Transcript Slide 1

CLARK COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT REVIEW
Presented to:
Clark County School District
Board of Trustees
October 12, 2006
0
Presentation Outline
• The Five W’s of MGT
• Why a Financial Management
Review?
• MGT’s Methodology
• Key Peer District Comparisons
• Key Staff Survey Results
• Key Community Survey Results
• Commendations
• Savings/Costs Overview
• Recommendations for Improvement
• Where do We Go From Here?
• Questions?
1
The Five W’s of MGT
• Nationally and Internationally
Recognized Consulting Firm
• President: Mr. Fred Forrer
• 100+ Employees
2
The Five W’s of MGT
(Continued)
PK-12
Education




Criminal Justice/
Public Safety
PK-12
Program Evaluation
Facilities
Technology
Higher
Education
State/Local
Government
3
The Five W’s of MGT
(Continued)
Established in Tallahassee,
Florida in 1974, MGT of
America, Inc. has enjoyed
a long and distinguished
history.
4
The Five W’s of MGT
(Continued)
•
National Firm
– Tallahassee, FL
– Sacramento, CA
– Olympia, WA
– Austin, TX
•
Firm Experience
– Work in 50 states
– Work in 5 foreign
countries
•
Leading National Firm in
Educational Consulting
– School Districts
– State Departments of
Education
– Community Colleges and
Universities
– Special Committees
5
The Five W’s of MGT
(Continued)
MGT Mission Statement
The mission of MGT is to improve the
efficiency and effectiveness of
government, nonprofit, and other
organizations serving the public.
6
MGT’s Experience Conducting
Financial Management
Reviews
•
School Efficiency Reviews of 10 Virginia School
Districts: Dinwiddie, Winchester, York, Smyth,
Lancaster, Clarke, Culpepper, Isle of Wight,
Louisa, and Bath
•
Academic Auditing Services for Roanoke City
Public Schools
•
Strategic Planning for Charlottesville City
Schools
•
Systemwide Management Review of Fairfax
County Public Schools
•
Management Reviews of Dallas, Midland,
United, McAllen, San Antonio, San Angelo,
Sherman, PSJA, La Joya, Seguin, Windham,
Grand Prairie, Dripping Springs, Lancaster ISD,
Culberson-Allamoore ISD, and Waco ISDs
•
Audited 20 Regional Service Centers
Virginia
Texas
7
MGT’s Experience Conducting
Financial Management
Reviews
•
Management Reviews and Salary Studies of the
Alachua, Broward, Brevard, Clay, Escambia,
Hamilton, Lee, and Hillsborough County School
Districts, Florida
•
Administrative Cost and Staffing Study for the
Duval County School District, Florida
•
Management Reviews of Baltimore City and
Baltimore County Schools
Performance Audits of Somerset and Hartford
Public Schools
Performance Study of Prince George’s County
Public Schools
Management Study of St. Mary’s County Public
Schools
NCLB Study for the Maryland DOE
Florida
Maryland
•
•
•
•
8
Why a Financial Management Review
“Begin with the end in mind.”
- Stephen R. Covey
9
Why a Financial Management
Review
The ultimate outcome of this
study…
To assist the District in
identifying and redirecting
resources that can be better
spent on your #1 client…
CCSD
STUDENTS!
10
Purpose of the Review
Determine if CCSD is carrying out the
financial management principles of
AB 580-Section 32-1 (legislation) in
a manner that:
1)
Encourages the increased efficiency
and effectiveness of the CCSD
2)
Increases public confidence that
CCSD is using resources wisely
3)
Increases parental satisfaction with
CCSD performance
11
MGT’s Methodology
• Utilized the Financial Management
Principles set forth in the RFP (per AB
580) in addition to MGT’s copyrighted
School District Audit Guidelines
• Worked Collaboratively with the
Appointed Oversight Committee
OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE MEMBERS
COMMITTEE MEMBER
Mark Coleman
JoAnn Cox
Erin Cranor, Committee Chair
Debbie Earl
Joy Kendall
Ken Lange
Sheila Moulton
Gary Waters
REPRESENTATION
CCSD/Principal
MGT Project Director
General Public (Assembly)
General Public (Senate)
Parent/Teacher Association
Nevada State Education Association
CCSD Board of Trustees
State Board of Education
12
MGT’s Methodology
• Based Upon a Very Detailed work plan
and time schedule (February-October
’06)
• Used Extensive Data Analyses to
Document Recommendations
• Analyzed District’s Self-Assessment
• Surveyed Administrators, Principals,
and Teachers and Benchmarked
Against Other School Districts
• Compared Various Data Points of CCSD
with Peer School Districts
13
MGT’s Methodology
• Diagnostic Visit
• Obtained Input from Parents, Students, Board
Members, Community and Business Leaders
Through Interviews, Survey, and 6 Public
Meetings
• In-Depth Visit:
– Interviewed over 75 central office staff
– Visited 68 schools
– Analyzed Preceding 6 Years of Audits
– Conducted Telephone Interviews with 12
Community Leaders/Elected Officials
– Audited 10 School District Functions (8
required and 2 additional)
14
MGT’s Methodology
• Draft and Final Reports (CCSD
staff verified the accuracy of the
findings and provided a written
response)
• Each Recommendation includes
a finding, recommendation, best
practice, five-year fiscal impact
and corrective action plan
15
Selected Peer District Comparisons
TOTAL
STUDENTS
2003-04
TOTAL
NUMBER OF
SCHOOLS
2003-04
TOTAL
STAFF
2003-04
PER
PUPIL
REVENUE
2002-03
PER PUPIL
OPERATING
EXPENDITURE
2002-03
PER PUPIL
CAPITAL
EXPENDITURE
2002-03
Clark County, NV
270,529
289*
21,049
$7,379
$5,774
$1,868
Broward County, FL
272,835
264
26,909
$7,515
$6,239
$1,403
San Diego Unified, CA
137,960
185
13,911
$10,778
$8,482
$3,153
Houston Independent, TX
211,499
308
25,507
$8,061
$7,236
$908
Miami-Dade County, FL
371,785
375
36,585
$7,971
$6,956
$627
Philadelphia, PA
189,779
263
22,554
$10,408
$7,554
$349
62,103
102
6,775
$7,115
$6,120
$1,017
216,641
255
21,899
$8,461
$6,909
$1,332
SCHOOL DISTRICT
Washoe County, NV
PEER DISTRICT AVERAGE
Source: NCES, Common Core of Data (CCD) public school district data, 2006.
*Although NCES reports 295 schools for the 2003-04 school year, documentation provided by the district reports 289 schools.
Note: Fiscal data (including per pupil count used in this table) from 2002-03 school year.
When compared to the selected comparison school districts, CCSD has:
• 3rd highest number of students and schools for 2003-04;
• 3rd lowest number of staff for 2003-04;
• 2nd lowest per pupil revenue for 2002-03;
• the lowest per pupil operating expenditure for 2002-03; and
• 2nd highest per pupil capital expenditures for 2002-03.
NOTE: The 2005-06 per pupil amount is $6,010.00.
16
Selected Peer District Comparisons
TOTAL
STUDENTS
CLASSROOM
TEACHERS
(FTE)
STUDENTS
PER
TEACHER
*SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS
(FTE)
SCHOOL
ADMINISTRATORS
PER 1,000
STUDENTS
Clark County, NV
270,529
13,483
20.1
741
2.74
Broward County, FL
272,835
14,264
19.1
629
2.31
San Diego Unified, CA
137,960
7,421
18.6
369
2.67
Houston Independent, TX
211,499
12,277
17.2
1,162
5.49
Miami-Dade County, FL
371,785
18,887
19.7
910
2.45
Philadelphia, PA
189,779
10,194
18.6
500
2.63
Washoe County, NV
62,103
3,614
17.2
186
3.00
PEER DISTRICT AVERAGE
216,641
11,449
18.6
642
3.04
SCHOOL DISTRICT
Source: NCES, Common Core of Data (CCD) public school district data, 2006.
*NOTE: School Administrators are staff members whose activities are concerned with directing and managing the operation of a
particular school, including principals, assistant principals, other assistants; and those who supervise school operations, assign
duties to staff members, supervise and maintain the records of the school, coordinate school instructional activities with those of
the education agency, including department chairpersons.
When compared to selected comparison school districts, CCSD has:
• the 3rd highest number of classroom teachers;
• the highest amount of students per teacher;
• a higher number of school administrators than the district average; and
• a lower number of school administrators per 1,000 students than the district
average.
17
17
Clark Staff Survey
Participants
Response Rate of:
• Central Office
Administrators.........66.4%
• Principals/Assistant
Principals................49.4%
• Classroom Teachers....5.0%
18
Selected Survey Results
•
The majority of each group feel the
quality of education in the district
is improving or staying the same.
•
At least 80 percent of
administrators and principals rate
the overall quality of special
education in CCSD as excellent or
good.
19
Selected Survey Results
•
Most of the respondents in each group
agree that the schools have materials
and supplies necessary for instruction in
basic skills programs.
•
More respondents in each group agree
that lessons are organized to meet
students’ needs and that the curriculum
is broad and challenging.
•
At least 65 percent of each group rates
the teachers’ work in meeting the
students’ learning needs as good or
excellent.
20
Selected Survey Results
•
A greater percentage of
administrators and principals agree
that the Board of Education
members’ work at setting or revising
policies is good or excellent while 67
percent of teachers feel their work
is fair or poor.
•
Between 53 percent and 75 percent
of respondents in each group believe
that staff development opportunities
for teachers are good or excellent.
21
Selected Survey Results
•
The majority of respondents in each
group agree that CCSD is an exciting,
challenging place to work.
•
Each group believes CCSD officials
enforce high work standards.
•
At least 74 percent in each group feel
they have the authority to adequately
perform their job responsibilities.
•
The majority of respondents in each
group feel their salary level is not
adequate for their level of work and
experience.
22
Selected Survey Results
•
At least 69 percent in each group agree
they have adequate facilities in which
to conduct their work.
•
All three groups show less positive
opinions with regard to parent
participation.
23
Selected Survey Results
•
A greater percentage of administrators
and principals agree that funds are
managed wisely to support education in
CCSD, while the majority of teachers
disagree.
•
The majority of principals and teachers
feel the transportation and food service
programs need improvement.
24
Selected Survey Results
•
When asked how the operational
efficiency in CCSD could be improved:
–
At least 82 percent of each group
responded with increasing the number
of teachers.
25
Clark Community Survey
Selected Survey Results
Responses from all community members were
combined and results show that:
•
Most respondents in the community
survey have favorable opinions toward
local education funding.
•
More than 80 percent of respondents
favor increased funding through impact
fees paid by developers.
•
76 percent would support bonds to build
more schools or renovate old schools.
•
Half of the respondents were not in favor
of increasing property taxes to build
smaller schools.
26
Clark Community Survey
Selected Survey Results
All survey participants were divided by
the region of residence. Responses were
similar across the regions. For example:
•
The majority of respondents in each region
does not believe CCSD spends education
funds wisely.
•
The majority of respondents in all regions
agree that the district ensures proper
maintenance and cleanliness of the
schools.
•
The majority of respondents in all regions
agree that the district provides adequate
and updated instructional technology for
the classroom.
27
Clark Community Survey
Selected Survey Results
Survey data was also disaggregated by
respondents who have children in CCSD and
those who do not. Results show that:
•
Both parents and non-parents agree the
district needs more funding and additional
buildings.
•
Parents believe the community
understands the financial resources and
needs of CCSD, while non-parents do not.
•
Parents feel CCSD performs well for the
funding it receives, while non-parents do
not.
28
Selected Best Practices
(Total #77)
• CCSD’s staff do an impressive job of
developing and presenting the district’s
budget document (Chapter 3.0)
• CCSD’s method of allocating campus
funding and establishing carryover
allocations should serve as a best practice
for schools nationwide (Chapter 3.0)
• CCSD’s Budget staff does a commendable
job of training and assisting schools and
departments in understanding the
development and administration of their
budgets (Chapter 3.0)
29
Selected Best Practices
• CCSD has done a commendable job of
managing its finances to increase its
reserve balances (Chapter 3.0)
• CCSD is commended for acquiring and
implementing SAP, an Enterprise
Resource Planning (ERP) system.
(Chapter 4.0)
• CCSD is commended for maintaining
collaborative purchasing arrangements
with other governmental entities. (Chapter 4.0)
30
Selected Best Practices
• CCSD is commended for establishing an
aggressive land acquisition program
(Chapter 5.0)
• CCSD is commended for its sophisticated
use of prototype designs (Chapter 5.0)
• The Clark County School District’s energy
conservation program incorporates a
comprehensive approach that produces
significant savings. (Chapter 5.0)
31
Selected Best Practices
• The Clark County School District is
commended for implementing ongoing
and aggressive efforts to recruit teachers
(Chapter 6.0)
• CCSD is commended for adopting a
personal leave policy that rewards
teachers for near perfect attendance and
reimburses them when personal or
universal leave is not used in a given year
(Chapter 6.0)
32
Selected Best Practices
• The Clark County School District Board is
commended for adopting and applying a
governance system that clearly focuses
on providing leadership in promoting high
student achievement (Chapter 7.0)
• The CCSD administration and Board of
School Trustees are commended for
obtaining certification with ISO 9001:2000
by meeting these rigorous standards.
(Chapter 7.0)
• The CCSD Legal Services Department is
commended for providing cost-effective,
client-centered services (Chapter 7.0)
33
Selected Best Practices
• The establishment of Region Offices in
2001 has been beneficial to CCSD
campuses and parents. (Chapter 7.0)
• The Clark County School District is
commended for adhering to policies and
agreements to help ensure cost
containment for health care programs
(Chapter 8.0)
34
Selected Best Practices
• CCSD is commended for providing a
comprehensive wellness program that
includes initiatives designed to encourage
healthier living by district employees
(Chapter 8.0)
• The Transportation and the Human
Resources Departments are commended
for their innovative joint recruiting effort to
resolve the problem of bus driver
shortages (Chapter 9.0)
35
Selected Best Practices
• CCSD is commended for using the
EDULOG system and maximizing the
benefits of this investment to achieve
greater efficiencies and cost effectiveness
in student transportation scheduling
(Chapter 9.0)
• CCSD is commended for the improvement
in student achievement for all student
subgroups over the past four years
(Chapter 11.0)
36
Selected Best Practices
• The CCSD’s Curriculum and Professional
Development Division is commended for
providing a comprehensive program of
training and orientation to new teachers.
(Chapter 11.0)
• CCSD is commended for exemplary
practices of compliance and monitoring
the delivery of services to students with
disabilities and the successful resolution
of due process cases and complaints filed
against the district (Chapter 11.0)
37
Selected Best Practices
• CCSD is commended for its exemplary
Career and Technical Education Program
(Chapter 11.0)
• CCSD is commended for providing
challenging opportunities for students
who are gifted, talented, and high
achieving (Chapter 11.0)
• CCSD has established a technology
leadership team and has solid
communication between technical and
instructional technology functions
(Chapter 12.0)
38
Selected Best Practices
• CCSD has implemented a fast and
robust Wide Area Network that has
been recognized in nationwide
educational publications (Chapter 12.0)
• The Clark County School District’s
stringent nutritional policy places it at
the forefront of the national movement
to improve the nutritional value of food
served at school (Chapter 13.0)
39
Selected Best Practices
• The Food Service Department keeps
labor costs low in comparison to
revenue and in alignment with industry
best practice standards (Chapter 13.0)
40
SAVINGS/COSTS OVERVIEW
CHAPTER-BY-CHAPTER SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL SAVINGS (COSTS)
ANNUAL SAVINGS (COSTS)
CHAPTER REFERENCE
2007-08
CHAPTER 3: PERSONNEL AND HUMAN RESOURCES
CHAPTER 4: PURCHASING AND WAREHOUSING
CHAPTER 5: FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
CHAPTER 7: DISTRICT ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
$40,435
$580
$5,830
$11,343
$17,131
$218,012
$218,012
$218,012
$218,012
$218,012
TOTAL FIVE
YEAR
SAVINGS
(COSTS)
ONE-TIME
SAVINGS
(COSTS)
$75,319
$0
$1,090,060
$0
$75,380,000 $75,800,000 $74,720,000 $73,640,000 $72,560,000 $372,100,000
$0
$214,745
$214,745
$214,745
$214,745
$214,745
$1,073,725
($183,036)
CHAPTER 9: TRANSPORTATION
$1,420,500
$1,420,500
$1,420,500
$1,420,500
$1,420,500
$7,102,500
$94,000
CHAPTER 11: EDUCATIONAL SERVICES DELIVERY
$3,346,680
$3,351,780
$3,351,780
$3,351,780
$3,351,780 $16,753,800
CHAPTER 12: COMPUTERS AND TECHNOLOGY
$0
$58,484
$157,537
$157,537
CHAPTER 13: FOOD SERVICE*
$0
NET SAVINGS (COSTS)
$157,537
$531,095
($5,000)
$9,602,109 $14,464,171 $15,086,089 $15,086,089
$54,238,458
$0
$80,620,372 $90,666,210 $94,552,575 $94,100,006 $93,025,794 $452,964,957
TOTAL NET SAVINGS (COSTS) LESS ONE TIME SAVINGS (COSTS)
$0
($94,036)
$452,870,921
* Reserve Fund for Food Service
41
SAVINGS/COSTS OVERVIEW (Cont’d)
42
Savings/Costs Overview
(Cont’d)
•
The MGT audit summary shows the distribution of
the potential $453 million savings and costs as a
percentage of the potential dollars
•
The largest percent of savings and costs are in the
Capital Projects Funds category resulting in
substantial dollars available for new and
renovation of old schools
•
Food Service Funds, at 12%, can only be
expended in food service related activity
43
Savings/Costs Overview
(Cont’d)
•
Federal and District Project Funds, totaling $16.7
million or 3.7%, are restricted to those
categories; however, those focused on students
with disabilities, NCLB, and other student learning
related areas can impact improving student
achievement
•
Savings in the General Fund category represent
0.8% or $3.7 million and do not provide
significant resources for redirection to improving
student learning
•
It is important to note that savings in the Capital
Projects Funds are substantial and provide the
district an opportunity to revisit many important
school construction and renovation needs
44
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT
(Total #86)
45
45
CCSD EDUCATIONAL SERVICES DELIVERY
46
46
Key Recommendations
• Conduct an analysis of district practices
in the areas found to highly correlate with
student achievement and devise strategies to
address areas that are not being practiced
effectively in CCSD (Recommendation 11-3)
• Identify the key issues related to students’
failure to attain a high school diploma and
address them through a strategic plan of
graduation enhancement (Recommendation 11-4)
• Reorganize the Student Support Services
Division and the Education Services Division to
create greater efficiency of fiscal resources,
oversight, and program implementation
(Recommendation 11-5)
47
Key Recommendations
• Conduct a comprehensive review of
evaluation procedures and special
education service delivery for students
with autism (Recommendation 11-7)
• Implement research-based alternatives
rather than traditional special
education referral practices
(Recommendation 11-9)
48
CCSD FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
49
49
Key Recommendations
• Centralize the organizational structure of the
district’s accounting functions by placing all
accounting-related staff positions within the
Accounting Department (Recommendation 3-1)
• Develop a comprehensive training program
and a change management plan for deploying
the new ERP system at the schools and within
departments (Recommendation 3-2)
• Conduct annual budget “kick-off” sessions
for all district administrators responsible for
developing and administering a budget
(Recommendation 3-7)
50
CCSD PURCHASING AND WAREHOUSING
51
51
Key Recommendations
• Streamline the bid process by eliminating
unnecessary steps in the processing of
purchase orders (Recommendation 4-3)
• Update the vendor database annually by
deleting firms no longer in business,
eliminating those firms who are no longer
interested in doing business with the district,
and making any other corrections or
adjustments that are needed (Recommendation 4-4)
• Reorganize the Department of Purchasing
(Recommendation 4-8)
52
CCSD FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
53
53
Key Recommendations
• Institute a formal value engineering process
(Recommendation 5-3)
• Decentralize maintenance services into
three locations that correspond to the major
geographical zones of the school system
(Recommendation 5-5)
• Increase the number of custodians to a
custodian-per-square-foot ratio of one per
25,000 square feet on a graduated basis
(Recommendation 5-8)
54
CCSD PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT
55
55
Key Recommendations
• Develop a written recruitment plan, including
a mission statement, goals, objectives,
budget requirements, a needs assessment, an
analysis and evaluation of past efforts,
statistical analysis of recruitment efforts, and
strategies for future efforts (Recommendation 6-3)
• Examine the qualifications and incentives for
hiring substitutes to enable CCSD to increase
its substitute pool (Recommendation 6-4)
• Continue to examine beginning teacher
salaries as well as all other teacher salaries in
comparison to those of competitor school
districts and make adjustments as budget
allows (Recommendation 6-5)
56
CCSD DISTRICT ORGANIZATION AND
MANAGEMENT
57
57
Key Recommendations
• Restructure the executive organization of
CCSD and realign functions (Recommendation 7-10)
• Fully implement the guiding elements to
provide increased empowerment to the
Region Office administrators
(Recommendation 7-11)
• Develop and implement a district-wide sitebased decision-making policy to assist the
Central Office, Region Offices, and campuses
with the following areas of responsibility:
planning, budgeting, curriculum, staffing
patterns, staff development, and school
organization (Recommendation 7-12)
58
Key Recommendations
• Develop and implement a district-wide
strategic planning process (Recommendation 7-14)
• Develop a plan to stabilize school-level
administration turnover and provide a career
path for assistant principals and deans
(Recommendation 7-16)
59
CCSD EMPLOYEE BENEFITS
60
60
Key Recommendations
• Create a location on the CCSD Web site
where current and prospective employees
can review benefits offered by the school
district (Recommendation 8-1)
61
CCSD TRANSPORTATION
62
62
Key Recommendations
• Complete the review of the internal audit
report of transportation billings and take the
recommended corrective actions to capture
all reimbursable costs (Recommendation 9-2)
• Implement a 14-year bus replacement policy
(Recommendation 9-5)
• Eliminate excess spare buses from the
inventory (Recommendation 9-6)
63
CCSD COMPUTERS AND TECHNOLOGY
64
64
Key Recommendations
• Move all help desk operations to one central
location and cross-train staff on all
applications (Recommendation 12-1)
• Analyze the total technology-related budget
in order to make benchmark comparisons
(Recommendation 12-3)
• Incorporate in the CCSD Technology Plan
timelines, financial resources, and staff
positions assigned responsibility for elements
of the plan (Recommendation 12-4)
• Discontinue use of the GroupWise e-mail
system (Recommendation 12-9)
65
CCSD FOOD SERVICES
66
66
Key Recommendations
• Implement a customer satisfaction survey to
determine the reasons behind the low levels
of CCSD satisfaction regarding food service
(Recommendation 13-1)
• Implement an annual report card on the Food
Service Department of CCSD
(Recommendation 13-3)
• Require all school-based cafeteria programs
to maintain financial sustainability for food
services operations (Recommendation 13-6)
• Pursue the utilization of cashless vending
machines to dispense reimbursable meals
(Recommendation 13-7)
67
Recommendations or Informal Findings
that Could Require Legislative or State
Level Policy Actions
1)
Propose the enactment of state legislation requiring
developers to provide land for new schools
2)
Amend the Aversive Intervention statute (NRS 388.522 et
seq) to provide for self-report on violations
3)
Eliminate Budget Development/Action redundancy
4)
Detailed Capital Project Reports, if to be required, should
address unmet capital needs rather than a detailed report
on met needs
5)
Determine if state requirements for licensing substitute
teachers should be amended by the Nevada Commission
on Professional Standards in Education
6)
Lunch After the Mid-Day Recess Period - impact of
legislation should be reviewed during the 2006-07 school
year to determine if legislative action is warranted
68
Where Do We Go From
Here?
• The District has 2 years to implement
the Corrective Action Plans
• District is responsible for providing a
progress report in 2008 and a final
report in 2009
• The Legislative Auditor is responsible
for a follow-up component to the
review of the District to determine the
CCSD’s compliance and progress
69
CCSD Should:
• Prioritize an implementation calendar
• Appoint an Advisory Committee to
monitor implementation and report
progress to the Board of Trustees
• Each recommendation should have a
point person to oversee implementation
& report progress.
• Establish a method for monitoring
progress (including a PC-based
tracking system)
70
QUESTIONS?
71