more data becomes available and user data needs
change, the data warehouse project grows and evolves.
HCPS indicated that they are planning to implement the recommendation related to allocating secondary
network interface cards (NICs) on servers to a backup or storage network during fiscal year 2017-18. The
Department is in the process of implementing a single, authoritative authentication source (e.g., LDAP)
which leverages the Active Directory domain to authenticate users and redesign and readdress remote
site networks in a more scalable, secure fashion as the report recommendation indicated. The Department
has fiscal year 2016-17 as a target to complete the implementation of this recommendation.
Change Management and Systems Development Life Cycle (SDLC)
The Department has implemented the following recommendations in the section of change management
and SDLC:
A formal process that ensures all changes are tested in a non-production environment.
A formal process that ensures application developers do not have administrative access to
production code environments.
A formal process that ensures all application code changes are reviewed using a
manual/automated process prior to deployment to production.
Develop a formal application developer training program to ensure all developers are trained in
secure coding techniques at least annually.
Formalize and require Quality Assurance (QA) and User Acceptance Testing (UAT) processes for
all applicable changes in development activities.
Develop a standardized Request for Change (RFC) form.
125 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
Consider implementing a QA/UAT automated testing tool.
While application developer training will be an ongoing activity for the Department, the other
recommendation processes are documented and underway.
The review team saw evidence during this review that the Department is in the process of developing a
formal enterprise–wide change management and system development life cycle (SDLC) process. They
developed these in the Web Development and Analytics and the Human Resources and Business System
areas of the IT Department. The Department estimated that they will be able complete developing these
processes in the remaining areas in 2016-17.
Although the Department assigned an estimated timeline on each of the following recommendations, at
the time of this review, implementation had not begun.
Develop a Change Approval Board (CAB) (FY 16-17).
Implement an "independent verification and validation" process into the SDLC for large IT projects
(FY 16-17).
Implement a formal process to ensure that production data is expunged, masked, or de-identified
prior to use into a non-production (e.g., development of testing) environment (FY 17-18).
Evaluate alternative project portfolio and change management solutions to replace MantisBT (FY
17-18).
The only high priority recommendation in this group was to develop a change approval board. The
Department should implement this recommendation first as it is essential for implementing the other
change management related recommendations.
IT Security
There were 44 recommendations made in the Sunera report related to IT security. Of the 44
recommendations made, 8 were classified as high priority, 18 as medium priority, and 18 as low priority.
Observations made and documents reviewed during the current review indicate that the district has
completed implementation of 23 recommendations. While 13 recommendations are in progress,
implementation has not started on eight recommendations though the Department is planning to do so.
Table B.3 in Appendix B lists all recommendations made in the IT security area and provides the assigned
priority, status at the time of this review, and the district’s response and timeline for completion of each
recommendation.
126 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
The report grouped IT security recommendations into the following sections:
Network Security
Information systems and server security
Application security
Data security and administration
User administration
Password management
Threat and vulnerability management
Anti-virus management
Security awareness
Physical and environmental security
Each is discussed in more detail below.
Network Security
The Department has completed implementing the following network security related recommendations
made in the Sunera report.
Configure all network devices to use secure, remote administration protocols.
Update configuration guides and standards to ensure that Cisco network devices use "level 5"
encryption for storage of local authentication credentials.
Re-configure the TippingPoint IPS system to inspect traffic into and out of the least trusted
network security zones.
Develop a high-level, current, and comprehensive network diagram that accurately depicts all
segments of the District's network.
Review and maintain network diagrams to ensure they accurately reflect the current state of the
network.
Develop a formal process that ensures all firewall rule set changes are approved, tested, and
documented.
Assess firewall configurations for approved ports, protocols, and services at least semi-annually.
Develop and publish a formal wireless policy that defines authentication and encryption
requirements.
Remove legacy network devices from the environment.
Update configuration guides and standards to require strong cryptography and authentication for
all remote administration services.
127 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
IT Department staff should continue to review and update those recommendation that require ongoing
support. The Department is in the process of implementing the following recommendations and expects
to have implementation completed during the 2016-17 school year:
Implement a secure wireless network in accordance with the prospective wireless policy.
Develop and implement procedures for identifying and removing rogue wireless networks within
the District's facilities on a routine basis (e.g., quarterly).
Develop and maintain configuration standards for network devices that define required security
parameters.
Implement a formalized program to ensure that firewall and router rule sets are reviewed on a
routine basis (e.g., semi-annually) to investigate and restrict/remove overly permissive and
extraneous rules.
The Department has not begun implementation of the recommendation related to deploying a Central
Authorization and Authentication Cache (e.g., RADIUS, TACACS) Server to integrate with a central LDAP
authentication system. The Department is scheduled to complete this recommendation in the 2017-18
school year.
Information Systems and Server Security
HCPS implemented a recommendation to improve network security by ensuring strong cryptography and
authentication was utilized in remote administration services.
In order to address security concerns regarding site-based domain controllers, the Sunera report gave the
Department two alternative solutions to implement: (1) Either replace the site-based domain controllers
with read-only domain controllers or (2) implement a virtual desktop infrastructure solution. While during
this review the IT Department indicated they are reviewing these options, the Department does not
believe they have the necessary funding to implement either solution in the near term. The district should
allocate funds to implement this recommendation in the 2016-17 school year.
Although the Department indicated that they are planning to implement the recommendation to formally
document and periodically review (e.g., annually) minimum security baselines for each major operating
system type in 2016-17 fiscal year, implementation had not started at the time of this review. This is high
priority recommendation that the Department should address no later than 2016-17.
Application Security
Use and enforcement of strong cryptographic ciphers (e.g., 128 bits or greater) on public web servers was
a Sunera report recommendation for increased application security. The Department is in the final phase
of testing for full implementation of this recommendation.
128 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
Sunera also recommended that the Department develop and implement a formal application scanning
program that requires all internally hosted applications to be scanned on a regular basis (e.g., quarterly)
and prior to deployment into the production environment for possible security related vulnerabilities. The
Department is planning on implementing this recommendation during 2016-17 work has not started yet.
The application developer security training recommendation made in the IT Application and Infrastructure
section of this chapter will help to enhance application security for the district.
Data Security and Administration
The Department is working on implementing the following recommendations related to data security and
administration. These recommendations are scheduled to be completed by the end of 2016-17.
Augment configuration standards to require that sensitive data at rest is encrypted with strong
cryptography.
Restrict local and domain administrator account access on critical databases to only respective
DBAs.
Evaluate current systems to determine what datasets should be encrypted at rest and ensure that
strong cryptography (128 bits or greater) is enforced.
Enforce full disk encryption on laptop computers issued to departments that interact with
sensitive data (e.g., PII, HIPAA).
At the time of this review, the Department had not begun implementation of the following
recommendations:
Document database security configuration baselines.
Review all instances to ensure user credentials are encrypted with 128 bit encryption or greater
during transmission.
Augment database configuration standards to require that user’s credentials be encrypted with
128 bit or greater encryption during transmission.
Data security and administration is a growing concern for school districts nationwide with growing usage
of cloud based services for data-related activities. Heightened awareness and concern by the public –
specifically students and their families – regarding safe keeping of confidential and sensitive data has also
contributed to the increased importance of data security. The Department should expeditiously
implement all of the remaining recommendations regardless of the assigned priority.
129 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
User Administration
The Department has implemented the following recommendations related to user administration made
in the Sunera report.
Implement a formally documented process for requesting, logging, and approving user access
rights.
Assign user and service accounts to groups based on their respective roles (i.e., RBAC).
Implement a formal process that requires system owners to conduct periodic (e.g., quarterly) user
access reviews to identify excessive/ inappropriate access, inactive accounts and terminated
users.
The following recommendation is in the early stages of and scheduled to be completed by the end of
2016-17.
Ensure that all systems which must be accessed from the internet are positioned within a DMZ,
or less trusted network.
The Department is reviewing the recommendation to conduct a comprehensive review of all local,
domain, enterprise, and schema administrator accounts within the Windows environment to determine
its feasibility. This recommendation will make ensure that all unnecessary administrative accounts are
disabled or removed. The Department is planning on implementing this recommendation during the 2016-
17 school year.
Password Management
The IT Department has completed the recommendation to enforce the LAN Manager Authentication level
policy and require the use of NTLMv2 for the transmission of Windows passwords. The Department
indicated that they are identifying and removing all shared administrative accounts on critical systems as
the recommendation suggested. This and the recommendation to review and update of all critical
systems' password parameters to ensure that configurations are in-line with industry best practices are
now part of the Department’s ongoing password management activities.
Threat and Vulnerability Management
The Department has completely implemented all recommendations related to threat and vulnerability
management. Below is the list of recommendations made related to this area:
Implement a formal vulnerability management program.
Develop, document, and implement a formalized security patch program.
Execute internal and external vulnerability scans on a routine basis (e.g., quarterly).
Execute internal and external penetration testing on a routine basis (e.g., annually).
130 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
Anti-virus Management
The Sunera report included three recommendations related to anti-virus management including:
Centralize the deployment, configuration, and administration of all anti-virus management into a
single department /function.
Configure the Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP) application to retain relevant anti-virus logs
for at least 365 days, with a minimum of 90 days readily available for review.
Integrate Mac OS based systems into the current SEP anti-virus system to provide central
management of anti-virus clients on Mac OS based systems.
The Department has implemented all three recommendations.
Security Awareness
Based on the Sunera report recommendation, the Department has implemented a formal security
awareness training program and indicated that this training program will be an ongoing activity
throughout the school year.
Physical and Environmental Security
According to the Department, the recommendation to adjust ventilation within the primary data center
to ensure that air temperature and humidity is consistently distributed throughout the raised floor space,
is addressed with HCPS’ move to a new data center with adequate ventilation capability.
IT Operations and Continuity
The review of IT operations and continuity by Sunera resulted in 21 recommendations. Two
recommendations were assigned a high priority, 12 were considered medium priority, and seven were
classified as low priority. During the current review, it was concluded that while the district has
implemented eight recommendations, eight recommendations are in progress, and the district is either
still considering whether or not they will implement and/or has not started work on the remaining five
recommendations in this area.
Table B.4 in Appendix B lists all recommendations made in the IT operations and continuity area and
provides the assigned priority, status at the time of this review, and the district’s response and timeline
for completion of each recommendation.
The report grouped IT Operations and continuity recommendations in the following sections:
System and data backups
Incident and problem management
Audit logging
131 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
Incident response
Disaster recovery
IT asset management
Each is discussed in more detail below.
System and Data Backups
The IT Department has implemented the recommendations regarding regular back-ups of the district’s
email system and performing periodic restores from tape for open systems (e.g., AIX and Linux).
The HCPS IT Department is in the process of implementing the recommendation to evaluate third-party
vendor contracting opportunities to maintain secure off-site storage of backup tapes in a location that is
at a sufficient distance (e.g., 50 miles) from district facilities.
The Department has not started implementing the following system and data backup recommendations:
Evaluate the current backup strategy to assess the legal and business requirements pertaining to
the retention of data as well as the data recovery objectives of the organization.
Identify and encrypt all sensitive backup media.
Both recommendations have a target completion timeline of 2016-17.
Incident and Problem Management
Implementation of the recommendation for a centrally located dashboard that projects an accurate
maintenance schedule for major systems, including a categorization of all outages with slight refinement,
has been completed. The maintenance information is published and discussed in weekly IT staff meeting.
The Department has also started to monitor customer and call center performance indicators on a regular
basis
In an ongoing effort, the Department is working on expanding the utilization and adoption of Symantec
Service for service request tracking, as well as change management tracking and documentation.
Audit Logging
The Department started configuring audit logging for the applications, hardware, data storage, and
network devices associated with critical/sensitive data. The Department indicated that this is an ongoing
process for their divisions.
The Department is evaluating vendors and working on securing funding to acquire and implement a secure
and centralized log collection appliance.
132 Chapter 4 – Technology Management
The key recommendation made related to audit logging was to develop a program to ensure that audit
logs are reviewed/monitored on a daily basis. The Department has not started to implement this
recommendation but are planning to do so during 2016-17.
Incident Response
The recommendation to develop a computer incident plan and perform annual testing of the plan has
been implemented by the Department as part of the security incident plan.
Disaster Recovery
While the Department is working to implement several disaster recovery related recommendations, such
as evaluating options for disaster recovery sites and augmenting current disaster recovery documents to
include detailed recovery procedures for all critical systems, the disaster recovery recommendations
related to the district’s mainframe system are connected to which IT service model the district chooses
(discussed previously in this chapter) and how long the district will continue to use a mainframe as a
mission critical platform.
The Department indicated that they have conducted a formal enterprise wide business impact analysis
for disaster recovery and conduct functional tests of the disaster recovery plans on an annual basis
IT Asset Management
The Department has adopted the recommendation to use Symantec Altiris as a centralized system to
track, monitor, and assess the district’s IT assets portfolio. The Department is liaising with other district
departments such as fixed assets determine the resources needed to implement the recommendation
related to tracking assets valued under $750. The review team agrees that it may be difficult to predict
the amount of resources needed to implement this recommendation, especially given the size of the
district; therefore a detailed cost analysis should be conducted before deciding whether to implement
this recommendation.
133 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Introduction
The Hillsborough County Public Schools’ (HCPS and/or the District) Transportation Department (the
Department) is responsible for home-to-school transportation for general education students and special
needs students in Hillsborough County. The Department is also responsible for student transportation for
summer programs, school activities, educational field trips, and extracurricular activity trips for all schools.
Additionally, the Department is responsible for vehicle maintenance for the fleet of school buses and the
for the district’s general services vehicles.
This chapter provides seven recommendations in the areas and transportation employee management,
routing and scheduling, rider eligibility and fleet management. Most of the information and
recommendations contained in this chapter were presented in the Phase I report in spring 2016. This
Phase II report includes additional background information, supplemental information on
recommendations made in Phase I, and presents an additional recommendation.
The transportation function at HCPS is a massive operation with an annual budget of $70 million. The
District operates a fleet of 1,409 buses and 980 driver route assignments each day. In 2015-16, HCPS
provided home-to-school transportation for 86,402 students each day, or approximately 41 percent of
the student population.
The Florida Department of Education (DOE) funding formula for student transportation provides funds to
school districts in Florida based on each district’s pro-rata, or proportional, share of eligible transported
students. The formula includes an additional weight for students with disabilities requiring specialized
transportation services. In addition to students transported by public school buses, the funding formula
includes students transported to and from school on public transit. Adjustments to each district’s share
of state transportation funds are made for cost of living differences, the percentage of population residing
outside urban centers, and efficiency as defined by the average number of students transported per day,
per bus.
Each district determines the number of eligible transported students by recording the full-time-equivalent
(FTE) students transported on specific “count” days in each of four periods (July, September, February,
and June). HCPS earned state funding of $34,121,39935 in 2014-15 based on the previous years’ FTE
counts. State funds allocated to HCPS in 2014-15 represented 49 percent of actual HCPS operating
expenditures for student transportation. HCPS covered the remaining $35,836,236 (51 percent) in
expenditures primarily from the district’s General Fund.
35 FLDOE 2014-2015 Funding for Florida School Districts: Statistical Report.
http://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/5423/urlt/Fefpdist.pdf
134 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
HCPS Transportation Spending
Over the past five years, transportation expenditures dropped, then increased starting in 2013-14. Over a
five-year period, expenditures have increased by 6 percent, or approximately 1.5 percent per year. Figure
5.1 presents a five-year spending history for the transportation function. These expenditures include
school bus transportation as well as vehicle maintenance for the district’s general service vehicles (white
fleet).
Figure 5.1. HCPS Transportation Function Operating Expenditures, General Fund, 2010-11 through
2014-15 (in $ millions)
Source: HCPS Five-Year Expenditure History, Function 7800 (Transportation Services)
Table Note: While 2015-16 unaudited data were made available, reported expenditures were significantly lower
than the prior year and could not be satisfactorily explained. Accordingly, 2014-15 expenditure data is the most
recent data used throughout this chapter.
In 2014-15, the total operating expenditures for the HCPS Transportation Department – excluding vehicle
maintenance for the white fleet – were $69,957,63536. These expenditures include $44 million for
operations, $22 million for school bus maintenance including fuel, and $3.8 million administration. In
addition, the Transportation Department incurred $10.8 million in capital costs, the majority of which was
for school buses. Table 5.1 presents a summary of HCPS Transportation Department operating and capital
expenditures for 2014-15.
36 Excludes Site Code 9799 Vehicle Maintenance for the white fleet
$69.3$67.1 $65.5
$68.5
$73.5
$0.0
$10.0
$20.0
$30.0
$40.0
$50.0
$60.0
$70.0
$80.0
2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
135 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Table 5.1. HCPS Transportation Department Expenditures, 2014-15
Budget Category Amount Percent
Operations $44,047,917 54.5%
Maintenance (including fuel) $22,075,664 27.4%
Subtotal – Variable operating expenses $66,123,581 81.9%
Administration $3,834,054 4.7%
Total Operations and Capital Expenditures $80,760,490 100.0%
Bus vehicle capital $10,398,068 12.9%
All other capital $404,787 0.5%
Total Operations $69,957,635 86.6%
Total Capital $10,802,855 13.4%
Source: HCPS expenditure data, 2014-15
The district’s cost efficiency in transportation is better than most urban school systems in the U.S. Based
on the Council of Great City Schools (CGCS) most recent performance benchmark survey, HCPS ranks in
the lower (more efficient) quartile for cost per mile and cost per rider. HCPS also ranks in the highest (best)
quartile for daily runs per bus, indicating a productive use of the fleet. However, in the comparing the
average age of the bus fleet, HCPS is in the highest (lowest performing) quartile. The district has taken
steps since 2013-14 to replace buses (see capital expenditures above). Table 5.2 compares HCPS to
selected CGCS median measures for 2013-14, the most recent data available.
Table 5.2. Comparison of HCPS Performance Measures to CGCS, 2013-14
Budget Category HCPS CGCS Median
Cost per Mile $3.20 $5.31
Cost per Rider $606 $1,077
Daily Runs per Bus 5.07 4.36
Average Age of Bus Fleet 12.7 years 9.0 years
Source: Managing for Results in America’s Great City Schools, Council of Great City Schools, October 2015
Transportation Department Organization
The HCPS General Manager for Transportation is responsible for a staff of approximately 1,650 (filled and
vacant positions) who work in five functional areas: operations, administration, routing and planning,
training and safety, and vehicle maintenance (fleet management). Figure 5.2 is an illustration of the
organizational structure and staffing levels for the Transportation Department.
136 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Figure 5.2. HCPS Transportation Department Organization and Staffing
Administrative Manager
Field Support Supervisor (9)
Operations Manager
Training and Safety Manager
Fleet Manager
General Manager
Routing and Planning Manager
Clerk III (9)
Field Compliance Inspector (20)
School Bus Driver (969)
Bus Attendance (307)
Administrative Supervisor
Senior Administrative Services Specialist (2)
Administrative Services Specialist
(10)
Routing and Planning Supervisor
Routing and Planning Analyst (4)
Routing and Planning Specialist
(7)
FTE Specialist (3)
Training and Safety Supervisor
Training and Safety Specialist (5)
“Behind the Wheel” Driver Trainer (25)
Secretary
Property Supervisor
Fleet Shop Manager (2)
Service Writer
Fleet Shop Supervisor (6)
Facility Maintenance (3)
42 Positions
Warehouse and Purchasing Supervisor
18 Positions
Source: HCPS Transportation Department
HCPS manages and operates most transportation services in-house. The Department does contract
transportation service in situations when the travel is a long trip for a single student, and a private
transportation provider can operate the trip at a lower cost. The largest functional division within the
Transportation Department is operations. Each of nine field support supervisors is responsible for
transportation services in one of nine areas. Areas 1-8 supervise transportation in designated geographical
areas of the county; Area 9 supervises transportation for the district’s magnet school program.
The second largest functional division is fleet management. The fleet manager is responsible for vehicle
maintenance for school buses and the white fleet, and facility maintenance for the Transportation
Department. The Transportation Department employs 38 mechanics and technicians for bus maintenance
and 17 for white fleet maintenance. Several service writers and data clerks organize and document vehicle
maintenance work orders.
Staff in the routing and planning division manage the Department’s student data, bus routes, state data
reports, and prepares changes to the routes per requests and policy. The routing and planning manager
works with a supervisor to monitor staff divided into three functional areas. The four routing and planning
analysts perform advanced investigations to forecast future bus and route needs, recommend adjusted
bell times, and identify program costs. The seven routing and planning specialists perform routine routing
137 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
tasks for general education and exceptional student education (ESE) transportation, organize contracted
supplemental transportation services, and file hold harmless agreements. Hold harmless agreements are
required for HCPS buses to access private, gated communities, necessary at times due to the walk-to-bus
stop distance policy. The third functional area of routing and planning consists of three FTE specialists.
These three positions monitor special transportation needs established in individualized education
programs (IEPs) and collect and report data for quarterly FTE student counts to the Florida DOE.
Training and safety staff coordinate new driver training, existing driver continuing education and training,
incident-related driver re-training, and provide on-the-street spot checks as needed. Five specialists
conduct classroom training. Twenty-five experienced drivers provide behind-the-wheel training and also
drive assigned bus routes.
The administrative manager leads 13 staff to provide administrative support to all divisions of the
Department.
Technology and customer service report directly to the general manager for Transportation. Two
technology positions provide information technology support. Two customer service liaisons and four
phone representatives receive customer feedback from both schools and parents. The Department uses
software to support bus routing and scheduling, and for vehicle management and maintenance.
Operations and Maintenance Facilities
The transportation function operates from four primary facilities, plus dedicated training space at a fifth
facility through a contract with a community technical college. The physical layout of the transportation
function is described below:
40th Street Facility
The 40th Street Facility, located at 2920 N. 40th St, Tampa, Florida, is the base for vehicle
maintenance for the white fleet. The facility is considered adequate in terms of both vehicle
storage capacity and maintenance facility space. Mechanics at this facility work a single shift
during normal weekday business hours.
Harney Road Facility
The Harney Road Facility is located at 9455 Harney Rd in Thonotosassa, Florida. The facility is the
headquarters for the Transportation Department and includes the offices for operations
supervision for Areas 3, 4, 7, and the magnet program. The facility also houses administrative,
routing and planning, customer service, technical support, and fleet management functions. The
Department completed a new administrative and training building in spring 2016. The Harney
Road vehicle maintenance building include a fueling station, bus wash equipment, 20 permanent
vehicle maintenance bays, and eight outdoor, covered vehicle bays. Harney Road vehicle
maintenance personnel operate two shifts and provide road-call support and vehicle
maintenance from 5:00 AM to 10:00 PM. Harney Road has space to park approximately 300 school
buses. Much of the current space is dedicated to parking for spare buses.
138 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Plant City Facility
The Plant City facility is located at 3102 N Airport Rd in Plant City, Florida. The facility is on the
eastern side of the county and includes both vehicle parking and maintenance functions. The
office for Area 6 is located in another building 3.1 miles away at 703 N Thomas St, Plant City,
Florida. Area 6 and other area routes operate from the Plant City facility. The facility has space for
parking 180 buses and an outdated maintenance facility. HCPS completed maintenance facility
renovations during 2015-16 and the facility has eight maintenance bays. The Plant City
maintenance facility runs a split shift and is open from 5:00 AM to 7:00 PM. Parking and drainage
improvements are scheduled to be complete before the start of 2016-17. The expanded parking
area will have the capacity to park 350 school buses.
East Bay Facility
The East Bay Facility is located on the campus of Eisenhower Jr High School and East Bay High
School at 7620 Big Bend Rd in Gibsonton, Florida. The facility is the district’s most centrally located
transportation facility. Offices for Areas 5 and 8 are located on-site. The facility has several
maintenance bays and portable buildings for area offices. The East Bay maintenance facility
operates a split shift and is open from 5:00 AM to 7:00 PM, similar to Plant City. East Bay can
accommodate parking for as many as 200 school buses if distributed across the campus.
The Area 1 supervisor is located on the campus of Ballast Point Elementary in southwest part of
the region, and the Area 2 supervisor is located on the property of an HCPS general maintenance
facility, in the central west of the county.
Training Facility
The Transportation Department has dedicated office and classroom space on the HiTEC Campus-
Aparicio-Levy Technical Center. Office space includes desks for each trainer and storage for
materials. Classroom spaces include typical modern college features, such as row table-desks,
comfortable seating, white boards, and projectors with screens. Five school buses are parked on-
site overnight and used regularly for training. The district’s 25 behind-the-wheel driver trainers
use their regular route bus to provide training. The Department intends to maintain the training
space on the Aparicio-Levy campus for the foreseeable future.
Recommendations
Transportation Employee Management
Transportation Department area supervisors each have a clerk and one or more field compliance
inspectors to assist in oversight of drivers and bus attendants. The district authorized 1,234 driver
positions for 980 route assignments during 2015-16. However, during the year HCPS employed 969 bus
drivers and 307 bus attendants. Accordingly, there were not enough drivers to fill all 980 route
assignments, and there are no extra drivers to fill routes when drivers are absent. Each area office
supervisor oversees an average 108 drivers and 34 bus attendants.
139 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Recommendation 5-1: Implement a timekeeping system for school bus drivers to report actual time37.
HCPS does not require a school bus driver to report actual time worked each day and therefore,
compensation is not based on actual time. A bus driver’s pay is based on a time report completed by each
bus driver and approved by a supervisor once per school semester. The bus driver’s record of hours
worked is the time driving a school bus including travel time to and from a route, time transporting
students, and time between scheduled trips. Each HCPS school bus driver is paid an hour each school day
for time not driving a school bus. The one hour is intended to cover pre- and post-trip inspections, fueling
and sweeping the bus, and filing required reports such as passenger counts. The additional hour
represents 180 hours paid time per year per bus driver for duties not driving a school bus.
After the initial time report, a bus driver’s record of hours driving the school bus is revised if the route
changes or if the bus driver reports an exception on any day. Use of exception reports for time reporting
introduces the risk of error.
HCPS should implement a timekeeping system for the school bus drivers to report actual time worked
each day. The district has invested in upgrades to the existing routing and scheduling software that can
include a mobile application that uses cell phones or computer tablets to report and record bus driver
work schedules in real time. The bus drivers have the ability to use a cell phone or tablet keypad on each
bus to enter an identification number that interfaces with the payroll system. The system will then record
the actual time and physical location of the bus driver and bus (using the existing bus global positioning
system).
Fiscal Impact
Transportation industry standard practice for scheduling the bus driver report allowance (e.g., time for
sign-in, vehicle inspection, pull-out and filing reports) is between 10 and 15 minutes.38 Assuming the
report allowance twice per day, the total estimated time per day is 20 to 30 minutes. HCPS bus drivers are
also tasked with fueling the bus every few days. An estimated 40 minutes per day (20 to 30 minutes plus
10 minutes additional report allowance) means at least 50 minutes per week for fueling the bus. Using an
average of 40 minutes per school day, reported directly through a timekeeping system, will generate
savings of over $1.26 million annually for non-driving duty time. However, this adjustment would need to
be negotiated in the subsequent Blue Collar Contract. Table 5.3 presents the details of this calculation.
37 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS. 38 Source: Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) Report 135: Controlling System Costs, Chapter 5, pages 5-
08 and 5-14 includes estimates for run cutting (driver scheduling) for 10 to 15 minutes report allowance at the
start of a run for sign-in, inspection, pull-out, and report time.
http://www.trb.org/Publications/Blurbs/161864.aspx
140 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Table 5.3. Estimated Savings from Actual Time Reporting by Bus Drivers
Savings Factor Amount
Drivers, 2014-15 1,012
Estimate 20 minute reduction in paid hours per bus driver per day 0.333
School days per year 180
Reduction to total annual hours 60,659
Hourly direct wages 2014-15 $18.35
Ratio for benefits for Social Security/Medicare and retirement only 1.133525
Annual savings (includes payroll taxes for Social Security/Medicare) and
retirement) $1,261,724
Sources: HCPS data spring 2016 (Payroll by Job Code - Reg and OT with Staffing Levels; expenditure data)
An investment will need to be made for the procurement, implementation, training, and any ongoing
maintenance fees associated with a new timekeeping system. The fiscal impact of this investment cannot
be determined until the district issues a Request for Proposals.
Recommendation
One-Time
(Costs)/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Require school bus
drivers to report actual
time.
$0 $0 $1,261,725 $1,261,725 $1,261,725 $1,261,725
Total $0 $0 $1,261,725 $1,261,725 $1,261,725 $1,261,725
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Recommendation 5-2: Reduce driver absenteeism39.
HCPS school bus drivers work 180 days over a 10-month calendar. HCPS provides a benefit of one day per
month paid time off for personal leave (including sick leave). The absentee rate for the district’s school
bus drivers is high.
In 2014-15, the average number of absences for any reason (including sick leave, personal leave, family
leave, worker’s comp, etc.) was 2.35 absences per bus driver per month and the average duration of each
absence was 5.76 hours. Ninety-five percent of all absences were paid time off. The annualized time off
per bus driver was 135.36 hours40 resulting in an absentee rate of 13 percent41.
39 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS. 40 (2.35 absences per month x 10 months x 5.76 hours) 41 (2.35 absences x 10 months = 23.5 annualized absences divided by 180 school days = 13 percent)
141 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
With 980 scheduled bus driver assignments, the HCPS Transportation Department needs 127 substitute
bus drivers42 to cover for absences, or a total bus driver pool of 1,107 bus drivers43. The number of bus
drivers available to work varies monthly; however, assuming 1,012 bus drivers (the number of drivers in
2014-15), approximately 95 school bus driver positions were vacant.
The Transportation Department does not have enough stand-by bus drivers to fill-in when regular bus
drivers are absent. When bus drivers and attendants are absent, the route has to be assigned to another
bus driver (who already has an assignment). This means routes operate behind schedule and students are
not delivered to school timely.
The HCPS policy to provide paid time off for personal leave in addition to sick leave44 may increase the
number of absences for bus drivers who work 10 months. The Transportation Department must pay for
the paid time off of the absent bus driver, the additional time of the bus driver to cover the route, and
any overtime charges. The Transportation Department is working to reduce absenteeism by training bus
drivers on the detrimental impact on the students and the Transportation Department when a bus driver
is absent from duty.
The HCPS Human Resources Division should also increase initiatives to recruit and hire new drivers to fill
bus driver vacancies. A sufficient number of substitute bus drivers will permit absences to be filled with
regular pay hours rather than overtime pay.
Fiscal Impact
If absentee events by bus drivers are reduced from 13 percent to 10 percent (18 average absentee events
per bus driver per year), this will result in 31,900 fewer hours required for duplicate pay, or a savings of
$665,594 (see Table 5.4). If any of that duplicate pay is at the overtime pay rate, the savings could be up
an additional $332,978.
Table 5.4. Estimated Savings from Reducing Driver Absenteeism
Savings Factor Amount
Absentee rate 13 percent 23.49
Absentee rate 10 percent -18.00
Fewer absences per bus driver 5.49
Hours average duration of absence 5.76
Fewer hours absent annually per bus driver 31.62
Bus drivers 1,012
Fewer hours absent annually 31,999
Bus driver average hourly rate $18.35
42 (980 x 13 percent) 43 (980 + 127 = 1,107 bus drivers) 44 Blue Collar Contract 2014-2017 Sections 21.2 and 32.1
142 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Savings Factor Amount
Possible savings annually, direct labor only $587,190
Ratio for benefits attributable to Social Security/Medicare and retirement 1.133525
Annual savings (includes taxes for Social Security/Medicare and retirement) $665,594
Fewer hours absent annually 31,999
Additional savings per hour if replacement hours are overtime premium $9.18
Possible savings annually, direct labor only $293,755
Ratio for benefits attributable to Social Security/Medicare and retirement 1.133525
Annual savings including payroll benefits $332,978
Total savings direct labor plus overtime premium, including benefits $998,572
Sources: HCPS data spring 2016 (expenditures; Absenteeism – October 2015)
Table Note: May not sum to total due to rounding
The five-year fiscal impact of this recommendation assumes full implementation in year one.
Recommendation
One-Time
(Costs)/
Reductions
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Reduce driver
absenteeism. $0 $665,594 $665,594 $665,594 $665,594 $665,594
Savings if replacement
hours are overtime
premium.
$0 $332,978 $332,978 $332,978 $332,978 $332,978
Total $0 $998,572 $998,572 $998,572 $998,572 $998,572
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Recommendation 5-3: Reduce overtime for school bus drivers and vehicle maintenance staff45.
In 2014-15, the total HCPS payroll for bus drivers (including regular pay, overtime, training, etc.) was
$26,013,460. Of that total, overtime pay was $2,765,720, or 10.6 percent of total bus driver pay. The
overtime pay is for scheduled route time over 8 hours daily (over 40 hours per week), overtime required
when on-duty bus drivers operate longer assignments due to bus driver vacancies and absences, and
overtime for activity, field, and extracurricular trips. At $27.53 per hour of overtime46, the equivalent
overtime hours were 100,462.
A goal to reduce overtime by 40 percent will reduce overtime expenditures by $1,106,288 per year.
The Transportation Department has identified opportunities to reduce scheduled overtime pay for daily
home-to-school routes by pairing longer and shorter runs for more balanced scheduled time and by
45 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS. 46 ($18.35 x 1.5)
143 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
encouraging bus drivers to minimize time absent for personal time other than illness. The Transportation
Department’s initiatives have already resulted in lowering overtime pay. HCPS should continue strategies
to eliminate unnecessary overtime and reduce overtime pay for school bus drivers.
Fiscal Impact
Reducing or eliminating overtime on daily scheduled routes can save up to $581,490 in overtime pay.
These savings are premium pay only because the routes are still required but can be operated with straight
time pay.
Analysis of route schedules for student transportation between home and school and between schools
shows that 341 routes are scheduled for more than 8 hours each day. Assuming each route operates 5
school days per week, the routes are scheduled to require overtime pay for time over 40 hours per week.
The scheduled routes generate 277.24 overtime hours for bus drivers each day and 47.64 overtime hours
for attendants assigned to some of the routes. The annualized overtime hours are 49,903 for bus drivers
and 8,575 for attendants. While geographic location and student program placement may in some
circumstances, require driver/bus aide weekly assigned routes with overtime, the overtime schedules
generate additional expenses for the overtime premium. The 341 routes require $519,281 overtime
premium pay annually for bus drivers and $62,209 overtime premium pay annually for attendants,
including benefits. The total cost of scheduled routes with overtime is $581,490 annually (see Table 5.5.
Table 5.5. Annual Cost of Scheduled Routes with Overtime
Savings Factor Drivers Attendants
Daily route with scheduled overtime hours 277.24 47.64
School days 180 180
Annualized overtime hours on scheduled routes 49,903.2 8,575.2
Overtime premium per hour (direct labor rate x 0.50) $9.18 $6.40
Annualized payroll for scheduled route overtime hours $458,111 $54,881
Ratio for benefits for Social Security/Medicare and retirement
only 1.133525 1.133525
Annualized payroll including benefits for scheduled overtime
hours $519,281 $62,209
Total annualized savings in overtime premium $581,490
Sources: HCPS data spring 2016 (expenditures; Operator-Rider Paid Time - snapshot from area office files)
Further analysis of the same route schedules shows 373 routes are scheduled for less than 7 hours per
day. Drivers are paid any difference in scheduled hours and the 7 hour minimum guarantee per day. The
373 routes total 272.16 hours paid for time not scheduled. The 272.16 hours per day for each of the 180
school days totals 48,989 hours annually.
Because bus drivers are assigned to 341 routes that are scheduled for more than 8 hours each day, other
school bus drivers are paid a minimum 7 hours per day, and the minimum schedule for a field trip is 3
144 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
hours, many bus drivers accepting field, activity, and extracurricular trip assignments are paid at the
overtime rate. The Transportation Department assigns field trips based on seniority, not based on a bus
driver’s available time before reaching overtime status as specified in the Blue Collar Contract.
The Transportation Department can also identify savings by reducing overtime among vehicle
maintenance staff. In 2014-15, the HCPS vehicle maintenance personnel (non-supervisory maintenance
staff including mechanics, trade specialists, etc.) earned overtime pay of $515,474, or 19 percent of
regular pay $2,717,513.
Recommendation
One-Time
(Costs)/
Reductions
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Reduce overtime pay for
school bus drivers. $0 $581,490 $581,490 $581,490 $581,490 $581,490
Reduce overtime among
vehicle maintenance
staff.
$0 $515,474 $515,474 $515,474 $515,474 $515,474
Total $0 $1,096,964 $1,096,964 $1,096,964 $1,096,964 $1,096,964
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Routing and Scheduling
The Transportation Department follows board policy and state requirements regarding bus route design
and stop selection pursuant to Florida Statutes.47 To ensure compliance and to maximize efficiency, the
HCPS Transportation Department uses technology to collect accurate data, design efficient bus routes,
and safely carry out their mission. Routing and planning staff recently upgraded to the newest iteration
of EDULOG SQL, the routing and scheduling software. The Department anticipates the new system will
improve the ability to create accurate route alignments and determine safe bus stop locations for
students. The Department actively uses web-based tools to keep district staff and parents informed of
student bus assignments. All buses have an onboard global positioning system (GPS) and passenger
compartment cameras. GPS tracking is primarily used at the beginning of each year to verify driver routes
and paid time. However, the Department is working to implement a link between vehicle GPS units and
the routing and scheduling software which may eliminate paper-based time reporting. Real-time use of
GPS will enable more effective communication with parents and district staff.
Recommendation 5-4: Increase time between bell schedules48.
HCPS Transportation operates 980 school bus routes each day. Each route represents a required bus and
a bus driver assignment. Fifty-six percent of the bus routes (547 routes) are scheduled for three runs (or
tiers) each morning and afternoon. Of the remaining routes, 40.7 percent (399 routes) are scheduled for
47 Florida Statutes 1006.21 and 1006.22. 48 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS.
145 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
two tiers each morning and afternoon, and 3.5 percent (34 routes) are scheduled for one tier each
morning and afternoon. The current school bell times limit greater schedule efficiency.
General school bell times are 7:33 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. for high schools, 8:00 a.m. to 2:15 p.m. for elementary,
schools and 9:00 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. for middle schools. There is not enough time between the bell
schedules for the high schools and elementary schools to optimize the number of bus routes required.
The buses on some routes cannot serve both a high school and an elementary school before the middle
school. The bell time for some schools, particularly magnet schools, vary from school to school, adding to
the challenges for the Transportation Department to schedule efficient routes.
The Transportation Department can influence but does not control the bell schedules. If the school district
provides more time between bell times, the Transportation Department could schedule more bus drivers
and buses for three tiers, reducing the total number of bus drivers and buses required to meet student
transportation requirements.
In order to improve student transportation productivity, HCPS should adjust the start and end times of
school each day to allow at least one hour between bell times for high schools, elementary schools, and
middle schools and limit variations on bell times for individual schools. Increasing the number of routes
with three tiers each morning and afternoon and decreasing the number of routes with two tiers or one
tier (by 77 routes49) will mean fewer bus drivers and buses can serve the same number of students.
Fiscal Impact
A net reduction of 77 routes could save HCPS approximately $2.4 million annually in bus driver labor. This
calculation is presented in Table 5.6.
Table 5.6. Estimated Savings from Staggering Bell Schedules – Bus Driver Savings
Savings Factor Amount
Guaranteed minimum paid hours daily per bus driver 7
School days per year 180
Regular hours per year 1,260
Hourly direct wages, 2014-151 $18.35
Per bus driver, annual direct salary only $23,121
Net reduction to total routes2 77
Annual direct salary only (n=77 bus drivers) $1,780,317
49 In 2015-16, the Transportation Department scheduled 980 bus/driver assignments (routes) to operate 2,473 runs
in 3 tiers. Of the 980 routes, 547 buses operated 3 tiers; 399 buses operated 2 tiers, and 34 buses operated 1 tier
each AM/PM. The assumptions for 77 reduced number of bus drivers: Change from 547 to 700 buses operating 3
tiers (+153), from 399 to 170 buses operating 2 tiers (-229), from 34 to 33 buses operating 1 tier (-1). Net fewer 77
buses. The current 980 buses operate 2,473 runs, the revised assumptions = 903 buses operate 2,473 runs, or no
change in the number of runs.
146 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Savings Factor Amount
Full benefits ratio, 2014-15 1.331234
Annual savings for reduced number of bus drivers (77) through additional tiering $2,370,019
Sources: HCPS data spring 2016 (Routes - Runs – Stops; expenditure data)
Table Notes: 1Excludes overtime and benefits; 2Net reduction to total routes results in a reduction in total bus drivers
and buses; May not sum to total due to rounding
On average, 26 percent of school bus routes are assigned an attendant to assist exceptional student riders.
If a similar percentage of the reduced routes also requires an attendant, HCPS would require 20 fewer
attendant positions (guaranteed 6 hours per day) representing $367,800 in annual savings, as reflected in
Table 5.7.
Table 5.7. Estimated Savings from Staggering Bell Schedules – Bus Attendant Savings
Savings Factor Amount
Assumed daily paid hours 6
School days per year 180
Regular hours per year 1,080
Hourly direct wages, 2014-151 $12.79
Per attendant, annual direct salary only $13,813
Reduction in number of attendants required (26% of 77 routes) 20
Annual direct salary only, 20 attendants $276,264
Full benefits ratio, 2014-15 1.331234
Annual savings for reduced number of attendants (20) by additional tiering $367,772
Sources: HCPS data spring 2016 (expenditure data; staffing data)
Table Notes: 1Excludes overtime and benefits; May not sum to total due to rounding
The total estimated annual savings from this recommendation is $2,737,790.
Recommendation
One-Time
(Costs)/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Increase time between bell
schedules (bus driver savings). $0 $2,370,018 $2,370,018 $2,370,018 $2,370,018 $2,370,018
Increase time between bell
schedules (bus attendant
savings).
$0 $367,772 $367,772 $367,772 $367,772 $367,772
Total $0 $2,737,790 $2,737,790 $2,737,790 $2,737,790 $2,737,790
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
147 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Eligibility for Student Transportation
The Florida DOE reimburses school districts for a portion of the cost of student transportation for
Kindergarten through Grade 12 and ESE programs. A student’s transportation is eligible for transportation
funding if one of the following conditions are met50:
The student lives two or more miles from the school.
The student is classified as a student with a disability under the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA), regardless of distance (excluding gifted students).
The student/parent or infant is enrolled in the Teenage Parent Program (TAP).
The student is enrolled in a state-funded prekindergarten program (IDEA or TAP), regardless of
distance from home to school.
The student is a career or exceptional student being transported from one school center to
another where appropriate programs are provided.
Summer transportation funding is only available for eligible students requiring extended school
year services, as documented by their IEPs or by the Department of Juvenile Justice.
The student meets the criteria for hazardous walking as stated in Section 1006.23, F.S. Only
elementary school students are eligible for funding under the hazardous walking category.
Recommendation 5-5: Phase out courtesy transportation for secondary school students. 51
HCPS provides home to school transportation for 86,402 students. Approximately 74,000 (85.6%) of these
riders are eligible for state reimbursement. An additional 12,357 Grade 6-12 students – called courtesy
riders – are not. HCPS must incur the full cost of transportation for these student riders.52 Table 5.8
presents a breakdown of the student transportation at HCPS in 2015-16.
50 2015-16 Funding for Florida School Districts for Student Transportation
http://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/7507/urlt/Fefpdist.pdf 51 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS. 52 HCPS FTE reports to Florida Department of Education <140-FLDOE Rpt 3>
148 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Table 5.8. Students Eligible for Transportation
Category of Student Rider 2015-16 Percent
Students using HCPS student transportation 86,402 100.0%
Regular student riders 58,429 67.6%
Hazardous K-6 student riders 11,695 13.5%
IDEA, IEP student riders 3,863 4.5%
TAP student riders 58 0.1%
SUBTOTAL – Students eligible for State funding 74,045 85.7%
Courtesy riders using transportation services 12,357 14.3%
Source: HCPS FTE 2015-16, Survey 3, Transportation Department data, February 2016
The HCPS Transportation Department is proposing to revise transportation practices to provide courtesy
transportation after routes for student riders living two miles or more from school are complete. This
means students requesting courtesy transportation will ride on the school bus longer or will have to wait
at home or school for a bus that has completed the regular run. A change in practice may discourage
current student riders who could walk to and from home.
The review team recommends a more aggressive approach. HCPS should discontinue providing student
transportation services to secondary students that are not eligible for funding from the Florida DOE. This
recommendation should be phased in over the next three years.
Fiscal Impact
The total operating expenditures for the Transportation Department in 2014-15 were $69,957,63553. The
total expenditures include $3,834,054 for administration (5%), $44,047,917 for operations (63%), and
$22,075,664 (32%) for maintenance (includes fuel). Administration expenses are considered fixed because
they do not change with the number of routes operated or the number of students transported. Operating
and maintenance costs ($66,123,581) are variable depending on the hours and miles required to operate
routes for student riders. Accordingly, the average variable operating and maintenance cost per student
rider to provide HCPS transportation was $765.30 in 2014-15.54 This amount is used as the basis for
calculating cost savings for this recommendation to phase out courtesy transportation.
Assuming courtesy transportation for 12,357 students is phased out completely over the next three years,
HCPS will save approximately $9.5 million annually upon full implementation (see Table 5.9).
53 Excludes Site Code 9799 Vehicle Maintenance for the white fleet 54 HCPS expenditure data, 2014-15
149 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Table 5.9. Estimated Savings from Discontinuing Courtesy Transportation for Secondary Students
Savings Factor Amount
Courtesy riders, not reimbursed by Florida DOE 12,357
Goal to reduce courtesy student riders (100 percent) 12,357
Cost per student transported, calculated $765.30
Possible annual savings by discontinuing courtesy transportation $9,456,812
Sources: HCPS expenditure data spring 2016; FTE reports to Florida Department of Education (140-FLDOE Rpt 3);
Florida Department of Education (http://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/5423/urlt/Fefpdist.pdf page 33 for
2014-15 http://www.fldoe.org/core/fileparse.php/7507/urlt/Fefpdist.pdf page 32 for 2015-16)
The five-year fiscal impact below assumes a phase-in approach of 25 percent the first year, 50 percent the
second year, and full implementation by the third year.
Recommendation
One-Time
(Costs)/
Reductions
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Phase out courtesy
transportation for
secondary school
students.
$0 $2,364,012 $4,728,406 $9,456,812 $9,456,812 $9,456,812
Total $0 $2,364,012 $4,728,406 $9,456,812 $9,456,812 $9,456,812
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Fleet Management
Recommendation 5-6: Require drivers to park school buses overnight at HCPS transportation facilities.55
The number of school buses in the HCPS fleet in 2015-16 was 1,409 buses. The total combined parking
capacity for school buses at the three transportation facilities is 850. The current facilities, even with
recent improvements, leave the district without parking capacity for 559 buses, or 40 percent of the
school bus fleet.
The current Blue Collar Contract 2014-2017 with the Employees Federation includes a provision regarding
overnight parking for school buses. School bus drivers hired prior to July 1, 2008 are allowed to park their
assigned school bus at home if a suitable parking location on school property is not available and if the
home parking location meets specified criteria. School bus drivers hired July 1, 2008 or later must comply
with Transportation Department direction regarding overnight parking of the school bus.
HCPS school bus drivers park their assigned buses overnight at home or in 100 different HCPS locations
across the county. Current HCPS practice is to permit school bus drivers to park the bus overnight at home
or a school close to home, without limitations on the date of hire. This practice increases time and effort
55 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS. However, the fiscal impact for this recommendation was not included in the Phase I report.
150 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
by administration, operations, and maintenance personnel to track and manage school buses and bus
drivers and attendants. The practice also places school district assets at risk when schools buses are
parked at unsecured locations.
This section discusses an analysis of driver time studies in regards to overnight parking location for 2015-
16. The actual breakdown of overnight parking location by both Transportation Department area and type
of parking location is reported as Table 5.10 (number of drivers) and Table 5.11 (percent of drivers). The
data for these tables are based on 2015-16 driver time reports.
Table 5.10. Number of Drivers by Area and by Type of Overnight Parking Location
Source: 2015-16 Time Reports
Table Note: *Or other HCPS property
Approximately 200 drivers’ time reports indicated the driver’s overnight parking location was a
transportation facility (22 percent); about 180 drivers’ overnight parking location was home (18 percent);
and 581 drivers parked at a school site or other district property (60 percent).
Area
Drivers Parking
at HCPS Transp.
Facility
Drivers
Parking at
Home
Drivers
Parking at a
School*
Total Drivers
by Area
Area 1 6 0 61 68
Area 2 11 2 105 117
Area 3 34 8 101 143
Area 4 12 6 47 64
Area 5 3 23 57 83
Area 6 54 68 9 131
Area 7 38 26 45 108
Area 8 19 26 75 120
Magnet (Area 9) 32 21 81 134
Total by Type of Parking Location 209 179 581 969
151 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Table 5.11. Percent of Drivers by Area and by Overnight Parking Location
Area Office
% Drivers
Parking at
Transp Facility
% Drivers
Parking at
Home
% Drivers
Parking at a
School*
Total Drivers
by Area
Area 1 9% 0% 91% 100%
Area 2 9% 2% 89% 100%
Area 3 24% 6% 71% 100%
Area 4 19% 9% 73% 100%
Area 5 3% 28% 69% 100%
Area 6 41% 52% 7% 100%
Area 7 35% 24% 42% 100%
Area 8 16% 21% 63% 100%
Magnet (Area 9) 24% 16% 60% 100%
Total by Parking Location 22% 18% 60% 100%
Source: 2015-16 Time Study Data Entry (percent of 969)
Table Note: *Or other HCPS property
During the fall 2015, the Council of Great City Schools (CGCS) was invited by the district administration to
review the Transportation Department. A group including council staff and peer agency representative
conducted interviews with Transportation Department staff and visited facilities. The CGCS published
their findings in Review of the Transportation Program of the Hillsborough County Public Schools in
December 2015. The CGCS operations findings noted the Transportation Department facilities were
generally inadequate. The CGCS reported that unsecured bus parking lacks sufficient control, reduces
security, increases liability, invites potential worker compensation claims, creates service delays caused
by inoperable buses, increases maintenance costs due to logistics of shuttling buses to/from remote sites
(schools, homes), and exposes vehicles to vandalism.
HCPS should add bus parking facilities and require all buses to be parked there. Parking school buses at
HCPS transportation facilities will benefit supervision and operations, maintenance, and safety and
security. Each of these benefits is discussed briefly below:
Supervision and Operations
Parking school buses at transportation facilities will improve employee supervision and provide
the opportunity for better channels of communication between area supervisors and drivers and
bus attendants. Currently, supervisors do not have a daily opportunity for face-to-face
communication with drivers and attendants. Supervisors cannot know if the driver reports on
time or has a mechanical problem with the school bus until a delay has already occurred. The
supervisor cannot verify pre-trip vehicle inspections. If all drivers report to a transportation facility
to pick-up the bus before an assignment, the supervisor and drivers will benefit. Supervisor and
driver proximity will result in more effective and frequent communication. Closer supervision will
152 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
help managers to ensure compliance with district policy and monitor on-time bus pull-out so that
students are picked up according to scheduled times and delivered to school on time for classes.
Parking school buses at transportation facilities will enable the district to pay drivers for all hours
actually worked. Supervisors and drivers will be able to implement a more accurate time-
reporting system. Supervisors will know sooner if there is a problem with either employee or
vehicle and address the challenge a quickly as possible since staff and vehicles will be in proximity.
Parking school buses at transportation facilities will alleviate the negative impacts of unexpected
driver absenteeism and make it more convenient for another driver to take the route assignment.
For example, in May 2016, Area 6 had 38 occasions when a driver who parked at home or a remote
school was absent and the supervisor had to find a replacement driver and bus at the last minute,
often resulting in late service for the student riders. Separate recommendations in this chapter
address timekeeping, absenteeism, and overtime – the implementation of this recommendation
will improve the ability of the Transportation Department to achieve all three recommendations.
By strategically locating new facilities with adequate parking for school buses, the Transportation
Department will reduce operating costs through increased route efficiencies by minimizing the
distance between bus parking and first stop/last stop for routes.
Maintenance
Parking school buses at transportation facilities will help the Transportation Department reduce
expensive road-calls. Eighty-one percent of road-calls in 2015-16 were for buses that were not
parked overnight at a transportation facility. The most significant problems occur when a driver
has a mechanical problem with the school bus before service begins. If the bus does not start or
the bus has some other mechanical problem that makes the bus inoperable or unsafe, the driver
has to call for roadside assistance from vehicle maintenance. The time required by mechanics to
make road calls is unproductive, and road calls delay the driver from making on-time pick-ups at
bus stops. If the bus is declared out of service by the mechanic, the route is further delayed and
another bus and driver has to be assigned to the route. When school buses are parked at
transportation facilities, maintenance personnel have immediate access to expedite repairs and
can assign a different bus immediately.
Parking school buses at transportation facilities will help the Department to cost-effectively
provide preventive and scheduled vehicle maintenance. Operations personnel (supervisors, field
inspectors, clerks), routing analysts and schedulers, and vehicle maintenance personnel
(supervisors, mechanics, clerks) spend hours of time each day locating buses, assigning buses,
identifying spare buses, arranging for transfer of buses, and making road calls for buses parked in
remote locations. Too much of the time of bus drivers and administrative staff is spent finding
and transferring school buses, not transporting students.
153 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Safety and Security
Parking school buses at transportation facilities will limit liability and risk associated with drivers
driving district vehicles on paid-time to and from their personal residence. Buses leaving facilities
will be using designated, planned routes designed to be safe.
Parking school buses at transportation facilities will improve security for HCPS personnel and the
vehicle assets. Buses parked at transportation facilities are protected from tampering and
vandalism. While some risk for such acts remains, the potential likelihood is reduced, and the
Transportation Department’s ability to respond is significantly improved. Existing facilities have
fences, gated access, and other security features designed to limit the likelihood and impact of
tampering and vandalism.
Parking school buses at transportation facilities will reduce the district’s exposure to worker’s
compensation claims. Parking spaces are prepared and maintained to be safe for boarding and
alighting. Parking school buses at transportation facilities also bring staff into closer proximity and
thereby increase the opportunity for a timely response to limit injury and, therefore, claims.
Parking school buses at transportation facilities will protect vehicle assets during extreme weather
events – limiting financial risk and vulnerability. Hillsborough County is located on the Gulf of
Mexico side of central Florida. The region experiences occasional hurricanes, tropical storms, and
more frequently heavy rain. Heavy rain can cause flash or regional flooding. Transportation
facilities are more likely to be adapted to mitigate flooding. Hurricanes and tropical storms bring
heavy rain and high winds. High winds may inadvertently damage a bus parked at a personal
residence because the locations may have trees and lower-grade structures in close proximity to
the bus. Transportation facilities are constructed to be resilient to certain levels of storms and
parking areas are free of vegetation and objects that become flying debris in high winds. In
extreme, forecasted events like hurricanes, parking school buses at transportation facilities will
enable the Transportation Department to park buses in concentrated blocks that limit bus window
and body exposure to damage.
The primary barrier to parking the entire school bus fleet at HCPS transportation facilities is inadequate
parking capacity. The three existing facilities used for bus fleet parking and maintenance are each fully
developed in terms of parking. Site expansion is not possible because each facility is land-locked by
adjacent uses. As a result, HCPS will need two additional transportation facilities in strategic geographic
locations.
An administrative barrier to parking the entire school bus fleet at HCPS transportation facilities is that
some drivers are allowed by the Blue Collar Contract to park their buses at home and the Transportation
Department honors the requests of other drivers to park buses at home. These terms would need to be
renegotiated during the next union contract discussions.
154 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
The short-term recommendation is for HCPS Transportation Department to maximize assignments for bus
parking at existing transportation facilities and appropriate district property and school sites that are
located to maximize proximity to transportation facilities.
The district can also immediately enforce the provision for drivers hired subsequent to July 1, 2008
without renegotiating the union agreement. Drivers hired prior to July 1, 2008 are eligible by the Blue
Collar Contract to park the school bus at home if a suitable parking location on school property is not
available. About 85 of the approximate 200 drivers approved to park at home at the beginning of the
2015-16 school year are included in this group. The Transportation Department can require bus drivers
hired July 1, 2008 or later to park at a transportation facility or other school property near a transportation
facility.
The longer term recommendation requires capital investment to develop new strategically located
transportation facilities capable of parking and maintaining all buses in the fleet. This recommendation
will require HCPS to invest in property and/or improve property (pavement, fencing, and lighting) to
provide appropriate parking for school buses. HCPS is currently improving land near the Plant City facility
for expanded bus parking and also recently completed maintenance bay improvements to the East Bay
facility.
Fiscal Impact
Estimated Capital Cost (one-time)
The cost of each new facility will vary based on land value. Facilities of the size needed require between
20 and 40 acres to accommodate staff parking, administrative space, maintenance space, bus parking,
and site development for drainage, etc. The cost per East Bay maintenance bay was about $225,000. The
cost per Plant City bus parking space (excluding land cost because existing HCPS property was developed)
was about $5,000. New transportation facilities will need to be sized to meet district needs in their
respective geographic location. However, a typical transportation facility may require about 30 acres and
include 10 maintenance bays and parking for 300 buses. The cost for such a facility is likely to fall in the
range of $4.2 million to $7.1 million56. To be conservative, the higher end of the range is used in estimating
the one-time fiscal impact. Assuming two facilities are developed, the total cost would be $14.2 million.
Estimated Annual Operating Costs
The additional operating cost is comprised of additional labor cost for personnel specific to the new facility
and ongoing expenses for utilities, grounds maintenance, and facility (equipment, etc.) maintenance.
Staffing assumes the Operations and Maintenance are already staffed to operate 980 routes and
maintenance the full fleet of buses. It is assumed that both divisions will move existing personnel to the
new facility. New personnel are specific to staff in an additional facility location. Table 5.12 includes
56 $1.9 million for land w/an existing building + $2.25 million for maintenance bay modifications + $1.5 million for bus parking = $5.65 million +/- 25 percent due to site cost variability and market conditions.
155 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
calculations and assumptions used to support the estimate of annual operating costs for the two new
facilities.
Table 5.12. New Transportation O&M Facility
Positions Salary 2014-15
Vehicle Maintenance
Supervisor, Shop, Fleet Maintenance and
Repair 1 $44,085
Clerk , Maintenance Unit 1 $28,646
Specialist 2, Equipment Parts 1 $29,356
Custodian 1 $19,297
Operations
Clerk 3 1 $26,888
Total Salaries $148,272
Full Benefits Ratio 2014-15 1.331234
Total Labor Cost ($197,385)
Source: HCPS
Estimated Annual Operating Savings
Implementation of this recommendation will help achieve savings identified in other recommendations
in this chapter. Additional savings for reduced deadhead time (non-route bus driving time) is also expected
to be achieved since bus drivers will not be driving buses to and from home or other remote parking
location. Table 5.13 provides the calculations supporting the savings estimate.
156 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Table 5.13. Estimated Annual Operating Savings
Source: HCPS spring 2016; Gibson Consulting Group, Inc. calculations
Routes (bus and driver route assignments) 980
Assume percent of routes would be less deadhead per day based on
analysis 2015-16 time reports for Area 6
27 routes of 131 would be closer if assigned to existing facility
27 131 20.6%
Benefit existing
facilities All Areas
50 routes would have less deadhead if new facility strategically located New facility
Assume 2 new facilities 100 10.2% benefit
Total percent of routes that will see benefit if buses are parked overnight
at transportation facilities + 2 new strategically located facilities 30.8% Total
Assume miles less deadhead per day (parking to first stop AM; last stop to
parking AM; parking to first stop PM; last stop to parking PM) 4x/day 4 2 8 miles
Miles per day 2,416
School days per year 180
Miles for school year 434,858
Assume benefit per new facility 50% 217,429
Vehicle
Maitenance
Cost
Average
Miles
per Bus
Savings for
Less Miles
Annual 2014-15 expenses per school bus for vehicle maintenance $15,267
Average annual cost for fuel per bus $5,286 12,611 0.4192$ fuel
Annual 2014-15 cost per school bus less fuel $9,981 12,611 0.7915$ maintenance
Per Mile 1.2106$ cost per mile
Estimated savings deadhead miles 217,429
Savings vehicle maintenance and fuel reduced deadhead miles 263,222$ savings
Savings for
Less Driver
Time
Average travel speed, calculated (miles per hour) 12.32
Divide speed into savings deadhead miles 17,648 hours
Driver, hourly direct salary only $18.35
Savings direct labor cost $323,849
Full benefits ratio 2014-15 1.331234
Savings driver time reduced deadhead miles $431,119 savings
Total Annual Savings Reduced Deadhead Miles per New Facility $694,341
157 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Recommendation
One-Time
(Costs)/
Reductions
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Require drivers to park
school buses overnight at
HCPS transportation
facilities.
One-time facilities cost (2
parking facilities)
($14,200,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Estimated Operating
Costs $0 $0 ($257,385) ($257,385) ($514,770) ($514,770)
Estimated Operating
Savings $0 $0 $694,341 $694,341 $1,388,682 $1,388,682
Total ($14,200,000) $0 $436,956 $436,956 $873,912 $873,912
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Recommendation 5-7: Reduce spares ratio for school bus fleet.
The Department maintains and manages 1,409 school buses57. The number of bus driver assignments each
day is 980 plus five buses dedicated to training means that 985 buses are in-service each day. Therefore,
the district currently operates with 424 spare buses, or a spares ratio of 43 percent58. The industry
standard for a spares ratio for student transportation service is 20 to 30 percent depending on the fleet
mix and the local operating conditions. There are three primary reasons for the large spares ratio at HCPS:
1. Florida law requires a school bus to be inspected every 30 school days. This requires a
minimum of 33 route buses59 to be available every day for inspection. Every bus driver must
have a spare bus when the route bus is scheduled for inspection.
2. The accepted practice of permitting school bus drivers to park buses at home or to park buses
at a school near home means the district’s assets are distributed around the county.
Management of a disbursed fleet requires a higher number of spare buses.
3. The average school bus fleet age is high, meaning buses are older and require more
maintenance for repairs. HCPS has purchased new buses to replace the oldest and least cost-
effective buses in the fleet.
HCPS recently purchased 200 buses, permitting replacement of the oldest buses in the fleet; however, the
replacement is one for one, spare buses were not reduced. The Transportation Department may be able
to reduce the total fleet by prioritizing buses for retirement that have high maintenance cost and low
average miles operated.
57 As of March 2016 58 (1,409 – 980 = 419/980 = 43 percent spares ratio) 59 (980 route buses every 30 days = 33 buses each day for inspection)
158 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
A change in the practice of school bus drivers taking the bus home or near home will reduce the number
of spares required. A smaller, newer fleet that is managed from a limited number of overnight parking
locations will require less maintenance for repairs and less staff time finding and shuttling buses from
location to location.
The Transportation Department enters every vehicle maintenance work order in a vehicle management
information system. The database allows HCPS to track school bus and white fleet maintenance
information in detail. Information can be retrieved for each of 1,446 school buses for 2014-15. The
information includes parts costs, tire costs, outsourced (vendor) expenses, and fuel dispensed.
Unfortunately the vehicle management information system does not produce reports that include
mechanic labor hours by vehicle. Without mechanic labor hours by school bus, the cost analysis is not
complete.
The 2014-15 database showed a total of 18,234,949 annual vehicle miles of service for 1,446 school buses
(the number of school buses for which the data appeared complete), or an average 12,611 annual vehicle
miles per bus. Assuming the average school bus is intended to operate 200,000 life service miles, the
average HCPS school bus should have a 15 to 16 year service life. The 1,446 school buses in the 2014-15
fleet database included 389 buses with over 16 years of service. If 200 of the oldest buses and/or the
buses with the highest maintenance cost per mile are replaced with new vehicles, additional buses may
be eligible to place in surplus if not required to maintain an adequate spares ratio.
The Transportation Department reported a total fleet of 1,409 school buses and 418 buses out of service
on an example day in March 2016 but did not provide information on the reason each of the buses was
out of service. Without this information, analysis of the requirements for spare buses is limited. In order
to develop the basis for determining an appropriate spares ratio, Table 5.14 highlights reasonable
assumptions for future spares requirement based on the assumption that all school buses are parked at
transportation facilities or designated nearby parking areas. Parking school buses at transportation
facilities will reduce the necessary spare bus fleet by about 129 vehicles – a 9 percent reduction in the
maximum fleet requirement.60
60 (1,409 – 1,279 = 130/1,409 = 9 percent reduced fleet size)
159 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Table 5.14. Required Spare Bus Assumptions
Reason Buses Percent of Peak
Requirement
Peak Bus Requirement (including 5 buses for training) 985 100%
Buses for inspections 33 3.4%
Buses available for in service breakdowns 35 3.6%
Buses in minor repair 147 15%
Buses in major repair 50 5%
Buses out for vendor repair or warranty 30 3%
Total Spares 295 30%
Total Fleet with Spares 1,280
Sources: HCPS data spring 2016
Parking school buses at transportation facilities (see above recommendation) will also enable the
Transportation Department to operate with a lower vehicles spares ratio.
Fiscal Impact
Reducing the school bus fleet to a 30 percent spares ratio requires a total fleet of 1,280 buses61. Reducing
the spares ratio to 30 percent will reduce the fleet by approximately 129 school buses62. Reducing the
spare bus fleet by 129 buses can save $946,344 million annually plus one-time revenue for sale of surplus
buses of $258,00063.
When the analyses of vehicle maintenance costs are summarized at a high level, the review team expected
to see costs increasing and annual miles per vehicle decreasing as vehicles age. However, HCPS results
differ when the analysis is applied to more specific data by vehicle subfleet (group of buses with similar
characteristics). Some older vehicle subfleets are more productive (more annual miles per vehicle) at a
lower cost per mile than newer subfleets. Still, older vehicles should be replaced to ensure safety and to
increase the number of buses operating with clean fuels. However, the savings in maintenance cost with
a newer fleet will not include fuel savings because the buses will operate the same route miles.
The buses with the lowest annual mile of service should be retired (in addition to the 200 currently
scheduled for replacement). These are the buses in the fleet that are least productive and are likely less
reliable. At a minimum, this will reduce the time and expenses for 30-day inspections.
61 (980 daily route assignments + 5 training buses + 295 spares = 1,280) 62 (1,409 in March 2016 less 1,280 = 129) 63 (129 buses x $2,000 [estimated salvage value])
160 Chapter 5 – Transportation Management
Table 5.15. Estimated Savings from Reducing School Bus Fleet Spares Ratio
Savings Factor Amount
HCPS Transportation expenses 2014-15 for maintenance $22,075,664
School buses in 2014-15 database *1,446
Annual 2014-15 expenses per school bus $15,267
Less – average annual cost for fuel per bus 12,611 average miles -$5,286
Annual 2014-15 cost per school bus less fuel $9,981
Reduce spare buses 129
Annual 2014-15 expenses per school bus for 129 buses with lowest
odometer miles reported in 2014-15 $10,880
Less – average annual cost for fuel per bus for 8,448 average miles
bus for 129 buses with lowest odometer miles reported in 2014-15 -$3,544
Annual 2014-15 cost per school bus less fuel $7,336
Annual savings by reducing spare bus fleet 129 buses $946,344
Sources: HCPS data spring 2016 (expenditures; ReqNo13-HCPS Bus Summary Costs FY2015
HCPS Outsourced Work Transportation FY 2014-2015; HCPS Fuel Costs Transportation
FY 2014-15; HCPS Transportation Tire Cost FY 2014-15)
* The 2014-15 vehicle database of 1,446 buses included older buses scheduled for replacement as well as new buses placed into
service during the year. The active fleet for 2015-16 was 1,409 buses.
Below is the five-year fiscal impact of implementing this recommendation.
Recommendation
One-Time
(Costs)/
Reductions
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Reduce spares ratio for
school bus fleet. $258,000 $0 $946,344 $946,344 $946,344 $946,344
Total $258,000 $0 $946,344 $946,344 $946,344 $946,344
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
161 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Introduction
School facilities should be designed and maintained to provide an effective learning environment that is
educationally adequate to deliver the curriculum. Having suitable facilities requires good planning, which
is made possible by accurate measurement of school capacities and enrollment projections. There must
be good communication between facilities planning, design and construction, and facilities management.
Finally, processes to enable feedback from the operations and maintenance of facilities to planning and
design are important to enhance the quality of new and renovated schools.
Once schools are built, preventive maintenance (i.e., an ongoing plan for addressing annual maintenance
and operations) and a long-term capital improvement program are critical. One of the most important
aspects of maintaining facilities in the long-term is preventive maintenance. Beyond maintenance, an
aggressive energy management program is essential to minimizing utility costs and providing a sustainable
building environment. In addition, adequate custodial and grounds operations are necessary not only to
provide clean buildings and grounds, but healthy and suitable learning environments as well.
The scope of this chapter includes a review of the organization, staffing structure, models of operation,
policies, management practices, work order system, inventory and warehouse, custodial services, and
energy consumption. The review team conducted interviews, reviewed data and documents, assessed
processes and visited school sites to support the analyses and efficiency evaluation.
This chapter presents recommendations for facilities maintenance and operations for Hillsborough
County Public Schools (HCPS) and includes the following major sections:
School Size and Configuration
School Conditions and Capital Planning
Facility Asset Management Planning
Maintenance Operations
Custodial Services
Grounds Management
Energy Management
162 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
The HCPS Chief Operations Officer (COO) oversees the planning, design, construction, maintenance and
operations of school facilities. Three general manager positions report to the COO that pertain to this
chapter – Maintenance, Growth Management and Planning, and (Facilities) Planning and Construction.
The scope of this efficiency study focused on the facilities management activities listed above supported
by the General Fund.
Total spending on Maintenance and Operations, excluding custodial services, was $19.6 million in 2015-
16, down from 22.1 million or 11 percent since 2011-12. Table 6.1 presents a five-year expenditure history
for the HCPS Maintenance Division.
Table 6.1. HCPS Maintenance Expenditures, General Fund, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Expenditure Type
(Object) 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
2015-16
(Unaudited)
100 Salaries $14,181,023 $14,485,982 $13,854,602 $13,719,615 $13,654,848
200 Employee
Benefits $4,424,636 $3,933,319 $4,004,719 $4,038,763 $4,145,148
300 Purchased
Services $1,406,528 $1,428,245 $837,350 $625,595 $724,971
400 Energy Services $818,982 $847,150 $770,124 $600,089 $438,313
500 Materials &
Supplies $591,507 $644,015 $614,649 $486,379 $322,798
600 Capital Outlay $519,149 $548,617 $249,360 $511,319 $278,251
700 Other $177,396 $73,681 $79,112 $75,196 $89,189
Total $22,119,222 $21,961,008 $20,409,917 $20,056,957 $19,653,517
Source: HCPS five-year expenditure and staffing history - site codes 9810, 9811, 9812, 9813, 9820, 9821, 9823,
9824, 9831, 9833, 9834, 9839, and 9840
Table Note: May not sum to total due to rounding
As of April 2016, HCPS facilities included 139 elementary schools, four K-8 schools, 43 middle schools, 28
high schools, 6 alternative schools, 8 adult/technical schools, and various administrative/support
buildings. The total school and administrative support space currently in use throughout HCPS (including
portable buildings) is approximately 26.7 million square feet. Table 6.2 presents number and current
replacement value (CRV) of the HCPS facilities, by facility type, as of April 2016.
163 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Table 6.2. Summary of HCPS Facilities
Facility Category Number Area (nsf)1 CRV2
Elementary Schools 139 11,581,103 $2,320 M
K-8 Schools 4 525,176 $105 M
Middle Schools 43 5,513,581 $1,075 M
High Schools 28 7,504,537 $1,631 M
Special Center/Alternative
Schools 6 229,402 $50 M
Adult/Technical Schools 8 558,112 $121 M
Total Schools 228 25,911,911 $5,302 M
Administrative Facilities 21 826,542 $243 M
Total Facilities 249 26,738,453 $5,545 M
Source: HCPS (GCG REQUEST 86 - Facilities Inventory.xlsx, 85 Gibson Consulting Request (Construction Cost).xlsx).
Notes: 1. Total school areas include portables.
2. Current Replacement Values (CRV) calculated based on the following standard unit rates:
Elementary schools - $189/gsf
Middle schools - $184/gsf
High schools - $205/gsf
Other - $277/gsf
GSF calculated based on definition of net and gross square footage per State Requirements for Education
Facilities 2014 prepared by the Office of Educations Facilities, Florida Department of Education.
School Size and Configuration
The HCPS Growth Management and Planning Department provides services related to the planning and
siting of new schools and related facilities, managing capacity at schools to ensure adequate space to
serve new residential development, and the purchase and sale of district real estate. The Department
responsibilities include:
Maintaining the inventory of school buildings and spaces (master plans)
Coordinating the acquisition and disposal of all real estate
Preparing leases and agreements
Coordinating with local governments on siting, construction, and permitting issues
Providing information on the availability of adequate school capacity to serve proposed
residential developments including School Concurrency requirements
Coordinating the preparation and adoption of the Five-year Facilities Work Plan
Working with developers and local governments to have school sites dedicated as part of major
residential developments
164 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Working with local governments to co-locate school sites with complementary public uses
Periodically adjusting the attendance boundaries of schools
The HCPS Department of Growth Management and Planning has policies and procedures in place to
effectively manage educational and support space. Based on reviews of student enrollment projections,
existing school inventory and capacities, and a five-year facilities plan that includes some school additions
and limited new school construction, there is a sound plan in place to address projected modest growth.
Effectively managing a school district’s facilities requires a sound facilities planning process and the use
of rational school use, capacity, and design policies. The effective and efficient use of HCPS facilities
incorporates:
A detailed and accurate facilities inventory
Effective utilization of existing resources
Appropriate use of temporary buildings
Clear policies governing use of facilities, boundary changes, and consolidation
Valid demographic statistics and reliable estimates of enrollment trends
Established use rates and facility capacities
Understanding of educational program needs related to current schools and spaces
Rational school boundary and transportation analyses
The utilization of school space has changed dramatically over the past years in HCPS. Two decades ago,
HCPS was in a situation of severe overcrowding. Of the 150 schools at that time (1996), more than half
were over capacity with over a third being designated as “critically overcrowded.” Table 6.3 presents a
summary of critically overcrowded schools by school type in 1996.
Table 6.3. School Utilization (1996)
Facility Type Number of Schools No. Critically
Overcrowded
% Critically
Overcrowded
Range of Utilization
(% of Capacity)
Elementary Schools 107 32 30% 120% to 209%
Middle Schools 28 13 46% 124% to 176%
High Schools 15 7 47% 126% to 148%
Source: HCPS (Item 105 – Overcrowded Task Force Summary – MGT, 1997)
At that time there were also over 1,800 portable classrooms with more being recommended and delivered
at a rate of 125 portables per year.
Due to the overcrowded conditions, HCPS created an ‘Overcrowded Schools Task Force’ to make
recommendations to the school board addressing the conditions. The Overcrowded Schools Task Force
and subsequent policies had a significant impact over the next 20 years in dealing with the overcrowding
of school facilities. Past superintendents and chief operating officers also drove the reduction of the
number of portable classrooms and the move to more permanent modular units.
165 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Today, based on the Florida Department of Education’s Educational Facility Inventory System (EFIS), which
includes the Florida Inventory of School Houses (FISH) as well as other data resources, the number of
relocatable (portable) units has continued to decline to a current number of 68 units64. FISH is a
comprehensive facilities database maintained by the Florida Department of Education. It contains data
regarding school inventories (permanent and relocatable), total spaces, type of classroom, facility age,
and growth data.
Trends also indicate that HCPS has increased its school area to student ratio (sf/student) to 135.3
sf/student overall. The overall ratio is in line with state averages, although there is some variation by
school type. The national median school district ratios of school area to student enrollment compared to
HCPS ratios are presented in Table 6.4.
Table 6.4. School Ratios of Area per Student
Facility Type HCPS Actual National Average65
Elementary Schools 126.8 sf/student 120 sf/student
Middle Schools 146.1 sf/student 146 sf/student
High Schools 130.1 sf/student 163 sf/student
Source: Calculations based on HCPS data (REQ 86 – Facilities Inventory.xls, REQ 114D – School Enrollment 2015-15
(SP003)) and A4LE Calculating School Capacity: Local, State & National Perspectives, October 2007.
Best practices in determining school capacities have been researched and reported by the Association for
Learning Environments (A4LE; formerly CEFPI). School capacity is defined as the number of students that
can be reasonably accommodated by a school building and site. In determining optimal school capacity,
it is important to consider physical, operational and programmatic variables.
Physical variables include: school size, areas by type, site size and amenities, support facilities
(e.g., kitchens, cafeterias, multipurpose rooms, etc.), number and types of teaching stations,
building infrastructure, building and life safety codes.
Operational variables include: school utilization rates, efficiency of space use, operational policies,
staffing levels, funding structures, space management and scheduling, specialty academic and
program offerings, and operational budgets.
Programmatic variables include: educational program offerings, specialty programs, schedules,
extended use, community use, partnerships (i.e., off-site and distance learning), class sizes and
staff ratios.
Program capacity takes into consideration total student seats, support facilities, schedule flexibility,
program offerings, and utilization. Calculating accurate and suitable school capacities is critical to
distributing the right enrollment levels (right number of students) in each school, as well as planning for
schools to best accommodate projected enrollments. Optimizing utilization (the number of students
64 HCPS, School Land Inventory – 2016 (GCG Request 86 – Facilities Inventory.xlsx), “relocatable units”. 65 A4LE (formerly CEFPI) Calculating School Capacity: Local, State & National Perspectives, October 2007.
166 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
enrolled to school capacity) will minimize operational costs to the district. Other impacts of the school
capacity/planning process include: adjustment of attendance boundaries, minimization of overcrowding
and underutilization, maximizing educational resources, improved life safety and security, and
justification of school construction funding.
School sizes and configurations within HCPS are developed following HCPS Educational Specifications (Ed
Specs) and design guidelines.66,67 These guidelines are based on Size and Occupancy Design Criteria for
Public Schools in accordance with the Florida Department of Education Office of Educational Facilities
(2014).
The current capacities and utilization rates are calculated using two methodologies utilizing: 1) FISH
Guidelines, and 2) functional capacities based on available stations and space restrictions. The HCPS
Manager of Growth Management and Planning calculates both the FISH (design) capacity and functional
(operational) capacities for each school. The design capacity is equivalent to a ‘maximum capacity’ – the
total number of seats available in a school facility. The functional capacity considers teaching stations and
the desired number of students per classroom.
The functional capacity can vary within a school based on reconfiguration or reallocation of classroom
space to resource rooms or other functional uses. Many of the HCPS elementary schools have high
exceptional and special education (ESE) needs and have reallocated space, thus reducing the functional
capacity and increasing the utilization. Table 6.5 summarizes the current 2015-16 capacities and utilization
rates.
Table 6.5. School Utilization, 2015-16
Facility Type FISH
Capacity
Functional
Capacity Enrollment
% Capacity
(FISH)
% Capacity
(Functional)
Elementary Schools 110,475 94,362 91,297 83% 97%
Middle Schools 51,470 51,470 37,731 73% 73%
High Schools 62,048 62,048 57,689 93% 93%
K-8 5,564 5,564 4,808 86% 86%
Totals 229,557 213,444 191,525 83% (avg.) 90% (avg.)
Source: HCPS (REQ 114D - HCPS School Enrollment 2015-16 (SP003))
HCPS school functional capacities are within the range or above national benchmarks. Average national
utilization benchmarks for school capacities reported by A4LE are presented below:
Elementary schools – 95 to 100%
Middle schools – 70 to 85%
High schools – 80 to 85%
66 School District of Hillsborough County Prototype Schedule of Spaces – Elementary Schools (July 26, 2013), Middle Schools (February 3, 2014), and High Schools (May 6, 2016). 67 HCPS General Design Requirements (September 8, 2015).
167 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
School utilization rates can be increased by appropriate scheduling and efficient use of school space. The
tighter the scheduling of space the better the utilization rate for the school. Utilization rates should be
used in conjunction with design (maximum) capacities.
The HCPS Growth Management and Planning Department also maintains good procedures to manage
future school needs based on projected student enrollments. HCPS planners meet annually with the
County Planning Commission, School Board, and local city representatives to coordinate and base the
school facility plans and local government comprehensive plans on consistent projections. These student
projections include the use of statewide Capital Outlay full-time equivalent (COFTE) forecasts, district-
wide projections, impact of development trends, Inter-local Agreements, and concurrency service areas.
In 2005, the Florida Legislature passed legislation that requires adequate school facilities to be in place
within three years of construction of new homes. This concept is called “concurrency” and has been in
place in the County since 1990 for roads, parks, sewer, water, storm water and solid waste facilities.
Schools became part of that program in 2008 with the adoption of a school concurrency program. School
concurrency is determined when a development project reaches the point of a preliminary plat or multi-
family site plan or later in the development review process.
In order to implement the concurrency program, HCPS defines the geographic area that will "serve" new
developments. Individual school attendance zones are used to assess the impact of any new
developments. Any new development being proposed (at the subdivision and/or site plan stage) are
evaluated to determine if the three school levels (i.e., elementary, middle and high) that provide service
to the subject site have adequate capacity to serve the new development. The Growth Management and
Planning Department uses school concurrency tools, including the ‘student generation estimator’ to
evaluate the need for new space, schools or the re-allocation of space among existing schools.
Generation rates calculated by the estimator tool assume a certain percentage of students will go to the
charter schools in accordance with the HCPS open enrollment policy (School Choice). There are 47 charter
schools that draw students from the home schools within their designated boundary. The tool and
calculations adequately address this variable. Finally, any overcrowding at specific schools is addressed by
review and consideration of school attendance boundaries.
Figure 6.1 shows the projected student enrollment trends over the next decade. The trends indicate an
overall projected growth rate of 5.4 percent over the next five years and 1.3 percent thereafter. Overall,
this equates to about 24,000 new students by 2026-27.
168 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Figure 6.1. Student Enrollment Projections (COFTE)
Source: FEA analysis of HCPS data (REQ 114C - Statewide Total COFTE 2016-17 to 2026-27)
The HCPS Five-Year Facilities Work Plan (2016-17 through 2020-21) lists three new schools and five school
additions opening within the next five years.68 The projects will add about 4,450 new student stations.
Additional schools and school additions proposed for the following five years will add another 5,300
student stations. Excess functional capacity in the existing schools provides the ability to absorb over
22,000 students.
Based on reviews of student enrollment projections, existing school inventory and capacities, and a five-
year facilities plan that includes some school additions and limited new school construction, there is a
sound plan in place at HCPS to address projected modest growth.
School Conditions and Capital Planning
School systems across the U.S. are facing the largest collection of aging buildings ever encountered.
Deferred maintenance backlogs continue to grow at unprecedented rates, and the toll it has taken on
facilities is reaching critical levels. A wealth of research and data are available supporting the need for
better facility capital investments and asset management.
The average age of HCPS schools and support facilities is approximately 49 years. Half of the facilities are
over 50 years old. In addition, there was a large building boom in Hillsborough County and a corresponding
increase in school construction approximately 20 years ago. With a large percentage of building systems
design life being 20 to 25 years, many of these systems are nearing the end of their useful service life and
in need of renewal.
Many HCPS school building systems are in need of maintenance, repair, or replacement as evidenced by
the $794 million backlog of deferred maintenance and capital projects identified by Facilities Operations.
68 HCPS (REQ 114A 5-year Facilities Work Plan 2016-17 through 2020-21)
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Elementary Middle School High School Total
169 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Deferred maintenance is a measure of major maintenance and repair (i.e., capital renewal) needs that
have accumulated over the life of the school and have been generally delayed due to the lack of funding.
This backlog of deferred maintenance can be reflected in an overall facility condition index (FCI). The FCI
is a national standard derived by dividing the total cost of facility deferred maintenance by the current
replacement value (CRV) of the schools.
According to APPA, the association for Leadership in Education, an FCI less than 0.05 is indicative of
buildings in good condition; an FCI between 0.05 and 0.10 is fair; and greater than 0.10 is poor. Based on
this scale, most HCPS buildings (individual schools and other district facilities) are in fair to poor condition.
Overall, however, the district has a 0.14 ranking indicating poor condition.
In a February 2011 report by the 21st Century School Fund, school districts across the U.S. had an estimated
$271 billion in deferred maintenance, averaging $4,883 per student. HCPS backlogs of deferred
maintenance are reaching this level with an estimated $4,145 per student. With a growing deferred
maintenance backlog, lack of preventive maintenance and major repairs will translate into growing capital
project needs where under-maintained systems can no longer function.
In the 2016 State of Our Schools; America’s K-12 Facilities report, the following national standards for
school facilities funding based on industry best practices were proposed.69 The percentages refer to
recommendations for percent of CRV that should be invested annually to maintain schools in good
condition.
2 percent of CRV annually for capital renewal of buildings and grounds systems, equipment
replacement, upgrades and major repairs (e.g., roof replacements, HVAC repairs, etc.).
1 percent of CRV annually for alterations to accommodate facility changes necessitated by school
design trends, changing educational models, and new classroom requirements.
1 percent of CRV annually for systematically reducing the backlog of deferred maintenance.
A level of 4 percent of the CRV is recommended and should be budgeted for capital renewal on an annual
basis. For HCPS, this would translate to approximately $111 million per year in school renewal investments
to maintain current levels of deferred maintenance and current school conditions. The reduction of
deferred maintenance and meeting the changing demands of educational environments would double
that rate of investment.
Current funding levels, based on the HCPS Five-Year Facilities Plan are listed in Table 6.6.
69 2016 State of Our Schools; America’s K-12 Facilities, prepared by the National Council on School Facilities (NCSF), The Center for Green Schools (USGBC), and the 21st Century School Fund.
170 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Table 6.6. Comparison of Planned Capital Renewal Expenditures and Recommended Levels
Fiscal Year 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2020-21
Planned Expenditures $29,300,000 $35,100,000 $38,600,000 $40,000,000 $41,300,000
Recommended Level $110,900,000 $110,900,000 $110,900,000 $110,900,000 $110,900,000
Funding Gap $81,600,000 $75,800,000 $72,300,000 $70,900,000 $69,600,000
Source: HCPS (REQ 114A – HCPS 5-Year Facilities Work Plan 2016-17 through 2020-21 and REQ 114B - HCPS FY2015-
2016 Five-year Facilities Plan), 2016 State of Our Schools Report.
Recommendation 6-1: Dedicate a resource to manage an in-house Facilities Condition Assessment
program.
The goal of a facilities asset management program is to conduct facility condition assessments (FCAs) and
create a facility investment plan that is rational, repeatable, recognizable, and credible. To that end, the
State of Florida requires school districts to conduct an “educational plant survey” every five years to aid
developing plans to meet the needs of the student population, administrators, and staff. The survey must
be submitted to the Florida Department of Education (DOE) Office of Educational Facilities for review and
validation. According to the State Requirements for Educational Facilities (SREF), Section 3.1, the following
information must be included in the survey:
Inventory – current inventory of all existing Board owned and long-term leased educational,
ancillary and auxiliary facilities and plants, including all satisfactory lease-rented, lease-purchased,
owned and rented relocatables.
Recommendations for remodeling, renovation, new construction, site acquisition, site
development and site improvement for existing and new educational and ancillary plants and
auxiliary facilities. Include the general location, capacity and estimated cost of work for each
project.
Student Population – An analysis using numbers provided by the Department, of the projected
capital outlay full-time student population (COFTE).
Facilities Lists – Statements of proposed types of facilities, grade structure and student capacity.
Capital Outlay Proposed Funding Plan – An analysis of expenditures and projected capital outlay
funds for grades kindergarten through 12 and vocational schools; millage necessary to raise the
required local contribution; tax levies on nonexempt property (millage); debt service obligations;
anticipated state funds; the amount of unappropriated and unencumbered capital improvement
funds available for construction at the time of the survey or other financial data as may be
relevant, such as trends in assessed valuation.
171 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
The district’s last educational plant survey was approved in 2014. The next survey is scheduled to be
conducted in 2019.70 The 2014 survey identifies capital needs, primarily as renovation and expansion
projects.
The current process of conducting facility condition assessments on a five-year cycle is fragmented and
not well documented. There are also multiple survey processes used to identify needs and compile
separate lists, which complicates the prioritization of facility needs. These factors inhibit the ability of the
district to provide accurate, complete, objective and credible data for funding capital renewal needs and
identifying how to best utilize existing funds. The district should update the FCA program or have a process
for reconciling the survey with the existing facilities data to allow for a comprehensive understanding of
needs and prioritization of those needs.
The 2014 Council of Great City Schools report, Reversing the Cycle of Deterioration in the Nation’s Public
School Buildings, provides recommendations for implementing a good FCA program. The program
includes the following steps:
1. Categorize facility needs based on sources of funding.
2. Prioritize needs based on safety, code compliance, preservation of assets and enhancements.
3. Select a uniform method of categorizing building systems (e.g., Uniformat/Uniformat II).
4. Create standard forms to be used by assessors.
5. Select schools to be assessed.
6. Identify the assessment team and required skillsets.
7. Provide assessors with detailed information.
8. Provide assessors with training and calibration to ensure equitable grading.
An opportunity exists for HCPS to continue build upon the established facility asset management program.
While there have been efforts to collect and maintain important facilities data, there are areas of potential
improvement to improve the accuracy and consistency of facilities data. These include: using a systems
approach in data collection, consolidating the identification and prioritization of a backlog of deferred
maintenance, calculation of relative school facility condition indexes, standardization of building system
classifications and inventory nomenclature, positioning of facilities condition needs, additional training of
staff regarding the importance and impact of the asset management program, enhanced equipment
histories to support decision making, and enhancement of the quality and repeatability of asset
management information.
For school districts with a large number of schools and total building area, conducting facility condition
assessments can be very labor intensive and costly. Outside consultants can typically be procured for
$0.12 per gross square foot (gsf) to $0.15 per gsf to conduct the condition assessments. Multiplying
$0.12/gsf times the HCPS total square footage (26.7 million gsf) equates to approximately $3.2 million to
conduct external FCAs. An alternative systems-based approach to identifying deferred maintenance could
be applied using internal staff much more cost-effectively. The systems approach to FCAs is based on
70 http://www.fldoe.org/finance/edual-facilities/reports-pubs-surveys/k-12-school-diss-fl-college-system-sur.stml
172 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
industry standards and meets the previously stated guidelines. The approach identifies building system
level needs by using parametric estimates to produce a macro-level of deferred maintenance costs and
FCIs for each school.
This approach requires a facility walk-through by personnel knowledgeable in evaluating building system
condition. Using standardized forms, generalized condition levels of major systems from new or excellent
condition (5) to not operational or unsafe (1) are determined, and repair costs are developed based on a
percentage of the current replacement value (CRV). Site systems and site utilities are typically evaluated
as separate systems.
There should be a dedicated facilities position to manage an FCA and asset management program for
HCPS. This resource could complete periodic systems-level FCAs, identify and prioritize requirements,
prepare the Five-year Facilities Plan, and coordinate with other aspects of a good asset management
program. It is important for this position to collaborate with the maintenance and operations activities
such as identifying critical schools, systems and optimizing the preventive maintenance program.
(Preventive maintenance is discussed later in this chapter.)
Fiscal Impact
The estimated fiscal impact of adding a dedicated position assumes a manager salary, pay grade 30, of
$57,692. With benefits at 28 percent of compensation, the total fiscal impact is $73,845 a year.
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Dedicate a resource to
manage an in-house FCS
program
$0 $0 ($73,845) ($73,845) ($73,845) ($73,845)
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Facility Asset Management Planning
Recently published international standards define asset management as involving “the coordinated and
optimized planning, asset selection, acquisition/development, utilization, care (maintenance) and
ultimate disposal or renewal of the appropriate assets and asset systems.”71 The U.S. National Research
Council defines facility asset management as a systematic process of maintaining, upgrading, and
operating physical assets cost-effectively. It combines engineering principles with sound business
71 International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 55000 – asset management.
173 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
practices and economic theory and provides tools to achieve a more organized, logical approach to
decision making.72
Facility asset management can be described as the practice of making sound decisions regarding asset
disposition and when, where, and how to spend facility operations and maintenance, preservation, and
improvement resources in the most cost-effective way on assets that are retained. A cohesive facility
management plan with appropriate performance measures and metrics provides a framework to guide
those decisions related to caring for facility assets.
Recommendation 6-2: Develop a Facility Management Plan.
Maintenance Operations does not have a comprehensive facilities management plan to integrate the
functions of the Department and align its efforts with the HCPS 2015-2020 Strategic Plan. While the HCPS
2015-2020 Strategic Plan does not explicitly mention facilities, in the goal area of “Processes & Financials”
the district’s Strategic Plan Objectives tracks three objectives that relate to facilities management:
Increase energy consumption efficiency
Optimize percentage of utilized student stations
Increase number of days with optimal learning conditions73
While some parts of Maintenance Operations have developed handbooks or documented the individual
procedures that guide their work efforts, there is no overall plan that defines the full breadth and depth
of the Department’s activities nor a structure that ties various individual plans together to show how they
support the larger district mission. Facility management leaders in an educational environment must
develop strategies and plans that are consistent, clear, and well thought out.
The review team identified functional areas that would benefit from operational plans that better define
the processes and procedures within Maintenance Operations. For example, there are no documented
quality assurance procedures for oversight of work performed by contractors. Instead, supervisors with
the various maintenance departments are expected to know what contractors are working on in their
functional or geographic areas and oversee the execution and quality of the contractor’s work. This
approach has resulted in instances of contractors billing the district for work that was never performed
and poor craftsmanship in other cases. Given the size of the district and the amount of contracted work,
a more formalized, documented plan for controlling and overseeing contracted work is merited.
Another example where the lack of an operational plan negatively affects Maintenance Operations is in
the area of work management and control. There is no written plan that describes the district’s approach
for integrating planned maintenance activities, corrective maintenance, and customer requests. Without
such a plan, there are also no standard operating procedures for work performed within each of three
geographically-aligned maintenance departments. Each department determines how it prioritizes work,
72 National Research Council (NRC), 2004, Investments in Federal Facilities: Asset Management Strategies for the 21st Century, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C. 73 HCPS Strategic Plan Objectives 1516, Rows 93-95.
174 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
assigns a technician, and documents work completion. The lack of standard procedures across the three
geographical departments introduces risks for inconsistencies in levels of customer service and data errors
in the computerized maintenance management system.
The Maintenance General Manager should lead the preparation of a Facility Management Plan that
includes detailed operational plans describing how the Department will carry out its functions in support
of HCPS’ Strategic Plan. Examples of operational plans that should be developed include facility condition
assessment, management of contracted services, work control and management, inventory control,
energy management and sustainability, grounds operations, emergency preparedness and disaster
recovery, safety and security, and employee training and development. The plan should also describe how
Maintenance Operations intends to create value for its stakeholders and document how the organization
will respond to both external and internal factors. External factors may include economic, political and
social concerns. Internal factors may include talent pool, organizational culture, and the availability of
resources.
As part of the Facility Management Plan, the Maintenance General Manager should develop specific
objectives and initiatives that will demonstrate that the operational plans are being fully implemented.
These objectives and initiatives will provide accountability throughout the entire organization and should
be well understood by department managers, supervisors and staff. The objectives and initiatives should
then be tracked, measured and tied to improvement of facility management services for the district.
Educational organizations at the forefront of their communities have developed best practices by using
various approaches to develop and track key performance indicators (KPIs) for measuring results. Any
performance management approach used should integrate financial and non-financial performance
measures to show a clear linkage between the district’s strategies and objectives and Maintenance
Operations’ objectives, initiatives, and metrics. An example list of potential KPIs is presented in Table 6.7.
Table 6.7. Example Key Performance Indicators
K-12 SCHOOL KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS (KPI)
Input Measures:
FCI of building inventory (% DM/CRV);
Maintenance staffing levels (# of FTEs);
Operations funding ($/GSF);
Baseline energy utilization index (EUI) /school; and
Capital project funding ($).
Process Measures:
Work orders by type;
Top 10 work order problem codes;
Staff utilization (productivity) rates;
PM completion rate (%);
Proactive maintenance (PrM) WOs generated;
PM / CM mix (%);
175 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Utility cost/GSF ($/GSF);
Re-work percentage (%);
School safety inspection findings;
Work order turn-around time (days); and
Annual building inspections completed (%).
Outcomes:
Cost of operations ($/GSF);
Custodial inspection scores (#);
Change in FCI (%);
Trend in EUI per school
Customer Satisfaction (%); and
Budget Performance (%).
Source: Developed by Facility Engineering Associates
Fiscal Impact
This recommendation can be implemented with existing resources.
Maintenance Operations
The Maintenance Operations Department, part of the Division of Operations, falls under the responsibility
of the Chief Operations Officer. Maintenance is organized into nine departments or shops that report to
the Maintenance General Manager.
Air Conditioning & Energy Management (AC)
Communications & Electronics (CE)
Custodial Operations (CU)
Facility Maintenance Support (FM)
Logistics Operations (LO)
Maintenance Central (MC)
Maintenance East (ME)
Maintenance West (MW)
Sites & Utilities (SU)
Maintenance Operations provides maintenance and repairs for all district facilities and is organized by
function to deliver services across the entire district, with the exception of three Maintenance
Departments that are geographically aligned to East, Central, and West areas. Each functional and
geographic department is led by a manager who reports to the Maintenance General Manager. An
organizational chart for HCPS Maintenance is shown in Figure 6.2.
176 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Figure 6.2. Organizational hart for HCPS Maintenance Operations
General Manager, Maintenance
Department Manager, Facilities
Maintenance Support
Department Manager, AC &
Energy Conservation
Department Manager, Sites &
Utilities, SNS Maintenance
Manager, Communications & Electronics, CMMS/
IT
Manager, Custodial Operations
Manager, LogisticsManager,
Maintenance WestManager,
Maintenance East
Manager, Maintenance
Central
Executive Secretary
12 Filled Positions 77 Filled Positions 85 Filled Positions 17 Filled Positions 10 Filled Positions* 60 Filled Positions 51 Filled Positions 40 Filled Positions 41 Filled Positions
Source: HCPS September 2015 (11- Maint Mgrs and Counts)
Figure Note: *Substitute Custodians not included
The Facilities Maintenance Support (FMS) Department conducts deferred maintenance inspections and
maintains a five-year plan for major repairs, manages a roofing inspection, maintenance and repair
program, oversees contracts for elevator preventive maintenance and certification, and retains the
services of architects and engineers for repair projects. The Department also works with the district’s
procurement staff to obtain and manage contracted services for the entire Facilities Maintenance
Division. Clerks in FMS assist with budgeting, accounts payable, and human resources duties. The FMS
Department Manager also serves as assistant to the General Manager of the Facilities Maintenance
Division.
The Air Conditioning & Energy Conservation Department maintains and repairs heating, ventilation, and
air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, water coolers, and ice machines at all district facilities and oversees
contracted vendors that provide HVAC services. The Department also is responsible for district energy
conservation and energy management programs.
The Sites and Utilities Department provides general landscaping, athletic field and play court
maintenance, site and drainage repairs, pest control, collection of solid waste and recycling, maintenance
of exterior features such as fencing, signs and pavements, and oversees any contractors that provide these
services. The Department also operates and maintains water supply and wastewater treatment systems
at eleven schools not connected to municipal services, inspects all backflow preventers and fire hydrants,
and maintains equipment in support of the district’s Student Nutrition Program.
The Communications and Electronics Department is responsible for the maintenance and support of
systems across the district in the areas of telecommunication, fire alarm, security, intercom, video
surveillance, and access control. The Department also maintains equipment such as public address
systems, stage lighting, scoreboards, bells, and master clocks. The Department operates and maintains a
computerized maintenance management system (CMMS) in support of all facility maintenance functions.
177 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
The Custodial Operations Department works with staff and the head custodian at each school to maintain
building cleanliness, coordinate special cleaning, and respond to emergencies. The Department provides
janitorial training programs, works with suppliers to evaluate cleaning supplies, and repairs cleaning
equipment. The Department also manages the pool of substitute custodians that augments permanent
staff.
The Logistics Operations Department provides a variety of services for the district, some of which go
beyond traditional facilities maintenance functions. The Department orders, stores and delivers textbooks
and instructional materials, manages mail services, operates the district’s central warehouse, and
provides furniture repair and reuse programs. The Department directly supports the Facilities
Maintenance Division with purchasing and warehouse support for five maintenance departments (Air
Conditioning and Energy Management, Sites and Utilities, and Maintenance East/Central/West).
The geographically aligned maintenance departments, Maintenance East, Maintenance Central, and
Maintenance West, provide facility maintenance and repairs for building interiors in the areas of electrical,
plumbing, carpentry, floor coverings, painting, and locksmith services.
A summary of budgeted positions by maintenance department is shown in Table 6.8. The counts represent
budgeted positions for fiscal year 2015-16 and include assigned and vacant positions.
Table 6.8. Summary of Maintenance Operations Budgeted Positions, Fiscal Year 2015-16
Department Budgeted Positions
Maintenance Operations 141
Facilities Maintenance Support 12
Air Conditioning & Energy Management 91
Sites & Utilities 104
Communications & Electronics 18
Custodial Operations 2102
Logistics Operations 72
Maintenance East 45
Maintenance Central 44
Maintenance West 57
Total Budgeted Positions 667
Source: HCPS (11 - Count Sheet)
Table Note: 1Includes the Maintenance General Manager, nine department Managers, and other support staff. 2 Includes 200 Substitute Custodian positions (all other custodians are charged to the schools)
The five Facilities Maintenance departments that perform building maintenance activities (Facilities
Maintenance Support, Air Conditioning & Energy Management, Maintenance East, Maintenance Central,
and Maintenance West) are comprised of 254 budgeted positions ranging from the Department managers
178 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
to front-line trades workers. There are 198 trades worker positions that are responsible for maintaining
28,373,368 gross square feet (gsf) across 288 facilities.
The in-house workforce is supplemented by numerous contractors who perform a variety of maintenance
tasks totaling about 13 percent of facilities work orders, which results in an adjusted workforce size of 224
fulltime equivalents (FTE). The calculated maintenance ratio of 126,667 gsf per FTE is higher than the
typical range for educational facilities of 95,000-110,000 gsf per FTE that is observed in K-12 districts
across the country and far exceeds the staffing formula of 45,000 sf per building maintenance staff
suggested by the Florida Department of Education.74
HCPS spends considerably less per square foot on maintenance than the Florida state average, and this
gap has increased over the past five years. Table 6.9 shows that in 2014-15 HCPS spent 28 percent less
than the state average on a cost per square foot basis and 42 percent less than the state average on a
COFTE basis.
Table 6.9. HCPS Annual Maintenance Cost Comparisons
Maintenance Cost per GSF Maintenance Cost per COFTE
School Year Hillsborough State
Average
Percent Below
St. Avg. Hillsborough
State
Average
Percent
Below St. Avg.
2010-11 $1.01 $1.32 23% $153.29 $241.64 37%
2011-12 $0.95 $1.25 24% $145.21 $228.20 36%
2012-13 $0.98 $1.27 23% $146.28 $232.94 37%
2013-14 $0.95 $1.32 28% $142.30 $243.20 41%
2014-15 $0.96 $1.34 28% $142.76 $246.56 42%
Source: FEA analysis of Florida Department of Education, Florida School District Annual Plant Maintenance and
Operations Cost Information
For the 2014-15 school year, the district’s $0.96/GSF maintenance cost was the fourth lowest among the
13 Florida school districts with 10,000,000 or more gross square feet and the $142.76/COFTE maintenance
cost was the fourth lowest among all 67 Florida districts.
The lower investment in maintenance is reflected in lower customer satisfaction. A trend in customer
satisfaction survey results from the 2010-11 through 2014-15 school years shows that building occupants
are less satisfied with the services provided by Maintenance Operations than they were five years ago. In
response to the question, “How would you rate the services of Facilities Maintenance compared to 12
months ago?” respondents answered “Significantly Improved” or “Slightly Improved” on a decreasing
basis and “Slightly Worse” on an overall increasing basis. Table 6.10 presents customer responses on the
relative assessment of facilities maintenance over the past five years.
74 Florida Department of Education, Maintenance and Operations Administrative Guidelines for School Districts and Community Colleges, Chapter 6.5. (http://www.fldoe.org/finance/edual-facilities/maintenance-operations-administrative-.stml)
179 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Table 6.10. Customer Satisfaction Responses
Percent of Responses (District Wide) to
“How would you rate the services of Facilities Maintenance compared
to 12 months ago?”
School Year Significantly
Improved
Slightly
Improved
About the
Same
Slightly
Worse
Significantly
Worse
2010-11 23.8 36.8 37.7 1.7 0.0
2011-12 19.7 38.9 39.7 1.3 0.4
2012-13 18.6 30.4 48.1 3.0 0.0
2013-14 18.0 28.3 51.1 2.1 0.4
2014-15 14.9 27.4 54.4 3.3 0.0
Data Source: HCPS (15 – Customer Service)
These findings were reinforced by school visits conducted by the review team. While interviews were
conducted with only a limited number of school principals, similar dissatisfaction was expressed.
Comments were made about the routine deferral of needed repairs due to the lack of funding and the
length of time for problems to be corrected. For example, one school visited has not had its exterior
painted since its original construction in 2002; the principal understood that appearance was a lower
priority than other needed repairs, but expressed concern that the dingy appearance does have a negative
effect on the learning environment. Another example cited was an interior location that took about a year
and a half to get its light bulbs replaced; the ceiling height was too high for the school’s custodians to
reach with a ladder so they had to rely on a maintenance request to obtain workers and a manlift to reach
the high ceilings.
Recommendation 6-3: Establish a Preventive Maintenance (PM) program manager position to oversee
an effective PM program.
One of the most important aspects of maintaining facilities in the long-term is preventive maintenance.
Preventive maintenance is a set of planned actions undertaken to retain an item at a specified level of
performance by providing repetitive scheduled tasks (e.g., inspection, cleaning, lubrication and part
replacement) which prolong system operation and useful life. Through preventive and predictive
maintenance, life cycle costs are reduced and the serviceable life of facilities is extended.
The HCPS’s maintenance program is insufficient to provide the long-term stewardship needed to preserve
the district’s facilities. Due to the aging facilities and increasing backlogs of deferred maintenance,
Maintenance Operations operates generally in a reactive mode, performing breakdown maintenance,
corrective actions, and responding to customer work requests. There are limited and only recent
documented preventive maintenance (PM) program job plans to set standards and provide processes for
ensuring PM completion. Maintenance managers reported that PM tasks get done “when they [the
workers] get caught up.” This is primarily due to a lack of dedicated staff and allocation of resources to
complete preventive maintenance.
180 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Analysis of facilities work order data from the 2011-12 through 2014-15 school years shows that only 1.5
percent of work orders for building systems could be classified as some degree of planned maintenance.75
There has been some improvement in preventive to corrective maintenance ratios over the last few years
with the improved use of WebTMA to generate PM work orders. However, a review of the WebTMA data
still indicates only 14 percent of the Maintenance Operations staff labor hours are attributed to PM.
Figure 6.3. PM Work Order History and PM/CM Ratio
Source: FEA analysis of HCPS WebTMA data (Work Order Sort.xls)
While there is no universally accepted standard for the degree of preventive maintenance needed to care
for K-12 facilities, two sources provide some perspective on the importance of planned maintenance. First,
the Florida Department of Education states:
Planned maintenance, as opposed to responding to maintenance problems after they
occur, should be implemented as a proactive strategy by all administrators and
supervisors at Florida’s various educational facilities…The benefits of this approach are
numerous and proven to be effective in maintaining the general functional utility of
educational buildings on an ongoing basis.76
A second perspective comes from APPA: Leadership in Educational Facilities (APPA), an organization
whose focus is facilities in an educational environment. APPA’s Levels of Service help describe the
characteristics of a facilities maintenance program on a one through five scale. Their definitions for the
75 For this analysis, work orders (WO) were categorized with "WO Type Description" equal to Facility Assessment, Preventive Maintenance, PM Repairs, Project Work, and Planned Maintenance as being planned maintenance activities. 76 Florida Department of Education, Maintenance and Operations Administrative Guidelines for School Districts and Community Colleges, Chapter 6.2. (http://www.fldoe.org/finance/edual-facilities/maintenance-operations-administrative-.stml)
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-Feb 2016
PM WO (count) PM WO (hours)
181 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
degree of preventive maintenance versus corrective maintenance at each level are shown in Table 6.11
and reveal that HCPS’ maintenance approach would be characterized somewhere between “Reactive
Management” and “Crisis Response” in its level of preventive maintenance.
Table 6.11. Preventive Maintenance for APPA Levels of Service
Level 1 2 3 4 5
Description Showpiece
Facility
Comprehensive
Stewardship
Managed
Care
Reactive
Management
Crisis
Response
Preventive vs. Corrective
Maintenance 100% 75-100% 50-75% 25-50% 0%
Source: Becker, T. and Bigger, A. (2011). Operational Guidelines for Educational Facilities: Maintenance (Second
Edition), APPA: Leadership in Educational Facilities
The common challenge many school systems face is how to break the cycle of reactive (corrective)
maintenance with limited resources to focus on more PM. With insufficient maintenance staffing levels,
HCPS is faced with the challenge of continuing to meet customer expectations for repairs while dedicating
resources to implement an effective PM program. In our experience, school facilities organizations that
have succeeded in doing this have invested in dedicated PM pilot programs and/or PM groups.
A dedicated PM manager can align a prioritized PM program with the critical needs determined by the
facility condition assessments in an overall facilities asset management program. Using the results of the
FCAs to prioritize schools by facility condition index (FCI) and criticality, a dedicated PM group can focus
limited resources (either internal staff or external contractors, or both) on the critical systems to extend
the life of schools and maximize reliability.
In almost all cases, experience has shown that a streamlined reliability-centered maintenance (RCM)
approach is most successful in school systems with limited resources. A streamlined RCM approach simply
consists of the optimal mix of preventive (PM), predictive (PdM), proactive (PrM) maintenance and run-
to-failure methodologies. The incorporation of predictive technologies, age exploration, failure modes
and effects (FMEA) analyses, business impact analyses and root cause failure analyses (RCFA) will make
best use of staff time and maximize the reliability of building systems. This will decrease building system
and equipment failures resulting in corrective maintenance (CM) work orders and eventually allow more
resources to be dedicated to PM. A recommended target would be for HCPS Maintenance Operations to
achieve a minimum mix of 50%/50% for a PM/CM ratio.
HCPS should hire a dedicated manager to accomplish the implementation of an effective PM/RCM
program and optimize the use of internal staff and contractors. The PM/RCM manager should also
collaborate with the FCA program manager, coordinate reconfiguration of WebTMA to measure success
of the PM/RCM program, implement predictive technologies and develop a training program for staff. The
PM/RCM program manager should also implement an RCFA program to investigate systemic failures and
design solutions to mitigate future failures.
182 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Fiscal Impact
The estimated fiscal impact of adding a dedicated position assumes a program manager salary, pay grade
30, of $57,692. With benefits at 28 percent of compensation, the total fiscal impact is $73,845 a year.
Recommendation One-Time
Costs/Savings 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Dedicate a resource to
manage an in-house FCS
program
$0 $0 ($73,845) ($73,845) ($73,845) ($73,845)
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Recommendation 6-4: Implement a maintenance staffing model based on trade-specific positions
instead of Multi-Trade Workers.
HCPS has adopted a model of classifying most of its facilities maintenance workforce as “Multi-Trade
Workers.” Of the 198 trades positions in the five departments performing building maintenance, 158
positions (or 80 percent) are categorized as Multi-Trade Workers. Few personnel have the trade-specific
licenses typically expected for electricians, plumbers, and other maintenance trades.
An example from a Multi-Trade Worker job description states that the employee’s specific duties include:
Perform and (sic) higher skilled repairs and adjustment to carpentry, plumbing, water lines,
electrical wiring and equipment, drywall, sheet metal, plastering, ceramic tile, furniture,
shelves, doors, door frames, masonry, glazing, windows, painting, fencing, irrigation,
landscaping, locks, roofing, HVAC and other related minor maintenance or repair to property
or machines/tools of various kinds.77
Given such a wide variety of maintenance duties, workers are more susceptible to being assigned to tasks
for which they are not fully qualified. They may not have the knowledge and experience to recognize and
mitigate safety hazards, which can result in severe injuries to themselves or anyone in their work area.
They are also more likely to lack sufficient technical expertise in an assigned task and thus produce lower
quality work in a less productive manner.
While classifying workers as Multi-Trade Workers can provide a degree of flexibility in assigning tasks to
an individual employee and in transferring or promoting workers within the organization, such an
approach introduces safety and quality risks to the individual and the district. The use of the Multi-Trade
Worker classification should be limited to a small percentage of the maintenance workforce that can be
used as part of team under the supervision of qualified, trade-specific workers.
In order to determine the right number of maintenance positions to retain as Multi-Trade Workers and
the appropriate classification of other positions by technical trade and skill level, the district should
conduct a comprehensive labor needs analysis that considers workload distribution by type of work, age
77 11 - 54757_Trades_Worker_10_Multi.pdf
183 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
and type of buildings, adequate supervision, and other factors that go beyond high-level benchmark
comparisons for staffing.
Fiscal Impact
The fiscal impact for this recommendation reflects a one-time cost for outside assistance in preparing a
detailed labor needs analysis, plus internal staff time to rewrite position descriptions and reclassify
employees into appropriate positions. The potential costs for additional maintenance trade worker
positions are not included, as these cannot be estimated until the labor needs analysis is performed.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Implement a maintenance
staffing model based on trade-
specific positions instead of
Multi-Trade Workers
($75,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Recommendation 6-5: Increase the number of maintenance supervisors.
The negative effects of an overall low maintenance staffing level and the high use of the Multi-Trade
Worker designation are exacerbated by high staff to supervisor ratios. A trades worker to immediate
supervisor ratio of 10:1 is considerable reasonable and appropriate in a typical facilities management
environment. The HCPS supervisor to trades worker ratios in the five building maintenance departments
are shown in Table 6.12.
Table 6.12. Maintenance Worker to Supervisor Ratios
Department Trades
Workers
Line
Supervisors
Ratio
(Rounded)
Facilities Maintenance Support 5 1 5:1
Air Conditioning & Energy Management 66 4 17:1
Maintenance East 39 2 20:1
Maintenance Central 40 2 20:1
Maintenance West 48 2 24:1
Source: FEA analysis of HCPS data (11 – Count Sheets)
HCPS maintenance supervisors are expected to oversee the execution of work by the in-house workforce,
coordinate with and provide oversight of work performed by contractors across a district that spans
approximately 1,260 square miles, mentor and train the predominantly Multi-Trade Worker staff, and
perform normal administrative duties expected of all supervisors. In addition, multiple interviewees
indicated that maintenance supervisors spend a significant amount of their time chasing down
information from requestors that is necessary in order to set the priority for work orders and assign the
work to an appropriate worker. Given their span of control and long list of responsibilities, maintenance
184 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
supervisors have little time to plan, organize and control the work under their charge and instead spend
nearly all their time reacting to crises. As discussed in other recommendations, work processes suffer and
contractor oversight is lacking.
HCPS should add nine supervisory positions to be distributed across Air Conditioning & Energy
Management, Maintenance East, Maintenance Central, and Maintenance West so that a trades worker
to supervisor ratio of approximate 10:1 is attained in each department. If additional maintenance trade
workers are later added to the workforce as a result of the labor needs analysis, an appropriate number
of supervisors should also be added at that time to maintain adequate supervision.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal impacts for this recommendation are based on an estimated salary and benefits cost for a
maintenance supervisor of $51,731, plus 28 percent for benefits. For nine positions the estimated annual
fiscal impact is $595,941 ($51,731 x 1.28 x 9).
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Increase the number of
maintenance supervisors $0 ($595,941) ($595,941) ($595,941) ($595,941) ($595,941)
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Recommendation 6-6: Document and streamline facilities management processes.
There is a need to more fully document facilities management procedures and automate processes. It is
critical to have well-documented workflow processes prior to, or concurrent with, the implementation of
PM/RCM programs and work order management improvements. A well-structured facilities organization
coupled with efforts to improve processes will lead to the creation of generally effective and efficient
maintenance and operations processes.
There is an opportunity to improve work coordination and transitions, as well as HCPS facilities staff’s
understanding of expectations. This is where the documentation of standard maintenance processes can
really help. A number of efficiencies are typically gained through the training and communication of
enhanced and documented processes. First, and foremost it forces a critical and objective look at the
current way things are done. The benefits typically include:
Enhanced use of technology by identifying technology touch-points and requirements
Streamlined workflow – including automating processes
Understanding of better coordination and communication requirements between shops and
between supervisors and staff
Better understanding of expectations and focus on achieving them
Ability to generate more accurate and consistent performance measures
Reduced training requirements due to reduction in the number of process variations
185 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Improved staff morale through fairer evaluations of performance
Creation of easier staff transition to other roles
The lack of formal and documented processes at HCPS appears to be in part the result of extensive
experience and long tenures of many of the facilities supervisors and managers. The success of the
informal processes that have served Maintenance Operations well in the past will be more and more
difficult to achieve as experienced personnel retire. It is also more important than ever today to be able
to truly take advantage of the technologies available.
The HCPS Maintenance Operations Department should formalize and document facilities planning and
maintenance procedures to ensure effective transfer of knowledge (and prevent the loss of institutional
knowledge) of operation and maintenance of the facilities. HCPS should consider developing process
flowcharts for the following:
Corrective maintenance (CM)
Preventive maintenance (PM)
Emergency response
Service requests/reimbursable services
QC and life safety inspections
Asset/equipment updates
Materials management
A sample workflow process chart (i.e., swim lanes chart) is shown at Figure 6.4.
Figure 6.4. Sample Workflow Process Chart
Source: Facility Engineering Associates
If everyone understands the workflow processes, then the “why” behind inputting data into WebTMA
(the current CMMS) becomes much more relevant. Understanding the “why” greatly increases the odds
that people will do it; therefore, improving the accuracy of the reports and numbers coming out which in
186 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
turn leads to confidence in the performance measures being used to evaluate overall performance and
justify HCPS operations budgets and staffing.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal impacts for this recommendation are limited to use of in-house resources, primarily staff time. The
implementation of formal and documented processes for facilities management is expected result in cost
avoidance from increased staff efficiencies coupled with lean process improvements, but they cannot be
explicitly quantified.
Recommendation 6-7: Use available data to analyze work order processes and improve worker
productivity.
HCPS uses a CMMS to track maintenance work orders. These information systems provide a rich data set
for analysis by managers to help in planning and evaluating the efficiency and effectiveness of the
maintenance work. Analysis of worker productivity can reveal opportunities for maintenance process
improvements, introduce more accountability into work practices, and reduce the need for additional
maintenance staff by increasing the output of the existing workforce.
Existing CMMS data is being used by some managers, particularly in Communications and Electronics
(C&E) and Sites and Utilities (S&U), to monitor processes and manage work. C&E metrics include
maintaining a goal of zero work orders over 30 days old, performing five inspections per month, and
increasing quality control inspections from 5 to 10 per month. In S&U, the number of work orders is
tracked by month and number of productive hours. These efforts, while admirable, have been developed
ad hoc and there is no overall plan for work management and control or productivity improvement within
Maintenance Operations.
The review team also analyzed district work order data from the CMMS. Figure 6.5 presents the
distribution of work orders (counts) by department/shop for the 12 months ending April 2016. This data
shows that the two largest volumes relate to general maintenance (e.g., plumbing, carpentry, electrical)
and air conditioning maintenance.
187 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Figure 6.5. Number of Work Orders by Maintenance Operations Department
Source: FEA analysis of HSPC CMMS data
Figure 6.6 presents the distribution of work orders (counts) by trade for the 12 months ending April 2016.
AC - Air Conditioning CE - Communications and Electronics CU - Custodial Operations FM - Facility Maintenance Support FR - Furniture Repair LO - Logistics Operations MC - Maintenance Central ME - Maintenance East MW - Maintenance West PC - Planning and Construction SN - Student Nutritional Services SU - Sites and Utilities
188 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Figure 6.6. Number of Work Orders by Maintenance Operations Department
Source: FEA analysis of HSPC CMMS data
Work order completion times were also analyzed. Figure 6.7 presents the number of work orders (WO)
completed in less than 30 days, 30-90 days, and greater than 90 days by department/shop. The two largest
consumers of work orders identified above also reflect the longer response times. General maintenance
and air conditioning maintenance have the highest number and percentage of work orders completed in
more than 30 days.
189 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Figure 6.7. Work Order Completion Times
Source: FEA analysis of HSPC CMMS data
Interview with HCPS maintenance staff revealed conditions that reduce worker productivity and which
could be addressed through an analysis of and improvement to work order management processes. For
example:
The majority of the maintenance technicians are dispatched from one central location. With such
a large district, it can take many hours to drive to farther locales which reduces the number of
productive hours completing work orders that a technician can accomplish in a day. The district is
not currently tracking this “windshield time” or taking steps to minimize its impact on
productivity. It was reported that maintenance vehicles have global positioning system (GPS)
tracking installed, but that a very limited number of managers have access to the GPS data and
that union agreements only allow them to do so for disciplinary investigations and not for routine
management of work.
Data provided by HSPC shows that a majority of vehicles are over 10 years old, and it was reported
that breakdowns are frequent. Transportation does not typically provide loaner vehicles, so when
a maintenance truck is in the shop for repairs the worker normally assigned to that vehicle is
without most of his/her tools and parts and must share a vehicle with another trades worker.
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
45000
50000
Nu
mb
er o
f W
ork
Ord
ers
Number of WOsCompleted in > 90 days
Number of WOsCompleted in 30-90 days
Number of WOscompleted in < 30 days
190 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Workforce productivity is reduced when two workers are dispatched to a task typically completed
by one worker or extra time is spent by the primary worker “chauffeuring” a passenger worker to
a second location.
Fiscal Impact
Improvement of worker productivity by implementing this recommendation will not translate to direct
cost savings, but will create more time for the performance of planned maintenance. Thus, while there is
no direct annual fiscal impact, the long-term value will be realized.
Recommendation 6-8: Enhance data standards and quality, data maintenance and configuration of
WebTMA to improve performance measurement.
The current CMMS in place at HCPS is WebTMA, version 5.1.09. The HCPS Maintenance Operations
Department has been using WebTMA since October 2010. Several modules are in use:
Base Module
Service Request
Materials Management
Time Management
Project Management
Contract Management
Report Writer
Custodial Management
mobileTMA Go
The relatively recent implementation and use of WebTMA has helped streamline the work request
process, allowing requesters to initiate their own requests. The Department is moving toward equipment-
based work orders, which will improve the district’s ability to identify, track, and plan for capital renewal
needs. There has been improvement in the acceptance and use of WebTMA as evidenced by improvement
of the utilization data and improved metrics. However, the equipment records and data maintenance
processes are in need of improvement.
For example, review of CMMS work order data for the 12 months prior to the site visit showed that a
significant percentage of work orders do not have labor hours assigned (Figure 6.8). This lack of data would
be an impediment to process improvements in work order management, such as improving worker
productivity.
191 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Figure 6.8. Recording of Hours on Work Orders
Source: FEA analysis of HCPS CMMS data
To move forward with the improved utilization of WebTMA, the following actions should be taken:
Improve and document facilities data standards (including equipment nomenclature, attributes,
and building systems classifications).
Validate the equipment records and create records for all major maintainable assets.
Document and train staff on an asset update process to maintain accurate records.
Re-configure WebTMA work order codes to enable generation of the recommended performance
measures (e.g., work order type codes, problem and repair codes, status codes and priority
codes).
Fiscal Impacts
Fiscal impacts for this recommendation are limited to use of in-house resources, primarily staff time.
Recommendation 6-9: Consider implementing the use of procurement cards by technicians.
Current HCPS practices regarding warehousing of assets, materials, and supplies and supply chain
management are overseen by the Logistics Operations department. There is a central warehouse located
at 5715 E. Hanna Avenue in Tampa. The warehouse receives, distributes, and manages construction
materials, repair parts, educational materials. Five additional smaller warehouses which are aligned to
support maintenance activities.
168066321
1449
18861036
375935736
1
381212408
83284687
249
775279
3578150
291
19664411
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
AC CE CU FM FR LO M(C,E,W)
PC SN SU
Work Orders with Labor Hours Work Orders without Labor Hours
AC - Air Conditioning CE - Communications and Electronics CU - Custodial Operations FM - Facility Maintenance Support FR - Furniture Repair LO - Logistics Operations MC - Maintenance Central ME - Maintenance East MW - Maintenance West PC - Planning and Construction SN - Student Nutritional Services SU - Sites and Utilities
192 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
The warehouse utilizes Lawson inventory management software to manage inventory. Parts and supplies
utilized for facilities related projects are also captured in the district’s CMMS, TMA. Logistics Operations
has captured its processes and procedures, particularly as they relate to inventory management utilizing
Lawson and TMA, in the Handbook for Warehouse Personnel.
Warehouse personnel are responsible for maintaining the inventory database and ensuring WebTMA is
updated. Specific responsibilities include:
Prioritizing requests
Regularly (daily) entering parts into TMA
Reviewing open purchase order reports and verifying deliveries have been completed.
Organizing and streamlining process related paperwork related to p-card transactions,
requisitions, returns, and adjustments
Maintaining item location records
Determining the amount of inventory to be stocked
Completing inventory counts twice a year
Assisting trades workers in inventorying truck stock
HCPS has established procurement guidelines for five categories of purchasing thresholds:
1. <$5,000 = Use good business practices
2. $5,000-$9,999 = Telephone quotes
3. $10,000-$49,999 = Written quotes
4. ≥$50,000 = Invitation to Bid or Request for Proposal
5. Sole source/public notice = Sole Source Letter78
The requisition of parts for facilities personnel is governed by Logistics Operations through a request
process utilizing a stock transfer form. Unlike many school districts which allow technicians to procure
parts directly from vendors, HCPS requires technicians to coordinate procurement through Logistics
Operations. This has created a high degree of accountability of parts and materials, but can inhibit worker
productivity as it requires the intervention of warehouse specialists and storekeepers to procure and
release parts to technicians.
For example, if a worker responding to a service call at a remote location needs a part not stocked on his
or her vehicle and knows of a nearby outlet that may have the part, they must call a parts technician and
provide all descriptions and part numbers over the phone. The parts technician contacts the store or
supplier to place the order and provide purchasing details, and then the technician is notified to go pick
up the part. The review team learned of several accounts of how this process sometimes breaks down,
including:
78 14 – Logistics_Operations_Manual.pdf
193 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Not being able to reach the parts technician who normally handles the location where the work
is being performed, and having difficulty getting a different parts technician to address the
worker’s need on the spot.
Errors when sending or receiving detailed parts information verbally, because the workers do
not have email or text capability when dispatched.
Not allowing the purchase of a part if it is an item is in stock in a maintenance warehouse. The
worker is expected to pick up the part from the warehouse the next morning and then return a
second time to complete the repair.
Implementing a method that allows technicians to more readily obtain parts can help improve both
productivity and response time. While the ability of technicians to obtain materials is not solely
responsible for a decrease in timeliness of response (discussed earlier in this chapter), it is a contributing
factor. The district already has a procurement card system employed which is robust and considered a
model for other districts. To improve worker productivity and timeliness of response, the district should
consider allowing technicians to procure parts using procurement cards. Purchases would still need to be
captured and coded by Logistics Operations to ensure inventory tracking and assignment of used parts to
maintenance work orders.
Fiscal Impact
Fiscal impacts for this recommendation are limited to use of in-house resources, primarily staff time.
Recommendation 6-10: Implement an employee training and development program for Maintenance
Operations.
Adequate training is an important part of a long-term workforce strategy, but Maintenance Operations
has no formal employee training and development plan. There is a recognized need for training, but
training ranges from very limited to non-existent. Changes in employee classifications to trade-specific
positions, adding more supervisors, and other recommendations for improvements identified throughout
this chapter drive the need for a documented training and development program and adequate funding
for training. Figure 6.9 identifies the types of training typically included in a comprehensive training plan,
as well as indications of how such training is generally delivered and who should receive it.
194 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Figure 6.9. Example Employee Training Matrix
Source: Developed by Facility Engineering Associates
Dir
ecto
r of M
&O
Mai
nten
ance
Sup
ervi
sor/
Lead
HVA
C M
echa
nic
Elec
tric
ian
Plum
ber
Carp
ente
rM
aint
enan
ce G
ener
alis
t
Pain
ter
Gro
und
Crew
Lea
der
Gro
unds
Wor
ker
Cler
k
Onl
ine
Vid
eo
Peer
Del
iver
edO
utsi
de P
rovi
der
Asbestos Awareness l l l l l l l l l
Bloodborne Pathogens Safety l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
Combustible & Flammable Liquids l l l l l l l l l l l l
Confined-Space Entry l l l l l l l l
Hazard Communications l l l l l l l l l l l l l
HAZ-MAT Spi l l Prevention & Control l l l l l l l l l l l
Lock-out/Tag-out l l l l l l l l
Materia ls Handl ing, Storage & Use l l l l l l l l l l l l
Alcohol -Free Workplace l l l l l l l l l l l l
Back Injury Prevention l l l l l l l l l l l l
Bui lding Evacuation & Emergencies l l l l l l l l l l l l
Emergency Response l l l l l l l l l l l l
CPR Academic l l l l l l l l l l l l l
Disaster Preparedness l l l l l l l l l l l l l
Electrica l Safety l l l l l l l l l l
Eye Safety l l l l l l l l l l l l l
Fal l Protection l l l l l l l l l l
Fire Extinguisher Safety l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
Fire Prevention Safety l l l l l l l l l l l l l
General Construction Safety l l l l l l l l l l
General Fi rs t Aid l l l l l l l l l l l l l
Golf Cart l l l l l l l l l l l l l
Fortkl i ft l l l l l l l l l l l
Bucket Truck l l l l l l l
Job-Speci fic Equipment l l l l l l l l l l l
Hand & Power Tool Safety l l l l l l l l l l l l l
Hearing Conservation l l l l l l l l l l l l
Ladder & Scaffolding Safety l l l l l l l l l l l l l
Office Safety l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
Cultura l Di fferences l l l l l l l l l l l l l
Personal Protective Equipment l l l l l l l l l l l l
Sexual Harassment l l l l l l l l l l l l
Sl ips , Trips , & Fa l l s Prevention l l l l l l l l l l l l l
H.S. Diploma/GED l l l l l l l l
Col lege Degree l l
Technica l Degree l l l l l
Electrica l - Master/Journeyman l l
Plumbing - Master/Journeyman l l
HVAC Certi ficate l l
On-the-Job l l l l
Department Procedures l l l l l l l l l l l l
Work Practeices - Time Management/Organizationl l l l l l l l l l l l l
Supervis ion l l l l
Employee Relations - Consel ing, Performance Evaluationl l l l
Work Order System l l l l l l l l l l l
Re
gula
tory
Ge
ne
ral T
rain
ing
Ce
rtif
icat
ion
/Lic
ense
sG
en
era
l Pe
rso
nn
el
Pra
ctic
es
195 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Fiscal Impact
The fiscal impact for this recommendation includes a one-time cost of $25,000 for outside assistance in
developing a training program, plus an allocation of $500 per year per Maintenance Operations employee
(467 positions) for additional training activities across the Department.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Implement an employee
training and development
program for Maintenance
Operations
($25,000) $0 ($233,500) ($233,500) ($233,500) ($233,500)
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Custodial Services
The HCPS custodial services function is responsible for cleaning 21.6 million square feet in 215 schools,
and other non-school facilities. District-wide there were 1,412.5 school custodial positions in 2014-15,
representing a salaries and benefits investment of $31.4 million a year. Custodial services are included in
each school’s budget and the head custodian at each school is supervised by the principal or other school
administrator.
There is a central office custodial support function at HCPS that provides training, quality assurance, and
technical support to the schools. This function serves in an advisory capacity to the school principals and
administrators. The central office custodial function is led by a Manager of Custodial Operations that
reports to the General Manager of Maintenance. Three custodial supervisors and a recently added Central
Placement Specialist report to the Manager of Custodial Operations and they split up school support
geographically. The Central Placement Specialist is responsible for the maintenance and placement of the
custodial substitute pool.
Table 6.13 presents a five year expenditure history for the central office custodial function. All campus
based custodial staff, supplies, equipment and training costs are charged to the respective schools.
196 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Table 6.13 Central Office Custodial Expenditures, General Fund, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Expenditure Type (Object) 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
(Unaudited)
100 Salaries $240,756 $250,132 $280,561 $345,113 $349,863
200 Employee Benefits $86,929 $79,017 $90,268 $110,459 $133,548
300 Purchased Services $5,909 $1,444 $36,030 $32,165 $23,192
400 Energy Services $11,653 $13,664 $13,637 $11,401 $8,886
500 Materials & Supplies $23,239 $30,893 $35,971 $28,706 $42,769
600 Capital Outlay $3,144 $2,908 $4,573 $9,395 $6,041
700 Other $12,281 $8,876 $7,521 $9,695 $10,173
Total $383,912 $386,934 $468,560 $546,933 $574,472
Source: HCPS five-year expenditure and staffing history.
Table Note: May not sum to total due to rounding
Recommendation 6-11: Change custodial staffing formula and management approach to reflect
industry standards for efficiency. 79
The Planning Guide for Maintaining Public School Facilities, issued in sponsorship by the National Center
for Education Statistics and the National Cooperative Education Statistics System, establishes a standard
that a school custodian (night shift) should be able to clean between 28,000 and 31,000 square feet per
each 8-hour shift to keep school areas clean. The standard square footage allocation is best served by the
night custodial staff because the majority of their work is performed during hours when students are not
at school.
Additional custodians are needed during the day to open up the building, support cleaning during the
breakfast and lunch periods, be available for daytime restroom and spot cleaning, and other duties such
as event set-up and break-down. Because effective cleaning cannot be accomplished when students are
in school, most of the custodial time should occur after school hours. This is more challenging in smaller
elementary schools because at least one individual is needed during the day.
Overall, with day shift and night shift combined, many school systems are able to achieve an aggregate
coverage ratio of 22,500 square feet per custodial full-time equivalent (FTE). Because high schools are
larger and have larger custodial staffs, a smaller percentage of the custodial workforce needs to work the
day shift. The opposite is true for elementary schools. As a result, while 22,500 square feet per FTE should
be the overall target for productivity, this may vary by school type.
HCPC applies a complex formula for allocating custodial units, or FTE staffing, to schools. This formula uses
a point system that considers the school’s square footage, the number of rooms, and the number of
students, among other factors. Figure 6.10 presents an example of a custodian unit allocation worksheet
for 2014-15.
79 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS.
197 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Figure 6.10. HCPS Custodial Unit Allocation, 2014-15
Source: HCPS 2015 Custodial Unit Allocation spreadsheet
The custodial unit allocation formula results in much higher staff levels (lower productivity) than what
industry standards would prescribe. Productivity across schools within the same school type (e.g., within
elementary schools, within middle schools, etc.) also ranges significantly. Figure 6.11 presents a scatter
diagram of custodial productivity by school for 2014-15. Each dot represents the productivity (square feet
cleaned per FTE custodian). None of the HCPS schools achieves the overall productivity target of 22,500
per custodian. The vertical blue line separates secondary schools from elementary schools. Points to the
left of the vertical blue line represent middle school and high school productivity. Points to the right of
the line reflect elementary school productivity. Some school sites (USF/Patel, Sullivan Partner) are not
staffed with HCPS custodians. Accordingly, they reflect no staff allocations and their square footage is not
considered in the global productivity calculations. These two schools are visually depicted at the bottom
of the scatter diagram with “0” productivity.
2014-2015 Custodial Unit Allocation Total Points Admin Adjustment:
Position Description
Head Custodian: Level 1
Crew Leader
Custodians
Total 2014-2015 Custodial Unit Allocation:
2015-2016 Custodial Unit Allocation
Custodia l pos i tion a l locations for your s i te are based on the fol lowing ca lculations :
1. Instructional Certi fied Units / 8 = Points
2. Students / 225 = Points
3. Rooms * (includes portables ) / 11 = Points
4. Square Footage of Bui lding ** / 15000 = Points
5. Unkept Grounds (Up to 10 acres) / 2 Points
TOTAL POINTS: AVERAGE POINTS:
6. Breakfast Program Students Points
HOST Program Students Points
Custodial Allocation Calculation = = Total Pts = Custodians
7. Adult Education Schools ADM = Custodians
8. Gasol ine Pump Attendant = Attendants
9. Adminis trative Custodia l Adjustments = Custodians
2015 Total Custodial Allocation: Custodians
Head Custodian: Level 1Head Custodian: Level 1 2015 Custodial Unit Gain / Loss:
allocation
1.00
0.00
3.00
144 0.25
4.00
0 0.00
62,057
0
6.74
3.02
9.00
53.89
680
99
40 0.18
0.00
4.58
4.004.83 0.80 4.04
0.00
0.00
4.14
0.00
22.90
4.00
0.503.70
20152014
198 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Figure 6.11. HCPS Square Feet Cleaned per FTE Custodian, by School, 2014-15
Source: HCPS spring 2016 Custodial Unit Allocation spreadsheet
Based on the application of the above unit allocation districtwide, the current custodial productivity at
HCPS is 15,321 square feet cleaned per custodian.
The review team analyzed HCPS documentation, interviewed central office staff, and visited a sample of
school sites to better understand the custodial services function. Based on this information, the following
implementation strategies are critical to help ensure the success of this recommendation.
Head custodians currently report to school principals and the work schedules are established by
principals. Central office staff provide suggested guidelines for scheduling, however, it is
recommended that school head custodians report directly to a central office custodial function
through zone supervisors. This will provide appropriate technical leadership over the custodial
function and free up principal time to devote to instructional purposes. Under the new
organizational model the principal would be the customer and also provide input into the head
custodian selection, evaluation, promotion and termination decisions.
Because all head custodians will report to zone supervisors, more supervisors will be needed for
HCPS schools. It is expected that six additional zone supervisors will be needed. The resulting
zones would match the district’s eight existing geographic areas, plus one for non-school facilities.
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Global Target Productivity
Elementary SchoolsSecondary Schools
199 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Additional zone supervisors will result in an annual investment of $367,49780 in salary and
benefits.
Additional quality assurance inspectors may be needed to observe the night shift custodial staff
at schools. This should be evaluated after the additional zone supervisor positions are filled.
Work schedules should be standardized by the central custodial function and applied at all schools
for each school type, adjusting only for differences in bell schedules.
Additional equipment will need to be purchased to support the efficient cleaning of schools. Some
schools visited use floor mops for hallway cleaning instead of riding auto-scrubbers. Most schools
visited also use upright vacuum cleaners instead of the more efficient backpack vacuums. While
the equipment purchased for each school should be need-based, approximately $250,000 a year
should be invested overall in equipment purchases.
Standard cleaning procedures and frequencies – including summer deep cleaning – should be
enforced by the zone supervisors and the head custodians at each school.
The substitute pool of custodial staff will need to be increased by 50 positions, particularly to fill
vacancies or to cover absentees at elementary schools, where the total custodial counts are lower
and the impact of a single vacancy or absent employee is greater. The estimated cost of increasing
the substitute pool is $1,050,000 a year (assuming base compensation of $21,000).
Fiscal Impact
The potential for savings is based on the application of a global productivity rate of 22,500 square feet
cleaned per custodian (compared to the current HCPS level of 15,321 square feet per custodian). This
represents a blended rate of 29,500 square feet per custodian for night shift (the middle of the industry
standard range for productivity) plus day shift staffing levels. Use of the 22,500 productivity rate would
result in a reduction of 450.7 custodial FTE positions. Table 6.14 presents the calculation of estimated
annual savings if the staffing formula is changed.
80 (6*$61,249.46 [average salary and benefits for zone supervisors])
200 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Table 6.14. Estimated Custodial Savings from Changing Staffing Formula
Savings Factor 2014-15 Proposed
Total Square Feet Cleaned 21,644,402 21,644,402
FTE Allocation 1,412.7 962.0
Square Feet per FTE Custodian 15,321.3 22,499.4
Average Salary and Benefits $26,880 $26,880
Total Salaries and Benefits Cost $37,973,376 $25,858,560
Total - $12,114,816
Source: HCPS spring 2016 (Custodial Unit Allocation spreadsheet; expenditure data)
Formulas for elementary, middle and high schools may vary from the target district productivity (lower
coverage for elementary schools and higher coverage for high schools), but the net effect of formula
changes should achieve the 22,500 square feet per FTE target.
The fiscal impact in the table below assumes a two-year phase-in approach for the custodial formula and
increasing the substitute pool.
One-Time
(Costs)/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Change custodial staffing
formula. $0 $6,057,408 $12,114,816 $12,114,816 $12,114,816 $12,114,816
Increase number of zone
supervisors. $0 ($367,497) ($367,497) ($367,497) ($367,497) ($367,497)
Invest in additional
cleaning equipment. $0 ($250,000) ($250,000) ($250,000) ($250,000) ($250,000)
Increase custodial
substitute pool. $0 ($525,000) ($1,050,000) ($1,050,000) ($1,050,000) ($1,050,000)
Total $0 $4,914,911 $10,447,319 $10,447,319 $10,447,319 $10,447,319
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Grounds Management
The district occupies 5,070 total acres across 249 parcels. Grounds are maintained by a combination of
contracted and in-house workforces. The Sites and Utilities Department within the Facilities Maintenance
Division is responsible across the district for mowing, landscaping, tree trimming, irrigation, athletic field
and track maintenance, fence and gate repairs, installation and maintenance of traffic signs, site drainage,
pavement maintenance and sweeping, solid waste collection, playground maintenance, pest control, and
maintenance and repair of equipment. The Sites and Utilities Department staff composition is summarized
in Table 6.15.
201 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Table 6.15. Sites and Utilities Department Staff Composition
Staff Description Budgeted
Positions Comments
Administration
Manager
Clerks
1
3
Position allocated to 9811,
Maintenance Operations
Sites
Assistant Manager
Supervisors
Landscape Crew Leaders
Equipment Operators
Equipment Mechanics
Welders
Multi-Trade Workers
1
3
2
27
7
3
19
6 vacant
3 vacant
1 vacant
4 vacant
Utilities
Assistant Manager
Supervisors
Backflow Preventer Inspectors
Water Plant Operators
Wastewater Plant Operators
Maintenance 3, Utilities
Commercial Food Svc Equip Maint
Student Nutrition Mech Trainee
Clerks
Pest Control Techs
Multi-Trade Workers
1
2
2
1
2
2
7
3
2
7
6
Hired as Water Plant Operators
2 vacant
1 vacant
2 vacant
Total Budgeted Positions 105 19 vacancies
Source: HCPS (11 – Count Sheet, 7 - Updated Org Chart - Sites and Utilities)
Higher levels of service in mowing, irrigation, aeration, striping, and schedule coordination are needed for
maintaining football, baseball, and softball athletic fields, which are found primarily at high schools. HCPS
has opted to execute those functions using its in-house workforce and equipment. Twelve “routes” of
three to five schools each, comprised of two or more high schools plus other middle or elementary schools
that are geographically near the high schools, are assigned to a worker for both athletic field maintenance
and general mowing and landscaping.
The Sites and Utilities Department provides the appropriate schools with a copy of “Baseball-Softball Field
Maintenance; HCPS - Guidelines, Procedures and Understandings,” a document that delineates the shared
responsibilities between Sites and Utilities Department and the onsite staff at schools with respect to
athletic fields. This proactive approach is noteworthy because it establishes service level expectations for
the tasks to be performed, describes roles and responsibilities for field preparation, and provides a
customer feedback mechanism through a pre-season maintenance checklist that is completed by school
staff.
202 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Table 6.16 summarizes the analysis of data provided by HCPS that shows this staffing approach is
adequate, as the twelve zones are proportionally balanced for workload and individual worker
productivity. Mowing staff productivity typically fell in or near an acceptable 60-80 percent range.
Table 6.16. Analysis of In-House Mowing Routes
Worker Productivity
Mowing
Route
Route
Composition
Total Acres
Assigned Nov 2015 Dec 2015 Average
1 2 HS, 1 MS 155 81% 81% 81%
2 2 HS, 1 MS 146 Not Reported
3 2 HS, 2 MS 191 76% 17% 47%
4 2 HS, 1 MS, 1
ES 189 51% 81% 66%
5 3 HS, 1 MS 210 Not Reported
6 2 HS, 1 ES 102 Not Reported
7 2 HS, 1 MS 160 58% 57% 58%
8 2 HS, 1 MS 98 51% 70% 61%
9 2 HS, 1 MS, 1
ES 135 76% 75% 76%
10 2 HS, 1 MS, 1
ES 189 56% 75% 66%
11 2 HS, 1 ES 155 Not Reported
12 4 HS, 1 MS 143 84% 67% 76%
Source: FEA analysis of HCPS data (108 - Final Mowing Route Configuration After Phase 2; 89 - Facilities
Acres Maintained; 13 - Productivity Report Sites & Utilities 2015)
In addition to these grounds maintenance functions, the Sites and Utilities Department provides services
for water and wastewater treatment at 11 schools not connected to municipal services, backflow
preventer inspection, indoor gymnasium floor upkeep, and maintenance and repair of equipment
supporting the Student Nutrition Program.
For 191 locations without athletic fields, which includes nearly all elementary schools, most middle
schools, and all non-school district sites, twelve different contractors maintain grounds at an average of
fifteen sites each for mowing, edging, pruning, and other general landscaping services. HCPS has chosen
to compete the mowing work among smaller, multiple contractors so as not to have a potential single
point of failure for mowing, to align each mowing zone with a specific contractor for more effective quality
assurance oversight, and to increase contracting opportunities for small businesses in support of broader
district procurement goals. Personnel at the schools verify contractor performance and have access to an
online “Mowing Checklist” tool to report deficiencies, which are then routed to the Sites and Utilities
Department for follow up with the appropriate contractor as needed.
203 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Recommendation 6-12: Perform a detailed assessment of existing grounds maintenance equipment and
create a plan to replace outdated equipment.
Sites and Utilities Department management reported that most of the grounds equipment was old and a
challenge to maintain. A review of work order data for repairs to lawn equipment and tractors shows that
from the 2011-12 through 2014-15 school years the number of hours expended per work order increased
each year, and by 65 percent over the 3-year period. For the partial year’s data of 2015-February 2016,
the hours expended per work order decreased slightly but remained high.
These results, shown in Figure 6.12, indicate that repairs are getting more complex and difficult as
equipment ages and serve to support management’s assertion that the in-house equipment is a challenge
to maintain. The district could not produce a current inventory of grounds equipment that provided
descriptive information including data of purchase.
Figure 6.12. Analysis of Equipment Repair Work Orders
Source: FEA analysis of HCPS data (101 – Maintenance Work Order Reports)
Outdated, non-working equipment can cause delays and impact the ability to meet customer
commitments. The district needs to inventory and assess the functionality of existing equipment and
create a long-term plan to replace equipment that has reached the end of its service life. The inventory
should be entered into the HCPS fixed asset inventory system and tracked on an ongoing basis. HCPS
should allocate funds in the annual budget to fully implement the equipment replacement plan.
0.000
0.500
1.000
1.500
2.000
2.500
3.000
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-Feb 2016
204 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Fiscal Impact
The estimated cost of hiring an outside vendor to conduct the inventory and assessment of grounds
maintenance equipment should not exceed $20,000.
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Replace outdated grounds
maintenance equipment. $0 $0 ($20,000) ($20,000) ($20,000) ($20,000)
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Energy Management
Energy management is within the purview the Air Conditioning & Energy Conservation Department. In
addition to energy conservation, the Department is responsible for HVAC operation and controls. Schools
are divided into eight areas, each of which is assigned an energy mentor. Energy mentors are responsible
for monitoring monthly energy consumption, identifying activities that are in violation of established
practices, and interfacing with school principals to reduce energy use. Energy mentors conduct regular
site visits to identify energy conservation opportunities such as lights left on when the building is
unoccupied, windows open when air conditioning systems are operating, HVAC equipment run times and
heating/cooling set points. Technicians within the Department are responsible for addressing HVAC-
related problems such as repair of failed or failing equipment and adjustments to controls systems.
Together, the technicians and energy mentors work to ensure building systems are operating to support
the essential functions of facilities while simultaneously working to reduce energy consumption.
The district has established benchmark targets for energy use, and monitors energy consumption on a
monthly basis. HCPS spends more than $30 million annually on energy, with the vast majority of it relating
to electricity consumption. The 2015-16 spending level reflects a $3 million decrease from 2014-15 levels,
and a $5 million decrease since 2011-12.
Table 6.17. HCPS Utility Expenditures, 2011-12 through 2015-16
Expenditure Type
(Object) 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15
2015-16
(Unaudited)
410 Natural Gas $450,767 $392,454 $505,508 $346,062 $419,991
420 Bottled Gas $239,364 $86,025 $201,653 $68,024 $43,357
430 Electricity $35,688,028 $36,126,763 $34,336,968 $33,981,315 $30,626,294
Total $36,378,159 $36,605,242 $35,044,129 $34,395,402 $31,089,642
Source: HCPS five-year expenditure and staffing history.
The review team reviewed energy management program documents including policies, past annual
reports, electricity consumption and targets for each school, past projects, and future planned projects.
The district maintains and energy conservation guidelines and while it does not specifically identify
reporting or goals, it does require the following:
205 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Principals will be accountable for energy performance at their schools
Unnecessary lights will be turned off
Custodians will be responsible for shutting down schools
This program is considered to be moderately successful and is credited with HCPS achieving an overall
reduction in electricity use from 13.2 kWh/SF in 2012-13 to 12.2 kWh/SF in 2014-15, or approximately 7.6
percent reduction over four years (see Figure 6.13). Specific projects implemented since the 2009-10
school year have saved an estimated $1.6 million and 11.7 million kWh/year81. While the district has not
yet achieved its established district-wide goal of 10 kWh/SF, efforts continue to be implemented which
have resulted in improving energy efficiency. Figure 6.13 presents the historical electricity consumption
for HCPS over the past 10 years.
Figure 6.13. Historic Electricity Consumption in HCPS Facilities
Source: HCPS (District_kWhperSF_EUI.xlsx)
The review team performed interviews with individuals involved in the energy management program. Site
visits were also conducted at four representative schools. In a review of 240 elementary, middle, high,
special/alternative, and adult/technical schools, the average electricity use was 12.5 kWh/SF in the 2014-
15 school year. According to the district’s energy performance database, 139 schools are at or below their
energy consumption goals, however the goals vary by school. Out of 240 schools, a little less than half
(115 schools) consume more than 12 kWh/SF electricity (refer to Figure 6.14). Specific energy targets have
been set by the district for each school.
81 ECProjectsSummaryALL.xlsx, provided by HCPS
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
kWh
/GSF
RecommendedRange:8-12 kWh/SF
District Goal 10 kWh/SF
206 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Figure 6.14. Electricity Use in Schools
Source: HCPS (Electrical Consumption Jan 2015.xlsx)
The connection between the district’s energy database and ENERGY STAR Portfolio Manager has been
recently restored, allowing the district to benchmark school performance. Unlike the energy utilization
index which is a measure only of energy consumption, Portfolio Manager takes into account facility use
factors such as hours of operation, facility type, geographical region, and occupancy and then compares
each facility to peer facilities. As illustrated in Figure 6.15, approximately one-third of the schools have
achieved an ENERGY STAR score of 75 or better. Facilities scoring in this range are eligible to apply for the
ENERGY STAR and are encouraged to continue their programs. Facilities scoring in the 50-74 range
typically can achieve improvements through implementing low-cost controls strategies and best practices.
Facilities scoring less than 50 may require more capital intensive measures to achieve energy
improvements in addition to implementing controls strategies and best practices.
Figure 6.15. ENERGY STAR Scores in Schools
Source: HCPS (Energy Star Portfolio Manager Account)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015
Nu
mb
er o
f Sc
ho
ols
School Year
Low: 0-8 kWh/SF Recommended: 8-12 kWh/SF High: >12 kWh/SF
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
1-24 25-49 50-74 75-100
Nu
mb
er o
f Fa
cilit
ies
ENERGY STAR Score Bands
207 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
The district has identified a goal of reducing electricity consumption to 10 kWh/SF. Based on the
performance of similar districts, this is a reasonable target range and would result in an overall cost savings
of nearly $4.8 million annually.
Recommendation 6-13: Replace existing fluorescent tube (T8) lights and compact fluorescent lights
(CFLs) with light emitting diode (LED) lights.
District records show that 74 sites replaced their existing T12 fluorescent tubes with T8 fluorescent tubes
and the remaining sites are assumed to be equipped with T8 lighting. Counts at these 74 sites had a total
of 111,575 lamps replaced. From the data, some projects appeared to be a complete lighting system
upgrade and some were selective. Based on sites that appeared to be the entire building, the average
lamps per square feet is 0.025. The total district square footage is 26,721,629 square feet, yielding
approximately 668,040 T8 lamps district wide.
Fiscal Impact
Replacement of 15-watt LED in lieu of 32-watt T8 bulb would yield a district wide reduction of 11,357 kW
resulting in a rebate of $1.68 million.82 The replacement would yield an annual savings of approximately
14,309,820 kWh, which at 10.6 cents/kWh yields an annual cost savings of $1.5 million. The estimated
payback is 8.5 years with rebate.
The estimated fiscal impact is based on the following assumptions:
Conservatively assuming lighting runs for school hours only, (Average 8 AM to 3 PM), 180 days a
year: Annual run time is approximately 1,260 Hours.
Implementation costs approx. $21.60 per bulb for materials and tax (6% FL Sales Tax), not
including labor). Total project cost $14.4 million.
This analysis does not include savings from HVAC Cooling Costs, which would be reduced due to
the decreased lighting power density.
First year savings includes the TECO rebate of $1.68 million. Annually recurring savings of $1.5
million would begin in 2017-18.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Replace existing T8 lights
and CFLs with LED lights ($14,400,000) $0 $3,180,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
82 Current rebate from the utility company, TECO Energy Inc., is $148 per kW reduced
208 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Recommendation 6-14: Create a building re-tuning program.
Building re-tuning is a continuous process typically performed by in-house facilities personnel which
focuses on operational changes rather than capital projects. The process utilizes systems and personnel
that are already in place for a continuous-improvement approach. Developed by the U.S. Department of
Energy’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, the process of building re-tuning helps facilities staff
identify opportunities for improvement in existing facilities. The focus of re-tuning is on equipping building
operators with the means to use data from their building automation systems to understand the way the
facility is operating, to identify problems, and to address those problems through no- and low-cost
solutions.
Training is available online (http://retuningtraining.labworks.org). Individuals can register for the training
at no cost. In the training for building re-tuning, trainees work through controls scenarios to understand
the way systems should operate, as well as to identify operational problems. They learn to review data
trends and compare them to other operational indicators, allowing them to make system changes that
will improve operational efficiency.
Savings would be from improved HVAC control schemes such as:
AHU static pressure reset
Chilled water temperature reset
Chilled water loop differential pressure reset
Tight occupancy schedules.
Fiscal Impact
Building re-tuning typically yields energy savings between 2 percent and 26 percent with a median savings
of 15 percent (per Pacific Northwest National Laboratory). Using a conservative 5 percent savings rate for
the 200 HCPS schools with central plants, annual savings would be in excess of $1.4 million, starting in
2017-18. Savings are based on estimated energy use at the 200 schools of 268,956,378 kWh and an
average cost per kWh of $0.106/kWh. Re-tuning activities are assumed to be performed by in-house
personnel utilizing free training.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Create a building re-
tuning program $0 $0 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
209 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Recommendation 6-15: Implement low/no-cost energy conservation strategies.
Additional cost savings can be achieved through no-cost and low-cost energy conservation strategies
including the following:
1. Install VFDs on cooling tower fan motors
2. In older facilities where occupancy sensors are not present, install occupancy sensors in
classrooms, restrooms, and common areas with extended periods of low occupancy
3. Implement HVAC controls sequences
- AHU static pressure reset
- Chilled water temperature reset
- Chilled water loop differential pressure reset
4. Install air curtains between kitchens and outside, and between kitchens and dining areas
(kitchens are heated and ventilated, no A/C)
5. Repair/replace damaged chilled water piping insulation
6. Employ demand control ventilation in areas with largely varying occupancy (gyms, cafeterias,
etc.)
7. De-lamp lights in over-lit areas
Fiscal Impact
An average budget of $3,000 per school in the middle and high schools (71 schools total) has been
assumed to be invested in no-cost and low-cost energy conservation strategies for a total of $213,000. A
conservative estimate of 0.5 percent savings ($93,600) is assumed for the 71 schools, beginning in 2017-
18.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Implement no/low-cost
energy conservation
strategies
($213,000) $0 $93,600 $93,600 $93,600 $93,600
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
Recommendation 6-16: Implement no-cost best practices to reduce energy consumption.
Through current energy conservation efforts, the district has reduced its energy consumption 7.6 percent
over the last four years. Much of this success can be attributed to the vigilance of the energy mentors in
engaging schools in exercising energy efficient practices on a daily basis as well as monitoring monthly
energy consumption performance. The district should continue monitoring and implementation of
established practices including:
1. Close open windows to minimize humid air transfer into conditioned spaces
2. Maintain 76°F cooling set points during occupied hours
3. Enforce “lights out” policy
4. Calibrate thermostats
210 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
5. Perform “night drives” to schools to check lights out policy compliance after hours
6. Site visits to schools (performed quarterly at all schools, more frequently at the Top 15 worst
performers in each of the eight areas)
A list of general best practices for energy efficiency in facilities has been provided for additional
consideration in Table 6.18.
Table 6.18. Energy Efficiency Best Practices for Facilities
Social Behavior Maintenance and Operations
HVAC
Mandate temperature set-points Regular air filter changes, typically every 3 months by schedule or
longer if monitoring pressure drop
Clean coils annually
Set temperature lower when
unoccupied
Regular maintenance checks for proper performance
Check outside air damper actuator operation quarterly
Seal supply and return ductwork
Calibrate sensors and thermostats
Utilize programmable thermostat where central systems are not
present
Purchase equipment meeting ASHRAE 90.1 or higher during
replacements
Where window units are installed, insulate unit or remove with
not in use; properly seal unit in window opening.
Domestic Water
Turn off water when not in use Ensure water heater tanks and piping are insulated
Keep water heaters set at 120°F or
lower
Purchase ENERGY STAR qualified equipment during replacements
Appliances
Keep burners clean on stoves Keep refrigerator condenser coils clean
Allow air circulation for refrigerators Keep refrigerator / freezer properly sealed
Purchase ENERGY STAR qualified equipment during replacements
Lighting
Turn off lights when not in use Replace energy intensive bulbs with energy efficient bulbs, e.g.
LED retrofit bulbs
Utilize occupancy sensors in areas prone to transient traffic
where periodic non-use is anticipated
Electronics
Set computers to automatic sleep-
mode or turn off when not in use
Purchase ENERGY STAR qualified equipment during replacements
Use electronics with stand-by power
Use power strips for TVs, DVD
players, to turn off when not in use
Envelope
Draw shades during cooling Properly seal air leaks in buildings, e.g.
211 Chapter 6 – Facilities Use and Management
Social Behavior Maintenance and Operations
Close windows/doors during heating
and cooling
Install ASHRAE 90.1 compliant windows during replacements
(e.g. low-e glazing, dual pane)
Install window tinting on clear, uncoated windows
Source: FEA Energy Efficiency Best Practices for Facilities
Fiscal Impact
Strict enforcement of current and recommended district initiatives should achieve annual savings of no
less than 2 percent ($612,500). There will be no additional cost incurred to achieve this savings.
Recommendation
One-Time
Costs/
Savings
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Implement no/low-cost
energy conservation
strategies
$0 $0 $612,500 $612,500 $612,500 $612,500
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
212
This page intentionally left blank.
213 Appendix A – Recommendations and Fiscal Impacts
Appendix A – Recommendations and Fiscal Impacts
Recommendation One-Time
Costs/Savings
Net Year 1
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 2
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 3
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 4
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 5
Fiscal Impact
Net Five-Year
Fiscal Impact
Organization and Management
Recommendation 1-1: Consider options to improve
the efficiency of board meetings. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 1-2: Increase breadth of coverage
of internal audit to maximize effectiveness. ($100,000) $0 ($1,000,000) ($1,000,000) ($1,000,000) ($1,000,000) ($4,100,000)
Recommendation 1-3: Develop administrative
regulations for all applicable policy areas. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 1-4: Establish administrative
guidelines for the development of district
organizational charts.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 1-5: Reduce clerical staffing83. $0 $3,071,880 $6,143,760 $6,143,760 $6,143,760 $6,143,760 $27,646,920
Recommendation 1-6: Increase use of district’s
complaint tracking system. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 1-7: Develop a decision-making
framework for the central office, area offices and
schools.
($50,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($50,000)
Subtotal ($150,000) $3,071,880 $5,143,760 $5,143,760 $5,143,760 $5,143,760 $23,496,920
Financial Management
Recommendation 2-1: Consider implementing more
robust closing procedures to ensure the accuracy of
monthly financial statements.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
83 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS.
214 Appendix A – Recommendations and Fiscal Impacts
Recommendation One-Time
Costs/Savings
Net Year 1
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 2
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 3
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 4
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 5
Fiscal Impact
Net Five-Year
Fiscal Impact
Recommendation 2-2: Make changes to the district’s
account codes to support more effective cost control
and financial reporting.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-3: Upgrade the education,
experience, and certification requirements in the
Chief Business Officer job description.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-4: Develop supplemental annual
budget report to improve clarity and transparency. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-5: Start budget process earlier. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-6: Document new budget
process. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2.7: Establish a plan for the
Procurement Department, including specific goals,
objectives and KPIs.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2.8: Maximize the use of district
resources and accounting systems to increase the
efficiency of the Procurement Department.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-9: Implement a more robust and
intelligent spend analysis reporting tool. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-10: Require bookkeepers and
secretaries to attend ongoing training on the
purchasing process.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-11: Establish a plan for the
Accounts Payable Department, including specific
goals, objectives and KPIs.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-12: Maximize the use of district
resources and accounting systems to increase the
efficiency of the Accounts Payable Department.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
215 Appendix A – Recommendations and Fiscal Impacts
Recommendation One-Time
Costs/Savings
Net Year 1
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 2
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 3
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 4
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 5
Fiscal Impact
Net Five-Year
Fiscal Impact
Recommendation 2-13: Re-align the creation of
vendors under the Procurement Department. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-14: Re-structure the organization
of the Accounts Payable Department. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-15: Require all hourly employees
to report hours worked. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-16: Purchase software to
streamline time reporting. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 2-17: Implement additional
controls over payroll review process. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Human Resources Management
Recommendation 3-1: Reorganize the Human
Resources Division. $0 $0 $497,586 $497,586 $497,586 $497,586 $1,990,344
Recommendation 3-2: Upgrade HR management job
descriptions to require HR experience and
certification.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 3-3: Re-engineer HR systems and
procedures. $0 $0 ($360,000) ($360,000) ($360,000) ($360,000) ($1,440,000)
Recommendation 3-4: Develop and analyze HR
performance measures. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 3-5: Modify the districtwide
performance evaluation system for non-educationally
certificated employees to align actual job duties with
performance measures.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 3-6: Consider converting current
employee health insurance program to a self-funded
program.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
216 Appendix A – Recommendations and Fiscal Impacts
Recommendation One-Time
Costs/Savings
Net Year 1
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 2
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 3
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 4
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 5
Fiscal Impact
Net Five-Year
Fiscal Impact
Recommendation 3-7: Implement changes to HCPS
health insurance programs. $0 $0 $10,833,300 $10,833,300 $10,833,300 $10,833,300 $43,333,200
Recommendation 3-8: Conduct dependent eligibility
audit. $0 $0 $330,000 $330,000 $330,000 $330,000 $1,320,000
Subtotal $0 $0 $11,300,886 $11,300,886 $11,300,886 $11,300,886 $45,203,544
Technology Management
Follow-up on Sunera Recommendations $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Transportation Management
Recommendation 5-1: Implement a timekeeping
system for school bus drivers to report actual time84. $0 $0 $1,261,725 $1,261,725 $1,261,725 $1,261,725 $5,046,900
Recommendation 5-2: Reduce driver absenteeism85. $0 $998,572 $998,572 $998,572 $998,572 $998,572 $4,992,860
Recommendation 5-3: Reduce overtime for school
bus drivers and vehicle maintenance staff86. $0 $1,096,964 $1,096,964 $1,096,964 $1,096,964 $1,096,964 $5,484,820
Recommendation 5-4: Increase time between bell
schedules. $0 $2,737,790 $2,737,790 $2,737,790 $2,737,790 $2,737,790 $13,688,950
Recommendation 5-5: Phase out courtesy
transportation for secondary school students. 87 $0 $2,364,012 $4,728,406 $9,456,812 $9,456,812 $9,456,812 $35,462,854
Recommendation 5-6: Require drivers to park school
buses overnight at HCPS transportation facilities.88 ($14,200,000) $0 $436,956 $436,956 $873,912 $873,912 ($11,578,264)
84 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS. 85 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS. 86 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS. 87 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS. 88 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS. However, the fiscal impact for this recommendation was not included in the Phase I report.
217 Appendix A – Recommendations and Fiscal Impacts
Recommendation One-Time
Costs/Savings
Net Year 1
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 2
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 3
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 4
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 5
Fiscal Impact
Net Five-Year
Fiscal Impact
Recommendation 5-7: Reduce spares ratio for school
bus fleet. $258,000 $0 $946,344 $946,344 $946,344 $946,344 $4,043,376
Subtotal ($13,942,000) $7,197,338 $12,206,757 $16,935,163 $17,372,119 $17,372,119 $57,141,496
Facilities Management
Recommendation 6-1: Dedicate a resource to
manage an in-house Facilities Condition Assessment
program.
$0 $0 ($73,845) ($73,845) ($73,845) ($73,845) ($295,380)
Recommendation 6-2: Develop a Facility
Management Plan. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 6-3: Establish a Preventive
Maintenance (PM) program manager position to
oversee an effective PM program.
$0 $0 ($73,845) ($73,845) ($73,845) ($73,845) ($295,380)
Recommendation 6-4: Implement a maintenance
staffing model based on trade-specific positions
instead of Multi-Trade Workers.
($75,000) $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($75,000)
Recommendation 6-5: Increase the number of
maintenance supervisors. $0 ($595,941) ($595,941) ($595,941) ($595,941) ($595,941) ($2,979,705)
Recommendation 6-6: Document and streamline
facilities management processes. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 6-7: Use available data to analyze
work order processes and improve worker
productivity.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 6-8: Enhance data standards and
quality, data maintenance and configuration of
WebTMA to improve performance measurement.
$0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Recommendation 6-9: Consider implementing the
use of procurement cards by technicians. $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
218 Appendix A – Recommendations and Fiscal Impacts
Recommendation One-Time
Costs/Savings
Net Year 1
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 2
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 3
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 4
Fiscal Impact
Net Year 5
Fiscal Impact
Net Five-Year
Fiscal Impact
Recommendation 6-10: Implement an employee
training and development program for Maintenance
Operations.
($25,000) $0 ($233,500) ($233,500) ($233,500) ($233,500) ($959,000)
Recommendation 6-11: Change custodial staffing
formula and management approach to reflect
industry standards for efficiency. 89
$0 $4,914,911 $10,447,319 $10,447,319 $10,447,319 $10,447,319 $46,704,187
Recommendation 6-12: Perform a detailed
assessment of existing grounds maintenance
equipment and create a plan to replace outdated
equipment.
$0 $0 ($20,000) ($20,000) ($20,000) ($20,000) ($80,000)
Recommendation 6-13: Replace existing fluorescent
tube (T8) lights and compact fluorescent lights (CFLs)
with light emitting diode (LED) lights.
($14,400,000) $0 $3,180,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,500,000 ($6,720,000)
Recommendation 6-14: Create a building re-tuning
program. $0 $0 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $1,400,000 $5,600,000
Recommendation 6-15: Implement low/no-cost
energy conservation strategies. ($213,000) $0 $93,600 $93,600 $93,600 $93,600 $161,400
Recommendation 6-16: Implement no-cost best
practices to reduce energy consumption. $0 $0 $612,500 $612,500 $612,500 $612,500 $2,450,000
Subtotal ($14,713,000) $4,318,970 $14,736,288 $13,056,288 $13,056,288 $13,056,288 $43,511,122
Grand Total ($28,805,000) $14,588,188 $43,387,691 $46,436,097 $46,873,053 $46,873,053 $169,353,082
Note: Costs are negative; savings are positive
89 This recommendation was made as part of Phase I of the Educational and Operational Audit for HCPS.
219 Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Table B.1. IT Strategy and Governance Recommendations
Rec# Section Recommendation Priority Status District
Response Timeline
1 IT Alignment
Establish and document a comprehensive IT
strategy that appropriately aligns with the
District's strategic goals
High Completed Adopted Updated
annually
2 IT Alignment Select and approve IT service model High In progress
Adopting
with
refinement
Student Bulk
Scheduler
FY16-17;
ERP
Upgrade
starting
FY16-17
over 5
years; SIS
replacement
potentially
starting
FY16-17
over 2 years
3 IT Alignment Establish, define, and publish a formal IT service
catalog High In progress Adopting FY16-17
4 IT Alignment Re-purpose Technology Steering Committee
(TSC) to establish IT strategic direction High Completed Adopted Completed
5 IT Alignment Establish a Business IT Council (BIC) for IT
governance High Completed Adopted Completed
6 IT Alignment Establish an Instructional IT Council (IIC) for IT
governance High Completed Adopted Completed
7 IT Alignment Establish an IT Architecture Review Council
(ARC) for IT governance High Completed Adopted Completed
8 IT Alignment Establish a Data Governance Council (DGC) for
IT governance High Completed Adopted Completed
9 IT Value
Delivery
Consider replacing the BPI team with a Process
Excellence team that is governed by a formally
documented charter
High Completed
Adopted
with
refinement
Completed
10 IT Value
Delivery
Create a formal Project Management Office
(PMO) High In progress
Adopting
with
refinement
FY16-17
11 IT Value
Delivery
Develop a formalized portfolio project
management approach High Not started Adopting FY16-17
12 IT Value
Delivery
Reprioritize and evaluate the criticality of all
current projects High Completed Adopting Ongoing
220 Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Rec# Section Recommendation Priority Status District
Response Timeline
13 IT Risk
Management
Develop and document a computer security
incident response plan High Completed Adopted Completed
14 IT Resource
Management Reorganize IT Division organizational structure High Completed Adopted Completed
15 IT Resource
Management
Develop a detailed succession plan to retain skill
sets, competencies and capabilities within the
organization
High In progress Adopting Ongoing
16 IT Staffing and
Skill Set
Re-distribute and re-purpose the current FTE
positions in use High In progress
Adopting
with
refinement
FY16-17
17 IT Staffing and
Skill Set
Remediate IT personnel skill gaps via training,
acquisition, transitioning and /or outsourcing High In progress
Adopting
with
refinement
Ongoing
24 IT Staffing and
Skill Set
Implement a formal process that requires all IT-
related procurement requests to Flow through
the IT Architecture Review Council (ARC)
Medium In progress
Adopting
with
refinement
FY15-16
25 IT Risk
Management
Identify legal/regulatory requirements to define
and document data breach and communication
procedures
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
26 IT Risk
Management
Ensure that all new or re-negotiated
information system and security service-related
contracts contain explicitly defined SLAs and a
"right to audit" clause.
Medium In progress Adopting Ongoing
27 IT Resource
Management
Define a pay scale and associated career path
for IT professionals Medium Completed Adopted Completed
28 IT Resource
Management Adjust salaries for re-organized IT organization Medium Completed Adopted Completed
29 IT Staffing and
Skill Set
Adopt a time tracking/portfolio management
application to account for IT personnel
utilization
Medium Not started
Adopting
with
refinement
FY16-17
72 IT Value
Delivery
Create an interface between the project
portfolio management tool and an internal PMO
web page
High Completed
Adopting
with
refinement
Completed
73 IT Resource
Management
Implement a formal IT budgeting process to
ensure that IT expenses appropriately align with
the organization's overall strategy
High In progress Adopting FY15-16
74 IT Resource
Management
Evaluate a re-adjustment of the balance
allocation of appropriated IT funds between
Instructional and operational IT
High In progress Adopting FY16-17
75 IT Resource
Management
Establish a formal IT Resource Planning (ITRP)
process that supports the overall IT strategic
plan
High Not started Adopting FY16-17
221 Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Rec# Section Recommendation Priority Status District
Response Timeline
76 IT Resource
Management Develop and implement an IT training program High In progress Adopted
Training
provided as
required
77
IT
Performance
Measurement
Establish formal Key Performance
Indicators KPIs , Scorecards, and Dashboards to
evaluate the performance of IT at a strategic
and tactical level
High In progress
Adopting
with
refinement
FY16-17
112 IT Value
Delivery
Define formal Service Level Agreements (SLAs)
for services provided by IT High In progress
Adopting
with
refinement
FY16-17
113 IT Value
Delivery
Communicate internal SLAs to business and
operational process owners and review on an
annual basis
High Not started Adopting FY16-17
114 IT Risk
Management
Develop, document, and distribute a
comprehensive set of information security
policies and procedures
High Completed Adopting Completed
121 IT Staffing and
Skill Set
Augment employee job descriptions to
accurately depict job requirements and
qualifications
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
122 IT Staffing and
Skill Set
Enhance the employee evaluation process by
creating IT position-specific performance
evaluation forms
Medium Not started Adapting FY16-17
125 IT Risk
Management
Conduct enterprise-wide IT risk assessments on
an annual basis Low Not started Adopted FY16-17
Source: Sunera IT assessment Report, December 2013; Gibson Consulting Group, Inc., April 2016
222 Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Table B.2. IT Application and Infrastructure Recommendations
Rec# Section Recommendation Priority Status District
Response Timeline
18 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Develop a formal, enterprise-wide change
management process High In progress Adopting FY16-17
19 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Develop an enterprise-wide Systems
Development Lifecycle (SDLC) High In progress
Adopting
with
refinement
FY16-17
23
Application
Portfolio
Analysis
Evaluate the opportunities associated with
outsourcing and/or leveraging application
service providers (ASPs) or a Software as a
Service (SaaS) model for critical applications
High In progress
Adopting
with
refinement
FY 16-17
30
Application
&Infrastructure
Performance
Evaluate the utilization and performance of the
mainframe to determine capacity and processing
requirements
Medium Completed Adopted Ongoing
31
Application
&Infrastructure
Performance
Evaluate the utilization and performance of
critical servers to determine capacity and
processing requirements
Medium In progress Adopted FY15-16
32
Application
&Infrastructure
Performance
Implement a single, authoritative authentication
source (e.g.,LDAP) which leverages the Active
Directory domain to authenticate users
Medium In progress Adopting FY16-17
33
Application
&Infrastructure
Performance
Implement a secondary core switch to reduce
the load on the current core switch and provide
redundancy
Medium Completed Adopting Completed
34 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Evaluate alternative project portfolio and change
management solutions to replace MantisBT Medium Not started Adopting FY17-18
78
Application
Portfolio
Analysis
Develop and implement an Application Portfolio
Management (APM) program High In progress Adopting FY16-17
79
Application
Portfolio
Analysis
Restructure the current application portfolio to
better align with the District's strategic vision and
service model
High In progress Adopting FY16-17
80
Application
&Infrastructure
Performance
Evaluate options for modernizing or replacing
the First Class email application to accommodate
platform-neutral mobile user access
High Completed
Adopting
with
refinement
Completed
81
Application
&Infrastructure
Performance
Redesign and readdress remote site networks in
a more scalable, secure fashion High In progress Adopting FY16-17
82
Application
Portfolio
Analysis
Adopt a virtual desktop infrastructure (VDI) in
conjunction with bring your own device (BYOD)
initiatives
High Completed Not
adapted Completed
83
Application
&Infrastructure
Performance
Establish a single, authoritative, accessible,
highly available data source to store and link
student and employee data
High Completed Adopting Completed
223 Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Rec# Section Recommendation Priority Status District
Response Timeline
84 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC Develop a Change Approval Board (CAB) High Not started Adopting FY16-17
86
Application
&Infrastructure
Performance
Allocate secondary network interface cards
(NICs) on servers to a backup or storage network Medium In progress
Adopting
with
refinement
FY17-18
87 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Develop a standardized Request for Change
(RFC) form Medium Completed Adopting Completed
88 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Implement an "independent verification and
validation" (IV&V) process into the SDLC for large
IT projects
Medium Not started
Adopting
with
refinement
FY16-17
89 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Formalize and require Quality Assurance (QA)
and User Acceptance Testing (UAT) processes for
all applicable changes
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
90 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Consider implementing a QA/UAT automated
testing tool Medium Completed
Under
Considerati
on
Completed
91 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Implement a formal process that ensures all
changes are tested in a non-production
environment
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
92 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Implement a formal process to ensure that
production data is expunged, masked, or de-
identified prior to use into a non- production
(e.g., development of testing) environment
Medium Not started Adopting FY17-18
93 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Implement a formal process that ensures
application developers do not have
administrative access to production code
environments
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
94 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Implement a formal process that ensures all
application code changes are reviewed using a
manual/automated process prior to deployment
to production
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
106 Change Mgmt.
& SDLC
Develop a formal application developer training
program to ensure all developers are trained in
secure coding techniques at least annually
Low Completed
Adopting
with
refinement
Ongoing
126
Application
&Infrastructure
Performance
Re-organize data center cabling Low Completed Not
adopted Completed
Source: Sunera IT assessment Report, December 2013; Gibson Consulting Group, Inc., April 2016
224 Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Table B.3. IT Security Recommendations
Rec# Section Recommendation Priority Status District
Response Timeline
20
Threat and
vulnerability
management
Implement a formal vulnerability management
program High Completed
Adopted
with
refinement
Completed
21
Threat and
vulnerability
management
Develop, document, and implement a formalized
security patch program High Completed Adopted Completed
35 User
administration
Ensure that all systems which must be accessed
from the internet are positioned within a DMZ,
or less trusted, network
Medium In progress Adopting FY16-17
36 Network
security
Deploy a central AAA (e.g., RADIUS, TACACS)
server to integrate with a central LDAP
authentication system
Medium Not started Adopting FY17-18
37 Network
security
Implement a secure wireless network in
accordance with the prospective wireless policy Medium In progress Adopting FY16-17
38
Threat and
vulnerability
management
Execute internal and external vulnerability scans
on a routine basis (e.g., quarterly) Medium Completed Adopted Ongoing
39
Threat and
vulnerability
management
Execute internal and external penetration testing
on a routine basis (e.g., annually) Medium Completed Adopted Ongoing
40 Anti-virus
management
Centralize the deployment, configuration, and
administration of all anti-virus management into
a single department /function
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
41 Anti-virus
management
Configure the Symantec Endpoint Protection
(SEP) application to retain relevant anti-virus logs
for at least 365 days, with a minimum of 90 days
readily available for review
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
42 Anti-virus
management
Integrate Mac OS based systems into the current
SEP anti-virus system to provide central
management of anti-virus clients on Mac OS
based systems
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
52 Network
security
Configure all network devices to use secure,
remote administration protocols Low Completed Adopted Completed
53 Network
security
Update configuration guides and standards to
ensure that Cisco network devices use "level 5"
encryption for storage of local authentication
credentials
Low Completed Adopted Completed
54 Network
security
Develop and implement procedures for
identifying and removing rogue wireless
networks within the District's facilities on a
routine basis (e.g., quarterly)
Low In progress Adopting FY16-17
225 Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Rec# Section Recommendation Priority Status District
Response Timeline
55 Network
security
Re-configure the TippingPoint IPS system to
inspect traffic into and out of the least trusted
network security zones
Low Completed Adopted Completed
56
Information
system and
server security
Review existing systems to ensure strong
cryptography and authentication is utilized for
remote administration services
Low Completed Adopted Completed
57 Application
security
Develop and implement a formal application
scanning program that requires all internally
hosted applications to be scanned on a regular
basis (e.g., quarterly) and prior to deployment
into the production environment
Low Not started Adopting FY16-17
58 Application
security
Enforce strong cryptographic ciphers (e.g., 128
bits or greater) on public web servers Low In progress Adopting FY16-17
59
Data security
and
administration
Restrict local and domain administrator account
access on critical databases to only respective
DBAs
Low In progress Adopting FY16-17
60
Data security
and
administration
Review all instances to ensure that user
credentials are encrypted with 128 bit
encryption or greater during transmission
Low Not started Adopting FY16-17
61
Data security
and
administration
Evaluate current systems to determine what
datasets should be encrypted at rest and ensure
that strong cryptography (128 bits or greater) is
enforced
Low In progress Adopting FY15-16
62
Data security
and
administration
Enforce full disk encryption on laptop computers
issued to departments that interact with
sensitive data (e.g., PII, HIPAA)
Low In progress Adopting Ongoing
63 User
administration
Conduct a comprehensive review of all local,
Domain, Enterprise, and Schema administrator
accounts within the Windows environment so
that unnecessary accounts are disabled or
removed
Low Not started Adopting FY16-17
64 User
administration
Implement a formal process that requires system
owners to conduct periodic (e.g., quarterly) user
access reviews to identify excessive/
inappropriate access, inactive accounts and
terminated users
Low Completed Adopted Completed
65 Password
management
Review and update all critical systems' password
parameters to ensure that configurations are in-
line with industry best practices
Low In progress Adopted Ongoing
66 Password
management
Enforce the LAN Manager Authentication level
policy to require the use of NTLMv2 for the
transmission of Windows passwords
Low In progress Adopted Completed
226 Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Rec# Section Recommendation Priority Status District
Response Timeline
67 Password
management
Identify and remove all shared administrator
accounts on critical systems Low In progress Adopted Ongoing
95 Network
security
Develop a High-level, current, and
comprehensive network diagram that accurately
depicts all segments of the District's network
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
96 Network
security
Review and maintain network diagrams to
ensure they accurately reflect the current state of
the network
Medium Completed Adopted Ongoing
97 Network
security
Develop and maintain configuration standards
for network devices that define required security
parameters
Medium In progress Adopting FY 16-17
98 Network
security
Develop a formal process that ensures all firewall
rule set changes are approved, tested, and
documented
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
99 Network
security
Assess firewall configurations for approved
ports, protocols, and services at least semi-
annually"
Medium Completed Adopted Ongoing
100 Network
security
Remove legacy network devices from the
environment Medium Completed Adopted Completed
101 Network
security
Implement a formalized program to ensure that
firewall and router rule sets are reviewed on a
routine basis (e.g., semi- annually) to investigate
and restrict/remove overly permissive and
extraneous rules
Medium In progress Adopted Ongoing
102 User
administration
Assign user and service accounts to groups based
on their respective roles (i.e., RBAC) Medium Completed Adopted Completed
103
Information
system and
server security
Replace site-based domain controllers with read-
only domain controllers or implement a VDI
solution
Medium Not started Adopting FY17-18
104 User
administration
Implement a formally documented process for
requesting, logging, and approving user access
rights
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
107 Security
awareness
Implement a formal security awareness training
program Low Completed Adopted Ongoing
108
Physical and
environmental
security
Adjust ventilation within the primary data center
to ensure that air temperature and humidity is
consistently distributed throughout the raised
floor space
Low Completed Not
Adopted Completed
115 Network
security
Develop and publish a formal wireless policy that
defines authentication and encryption
requirements
High Completed Adopting Completed
227 Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Rec# Section Recommendation Priority Status District
Response Timeline
116
Information
system and
server security
Formally document and periodically review (e.g.,
annually) minimum security baselines for each
major operating system type
High Not started Adopting FY16-17
117 Network
security
Update configuration guides and standards to
require strong cryptography and authentication
for all remote administration services
High Completed Adopted Completed
118
Data security
and
administration
Document database security configuration
baselines High Not started Adopting FY16-17
119
Data security
and
administration
Augment certain database configuration
standards to require that user credentials be
encrypted with 128 bit or greater encryption
during transmission
High Not started Adopting FY15-16
120
Data security
and
administration
Augment configuration standards to require that
sensitive data at rest is encrypted with strong
cryptography
High In progress Adopting FY16-17
Source: Sunera IT assessment Report, December 2013; Gibson Consulting Group, Inc., April 2016
228 Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Table B.4. IT Operation and Continuity Recommendations
Rec# Section Recommendation Priority Status District
Response Timeline
22 Disaster
recovery
Conduct a formal, enterprise-wide Business
Impact Analysis (BIA) High Completed Adopted Completed
43 System and
data backups
Evaluate the opportunities of contracting with a
third party that is located at a sufficient distance
(e.g., 50 miles) from District facilities to maintain
secure off-site storage of backup tapes
Medium In progress Adopting FY16-17
44
Incident and
problem
management
Expand the utilization and adoption of Symantec
Service Desk by the IS Department for service
request tracking, as well as change management
tracking and documentation
Medium In progress Adopting Ongoing
45 Audit logging
Configure audit logging for the applications,
hardware, data storage, and network devices
associated with the critical/sensitive data
Medium In progress Adopting Ongoing
46 Audit logging Implement a secure, centralized log collection
appliance Medium Not started Adopting FY16-17
47 Audit logging Develop a program to ensure that audit logs are
reviewed/monitored on a daily basis Medium Not started Adopting FY16-17
48 Incident
response Develop a computer incident response plan Medium Completed Adopted Completed
49 Disaster
recovery Evaluate options for a disaster recovery site Medium In progress Adopting FY15-16
50 Disaster
recovery
Formalize a recovery strategy for the mainframe
platform (depending upon service model
selected)
Medium In progress Adopting FY16-17
51 Disaster
recovery
Augment current disaster recovery documents to
include detailed recovery procedures for all
critical systems
Medium In progress Adopting FY16-17
68 System and
data backups
Ensure that regular backups of the District’s
email system are occurring and that redundancy
is in place to ensure availability and
recoverability
Low Completed Adopted Completed
69 System and
data backups
Perform periodic restores from tape for open
systems (i.e., Windows, AIX and Linux) Low Completed Adopted Ongoing
70 System and
data backups
Evaluate the current backup strategy to assess
the legal and business requirements pertaining
to the retention of data as well as the data
recovery objectives of the organization
Low Not started Adopting FY16-17
71 System and
data backups Identify and encrypt all sensitive backup media Low Not started Adopting FY16-17
85 Disaster
recovery
"Evaluate options for migrating from the
mainframe platform and leveraging commercial-High In progress Adopting FY17-18
229 Appendix B – IT Recommendations and Status
Rec# Section Recommendation Priority Status District
Response Timeline
off-the-shelf (COTS) applications that run on a
more common operating system"
105
Incident and
problem
management
Implement a centrally located dashboard that
projects an accurate maintenance schedule for all
systems, including a categorization of all outages
Medium Completed Adopted Completed
109
Incident and
problem
management
Monitor customer and call center performance
indicators on a regular basis (e.g., monthly) Low Completed Adopted Completed
110 Incident
response
Perform annual testing of the computer incident
response plan Low Completed Adopted Ongoing
111 Disaster
recovery
Conduct simulations and/or functional tests of
the disaster recovery plans on an annual basis Low Completed Adopted Completed
123 IT asset
management
Augment current IT asset inventory procedures
to include the tracking of assets valued under
$750 (e.g., $300 - $750)
Medium Not started Under
Consideration FY16-17
124 IT asset
management
Utilize Symantec Altiris as a centralized system to
track, monitor and assess the District’s IT asset
portfolio
Medium In progress Adopted FY16-17
Source: Sunera IT assessment Report, December 2013; Gibson Consulting Group, Inc., April 2016