Office of Accountability September 20, 2011 Office of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Office of Accountability September 20, 2011

• 11-11

Ron Rode Executive Director Office of Accountability

Supervising Administrative Assistant II Elizabeth Kramer Research Systems Analyst (1.0 FTE) Jeff Jones

Assessment Services Department Erin Gordon Director Research and Reporting Department Peter Bell Director

Editor (1.0 FTE) Chuck Allen Resource Teachers (3.0 FTE) Dario Gutierrez Mary Johnson Susan Weinshanker Resource Teacher (1.0 FTE) Cynthia Craft Microcomputer Applications Training Specialist (1.0 FTE) Tressa Renee Clerk Typist III (2.0 FTE) Griselda Aguirre Teresa Haywood Planning Analyst (1.0 FTE) Marcellus Walker Administrative Assistant II (3.0 FTE) Samantha Clabaugh Denise Ormsbee Velvet Wright Stock Clerk (2.0 FTE) Israel Diaz de Leon Alice Stewart Administrative Aide (1.0 FTE) Maria Johnson

Performance Management and Evaluation Dina Policar Director Monitoring and Accountabillity Reporting Vikki Henton Program Manager

Educational Research Specialist (3.0 FTE) Leah Baylon Mara Bernd Lorri Frangkiser Senior Systems Analyst/ Programmer (3.0 FTE) Lorenzo Curevas James Gustafson Tatiana Popescu Research Systems Analyst (1.0 FTE) Nick Nicolas Planning Analyst (1FTE) Karen Wilson Administrative Assistant I (1.0 FTE) Cathy Nunez Administrative Aide (2.0 FTE) Donna Havelin Beverly Navarro

Superintendent

Office of Accountability 2011-2012 Organizational Chart

Clerk Typist III (1.0 FTE) Berdalia Holt

Supervising Educational Research Specialist Vacant

Office of Accountability

2

–

Responsibilities

™ Coordinate the administration and processing of all district, state, and federally mandated assessments ™ Provide training and support for site test coordinators and principals; ™ Maintain test security ensuring appropriate test administration and test preparation procedures are followed at all school sites ™ Conduct investigations of reported testing problems

Staffing (FTE = 10; all classified)

™ Director, 3 Administrative Assistants, 2 Administrative Aides, 2 Clerk Typists, and 2 Stock Clerks

Office of Accountability: Assessment Services Department

3

–

Responsibilities

™ Train and support sites with SPSAs (SBB), SSCs, WASC ™ Support the District Advisory Council (DAC) for Compensatory Education ™ Monitor federal and state compliance for compensatory education programs ™ Complete the Consolidated Application

Staffing (FTE = 7; 4 certificated and 3 classified)

™ Program Manager, 3 Resource Teachers, 1 Planning Analyst, 1 Administrative Aide, 1 Clerk Typist

Office of Accountability: Monitoring and Accountability Reporting Department

4

–

Responsibilities

™ Conduct program and policy evaluation; ™ Perform mandated parent notification for Program Improvement; ™ Facilitate/write school PI restructuring plans; ™ Provide training, support, and oversight for DataDirector; ™ Provide survey/scanning services for other departments ™ Provide support to QEIA schools

Staffing (FTE = 5; 1 certificated and 4 classified)

™ Director, 1 Resource Teacher, 1 Educational Research Specialist, 1 Research Analyst, 1 Microcomputer Applications Training Specialist

Office of Accountability: Performance Management and Evaluation Department

5

–

Responsibilities

™ Process student, school, and district achievement, assessment, demographic, and other data; ™ Analyze data and prepare reports (e.g., CST, CAHSEE, dropouts and graduates, AP, SAT, ACT, etc.) ™ Collect, transform, and submit data for mandated reporting (e.g., CALPADS, CBEDS, OCR, SARC, etc.) ™ Maintain an extensive website to make data accessible to staff and public ™ Coordinate and monitor research within the district ™ Maintain the Course of Study and UC a-g course lists ™ Support the Board, district leadership, and staff with customized data and analyses for their reporting, planning, decision-making, fundraising, and other needs

Staffing (FTE = 11; all classified)

™ Director, 3 Educational Research Specialists, 3 Senior Systems Analysts/ Programmers, 1 Research Systems Analyst, 1 Editor, 1 Planning Analyst, 1 Administrative Assistant

Office of Accountability: Research and Reporting Department

6

–

Responsibilities

™ Oversee work of branch departments ™ Oversee updates to the Local Education Agency Plan ™ Prepare briefings and communicate with the Board, staff, and the public ™ Contribute to district initiatives (e.g. CRCP, Strategic Process, School Closure, AAAE workgroups) ™ Maintain relevant district procedures

Staffing

™ Executive Director, Supervising Administrative Assistant ™ Total FTEs = 35

Office of Accountability

7

–

• 1. Mandates and compliance
• 2. Serving sites (teachers and principals) and

departments

• 3. Agreements/Contracts (e.g. grants)
• 4. District/Board priorities
• 5. Ad hoc requests

Office of Accountability Priorities

8

–

Office of Accountability Budget Challenges

Budget Item 2009-10 2011-12 Change Change % Overall Budget $6,400,083 $4,507,026 $1,893,057

• 30%

FTEs 45 35

• 10
• 22%

FTE % of Budget 70% 78% +8 +11%

9

–

• 1. Elimination of district screening and diagnostic

assessments

• 2. No expansion of district benchmark and formative

assessments

• 3. Lack of data to effectively implement RTI2 and other

interventions

• 4. Assignment of work to diminishing numbers of staff
• 5. Limited ability to conduct program evaluations
• 6. Reduced ability to respond to new initiatives
• 7. Reduced ability for others to collaborate/meet deadlines
• 8. Quality of data can be compromised

Office of Accountability Budget Challenges

10

–

• 1. Use district resources where possible for services
• 2. Use lowest bidders on outside contracts
• 3. Complete or bring projects in-house (e.g., SARC

FITNESSGRAM, PBIS surveys, PI restructuring plans)

• 4. Automate processes where able (internally and

across district, e.g., GATE, Special Ed.)

Office of Accountability Cost Efficiencies

11

–

• 1. Maximize apportionment reimbursement (~$475K

for state assessments)

• 2. Cost avoidance (re-scoring of tests)
• 3. Avoiding categorical fund repayments
• 4. Building capacity for staff to be self-sufficient in

data access and analysis

• 5. Provide services and supports to increase efficiency

in other departments (e.g., Special Ed., GATE).

• 6. Assuring accuracy of data

Office of Accountability Cost Effectiveness

12

–

• 1. Reduced staffing results in less timely support to

schools and delays in responding to staff and public data requests

• 2. Increased CALPADS work (more cycles) and less

staff time

• 3. Increased number of schools in PI; more schools in

Year 4 to write restructuring plans

• 4. District PI Year 3 — Corrective Action
• 5. Fewer/different staff members at sites to enter data;

therefore, quality of data (accuracy and cleanliness) could be compromised; district achievement indicators may be affected

Office of Accountability Programmatic Differences in 2011-12

13

–

• 1. Increased time to respond to staff and public information/data requests
• 2. Quality of data (accuracy and cleanliness) could be compromised; district

achievement indicators may be affected

• 3. Cuts in other departments and at schools affect our ability to gather complete

and accurate data

• 4. Reduced support/training for DataDirector
• 5. Increase in testing irregularities; could affect accountability results
• 6. Potential loss of state reimbursement for state testing
• 7. Further lack of data to effectively implement RTI2 and other interventions
• 8. Lack of support to other programs/initiatives (e.g., GATE, PBIS, Sp. Ed., grants)
• 9. Reduction in site training/support with SPSAs and SSC mandates
• 10. Increased risk of non-compliant use of categorical funds
• 11. Inability to conduct program/policy evaluations

Office of Accountability: Impact of Further Cuts

14