Antioch Unified School District Report

Antioch Unified School District Transportation Review September 28, 2017 Michael H. Fine Chief Executive Officer Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM September 28, 2017 Stephanie Anello, Superintendent Antioch Unified School District 510 G Street Antioch, CA 94509 Dear Superintendent Anello: In July 2016, the Antioch Unified School District and the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) entered into an agreement for a review of the district’s transportation services. Specifically, the agreement stated that FCMAT would perform the following: 1. Review the transportation services for field trip activities and identify potential efficiencies and cost savings, if any. 2. Review the special education transportation delivery system, including but not limited to the role of the IEP, routing, scheduling, operations and staffing, and make recommendations for improvements and potential cost savings, if any. 3. Evaluate the transportation department organizational structure and staffing, and make recommendations for staffing improvements or reductions, if any. 4. Evaluate the current work flow and distribution of functions in the transportation department and make recommendations for improved efficiency, if any. 5. Review the transportation department operational processes and procedures and provide recommendations for improved efficiency, if any. 6. Determine whether the school bus fleet effectively meets the district’s needs. This final report contains the study team’s findings and recommendations. FCMAT appreciates the opportunity to serve the Antioch Unified School District and extends thanks to all the staff for their assistance during fieldwork. Sincerely, Michael H. Fine Chief Executive Officer Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM i TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents About FCMAT .........................................................................................iii Introduction ............................................................................................1 Background .............................................................................................1 Study Team.......................................................................................................2 Study and Report Guidelines .....................................................................2 Executive Summary ..............................................................................3 Findings and Recommendations .....................................................5 Transportation Finance and Purchasing .................................................5 Routing, Scheduling and Field Trips ........................................................7 Organization and Staffing .........................................................................13 Bus Driver Training and Safety ................................................................17 Vehicle Maintenance, Fleet and Facility ................................................19 Appendix ................................................................................................23 Antioch Unified School diStrict ii Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM iii ABOUT FCMAT About FCMAT FCMAT’s primary mission is to assist California’s local K-14 educational agencies to identify, prevent, and resolve financial, human resources and data management challenges. FCMAT provides fiscal and data management assistance, professional development training, product development and other related school business and data services. FCMAT’s fiscal and manage- ment assistance services are used not just to help avert fiscal crisis, but to promote sound financial practices, support the training and development of chief business officials and help to create efficient organizational operations. FCMAT’s data management services are used to help local educational agencies (LEAs) meet state reporting responsibilities, improve data quality, and inform instructional program decisions. FCMAT may be requested to provide fiscal crisis or management assistance by a school district, charter school, community college, county office of education, the state Superintendent of Public Instruction, or the Legislature. When a request or assignment is received, FCMAT assembles a study team that works closely with the LEA to define the scope of work, conduct on-site fieldwork and provide a written report with findings and recommendations to help resolve issues, overcome challenges and plan for the future. FCMAT has continued to make adjustments in the types of support provided based on the changing dynamics of K-14 LEAs and the implementation of major educational reforms. Studies by Fiscal Year 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 92/93 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 98/99 99/00 00/01 01/02 02/03 03/04 04/05 05/06 06/07 07/08 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 14/15 Antioch Unified School diStrict seidutS fo rebmuN FCMAT also develops and provides numerous publications, software tools, workshops and professional development opportunities to help LEAs operate more effectively and fulfill their fiscal oversight and data management responsibilities. The California School Information Services (CSIS) division of FCMAT assists the California Department of Education with the implementation of the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS). CSIS also hosts and maintains the Ed-Data website (www.ed-data.org) and provides technical expertise to the Ed-Data partnership: the California Department of Education, EdSource and FCMAT. FCMAT was created by Assembly Bill (AB) 1200 in 1992 to assist LEAs to meet and sustain their financial obligations. AB 107 in 1997 charged FCMAT with responsibility for CSIS and its state- wide data management work. AB 1115 in 1999 codified CSIS’ mission. iv ABOUT FCMAT AB 1200 is also a statewide plan for county offices of education and school districts to work together locally to improve fiscal procedures and accountability standards. AB 2756 (2004) provides specific responsibilities to FCMAT with regard to districts that have received emergency state loans. In January 2006, Senate Bill 430 (charter schools) and AB 1366 (community colleges) became law and expanded FCMAT’s services to those types of LEAs. Since 1992, FCMAT has been engaged to perform more than 1,000 reviews for LEAs, including school districts, county offices of education, charter schools and community colleges. The Kern County Superintendent of Schools is the administrative agent for FCMAT. The team is led by Michael H. Fine, Chief Executive Officer, with funding derived through appropriations in the state budget and a modest fee schedule for charges to requesting agencies. Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 1 INTRODUCTION Introduction Background The Antioch Unified School District is in Contra Costa County and covers approximately 42 square miles, including the city of Antioch and portions of the city of Oakley. It has approxi- mately 16,800 students at two comprehensive high schools, one medical career pathway high school, seven alternative high schools, an adult school, four middle schools, and 14 elementary schools. Seventy-two percent of the district’s students are foster youth, English language learners, or qualify for free or reduced-price meals. This increases the district’s current funding through the state’s Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF), with the expectation that the funding will be spent to improve these students’ outcomes. The district has 42 special education home-to-school bus routes and approximately 2,400 students who have an individualized education program (IEP) in compliance with the Federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Approximately 612 of these students receive transportation as a related service. On July 25, 2016, the district and FCMAT entered into an agreement for FCMAT to evaluate the district’s transportation department. The study agreement specifies that FCMAT will perform the following: 1. Review the transportation services for field trip activities and identify poten- tial efficiencies and cost savings, if any. 2. Review the special education transportation delivery system, including but not limited to the role of the IEP, routing, scheduling, operations and staffing, and make recommendation for improvements and potential cost savings, if any. 3. Evaluate the transportation department organizational structure and staffing, and make recommendations for improvements or reductions, if any. 4. Evaluate the current work flow and distribution of functions in the transpor- tation department and make recommendations for improved efficiency, if any. 5. Review the transportation department operational process and procedures and provide recommendations for improved efficiency, if any. 6. Determine whether the school bus fleet effectively meets the district’s needs. Antioch Unified School diStrict 2 INTRODUCTION Study Team The study team was composed of the following members: Scott Sexsmith Timothy Purvis* FCMAT Management Analyst Transportation Director Bakersfield, CA Poway Unified School District Poway, CA John Lotze FCMAT Technical Writer Michael Rea* Bakersfield, CA Executive Director West County Transportation Agency Santa Rosa, CA *As members of this study team, these consultants were not representing their respective employers but were working solely as independent contractors for FCMAT. Each team member reviewed the draft report to confirm its accuracy and to achieve consensus on the final recom- mendations. Study Guidelines The FCMAT study team visited the district on September 19, 20, and 21, 2016 to conduct inter- views, collect data and review documents. This report is a result of these activities and is divided into the following sections: • Executive Summary • Transportation Department Funding and Finance • Routing, Scheduling and Field Trips • Organization and Staffing • Bud Driver Training and Safety • Vehicle Maintenance, Fleet and Facility In writing its reports, FCMAT uses the Associated Press Stylebook, a comprehensive guide to usage and accepted style that emphasizes conciseness and clarity. In addition, this guide empha- sizes plain language, discourages the use of jargon and capitalizes relatively few terms. Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Executive Summary Transportation Department Funding and Finance In California, school district transportation apportionments are based on the actual transpor- tation costs they reported for the 1982-83 school year. In that year the revenue was capped at 80% of the reported operational costs for each school district in the state; currently, only approximately 35% of the statewide cost is funded. The Antioch Unified School District receives $275,118 annually for transportation, which covers only about 6.6% of its total transportation costs. Routing, Scheduling and Field Trips The district transports approximately 612 special education students on 42 home-to-school routes, for an average of 14.57 students per route, which is extremely good compared to other districts FCMAT has reviewed. The district has a total of approximately 2,400 students with individualized education programs (IEPs), and approximately 759, or 31.63%, of these have IEPs that identify transportation as a related service. This is an unusually high percentage of special education students with identified transportation needs. Special education student placement decisions can have an effect on the percentage of students who require transportation. The district took back operation of some special education programs this year. Although it trans- ported these same students before, this year it had to increase the number of bus routes to do so because all of its schools and programs have similar bell schedules. The district should adjust school starting and ending to increase the efficiency and cost effectiveness of its bus routing. A two-tiered bell schedule would likely reduce the number of bus routes by 10 for a savings of approximately $600,000 per year. Transportation department managers and schedulers should be involved in bell time decisions. The district needs four more drivers than it has, and it has only 42 buses for 42 special education routes, leaving no spare buses. Some special education routes use large coach-type buses instead of smaller more efficient vehicles when a special education bus is being repaired. The district has 24 bus aides and five specialized medical aides. Many bus aides have been added over the past five years, and some routes have more than one bus aide. Students have IEPs that specify a 1-to-1 bus aide; IEP language should instead indicate that the aide will be on a bus with the student. The district has only recently begun training its bus aides; training should be regular and ongoing. On many routes, the driver’s contract time exceeds what is needed for the routes by approxi- mately one hour. The district should review its contractual obligations and ensure that contract times are no longer than needed. The department schedules approximately 700 field trips or athletic trips per year on district buses. If a district bus is not available, the group must choose another provider from a list of approved vendors. Schools stated that the cost of field trips is high; however, the rate used to invoice schools for field trips has not changed in at least four years and does not cover the cost of trips. The district should review and revise its field trip rates. Antioch Unified School diStrict 4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Organizational Design and Staffing The district’s maintenance, operations and transportation director oversees the transportation department, which includes one manager and one supervisor. Because of its size, the district’s transportation department should be overseen by a director level position, and the district should provide the individual in this position with professional training and mentoring to ensure success. Vehicle maintenance should also be the responsibility of this department. It would also benefit the district to hire a second dispatcher and a bus driver/trainer. Driver Training and Safety The district is following laws and regulations applicable to school bus driver training and docu- mentation, including a legally required transportation safety plan; however, the district did not know whether it had a copy of this plan at each school as legally required. However, the district’s safety plan was written many years ago and needs to be reviewed and updated. The district offers no post-accident remedial driver training; it needs a process to ensure this training is provided after every accident. Vehicle Maintenance, Fleet and Facility The California Highway Patrol (CHP) inspects all school buses, school bus fleet maintenance records, driver records and drug and alcohol testing records annually. In November 2014, the district’s transportation department received a rating of “unsatisfactory” from the CHP. This would normally be reason for great concern; however, in the district’s case it was issued not for safety reasons but because some driver records were not kept properly. The district corrected the issue and passed a subsequent inspection. The district’s vehicle maintenance is in compliance with applicable laws and regulations, and the CHP has deemed its buses in safe mechanical condition. The district has two mechanics and one working supervisor who are responsible for maintaining 42 special education buses, seven coach-type buses, approximately 122 other wheeled vehicles and trailers, and more than 200 other pieces of equipment. The district needs to hire one addi- tional mechanic. The districtwide electronic work order system for facility and grounds maintenance includes a vehicle maintenance component, but it is not comprehensive or robust. It does not have the ability to provide management information, and the shop relies on paper copies of work orders and repairs. The district should research and purchase a separate, dedicated electronic vehicle maintenance work order program. The shop is not large enough for the maintenance work done there; it needs to be expanded so each mechanic has at least one work bay. The district has no lifts that can raise a bus so mechanics can walk under it to inspect the undercarriage. The department uses press-to-talk cell phones to communicate with drivers. This system has limited functions. The district should reinstate a two-way radio system. The department does not have any global positioning system (GPS) units or video cameras on buses. The district should explore purchasing such systems. The transportation facility does not have a legal, approved bus washing or steam-cleaning area. The district should review the industrial wastewater permit for the facility to ensure compliance. Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 5 TRANSPORTATION FINANCE AND PURCHASING Findings and Recommendations Transportation Finance and Purchasing School transportation in California was fully funded until 1977. School districts reported their operational costs for the year, and in the subsequent year the state would reimburse them for 100% of costs. Between 1977 and the 1982-83 school years, California reduced the reimburse- ment percentage. In the 1982-83 school year the state capped each school district’s revenue at 80% of reported costs. Since then, the state has occasionally granted a cost of living adjustment (COLA) but has not kept pace with increasing costs. During the Great Recession, all categorical programs were reduced by approximately 20%. That funding was never reinstated. In the 2012-13 fiscal year, the district received $166,254 for home- to-school transportation and $108,864 for transportation of severely disabled or orthopedically impaired (SD/OI) students. The state’s funding for school transportation now covers less than 35% of costs statewide. The Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) maintained school transportation funding at the level previously provided, as an add-on to each school district’s base grant. For the district, that was a total of $275,118 in state revenue for transportation. That funding comes with a maintenance of effort (MOE) requirement that obligates each district to spend as much as it receives; school transportation funding cannot be used for any other purpose. There has been no COLA for school transportation funding since the implementation of LCFF. The district’s 2015-16 unaudited actual financial report provided to FCMAT shows two resource codes for school transportation resource 0723 shows expenses for transportation required when a school is in Program Improvement under the Federal No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Specifically, NCLB allows students at a school that is in Program Improvement status to attend another school and receive transportation to and from that school. This resource also includes athletic and field trip transportation expenses. The amount of expenses for resource 0723 was $121,760.11. Resource 0724 shows expenses for transportation of special education students whose IEP requires it. The amount of expenses for Resource 0724 was $4,015,773.89. State revenue paid for a total of approximately 6.6% of the district’s transportation expense for the 2015-16 fiscal year. Although this is lower than the statewide average, it is not a cause for concern. The state revenue is based on a funding cap established 34 years ago, when the transpor- tation program was likely much smaller. Before LCFF, the California Department of Education (CDE) collected and published school transportation data, but it has not done this in recent years. The district’s approximate cost per special education student for the 2015-16 fiscal year was $6,561, which is approximately the same as the statewide average in the last year that the CDE collected such data. This indicates that the district’s program is operating relatively efficiently. Costs and Charges for Field Trips The district schedules approximately 700 field trips and athletic trips each year. It charges $3.46 per mile plus $19.03 per hour, and more for driver overtime. The rate has not changed for at least four years. There is no doubt that its per-mile operating costs have increased during that time; Antioch Unified School diStrict 6 TRANSPORTATION FINANCE AND PURCHASING the Bay Area consumer price index has increased approximately 2.5% in each of the past four years. In addition, bus driver salaries have increased. The hourly rate should take into account the average blended (step level and overtime) salary and benefits cost for a driver. For the 2015-16 fiscal year, the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between the district the California School Employees Association (CSEA) lists a Step A salary at $19.68 per hour, with a Step F salary at $25.19 per hour. Based on this information and on school transportation field trip rates that FCMAT has seen throughout the state, the district’s rate is low and may not cover its costs. All schools first request field trip or athletic trip transportation from the district’s transportation department. If a district bus is not available, the group is informed of this and is responsible for booking and paying for a privately operated bus. The district maintains a list of approved outside transportation providers that meets its requirements. It is not known how many trips are booked annually with these providers. The district uses one of its three passenger vans to transport special education students to community-based instruction. It does not use the other two vans to transport any special educa- tion or regular education students for any purpose, including field or athletic trips. Recommendation The district should: 1. Review and revise the charges for field trips and athletic trips to better reflect current costs. Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 7 ROUTING, SCHEDULING AND FIELD TRIPS Routing, Scheduling and Field Trips The district does not operate any regular education bus routes. However, approximately 19 regular education students are transported on special education bus routes. These are students who have requested a different school placement in accordance with the Federal No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 2001. This legislation established benchmarks for student achievement. If any school did not meet their required progress goals, the school would fall into Program Improvement status (PI). Schools in PI were required to offer their students placement in other schools that were not in PI, and transportation was required if the student desired it. With the recent end of NCLB and adoption of the new Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), this require- ment is no longer in place; however, students’ existing placements are usually honored until they graduate from or complete the highest grade at their school. The district has 42 special education bus routes that transport approximately 612 students, for an average of 14.57 students per route, which is significantly higher and more efficient than the average of approximately 10 students per route that FCMAT sees in school districts across the state. The 612 students include some who ride the bus only in the morning and some who ride only in the afternoon. The district also has 20 midday bus routes. The district has approximately 16,800 students, approximately 2,400 (or 14.28%) of whom have an IEP. Of these 2,400, approximately 759 (or 31.62%) have an IEP that includes transportation as a necessary related service. However, only 612 of these 759 students use district-provided transportation. The remainder are transported by their parents, a few of whom receive mileage reimbursement from the district. No students are transported in taxi cabs, and none are trans- ported by a nonpublic school (NPS) under contract with the district. The percentage of the district’s students who are identified for special education services (14.28%) is significantly higher than the statewide average of 10 to 11%. The percentage of the district’s special education students who have an IEP with transportation as a necessary related service (31.62%) is also high, as is the percentage of special education students using district-pro- vided transportation (612 students, or 25.5%). The percentage of special education students the district transports is more than twice the 10-15% FCMAT usually sees in school districts across the state. This could be indicative of poor management of the IEP process, or program place- ments outside of students’ normal schools of attendance. The district had 38 special education bus routes during the 2015-16 school year, which was four more than the previous year. The increase was mainly the result of the district taking back the operation of some special education programs. Although the district previously provided transportation for students in these programs, they were at locations with start and end times that were sufficiently different from the district’s that fewer bus routes were needed and efficien- cies could be realized. By contrast, all of the district’s schools and programs have similar bell times, resulting in the need for more bus routes, thus decreasing efficiencies. The transportation manager was not involved in the discussions and planning for these changes, Other factors that affect transportation logistics include students in an NPS or other out-of-dis- trict placement. Currently 151 of the district’s special education students are transported to out-of-district programs in Walnut Creek, Concord, Fremont, Fairfield and other locations. These types of placements often require one or more buses with few students, thus reducing efficiency. Bell schedules can hinder bus route efficiency or help increase it. Most of the district’s schools begin classes at or near 8 a.m., and most end the school day at approximately the same time as Antioch Unified School diStrict 8 ROUTING, SCHEDULING AND FIELD TRIPS each other in the afternoon. Without significant differences in bell times, a bus route can only serve one school. Changing school day start and end times by approximately 45 minutes to an hour at half the district’s schools would allow one bus to make two bus runs (one bus route can include more than one run). This would likely enable the district to reduce its number of bus routes by 10. The average annual cost of operating one bus route is $60,000, so doing this could yield a savings of approximately $600,000 per year. Any discussion about changing bell schedules and bus routes needs to include transportation department staff who perform bus routing. For students who are picked up early on a route, it is not unusual to have a ride time of 90 minutes, and a few students have even longer ride times. Employees indicated that families have complained about the long ride times. Because the district covers an area of only 42.1 square miles, a family could drive their student to school in a much shorter time. It is not feasible for the district to limit or reduce student ride times when the starting and ending bell times for all of its schools and programs are so similar. Although the district does not have or need a policy that limits student ride times, and there is no legal limit on student ride times, it would benefit the district to keep ride times reasonable while maintaining the efficiency of routing. The district does not have enough school bus drivers for the number of routes it operates. There are 38 bus driver positions and four floater bus driver positions. A floater is a driver who covers routes when a route driver is assigned to a field trip or is absent. One of the floater positions is unfilled. The district also has two substitute school bus drivers who can work occasionally. On most days the three floaters are assigned to bus routes, and one transportation office employee regularly drives a bus route. Whenever coverage is needed for other routes, office staff who are properly licensed are required to drive. The district must increase the number of driver positions to match the total number of bus routes, and it needs at least four floater positions if the total number of routes is not reduced as mentioned elsewhere in this report. In addition, the district has only 42 special education buses to operate 42 routes, with no spare buses. It is common for one or more of these buses to be in the shop for inspection or repair, and for two of the special education bus routes to use large coach-type buses. Although this legally meets the need, it is not the most efficient use of buses. The district also purchased two passenger vans to transport special education students. This is allowed as long as the vans are designed for and carry nine or fewer passengers plus the driver (California Vehicle Code Section 545(b)). Vans are statistically less safe than school buses. The district used one van to transport students to the California School for the Deaf in Fremont, but when a student in a wheelchair required transportation there as well, it could no longer use the van because the vehicle code limits both number of wheelchair passengers and the number of other passengers who can be transported if there is a wheelchair passenger. The district has 24 bus aides or monitors (these positions are classified as bus driver assistants) assigned to school buses, as well as five nurse’s aides (these positions are classified as instruc- tional assistant - special needs) assigned to students with medical needs. The special services department supervises and evaluates the five nurse’s aides, but they are paid from the special education department’s budget. The 24 bus aides are transportation department employees. The number of bus aides has increased over the past four years as the transportation department has requested additional staffing, particularly for routes for students in NPS placements and routes with students who have significant behavioral problems. Not all of these students have IEPs that require an aide, and when the department assigns an aide to a bus and the bus also has a student with an IEP that requires an aide, there is more than one aide per bus. Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 9 ROUTING, SCHEDULING AND FIELD TRIPS The district needs to revise the language used in the IEP to assign an aide so that it indicates the student will be assigned to a bus with an aide rather than having a one-to-one aide on the bus. The district also needs to evaluate its process for assigning aides to buses to determine whether there is a valid reason for an aide. The process for determining whether a special education student should receive transportation service begins with the IEP. A program specialist, school principal, or teacher leads the IEP process. If transportation is identified as a related service, the responsible individual inputs that information into the special education information system (SEIS). The transportation department created a request form in Microsoft Word that could be completed and submitted to the transportation department. Presumably, the IEP team leader would do this. However, no individual or position in the special education department has been assigned the responsibility of processing and forwarding transportation requests. Instead, at the beginning of the school year or extended school year, the special education department delivers the information to the trans- portation department in an Excel spreadsheet. The special education department is working to transition all transportation requests to a daily check of SEIS, and it has given the transportation department read-only access to SEIS so it can see new requests for transportation daily. The detail in SEIS would provide the transportation department with much more information than their request form. However, there has not been any robust communication or training to inform all parties that this is the new preferred procedures and to ensure they understand this powerful tool and how to use it. The transportation department uses a computerized routing system, and the transportation manager does most of the routing because the dispatcher drives most mornings and afternoons. This is not an appropriate use of the manager’s time. The computerized routing system is a useful tool, though as with any computer program, employee training and time is required to get maximum benefit from it. Field Trips The district schedules approximately 700 field trips each year. Schools send field trip or athletic trip requests to the transportation department. If the transportation department cannot provide transportation, they tell the school, which is then responsible for booking transportation with one of the providers on the district’s approved list. School administrators indicated that booking field and athletic trip transportation usually goes smoothly, although there are occasional communication problems. Their biggest concern is that the cost is high. However, as indicated earlier in this report, the rate the transportation depart- ment charges for trips is likely too low. FCMAT found that the district is receiving excellent value for its field trip transportation. The district has no written rules or procedures for arranging, booking and invoicing for field trips, nor does it have written best practices for teachers while on a field trip. It would benefit the district to have the transportation department create a guide so all schools are aware of the procedures for arranging and booking field trip transportation. The district operates three 84-passenger coaches and four 79-passenger coaches for field trips and athletic trips. This is an adequate number of buses for field and athletic trips. However, as indicated earlier, these buses are frequently used for special education routes. The transportation provision of the district’s collective bargaining agreement with classified staff has been modified to streamline and simplify bidding and field trip assignments. The new language was tested during the 2015-16 school year, and both the district and the classified bargaining unit decided to continue the experiment for the 2016-17 school year. The language Antioch Unified School diStrict 10 ROUTING, SCHEDULING AND FIELD TRIPS was implemented for most of the 2015-16 school year and it appears the drivers are becoming accustomed to the new procedures. For almost all routes, the contract with drivers specifics a route time that is longer than the actual time needed to complete the route. Most school districts include approximately 15 minutes for pretrip bus inspection in the morning and 15 minutes for sweeping or cleaning in the afternoon. Some also include some time for fueling or other activities. Most of the district’s contract times pay drivers for 30 minutes of pretrip inspection, 15 minutes of after-route time in the morning, at least 15 minutes before to the afternoon route, and another 15 minutes after the afternoon route. The amount of time for which drivers are paid exceeds what is necessary. Paying each driver even one half hour of extra time daily results in a total of 21 additional hours of paid employee time per day. For an entire 180-day school year, assuming the lowest pay rate of approximately $20 per hour, the district is spending approximately $75,600 for each half hour of additional time per day. The collective bargaining agreement has some language in articles 19.2.2 and 19.2.3 regarding drivers maintaining route books and cleaning the interior and exterior of buses; however, drivers no longer maintain route books. It would benefit the district to manage the contract with drivers more conservatively. Recommendations The district should: 1. Ensure that the transportation department employees and management are included in any discussions and decisions about the district taking back oper- ation of special education programs, moving program locations, and changing bell schedules. 2. Consider having different bell schedules for some schools to improve bus use, routing efficiency, and cost effectiveness. 3. Seek to maintain or increase routing efficiency without unduly increasing student ride times or adding bus routes. 4. Hire enough bus drivers to ensure adequate coverage for all routes and suffi- cient floater driver positions. 5. Ensure that it has enough buses for its special education transportation needs. 6. Revise IEP language regarding bus aides to ensure that they are assigned to a bus, not to an individual student. 7. Create opportunities for special education department and transportation department managers and staff to meet and communicate about transpor- tation requests for special education students, and to receive training in the request process and in using SEIS. 8. Create written guidance for schools about the procedures for requesting and booking transportation for field trips and athletic trips, and about best prac- tices for staff to follow while on field trips. Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 11 ROUTING, SCHEDULING AND FIELD TRIPS 9. Manage drivers’ contracts so that the contracted paid time aligns more closely with the actual time needed to operate the routes. Antioch Unified School diStrict 12 Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 13 ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING Organization and Staffing The district’s transportation department operates as part of the maintenance, operations and transportation (MOT) department. The assistant superintendent of business is responsible for several departments, including the MOT department. The district also has a director of MOT, who has direct responsibility for the transportation department. The transportation department office is staffed as follows: 1 full-time equivalent (FTE) manager-transportation 1 FTE supervisor-transportation 1 FTE transportation operations assistant 1 FTE school bus dispatcher-driver 0.25 FTE facilities use technician In addition, the department has the drivers, aides and mechanics mentioned elsewhere in this report. The mechanics are supervised by the MOT director. Mechanic staffing is discussed in detail in the Vehicle Maintenance section of this report. The department is not structured or staffed appropriately for a transportation operation of its size; MOT structures work well when there are fewer than 25 bus routes, but the district’s opera- tion is far larger, and it is growing as the need for special education transportation increases. The department would be better structured as a standalone department that reports to the assistant superintendent of business and is led by an individual in director-level position. The district’s manager-transportation and supervisor-transportation are not exempt positions, which means they earn overtime when they work more than eight hours in a day or more than 40 hours in a week. Transportation department office staff put in a great deal of overtime because they often drive bus routes so stay late or come in early to complete office tasks. In addition, almost every day two bus drivers help with office tasks such as posting daily extra work and scheduling assignments and trips. Their overtime varies but often exceeds two hours each day. The amount and frequency of overtime indicates that the department is not staffed adequately. A transportation operation of this size would benefit from having the following office positions: 1 FTE director of transportation 1 FTE supervisor-transportation 2 FTE dispatcher-drivers 1 FTE bus driver/trainer 1 FTE transportation operations assistant Under this organizational structure, the director of transportation would also have responsibility for the vehicle maintenance employees and operations. The dispatcher-drivers would have full responsibility for routing and scheduling, and for ensuring telephone and two-way radio coverage throughout the day. The bus driver/trainer is a classifica- tion that the district has not used recently but that it needs. This individual would be assigned a regular route and would be available the rest of the time to train drivers. The department would no longer need a facilities use technician to help answer phones. This position was originally created to help answer phones during the heaviest calling from 6:30 to Antioch Unified School diStrict 14 ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING 8:30 a.m. It evolved to be a 7 to 9 a.m. position, which is not the heaviest call time. The facilities use technician does not believe that their time is productive, and transportation department employees indicated they have not needed this additional support for some time. The district has worked on a draft revised job description for this position that includes transportation depart- ment duties; however, the revised job description was never adopted. There is no longer a need for this position, and it could be eliminated immediately. The transportation manager recently requested four additional school bus driver positions. There is an immediate need for these positions based on the routes and staffing FCMAT observed. In addition to routes with no assigned driver, drivers are occasionally absent. Although absenteeism is not excessive, the lack of drivers increases the impact of absences by reducing the department’s ability to staff all routes adequately and operate on-time service. The transportation manager also requested additional bus aide positions; however, as discussed above in the Routing, Scheduling and Field Trips section of this report, the district’s bus aide staffing and assignments are already excessive. The district needs to establish criteria for bus aide staffing and assignments while ensuring that there is no more than one aide per route. It is rare for a transportation operation the size of the district’s to need more than 10 bus aides. The district has recently also received requests from bus aides for training, which is needed and should be implemented. Effective training includes instruction in student disabilities, behavioral issues, mitigating strategies, and other topics. Staff members from the special education department could provide such training, and some private companies also produce excellent training programs. California has no robust, structured, ongoing professional development program for school trans- portation directors. However, a variety of resources are available that can help a district create its own professional development program to ensure the transportation director has adequate knowledge to successfully manage personnel, understand budgets and business functions, and learn the district’s human resources procedures including advertising, hiring, managing, evalua- tions and discipline. There are several open school transportation director positions in California, and the talent pool is limited; few candidates have the experience or training to fulfill the require- ments without significant district support. Transportation department staff meetings are infrequent. Recommendations The district should: 1. Restructure the transportation department as a separate department led by a director-level management position. 2. Consider changing transportation office staffing to reflect the following: • A 1 FTE director of transportation position, and make it also responsible for vehicle maintenance staff and operations. • A 1 FTE supervisor-transportation position • Two FTE dispatcher-driver positions • A 1 FTE bus driver/trainer position • A 1 FTE transportation operations assistant position • Elimination of the facilities use technician position Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 15 ORGANIZATION AND STAFFING 3. Establish criteria for staffing and assignment of bus aides, and consider reducing the number of bus aides. 4. Create and fill four additional bus driver positions. 5. Provide significant training for the director of transportation as needed. 6. Hold department staff meetings regularly; consider scheduling a meeting every two weeks. Antioch Unified School diStrict 16 Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 17 BUS DRIVER TRAINING AND SAFETY Bus Driver Training and Safety The requirements for school bus driver training in California are listed in Education Code Section 40080 and subsequent sections. School bus drivers must receive a minimum of 20 hours per year of classroom training in all units of the Instructor’s Manual for California’s Bus Driver’s Training Course, and a minimum of 20 hours per year of behind-the-wheel training with content from the Instructor’s Behind-the-Wheel Guide for California’s Bus Driver’s Training Course. To maintain their special certificate’s validity, drivers must also complete a minimum of 10 hours of in-service training each year, and they must take special classroom training in the last year of their certificate’s validity to renew it. All testing is performed by the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) through a special officer at each California Highway Patrol (CHP) office. A driver must complete many more hours of classroom and behind-the-wheel training. Trainers of drivers in most school districts teach for a minimum of 35 hours in the classroom and spend at least that many hours behind the wheel. All driver training records must be kept in compliance with laws and regulations. The district’s transportation manager and transportation supervisor are both state-certified school bus driver instructors. The supervisor has primary responsibility for maintaining the driver training records. The training program includes an orientation at the beginning of the year and monthly in-service meetings for drivers. The department also conducts training for new drivers as needed, and includes the renewal training in its new driver training classes. FCMAT reviewed approximately 10% of the driver training records and found they are in compliance with laws and regulations. Most of the drivers receive approximately 15 hours of in-service each year, which is adequate and meets legal requirements. However, the supervisor and manager do not have enough time to perform regular ride-alongs with drivers or other enhanced driver training. The driver training records are well organized in binders in a locked cabinet in the supervisor’s office, ensuring the confidentiality of sensitive information. Several months ago the CDE’s Office of School Transportation also conducted a review of these driver training records and found them to be in compliance. The district has no requirement for a driver to complete training after being involved in an acci- dent. It is a best practice for a district to review the cause of each accident and ensure the driver involved receives some remedial behind-the wheel training that includes a focus on any areas that merit it based on a review of the accident. The district’s drivers desire more bus aides to support them on routes for students in nonpublic schools. However, the district is overstaffed with bus aides already. The desire for more aides may be an indicator that bus drivers are not trained or equipped to handle the heightened behavioral issues on these routes. Although the district’s special education department has provided drivers with some training, more is needed. New bus driver trainees are not paid for their initial training, and they must also pay their own licensing fees. The district pays for an initial physical exam, as well as drug test required by federal law. Once a driver is licensed and has worked for six months, they can submit a voucher for the district to pay for all of the initial training hours, which are paid at minimum wage. This arrangement can be a significant deterrent for trainees. Although the initial training is Antioch Unified School diStrict 18 BUS DRIVER TRAINING AND SAFETY free, prospective employees need to earn an income. School bus driver training often takes two months or more. Most candidates cannot afford to go without pay for such a long time. Education Code 39831.3 requires school districts to have a transportation safety plan and to maintain a copy of it at each school site. Any CHP officer can request this plan for inspection. The district has such a plan, but it has not been reviewed since it was adopted in 1998. It is not clear whether the district maintains a copy of the plan at each school site. Education Code 39831.5 requires school districts to conduct school bus safety instruction and evacuation drills annually for students in certain grades who ride the bus. A district must also keep records of the drills. The district is in compliance with this law. The district’s drivers are enrolled in the DMV pull notice program, so the district receives regular copies of their driving records. The manager receives these notices electronically, and the supervisor also has access to the program. The drivers are also enrolled in a drug and alcohol testing program as required by federal law. The manager and supervisor are both in the pool of tested employees. The outside company that manages the drug testing sends the district’s human resources office a random list of drivers to be tested, and the human resources office forwards it to the transportation manager to ensure that drivers are tested. If the manager is on the list, the human resource office requires that the manager be tested and sends the list of remaining drivers to be tested only after this has occurred. This testing process is appropriate. Recommendations The district should: 1. Provide drivers with additional training so they can be well equipped to handle behavioral issues on their routes. 2. Conduct post-accident remedial behind-the-wheel driver training. 3. Explore improving recruitment by paying bus driver trainees for their time shortly after completion of training. Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 19 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FLEET AND FACILITY Vehicle Maintenance, Fleet and Facility The CHP’s Motor Carrier Division inspects school buses, maintenance records, driver records and federal drug and alcohol testing program records annually. The CHP provides a Safety Compliance Report/Terminal Record Update that grades the school district on the items inspected. This is commonly known as the terminal grade. Until 2014, the district consistently received the CHP’s highest grade, satisfactory, which indicates overall compliance with laws and regulations in each area inspected. However, the CHP’s November 2014 report gave the district a grade of unsatisfactory because two time-keeping records for drivers were not complete, the district did not have DMV pull notices on file for two drivers, and one driver had been allowed to drive when their commercial driver’s license had not been renewed on time. In 2015 the district received a grade of “satisfactory” in the CHP’s inspection. After a grade of unsatisfactory, the CHP conducts a reinspection within 120 days. The district received a grade of satisfactory upon reinspection. The next inspection will be in November 2016. The transportation department has corrected the conditions that resulted in the grade of unsatisfactory in 2014. When the district receive the grade of unsatisfactory, district administrators immediately met with the CHP motor carrier inspector and discussed their situation. At that time, the assistant superintendent of business stated that the district would purchase an electronic timekeeping system. This has not occurred; however, it is not necessary for compliance. The department keeps a relatively comprehensive daily sign-in sheet to track driver time, but payroll records would suffice as well. Before the 2014 inspection, the district was on a DMV pull notice program that relied on the U.S. mail, and updates could take as long as 30 days by mail. However, the district has since changed to an electronic system and receives immediate updates. The terminal grade has often been considered a school transportation program’s safety report card. However, the district’s unsatisfactory grade in 2014 had nothing to do with vehicle mainte- nance or vehicle safety. The district is in the CHP’s Golden Gate Division. FCMAT has noticed that recently a relatively high number of school transportation operations in this CHP division’s area have received unsatisfactory ratings for relatively minor deficiencies in records. Deficiencies such as this would not have resulted in an unsatisfactory terminal grade in the past. In fact, the district has similar notations in its 2012 and the 2013 terminal inspection reports, both of which gave it a satisfactory rating. It important that the district reach out to the CHP, seek to understand its current expectations, and do everything possible to maintain a satisfactory rating. An unsatisfactory rating that includes significant vehicle safety or maintenance program concerns can result in the local district attorney filing criminal charges against a district and its superintendent. Most of the district’s 42 special education buses are small school buses, which typically have a truck chassis with a front engine and hood, and a bus body. Most of these are 35-passenger buses, and many have wheelchair lifts. The remaining special education buses are van-type school buses. The district also has seven coach-type school buses that are used for field trips or athletic trips. As noted previously, there are no spare special education buses. School bus maintenance is heavily regulated in California. Title 13 of the California Code of Regulations, Section 1232 (13CCR1232), requires school buses to undergo a specific preventive maintenance inspection every 45 days or 3,000 miles, whichever comes first. No other vehicle in California requires such frequent inspections. Specific elements of the bus must be inspected. The most critical elements are steering, brakes and suspension components. In addition to the Antioch Unified School diStrict 20 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FLEET AND FACILITY regulated inspection items, the motor carrier (in this case, the district) must also have a written preventive maintenance program for all other elements of the vehicle. The district has a well-de- veloped school bus preventive maintenance program. In addition to school buses, the district’s shop is responsible for maintaining approximately 122 vehicles, riding mowers and trailers, as well as approximately 200 other motorized hand tools such as string trimmers, hedge trimmers, chain saws and other hand and turf tools. The district’s shop is staffed by one vehicle maintenance supervisor and two mechanics. There are no other shop personnel or service persons. Drivers fuel and wash their own buses. The mechanics regularly need to work overtime to complete all of their tasks. The shop is understaffed and needs one additional mechanic to adequately maintain the number of vehicles and items of equipment for which it is responsible. Although any mechanic is permitted to purchase parts if necessary, the supervisor usually performs this task. The supervisor also schedules the 45-day/3,000 mile inspections and prior- itizes and assigns work to the mechanics. The transportation operations assistant provides the supervisor with some clerical support, including processing parts purchases for payment, entering work orders into the electronic system, and charging fuel and repair costs for non-school bus vehicles to the correct district departments. The transportation department shop uses a districtwide electronic work order system that is used mostly for facility and grounds repairs. Although the system has a vehicle maintenance module, it is not comparable to a comprehensive electronic vehicle maintenance system and cannot generate vehicle cost histories or other typical vehicle maintenance and cost tracking reports. The trans- portation department relies mostly on paper files for bus and vehicle repair histories. The system also cannot keep inventory records or cost information for the vehicle parts on hand. The transportation department has never conducted a physical parts inventory and does not know the value of the parts and supplies it has in stock. However, it does have reasonable purchasing and inventory controls in place to deter theft and fraud. A comprehensive electronic vehicle maintenance system would enable the district to better track vehicle maintenance repair and inspection history and parts inventory information, and to generate valuable management reports and information. The district’s bus drivers are required to perform a daily pretrip inspection of their bus. If any defects are reported, they are documented and the document is forwarded to the shop for future repair. If there is any critical safety defect the bus can be taken out of service immediately. Mechanics are on duty when drivers report in the morning until they return from their routes in the afternoon. Drivers often go directly to the shop and speak with mechanics about defects in their assigned buses. Some repairs are made without proper reporting or documentation; however, this is relatively rare. The California Air Resources Board adopted its truck and bus rules for diesel particulate exhaust in December, 2010. The rules are codified as 13 CCR 2022 and 2022.1. These rules require that diesel school buses with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) over 14,000 pounds install a level 3 diesel particulate filter by January 1, 2014. District staff reported that their fleet is fully compliant with this rule. Cursory inspection of some buses verified that they have the required filters. Shop staff have the tools needed to work on the district’s fleet; however, the shop has no vehicle lifts capable of lifting a school bus. Wheel lifts have become common in heavy duty vehicle Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 21 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FLEET AND FACILITY maintenance and school bus shops. They are relatively inexpensive and allow a bus to be raised so mechanics can perform a thorough undercarriage inspection. Lifts also shorten the time needed for many repairs. Facility The transportation offices and drivers’ room are spacious and adequate. The bus parking yard is large enough to accommodate parking for employees’ vehicles and all buses. However, the vehicle maintenance shop has only two bays and is too small for the size of the transportation operation it serves. There is a small covered area adjacent to the shop that can be used for smaller vehicles. Many vehicles that are in the shop for a long time are parked outside and worked on outside. This is not the best environment for many repairs, particularly engine work, because it increases the risk that internal engine components will become contaminated, which can negate the mechanics’ work and lead to premature failures. The district needs a larger repair shop. The area outside of the shop where some work is done is a sloped, drained area that would be ideal for steam cleaning or washing buses. However, the area does not have a permitted oil separator (an underground containment area that separates oil, grease and sludge and does not allow it into the sewer). Another area on the opposite side of the shop has such a separator, but it is not covered. It is unusual for a local wastewater treatment organization to issue an industrial wastewater permit without strict rules to prevent rainwater from entering the system. Most wastewater treatment plants do not want to treat large quantities of rainwater. The district needs to check its industrial wastewater permit and the conditions specified when it was issued. The district fuels its own vehicles. It has a 10,000-gallon diesel tank and a 4,000-gallon gasoline tank. FCMAT did not determine whether they comply with local regulations or are properly permitted. The facility has an electronic fuel tank leak detection system. It also has an electronic fuel management kiosk on the fueling island, but this has reportedly been out of operation for some time. Bus drivers and other vehicle operators fuel vehicles and record the vehicle number, odometer and quantity of fuel on a sheet of paper at the fueling island. Transportation department staff log the fuel use and the mileage, which helps them determine when to perform preventive maintenance inspections. All other departments are invoiced for their fuel. The fuel system is turned off whenever the shop is closed, and no one has access to fuel after-hours. Employees indicated that no theft of fuel has occurred. Related Equipment The department’s bus drivers use press-to-talk cell phones to communicate with dispatchers and other transportation staff. These work like two-way radios; however, drivers must hold the phone. This technology is relatively expensive and creates a distraction and driving hazard. The law prohibits school bus drivers from using phones while driving. With the press-to-talk system, drivers cannot listen to other drivers’ conversations as they would on a two-way radio, and the office cannot broadcast messages or poll drivers to see who is avail- able to help with immediate needs such as a last minute student pick up. Thus the system limits both communication and operational flexibility. Simple two-way radios are usually less expensive, have greater coverage and are much more useful for a school transportation system. Employees indicated that the district used to have such a system. If so, the district may still have its Federal Communications Commission frequency and license. Antioch Unified School diStrict 22 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE FLEET AND FACILITY The district does not have a global positioning system (GPS) for its buses. These systems enable a district to locate any bus at any time and to produce reports that identify time, speed and location. Some can even report other events, such as when the door is opened or the red lights are activated. These devices are extremely useful when seeking to track and recount events after an accident or in response to a parent complaint. In most cases they help confirm a driver’s recitation of events. The district also has no video camera systems on its buses. These can be extremely useful to verify student discipline and behaviors. Many can also use GPS data to identify location, time and speed, and many can combine video from multiple cameras. The cost of these systems has been decreasing. Governor Jerry Brown recently signed California Senate Bill 1072, which will require all school buses to have a child check alarm, which is an alarm that the driver must walk to the back of the bus to disable, thus helping to ensure that the driver has inspected the interior of the bus for any remaining students. The CHP will create regulations for installing and using these devices. Recommendations The district should: 1. Research and consider purchasing electronic vehicle maintenance software. 2. Hire an additional mechanic. 3. Purchase at least one set of wheel lifts for the shop. 4. Review its industrial wastewater permit for the bus facility to ensure compli- ance. 5. Replace its push-to-talk cell phones with a two-way radio system. 6. Research and purchase GPS and video camera systems for its buses. 7. Prepare to purchase and install child check alarms for its buses, but wait to purchase these until after the CHP issues regulations for installing them. Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 2233 APPDERNADFIXT Appendix Antioch Unified School diStrict 2244 DARPPAEFNTDIX Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 2255 APPDERNADFIXT Study Agreement Antioch Unified School diStrict 2266 DARPPAEFNTDIX Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 2277 APPDERNADFIXT Antioch Unified School diStrict 2288 DARPPAEFNTDIX Fiscal crisis & ManageMent assistance teaM 2299 APPDERNADFIXT Antioch Unified School diStrict