Comprehensive Review

King City Joint Union High School District Comprehensive Review and Recovery Plan Initial Report February 2010 King City Joint Union High School District Comprehensive Review and Recovery Plan Initial Report February 2010 Introduction and Executive Summary Background The King City Joint Union High School District is located in the town of King City in Monterey County. The District serves 2,185 students in grades 9-12 at two comprehensive high schools and two continuation schools. The student population is diverse; 37.6% of students are English learners and 56% are eligible for free or reduced-price meals. The district’s annual revenue limit funding per average daily attendance (ADA) was $7,066.34 for 2008-2009 and $7,366.34 for 2009-2010. The district has experienced multiple years of financial difficulties leading to cash insolvency and the need for state intervention. of the lack of organizational decisions and an unfavorable ruling from the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) have compounded the district’s financial problems. The PERB decision resulted in a retroactive formula-based increase in employee compensation costs and contributed to the district’s continued deficit spending. In 2006, the cost of retroactively applying the compensation formula was estimated at $5.2 million; the on-going cost was $600,000 annually, an increase of 11% to total compensation. A FCMAT fiscal review commissioned by the district in May 2006 concluded that the retroactive payout and ongoing liability “…could potentially lead to insolvency, necessitating a loan from the state.” Based on the requirements of Assembly Bill (AB) 1200 that the district maintain a reserve for economic uncertainties and undergo budget certification, the district could not afford to fund the retroactive amount for employee compensation, and subsequently in 2007 the certificated bargaining unit agreed to a negotiated settlement of $1.2 million. The district requested and received a temporary loan from the Monterey County Office of Education in accordance with Education Code sections 42621 and 42622 to fund the settlement because it did not have sufficient cash to fund both the retroactive amount and the permanent ongoing increase to the salary schedule. Over the past two fiscal years, the board and administrative teams were unable to resolve the growing structural deficit. From 2002 until the appointment of the state administrator, the district was unable to maintain consistent leadership in key administrative positions. Several superintendents and chief business officials were employed in succession, and at one time these functions were combined into one position to reduce costs. The administrative and business services were shared with the King City Union School District, in effect leaving one person to fill four key administrative positions. This organizational structure unfortunately exacerbated the lack of effective decision-making to keep the district financially solvent. Ineffective governance has also contributed to the fiscal crisis and need for state intervention. The high school district’s governing board experienced many changes in membership during the last several years. The board’s lack of experience and institutional knowledge contributed to a limited understanding of the seriousness of the district’s financial condition and the types of fiscal priorities and solutions needed to eliminate the structural deficit. The permanent cost increase associated with the certificated staff compensation formula was significant and created a substantial structural deficit. By fiscal year 2006-07 the district was spending $654 more annually per pupil than it received in revenue. Since that year, this deficit has varied between $450 and $1,987 per pupil annually. Beginning in 2007, the Monterey County Office of Education assigned a variety of fiscal experts to the district to provide support to ensure that the district’s financial obligations were met and Introduction and Executive Summary 1 business was conducted appropriately while critical business office positions were vacant. A fiscal advisor was assigned to the district in 2008 to assist the district in achieving fiscal recovery. On December 4, 2007, the Monterey County Office of Education declared the district a “lack of going concern” because the district’s budget was projected to have a negative fund balance for the current and two subsequent fiscal years. In addition to the total employee compensation, other factors contributing to this condition included a developing and serious state budget crisis and the beginning of a period of declining enrollment. In May 2008, the Fiscal Crisis and Management Assistance Team (FCMAT) concluded a fiscal review of the district commissioned by the Monterey County Office of Education. That study included the effect of the PERB decision, and FCMAT’s report stated, “Based on the district’s projected budget and levels of deficit spending, FCMAT projects that the district will need to make substantial reductions in the multiyear financial projection (MYFP) or the district may require state intervention in the 2009-10 fiscal year.” On July 23, 2009, Senate Bill (SB) 130 (Denham, co-author Assembly member Caballero) was signed into law. The bill authorized the appointment of a state administrator and provided a $13 million emergency state loan or line of credit. So far, $5 million has been required from the emergency apportionment for the King City Joint Union High School District to continue to meet its financial obligations. The legislation authorizes FCMAT to complete comprehensive assessments of the King City Joint Union High School District and develop recovery plans in five operational areas. The bill also requires FCMAT to file written status reports annually with various entities, including the Legislature, regarding the school district’s progress in meeting the recommendations contained in the recovery plans. SB 130 differs from prior state emergency loans in that it also requires that the recovery plan include specific training for board members and staff who have management and personnel policy-making and advisory responsibilities to ensure that the district’s leadership team has the knowledge and skills to discharge their responsibilities effectively. In addition FCMAT is authorized to assist the state administrator in developing the first multiyear financial recovery plan required under paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) of Section 41327.1 of the California Education Code (EC). FCMAT has prepared a multiyear financial projection and cash flow analysis that will form the basis for the financial recovery plan, which will be issued in a separate report. SB 130 further authorizes FCMAT to do the following: 1. Assist the state administrator in the development of the adopted budget and interim reports. 2. Recommend to the state administrator any studies or activities that the state administrator should undertake to enhance revenue or achieve cost savings. 3. Provide any other assistance as described in EC Section 42127.8. SB 130 further intended that the state superintendent of public instruction (SPI), through the state administrator, work with the staff and board to identify the procedures and programs that the district will implement to accomplish the following: 1. Significantly raise pupil achievement. 2. Improve pupil attendance. 3. Lower the pupil dropout rate. 2 Introduction and Executive Summary 4. Increase parental involvement. 5. Attract, retain and train a quality teaching staff. 6. Manage fiscal expenditures in a manner consistent with the district’s current and projected revenues. The purpose of this report is to provide the district with the results of a systemic, comprehensive assessment and recommendations for improvement and recovery in the following five operational areas: 1. Community Relations and Governance 4. Personnel Management 5. Pupil Achievement 6. Financial Management 7. Facilities Management This report provides data to the district, the community and the Legislature to facilitate more effective collaboration and to build the district’s capacity to effectively manage personnel, reduce operating costs, increase revenue and promote student learning. The report also provides critical information regarding site and facility issues that interfere with effective teaching and learning. Comprehensive Review Process In preparation for this comprehensive review, FCMAT revised the legal and professional standards to align with industry best practices and with applicable state and federal law, including the California Education Code. The standards used are applicable to all California school districts. Independent and external professional experts from both the private and public sectors assisted in researching, identifying and categorizing the 307 standards used in this assessment. FCMAT monitored the use of the standards during the assessment process to ensure that they were applied fairly and rigorously. FCMAT also measured the district’s implementation of the standards, and this report includes recommendations for improvement and recovery related to each standard addressed. Recommendations for recovery are designed and intended to affect functions directly at the district, school site and classroom level. Implementing the designated standards and recommendations with this type of depth and focus will result in improved pupil achievement, financial practices, personnel procedures, community relations and facilities management. This comprehensive review process is a deficit analysis model. The process of systemic assessment, prioritization and intervention lays the foundation for increasing the district’s capacity and productivity by establishing a baseline measurement against which future progress can be measured. The process also serves to engage board members, parents, students and the community in a partnership to improve student learning. The findings presented in this report measure the district’s operations prior to the appointment of the state administrator on July 23, 2009, and the recommendations are based on identified needs. Introduction and Executive Summary 3 At the time of this report’s publication, the district has already begun working on a number of the concerns addressed in this report and has thus made progress that is not reflected in this report. FCMAT acknowledges and extends its thanks to the state administrator, the district’s staff and the community for their assistance and cooperation during this review. Study Guidelines FCMAT’s approach to implementing the statutory requirements of SB 130 is based on a commitment to an independent and external standards-based review of the district’s operations. FCMAT performed the assessment and developed the recovery plan in collaboration with other external providers selected using a competitive process. Professionals from throughout California contributed their knowledge and applied the legal and professional standards to the specific local conditions found in the King City Joint Union High School District. Prior to working in the district, FCMAT adopted five basic tenets to be incorporated in the assessment and recovery plans. These tenets were based on previous assessments conducted by FCMAT in school districts throughout California and a review of data from other states that have conducted external reviews of troubled school districts. The five basic tenets are as follows: 1. Use of Professional and Legal Standards FCMAT’s experience indicates that for schools and school districts to be successful in program improvement, the evaluation, design and implementation of recovery plans must be standards- driven. FCMAT has noted positive differences between an objective standards-based approach versus a non-standards-based approach. When standards are attainable and clearly communicated and defined, there is a greater likelihood they will be measured and met. The standards are the basis for the recovery plans for the district. To participate in the review of the King City Joint Union High School District, providers were required to respond to a scope of study that identified the standards as the basis for assessment and improvement and demonstrate how they would incorporate the FCMAT-identified standards into their work. Although the standards were identified for the comprehensive review of the King City Joint Union High School District, they are not unique to this district and could be readily used to measure the success of any school district in California. Every standard was measured using a consistent rating format, and each standard was given a scaled rating from zero to 10, indicating the extent to which it has been met. Consultants met to discuss findings and test for inter-rater reliability. Following are definitions of terms and the rubric used to arrive at the scaled scores. The purpose of the scaled ratings is to establish a baseline against which the district’s future gains and achievements can be measured. Not Implemented (Scaled Score of 0) There is no significant evidence that the standard is implemented. Partially Implemented (Scaled Score of 1 through 7) A partially implemented standard has been met to a limited degree; the degree of completeness varies as follows: 1. Some design or research regarding the standard is in place that supports prelimin ary development. (Scaled score of 1) 4 Introduction and Executive Summary 2. Implementation of the standard is well into the development stage. Appropriate staff are engaged and there is a plan for implementation. (Scaled score of 2) 3. A plan to address the standard is fully developed, and the standard is in the beg inning phase of implementation. (Scaled score of 3) 4. Staff are engaged in implementing most elements of the standard. (Scaled score of 4) 5. Staff are engaged in implementing the standard. All standard elements are developed and are in the implementation phase. (Scaled score of 5) 6. Elements of the standard are implemented, monitored and becoming systematic. (Scaled score of 6) 7. All elements of the standard are fully implemented and are being monitored, and ap propriate adjustments are taking place. (Scaled score of 7) Fully Implemented (Scaled Score of 8 through 10) A fully implemented standard is complete relative to the following criteria. 8. All elements of the standard are fully and substantially implemented and are sust ainable. (Scaled score of 8) 9. All elements of the standard are fully and substantially implemented and have been sustained for a full school year. (Scaled score of 9) 10. All elements of the standard are fully implemented, are being sustained with high quality, are being refined, and have a process for ongoing evaluation. (Scaled score of 10) 2. Conduct an External and Independent Assessment FCMAT used an external and independent assessment process to develop the assessment and recovery plans for the district. This report presents findings and recovery plans based on external and independent assessments conducted by FCMAT staff, separate professional agencies, and independent consultants. Collectively, these professionals and consultants constitute FCMAT’s providers in the assessment process. Their external and independent assessments serve as the primary basis for the review’s reliability, integrity and credibility. 3. Utilize Multiple Measures of Assessment For a finding to be considered valid, the same or consistent information is needed from multiple sources. The assessments and recovery plans were based on such multiple measures. Testing, personal interviews, group meetings, observations, review and analysis of data all added value to the assessment process. The providers were required to use multiple measurements and triangulate their findings as they assessed the standard. This process allowed for a variety of methods of determining whether the standards were met. All school district operations that affect student achievement (including governance, fiscal, personnel and facilities) were reviewed and included in the recovery plan. Introduction and Executive Summary 5 4. Empower Staff and Community Senate Bill 130 requires that the recovery plan include specific training for board members and staff who have personnel and management policy-making and advisory responsibilities to ensure that the district’s leadership team has the knowledge and skills to carry out their responsibilities effectively. The success of the recovery plans and their implementation depend on an effective professional and community development process. For this reason, empowering staff and the community is one of the highest priorities, and emphasizing this priority with each of the five teams was critical. Thus the report consistently calls for training for board members, staff and administrators. Of paramount importance is the community’s role in local governance. The lack of parental involvement in education is a growing concern nationally. Re-engaging parents, teachers and support staff is vital to the district’s success. Parents in the district care deeply about their children’s future and want to participate in improving the school district and enhancing student learning. The community relations section of this report provides recommendations for engaging parents and the community in a more active and meaningful role in their children’s education. 5. Engage Local, State and National Agencies It is critical to involve various local, state and national agencies in the district’s recovery; the engagement of state-recognized agencies and consultants in the assessment and recovery process emphasized this. The California Department of Education (CDE), city and county interests, and professional organizations have expressed a desire to assist and participate in the district’s recovery. 6 Introduction and Executive Summary Study Team The study team was composed of the following members: For FCMAT: Mary Barlow, Deputy Administrative Officer Jim Cerreta, Fiscal Intervention Specialist Michelle Plumbtree, Chief Management Analyst John Lotze, Public Information Specialist For Community Relations and Governance: Bill Gillaspie, FCMAT Chief Management Analyst Robert Rice, FCMAT Consultant For Personnel Management: Dr. Terry Bradley, Vice President, School Innovations and Advocacy, Consultant William McGuire, Vice President, School Innovations and Advocacy, Consultant For Pupil Achievement: Patricia Alexander, Administrator, Kern County Superintendent of Schools, Consultant Nancy Sullivan, Deputy Operations Officer, California School Information Systems (CSIS), Consultant Greig Welch, Assistant Superintendent, Paso Robles School District, Consultant Mary Barlow, FCMAT Deputy Administrative Officer For Financial Management: Jim Cerreta, FCMAT Fiscal Intervention Specialist Michelle Plumbtree, FCMAT Chief Management Analyst For Facilities Management: Dean Bubar, Assistant Superintendent, Administrative Services, Los Banos Unified School District, Consultant Rod Sprecher, Rainbow Six Inc. Mary Barlow, FCMAT Deputy Administrative Officer Introduction and Executive Summary 7 8 Introduction and Executive Summary Executive Summary FCMAT’s assessment of the King City Joint Union High School District indicates that the district is having difficulty meeting most basic legal and professional standards. The district meets many of the conditions presented and identified as FCMAT’s predictors of school districts needing intervention, including but not limited to absence of leadership, ineffective communication, inadequate budget development, lack of budget monitoring, lack of position control, ineffective management information systems, substantial long-term debt commitments, lack of updated board policies, and other deficiencies in operational systems and structures. Staff function without the tools to help them complete their work efficiently and effectively. The district lacks a system to track progress and hold employees accountable. The district has experienced many indicators of malfunction and reacted to those issues rather than planning and preventing issues from arising. The district has also been reactive rather than proactive with regard to a number of significant crises, including the loss of Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation, the PERB decision, significant audit findings, program improvement status, coordinated program management findings and other issues. Low employee morale is pervasive, and a belief that positive change is not achievable is widespread among staff and the community. The perception that the district is unwilling and unable to change creates a barrier to positive progress. Internal and external communications are inconsistent, infrequent and lack a vision for district goals and student achievement. The district has become an adult-centered system that focuses on the best interest of adults rather than students. Board meetings, staff meetings, and energy are directed toward employee issues such as collective bargaining rather than toward supporting and improving student outcomes. Student achievement remains well below the countywide and statewide averages for similar schools. This report contains numerous findings and recommendations for recovery in five major operational areas. Prioritizing these recommendations and redirecting resources to address these issues must be the district’s top priority. The district lacks systems in almost all operational areas, and the few systems that are in place do not function effectively. The district must develop operational systems in every area of district management if it is to recover. The need to develop effective operational systems is a continual theme throughout this report. Principal Findings In an effort to meet the expense of an untenable teacher salary schedule and total compensation package, the district decimated the management and classified staffing of all other student and operational support systems, eliminated professional development, and reduced the facility program to areas essential to the maintenance of basic health and safety standards. The district has reduced classified staff support by 21% over a seven-year period.. Key student support positions and positions responsible for developing and implementing the district’s vision for student success have been eliminated. FCMAT’s multiyear financial projections and review of the district’s past and current budgets found that the district’s average salary and benefits exceed those of districts statewide, including comparison districts agreed upon in the collective bargaining agreement (CBA), by 37%. Certificated staff are contracted to work 180 days compared to 184.5 in comparison districts and statewide average. Introduction and Executive Summary 9 Certificated Salary Schedule Comparison King City Joint Union High School District ADA Highest Lowest BA + 60 Average Health Benefits No. of District Offered offered (step 10) Paid work days Single Two- Family Party Atascadero 4,945 $74,688 $40,744 $56,520 $63,682 $6,571 $6,571 $6,571 185 Carmel Unified 2,149 97,321 47,532 74,365 79,807 10,978 12,612 15,937 184 Gonzales Union High 2,299 89,011 41,666 62,237 64,438 9,653 9,653 9,653 185 Monterey 184 Peninsula 11,704 75,817 38,104 56,600 57,762 N/A N/A N/A Pacific Grove 1,654 94,884 40,205 71,130 76,111 4,274 4,274 4,274 183 Pajaro Valley 19,477 74,530 31,628 54,285 54,205 N/A N/A N/A 184 Paso Robles 6,875 76,702 40,643 59,673 64,434 N/A N/A 9392 185 Salinas High 13,455 88,970 37,905 65,577 66,801 N/A N/A N/A 184 San Benito High 3,098 84,156 45,364 65,901 65,881 15,346 15,346 15,346 186 King City High 2,134 119,657 39,624 80,858 81,391 8,822 13,013 17,848 180 Santa Cruz Unified 4,759 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Average 84,008 40,421 62,921 51,215 8,509 9,691 12,234 184.5 Statewide Average 80,902 40,322 62,602 66,642 9,671 FCMAT’s review also found the following: • The highest base salary for a King City Joint Union High School District’s certificated teacher is $119,657, 30% more than that of comparison districts. • The King City certificated BA+60 salary (mid point) is 22% more than that of com- parison districts. • The average King City certificated salary is 37% more than comparison districts. • King City’s certificated and classified family benefits were 32% more than the aver- age cost of benefits in comparison districts and $8,177 more than the statewide aver- age district contribution per FTE, according to the 2008-09 J-90. • For fiscal year 2009-10, the district’s health benefit costs are higher, at $10,693 for an individual, $16,479 for two parties and $23,363 for a family. • In addition, King City certificated staff receive the following annual benefits: a $1,225 annual district-paid contribution to a tax- deferred annuity, $487 for CLAD certifica- tion and $122 in district-paid premiums for an additional $60,000 of life insurance. Classified staff also receive a district-paid tax-deferred annuity benefit. • Teachers can also earn up to $4,751 per stipend annually for additional duties per- formed such as department chair, coach or student body advisor. Some teachers at 10 Introduction and Executive Summary the top salary also hold several stipend positions, which significantly adds to the base salary of $119,657. The current collective bargaining agreement identifies 24 stipend positions per school site that earn up to $4,751, for a potential district cost of $228,048 annually. • In addition, the agreement identifies 31 stipend grade 2 positions at each school that each earn up to $3,852 for a total cost of $238,824. • Teachers are also paid $40.41 - $42.41 hourly pay for extra duty. • The stipend amounts for additional duties are excessive in comparison to districts statewide. In addition, the number of stipend positions exceeds what is generally found in most districts. The district’s average class size is at or slightly below the Monterey County average in most subject areas; however, it is higher than the county average in mathematics, the lowest performing subject area in the district. Physical education class size is significantly lower than the state and county average, and the district should reduce the number of sections and increase the class size in this area. The district’s schools are low-performing according to state standards, with Greenfield High School in year four and King City High School in year one of program improvement. An increase in class size in any core subject area is not in the best interest of students or sound instructional practices. To address the structural deficit, the district must negotiate changes in the salary schedule to reduce personnel costs rather than sustaining the existing salary schedule and increasing class sizes or reducing the number of student contact days. The district has unrestricted general fundstructural deficits of $3,767,045in fiscal year 2009-10, $4,651,740 in fiscal year 2010-11, and $6,180,869 in fiscal year 2011-12. Significant savings must be realized in the salary and benefit schedule to address the structural budget deficit. To avoid additional use of the state’s line of credit, the district will need to negotiate a reduction in the total employee compensation package, including salary, stipends, tax-sheltered annuities, and health and welfare benefits, and align its salaries and benefits with those of comparable districts with similar revenue limits, average daily attendance (ADA) and demographics. Introduction and Executive Summary 11 12 Introduction and Executive Summary Summaries of Findings and Recommendations in Five Operational Areas The full report includes all of the various findings and recommendations for fiscal and operational recovery in five operational areas. Each finding and recommendation addresses a previously identified professional or legal standard. Following is a summary of the major findings and recommendations for each operational area, which are presented in greater detail in the body of this report. This assessment is the product of data collection and analysis of the district’s status at a specific point in time prior to the appointment of the state administrator. It is important to note that the ratings indicate the district’s status prior to the arrival of the state administrator. Past performance and future plans are acknowledged, but were not considered in the application of FCMAT’s rating rubric. The assessment team began work in October 2009 and concluded in December 2009. The formal report is scheduled for presentation to the district in February 2010. The district has addressed some preliminary findings reported during the assessment and is benefiting from the assessment team’s ongoing feedback. The district is also implementing some of the recommendations FCMAT provided in a separate business office staffing and organizational review requested by the state administrator in October 2009. Community Relations and Governance The community relations and governance section of the comprehensive report assessed the district based on 44 FCMAT standards in seven categories. The district received a mean rating of 2.91, with 10 standards not implemented; 28 standards partially implemented, with a rating of one through seven; and six standards fully implemented, with a rating of eight through 10. Communications From approximately 2002 until June 30, 2009, the King City Joint Union High School District shared an administrative team, including business and human resources operations, with the King City Union Elementary District. This organizational model greatly hampered the district’s ability to communicate effectively and systematically with staff and the community about the district’s financial and educational priorities. Communication is usually in response to urgent issues, such as the loss of accreditation or school closure; however, there is no ongoing or proactive communication with staff or the public regarding the district’s progress related to its vision, mission, current financial concerns and, most important, student achievement. All of the district’s board members have limited experience on the board and are not trained, skilled or knowledgeable in governance or in presenting or discussing district programs and issues. Some board members have spoken independently on behalf of the district without the full board’s authority or the superintendent’s knowledge. This causes confusion, and statements can often conflict with official board policy or the board majority. Communication is essential to the success of any organization. The district must develop a comprehensive plan that identifies goals for external and internal communications, target audiences, strategies for reaching those audiences, and an accountability system for monitoring and implementing the plan. Elements of the plan should include a system of communication Introduction and Executive Summary 13 protocols and procedures for ongoing and timely two-way communication between the district office and all staff. Individual board members should refrain from speaking to the public on issues without the support and authority of the full board and the knowledge, support and advice of the superintendent or state administrator. The district should establish advisory committees, such as a budget committee and a facilities management committee, that meet monthly to advise the district’s administrators and board regarding priorities and issues. The district should also schedule regular meetings with the media, employee organization representatives and administrative staff. The district’s vision statement is outdated and is not used to provide a framework to develop goals for student achievement. The district should review and revise its vision statement so it is consistent with the recovery plan and based on the needs of students, staff and the community. The board, staff and community should be involved in developing the vision, under the guidance of the state administrator. The district should establish, monitor and hold staff accountable for progress toward the stated goals. The district should revisit the vision statement annually to determine the effectiveness of implemented strategies and make adjustments based on an ongoing assessment of outcomes. Parent/Community Relations Engaging parents and the community in supporting the schools has not been a district priority. Parents, the media, and community members expressed their frustration with the lack of regular communication from the district. Parents stated they had difficulty engaging the administration to address their complaints about specific courses and teachers. The students and parents acknowledged that it is common practice to seek enrollment at the local community college for specific classes to meet University of California and California State University A-G requirements. Students and parents indicate that few district services are available to help them pursue or become knowledgeable about post-secondary educational opportunities. Principals hold no open public forums to discuss school issues, and there is no regular media coverage of parent meetings. Specific staff members attempt to get parents involved, but there is no proactive and systematic plan to accomplish this. Board policies regarding community relations are outdated, and the board lacks both a plan for involvement and an understanding of their role and responsibilities in this area. Board members need extensive training in understanding their roles and responsibilities, particularly with regard to public complaints outside of a board meeting. The board also needs ongoing training in building community relations. The board should develop a schedule to ensure that board members attend district functions, and develop a plan to work collaboratively with local governments, agencies and school organizations. The district should make a strategic effort to engage more students, parents and community members while ensuring that such efforts align with district goals. During recovery the district should conduct regular forums with staff, parents and interested community members, and should engage local media in scheduled meetings. The district’s Web site should provide information about how parents can become involved in school activities. Community Collaboratives, LEA Advisory Committees and School Site Councils The district has not developed community collaboratives and local educational agency (LEA) advisory committees. The district’s school site councils are organized and conducted in 14 Introduction and Executive Summary accordance with legal requirements; however, the school site councils have not been provided with working budgets, formal training or operational guidelines. The district office should provide the school site councils with clear budgets for categorical programs and regular training regarding their roles and responsibilities. The district should revise its goals to include the elements recommended in this review. There should be a clear link between the district’s goals and its recovery plan. Test scores and consequent outcome goals should be analyzed at both the district and site levels. The district should also form partnerships with the feeder elementary districts and develop and implement a plan that aligns goals for student achievement and focuses on improved student outcomes. Policy The district has one board policy manual in the district office, but many policies and regulations are out of date and do not reflect current laws, regulations or local needs. Board members and administrators do not possess a copy of the board policy manual. This makes it difficult for board members, administrators and staff to be knowledgeable about or properly implement policies and procedures. The board is systematically updating board policies under the leadership of the state administrator, who addresses the review and update of board policies at each board meeting, and is using the California School Boards Association’s (CSBA’s) Gamut system as a guide in this process. However, the district is not using the Gamut online system to post new board policies. The district should develop a process for systematically reviewing existing policies and adopting new policies to reflect changes in state and federal law; the process should be one that the district can sustain after governance is returned to the board. The policy development and review process should include meaningful input from the public, administrators and staff, as well as a plan for communicating changes to board policy. Board members and administrators should each have a copy of the board policy manual, and the district should use technology to improve the review and adoption process and make the board policies accessible to all interested parties. Board Roles/Boardsmanship Members of the board attend meetings and engaged with FCMAT during site visits. The state administrator is providing the board members with direct instruction in boardsmanship and differentiating the roles and responsibilities of the board and the district’s administration. Additional training is being scheduled with CSBA regarding legal and professional duties and practices for effective governance. The board of trustees is struggling to find a way to meaningfully engage in the public meetings and to participate in training to develop their capacity to perform their duties. Many of the district’s current problems originate with its current and former boards’ lack of consistent operational practices. A lack of training and an absence of understanding regarding board members’ roles and responsibilities have contributed to the district’s fiscal crisis. The board has a history of not following its own adopted policies, including policies regarding collective bargaining and informal complaint procedures. Board members were involved in day-to-day district operations, confidential personnel matters, and communication with collective bargaining unit members in which at least one board member shared confidential information about negotiations with union officials without the district’s or the board’s authority. Former boards and some members of the current board have a history of making decisions based on Introduction and Executive Summary 15 personal relationships with union representatives and individual staff members rather than fiscal and educational data provided by the district’s administration. Although the board does not currently have decision-making authority, the state administrator should ensure that the board receives appropriate materials and information to facilitate informed discussion. When the board’s authority is restored, board members should be practiced in making decisions based on objective data. Some board members and staff are struggling to understand the new role of the board and the state administrator. As the district develops and implements the recovery plan, the district must establish clear policies and protocols related to operations and oversight. The board and staff must understand their roles in all areas, and intervention must be immediate when board members or staff do not follow policies. The district should establish mechanisms to keep the board accountable for adhering to board policies and the state administrator’s decisions. Board Meetings Board meetings are held in a public forum and the entire board participates, but the state administrator has sole authority in all matters. The district has adopted a schedule of board meetings and a calendar for 2009-10 and has published this information and distributed it throughout the district. Board meeting agendas are posted in a timely manner and are consistent with legal requirements. Meetings include opportunities for public input, and both open public board meetings and closed sessions are conducted in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act. Some board members review the meeting agenda and support materials prior to board meetings, but the depth of reading and review varies. In the past, some board members did not contact the superintendent prior to the board meeting for answers to questions or clarification of board agenda items and were unprepared. The board did not consistently adhere to Board Bylaw 9323, Meeting Conduct. Board agendas properly indicate citizens’ ability to address agenda and nonagenda items. Past board meetings have not always proceeded in a businesslike manner: members of the public had been allowed to speak out of turn regarding agenda items, and board members discussed items with speakers as if the meeting were a public forum. The state administrator is training the board and the public attendees in the legal requirements and protocols of addressing and engaging the board in a public meeting. The state administrator has arranged for board training through CSBA. Personnel Management Introduction The district’s personnel department plays an important role in students’ academic and co-curricular success by providing an effective and efficient recruitment, selection, orientation and training program for all district employees. The personnel management section of the comprehensive report assessed the district based on 57 FCMAT standards in 10 categories. The district received a mean rating of 2.58. Two standards were not applicable and thus not factored into this calculation; 21 standards were not 16 Introduction and Executive Summary implemented; 29 standards were partially implemented, with a rating of one through seven; and five standards were fully implemented, with a rating of eight through 10. The leadership of the district’s personnel department was reduced to a part-time human resources consultant who was not retained after June 30, 2009. As a result, the personnel department is performing at a level far below what is needed to support the district’s objectives and mission. Because of a lack of consistent leadership, the remaining staff members have not been trained to adhere to acceptable personnel practices and procedures. The comprehensive assessment revealed numerous standards and professional practices that need significant improvement; many documents and board policies that are outdated and need major revision; and a lack of sound process and procedures that could expose the district to legal challenges. Organization and Planning The district’s board policies and administrative regulations governing personnel practices do not adhere to current legal requirements or industry-standard procedures and practices. This deficiency needs to be corrected immediately. The personnel department needs to develop and distribute a mission statement that reflects the goals of the department. The department also lacks a clearly defined system for developing, processing and maintaining personnel records. The district needs to implement a system that clearly defines how personnel records are developed and maintained. The system should also identify individual staff members responsible for all personnel functions. Communications: Internal/External No regular meetings of employees with personnel-related responsibilities are being held, and no representative of the department serves on the superintendent’s cabinet. The personnel department does not communicate with district staff members regularly regarding issues of importance to employees, such as employee benefits, tax sheltered annuities and new federal and state regulations. Technology is also not being used effectively to communicate at either the district or the school site level. The personnel department needs to hold organized weekly meetings that include an agenda and minutes that are distributed as needed. The department needs to implement an effective communication system supported by technology to distribute information to all district employees in a timely manner. In addition, the leader of the personnel department should be a member of the superintendent’s cabinet. Employee Recruitment/Selection During the last two fiscal years, the district has made significant improvements in meeting legal requirements for teachers to be properly credentialed in the subject matter being taught and to receive certain certifications (such as the cross-cultural, language and academic development certificate, or CLAD). The district also complies with legal requirements regarding fingerprinting, tuberculosis testing, and the filing of complaints related to teacher misassignments or vacancies. The district needs to develop a written, comprehensive recruitment plan for administrators, teachers and support staff, as well as written procedures for the selection and hiring of certificated and classified staff. Introduction and Executive Summary 17 Induction and Professional Development In the past, the district has not held new employee induction workshops for all new certificated and classified employees. The district needs to implement workshops for all new employees at least annually and develop an up-to-date employee handbook that covers federal and state laws as well as district policies. The district also offers minimal professional development for all employees on topics related to federal and state laws, such as sexual harassment training for supervisors, reporting of sexual harassment, diversity, and child abuse reporting. The district should implement ongoing professional development for all employees districtwide, including substitutes. Operational Procedures The district needs to develop a system of consistent procedures to ensure that all required documents for all employees are placed in the personnel files. The district should also consider using an electronic document imaging system to maintain and update personnel files. Personnel department staff need to attend professional development workshop regularly to stay abreast of new federal and state laws and regulations related to personnel issues. The district lacks procedural manuals and needs to develop and maintain a manual for all functions in the personnel department and distribute it to all district-level staff and to site administrators and office managers so that procedures are implemented consistently. The manual should clearly explain policies and procedures for leaves, salary placement, overtime approval, use of substitutes and other functions. State and Federal Compliance The district lacks job descriptions and needs to develop new and revise existing job descriptions for all positions. The district should also establish a process for reviewing job descriptions when the need arises or new positions are created. The district is exposed to liability in several areas under state and federal law. The entire 4000 series of the district’s board policy manual is out of date. New or updated policies and administrative regulations are needed to address compliance issues related to Title IX, the Family and Medical Leave Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the Fair Labor Standards Act and other state and federal regulations. Employment contracts with administrative and management staff meet state requirements related to length of contract and buyout provisions. Use of Technology The personnel department lacks technology systems, equipment and training. The district uses the Monterey County Office of Education’s financial and payroll system but has not implemented the system’s position control component. The system is capable of capturing and monitoring required data such as credentials, seniority and demographics; however, personnel department staff need additional training on the system. In addition to implementing a professional development program for personnel department employees to help them better understand technology systems, the personnel department should, 18 Introduction and Executive Summary in cooperation with the district, develop a long-range plan to add, upgrade and/or replace existing technology equipment and systems as needed. Evaluation/Due Process Assistance The district should develop a system to monitor certificated, classified and management evaluations to ensure that they are completed on time and are consistent with language in the collective bargaining agreements and employee contracts. The district also needs to place a much greater emphasis on employee evaluations as a tool to improve employee performance; it should develop and implement a training program for management personnel responsible for employee evaluations. The board did not evaluate the former superintendent annually as required by the contract but should do so in the future. Employee Services The personnel department depends on the Monterey County Office of Education to provide employees with information regarding employee benefits such as health, dental and vision insurance; however, the department should take a more active role in regularly providing employees with information. The personnel department should develop and continue to update a list of services available to employees through the Monterey County Office of Education, including retirement options, and make this information available to employees regularly. The department should also develop a list of options available to employees upon retirement, including substituting and part-time work. The district does not have an employee recognition program; it should consider developing an ongoing program of this kind for all employee groups. Employer/Employee Relations A comparative analysis of salaries and benefits has been completed in the past; however, the comparison districts should be more similar in geographic area, size and type. When collective bargaining contracts are negotiated in the future, a site administrator should be assigned to the district’s bargaining team. Upon ratification of any future agreements, the district’s administration must communicate the contents of the agreement to all district and school site managers and provide them with training in contract management, including handling grievance procedures. Because of the effect collective bargaining contracts have on the district’s budget, policy and academic and co-curricular programs, it is imperative that the district develop a process for reviewing and analyzing each collective bargaining proposal from both the district and employee organizations to project its effect on the district’s finances and policies. The superintendent and other members of the district’s bargaining team must meet regularly with the governing board to review the collective bargaining process and the continuing impact any proposal or agreement may have on the district’s budget and programs for students. Individual board members must refrain from any formal or informal involvement in the collective bargaining process. It is imperative that training for board members is firmly in place and understood before the state returns the district to local governance. Introduction and Executive Summary 19 Continuing with the current collective bargaining agreements will be a drain on the district’s fiscal health and a significant impediment to the quality of education provided to the students and communities it serves. Pupil Achievement The pupil achievement section of the comprehensive report assessed the district based on 59 FCMAT standards in six categories (planning processes, curriculum, instructional strategies, assessment and accountability, professional development, and data management/student information systems). The district received a mean rating of 2.48. One standard was not applicable and thus not factored into this calculation; seven standards were not implemented; 49 standards were partially implemented, with a rating of one through seven; and two standards were fully implemented, with a rating of eight through 10. FCMAT interviewed district and site staff, board members, staff of the Monterey County Office of Education, parents, and community members. FCMAT also reviewed district documents and board policies. The results of the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) and the California Standards Test (CST) reveal inadequate student achievement compared to statewide results as well as persistent gaps between the proficiency levels of Hispanic and white students, and between students with disabilities and those without disabilities. The districtwide average academic performance index score for 2009 was 639, compared to a Monterey County average of 707 and the statewide average of 755. In addition, student achievement gaps are significant and growing. In 2008-09 the average API score of the district’s white students was 766, compared to an average of 621 for its Hispanic students. Further significant gaps are illustrated by the average API score of 438 for students with disabilities compared to an average score of 639 for all students districtwide. The API score for students with disabilities declined by 43 points, or almost 10%, in the 2008-09 school year. There was no evidence of a coordinated approach to addressing these gaps, and most district and school staff interviewed did not articulate concerns regarding these gaps. These results provide evidence of serious learning issues and are an indicator of a critical lack of vision, leadership and academic focus at the district level. The following six themes are evident throughout the pupil achievement findings: Lack of systems The district lacks a unified approach to setting high expectations for all students and supporting improvements in practices to meet established goals. Board policies and administrative regulations are outdated and inadequate to provide the framework for communicating standardized and high expectations to staff and students. In addition, systems are lacking to ensure that improvement efforts at individual schools are aligned with district goals. Improvement efforts are teacher- or school-centered, with each teacher and school selecting their priorities and practices. Systems need to be in place to create a clear organizational structure, board policies and district procedures. These systems will form the basis for establishing, promoting and consistently 20 Introduction and Executive Summary communicating high expectations for learning as well as accountability for results. The systems should be designed to ensure coherence in goals, operations and actions, including the collection and use of common formative and summative assessment data to establish instructional priorities and shape and influence continual improvement for all students and significant subgroups. Systems must also ensure consistent communication from the schools to parents and accountability for district and site personnel. Adult-centered systems The systems in place focus on adults, not students. Students and parents expressed the opinion that most lessons were lecture- or worksheet-based. Students and teachers both indicated that individual teachers determine what support, if any, they will offer to struggling students. Individual teachers are allowed to set their own grading policies, and staff and students reported that grading practices vary greatly among teachers. The majority of the district’s instructors are crosscultural, language and academic development (CLAD) certified and receive additional compensation as a result, but there is little evidence that the certification and training is used in the classroom to help struggling students improve. This report includes recommendations to move the district from its adult-centered systems to student-centered systems. Included are recommendations to help district and site staff better understand and implement best practices and systems. Recommendations also include how to implement systems to collect and use data, and to establish and use accountability systems based on student results to drive continual improvement. Lack of vision for high student achievement Although the district’s vision statement calls for providing students “with engaging and meaningful instructional activities that will maximize achievement and retention of the California Content Standards,” in practice the district lacks a vision for both high achievement for all students and how adults should be organized to support student achievement. Although the district and its schools are among the lowest performing both statewide and compared to similar schools and districts, individuals interviewed expressed the opinion that this district was typical. District and site staff seem to have little awareness of the practices used to achieve better results in high-performing districts with similar populations. The district has in place the minimum state high school requirements for students to earn a high school diploma, but no requirements exceed the state minimum. Neither comprehensive high school hosts college recruitment or information events, and career information sessions for most students are limited to those offered by the armed services. Both continuation schools have let their accreditation status lapse and as a result can no longer issue high school diplomas. The team found no evidence that staff had high expectations for students within or beyond high school. The district does not have a defined or monitored intervention system to ensure that all students’ learning needs are being met or that opportunities to learn are available equally districtwide. Language, cultural, and social barriers to parents’ and families’ active participation in the education of their children are not being addressed systematically or systemically. Success in this area currently depends on individual teachers, administrators and students; FCMAT observed and collected evidence that an individual administrator and some teachers provide student support and intervention programs outside the regular school day. However, there is no districtwide plan or system of support. Introduction and Executive Summary 21 California English language development tests (CELDT) and benchmark assessment data are not used districtwide to help assign students to the correct intervention program and/or daily English language development (ELD) support. Recommendations call for establishing systems and processes to raise staff expectations for all students, including significant subgroups of students. Lack of accountability No formal system of planning and monitoring is in place to ensure the alignment of curriculum, instruction, and assessments districtwide. Teachers, site administrators and district staff are not held accountable for student achievement. The teacher evaluation system is highly sporadic and inconsistent; it does not help improve lesson delivery and design or student success. There are no consequences for teachers whose students are not successful, and staff are not held accountable for using consistent grading policies. The district must establish and use systems to hold district and site staff accountable. Administrator and teacher evaluations should be conducted in accordance with established policies and the collective bargaining agreement. Principals and district staff should conduct weekly classroom visits to ensure that board-approved standards-based programs are being implemented and research-based instructional strategies are being used with all students. Pacing calendars need to be monitored and reviewed regularly to ensure that all students are given the time and opportunity to learn the course-specific standards assessed on the CST and the CAHSEE. Grades should be evaluated and teachers should be held accountable for following established grading practices. Absence of consistent policy development The district has no consistent policy development that focuses efforts on student achievement. Written fiscal policies do not include an allocation plan that is aligned with student achievement outcomes and instructional goals, and current policy does not reference the essential program components (EPCs), which are the foundation for implementing state accountability measures. The district’s board policies do not include current accountability requirements and expectations, nor are they in accord with the education code’s requirements regarding parents’ rights to access information about their child and participate in the educational process. The board has not formally reviewed and adopted the district’s academic program since 1997, and current policies do not reflect the adoption of state content standards, frameworks and standards-aligned materials, nor do they articulate these requirements to the local educational agency (LEA) plan requirements. The district must develop and implement districtwide policies and practices based on research and best practices to ensure that all students (especially English learners, students with disabilities and other high priority students) have access to the core curriculum and, based on assessed needs, access to English language development, strategic interventions and intensive interventions. In addition, the district needs to develop and implement a policy and practices that addresses the language, cultural, and social barriers that discourage or prevent parents and families from participating in their children’s education. 22 Introduction and Executive Summary Morale Most individuals interviewed expressed serious doubt that the district can improve and seemed to have little understanding of practices used in other districts to produce different results. This doubt must be addressed if the district is to be successful in improving outcomes. Structured visits to high-achieving districts will help staff gain a broader perspective on what is possible and better prepare staff to implement the recommendations contained in this report. Financial Management The financial management section of the comprehensive report assessed the district based on 77 FCMAT standards in 23 categories. The district received a mean rating of 2.22, with 14 standards not implemented; 61 standards partially implemented, with a rating of one through seven; and two standards fully implemented, with a rating of eight through 10. The King City Joint Union High School District’s financial condition has been developing for many years because of deficit spending, declining or unchanging enrollment and state budget reductions. In fiscal year 2000-01, a dispute arose between the district and its certificated bargaining unit regarding formula-based compensation language in the collective bargaining agreement. The bargaining unit filed an unfair labor practice charge with the Public Employment Relations Board (PERB) in 2002, alleging that the district unilaterally imposed its interpretation of the formula. In 2004, an administrative law judge ruled in favor of the bargaining unit and although the district appealed to the PERB board, the ruling was upheld. In 2006, the cost of retroactively applying the formula was estimated at $5.2 million, and the ongoing annual cost was $600,000, or an increase of 11% in total compensation. A FCMAT fiscal review commissioned by the district in May 2006 concluded that the retroactive payout and ongoing liability “…could potentially lead to insolvency, necessitating a loan from the state.” The district could not afford to fund the retroactive amount, and in 2007 the certificated bargaining unit agreed to a negotiated settlement of $1.2 million. The district requested and received a loan from the Monterey County Office of Education to fund the settlement because it did not have sufficient cash to fund both the retroactive amount and the permanent ongoing increase to its budgeted salaries and benefits. During these years the district was unable to maintain either consistent management services or key administrators. Several superintendents and chief business officials were employed in succession, and at one time these functions were combined into one position to reduce costs. The services were also shared with the King City Union School District, in effect leaving one person to fill four key administrative positions. This structure unfortunately served to further increase the lack of effective response. Ineffective governance also contributed to the crisis. The high school district’s governing board experienced several changes in membership during the last 10 years. The board’s lack of experience and institutional knowledge contributed to a limited understanding of the seriousness of the district’s financial condition and the types of solutions needed to eliminate the structural deficit. The permanent cost increase associated with the certificated staff compensation formula was significant and created a substantial structural deficit. By fiscal year 2006-07 the district was Introduction and Executive Summary 23 spending $654 more annually per pupil than it received in revenue. Since that year, this deficit has varied between $450 and $1,987 per pupil annually. Beginning in 2007, the Monterey County Office of Education assigned a variety of fiscal experts to the district to ensure that district business was conducted appropriately while critical business office positions were vacant. On December 4, 2007 the Monterey County Office of Education declared the district a “lack of going concern” because the district’s budget was projected to have a negative fund balance for the current and two subsequent fiscal years. Factors contributing to this condition included the unsustainable employee total compensation package, a developing and serious state budget crisis and the beginning of a period of declining enrollment. In May 2008 another FCMAT fiscal review, this time commissioned by the Monterey County Office of Education, concluded that absent significant and immediate budget reductions, “. . . the district may require state intervention in the 2009-10 fiscal year.” A fiscal advisor was assigned to the district in 2008 to assist the district in achieving fiscal recovery. These services continued until January 2010 when the state administrator hired a full time interim director of fiscal services to assume the duties of the fiscal experts. In July 2009, senate bill (SB) 130 approved a state emergency apportionment to help the district avoid cash insolvency. A state administrator was also assigned to the district at that time. The district’s first interim general fund budget for 2009-10, as submitted to the Monterey County Office of Education, included a structural deficit of $3,935,199 before state loan proceeds and an ending fund balance of $39,878, or 0.2% of expenditures and other outgo. Multiyear financial projections indicate that the ending fund balance will decrease to -$10.4 million by the end of the fiscal year 2011-12 without additional state loan proceeds already authorized by SB 130. Much work is needed to resolve the deficit and restore budgeted reserves to levels required by the Education Code. The district has received an excessive number of audit findings because it has a significant lack of internal controls. Many audit findings remain unresolved, and some have resulted in the return of district funds to the state, including $106,462 in questioned costs for fiscal year 2008-09. During FCMAT’s review, significant concerns were discovered with regard to internal controls in purchasing and handling of cash. As a result the Monterey County Office of Education has requested an AB 139 fraud audit. Business office staff either do not implement corrective actions to prevent failures from being repeated, or their attempts to do so fall short because supervisors fail to hold staff accountable. There is a clear connection between these deficiencies and the fact that students’ academic performance is below that of comparable populations in similar districts. At the same time, the district’s certificated bargaining unit employees have one of the highest compensation packages among the state’s high school districts, and all staff receive generous salary and benefit packages. A tentative agreement approved by the district and its certificated bargaining unit in 2009 was rescinded by the county superintendent because it was determined that the agreement did not sufficiently address the district’s fiscal condition. The King City High School Teachers Association has initiated legal action against the Monterey County Superintendent of Schools over the rescission. The district has structural deficits of $4,059,065 in 2009-10, $4,698,551 in 2010-11 and $6,189,711 in 2011-12. The district could not and cannot achieve the necessary expenditure reductions by implementing the memorandum of understanding (MOU). Significant savings must be realized in the salary and benefit schedule to address the structural deficit. Adjustment to the compensation packages for all staff will be needed if the district is to have any hope of regaining financial solvency. 24 Introduction and Executive Summary To recover, the district and its board must first restructure the district to provide the services needed to improve operations and student performance and provide a safe school environment. To address these challenges, the district will need to implement the multiyear financial recovery plan FCMAT is developing as required by SB 130. The plan will include restoration of programs and services at the administrative, support and instructional levels to provide maximum opportunities for student success. The plan will also take into account the obligation to repay the state’s loan, and identify the amount by which expenditures need to be adjusted to eliminate the district’s structural budget deficit. Communications and the Board The district’s next step should be to set a new tone of fiscal accountability for all staff members. The board needs to review and update all fiscal policies and administrative regulations to guide administrators, and hold them accountable for adhering to these policies. Transparency and clarity when making decisions are also important to the district’s financial success. The board should take a more active role in understanding the district’s budget and seek clarity during complex budget presentations. Training in this area would be useful. A budget advisory committee that engages the community in meaningful dialogue would contribute to increased awareness of the district’s fiscal challenges. Staff members should present reports using a process and format that is defined by board policy and that improves communication of critical budget assumptions and plans. Internal Audit The district will need a functional audit committee and an effective internal audit program to hold all staff accountable for their fiscal responsibilities. The audit committee should manage the external audit and oversee the implementation of corrective actions in response to it. The internal auditor should report to the state administrator, who should implement recommendations in consultation with the audit committee and the board. Staffing, Professional Development and Management Information Systems Restoring staff development is vital to the district’s financial recovery. Budget reductions have significantly reduced staff development opportunities, leaving many business and district office staff members ill equipped to respond to the increasing fiscal challenges created by reductions in public education funding. The district should develop specific plans for each employee and incorporate these into employee evaluations. Procedural manuals either do not exist or are out of date, so will need to be created or revised and updated. Business office staffing is the subject of a separate study conducted by FCMAT. There is a clear need for a business office leader who can perform both detailed fiscal management and the more complex responsibilities typically managed by a chief business official. The staffing study provides the state administrator with a comparison of business office staffing using data from several similar districts. The risk of system failures in business office and financial technology is at critical levels and must be addressed. Connection failures periodically disrupt the financial management system, shutting down operations. Staff do not have an adequate understanding of the student information system, so errors remain undetected or unresolved. The district does not use a position control system and is thus at risk of excessive personnel costs. Inadequate integration of personnel Introduction and Executive Summary 25 and payroll data increases the risk of payroll errors and creates a sense of chaos. Because the district’s technology systems do not meet industry standards for security, there is a risk of data loss or corruption. Some systems, such as procurement, lack any automation, resulting in significant inefficiencies. All systems that the district uses to conduct its financial transactions need to be improved to meet industry standards. This will require automation and integration of existing systems and implementation of new systems. The district needs to restore support staffing levels to ensure that services can be provided and systems maintained at peak performance. Facilities Management The facilities management section of the comprehensive report assessed the district based on 71 FCMAT standards in 13 categories. The district received a mean rating of 2.8. Five standards were not applicable and thus not factored into this calculation; 18 standards were not implemented; 43 standards were partially implemented, with a rating of one through seven; and five standards were fully implemented, with a rating of eight through 10. FCMAT inspected all school and district facilities and grounds to assess their general condition; interviewed district and site staff, board members, staff of the Monterey County Office of Education, parents, and community members; and reviewed district documents and board policies. Leadership The high turnover and absence of effective and consistent leadership from senior district administrators during the past 10 years has resulted in a lack of accountability and clarity regarding lines of authority in the district’s organizational structure as it relates the facilities and maintenance department. This resulted in inconsistent policy administration and an absence of planning and coordination in facility operations. The termination of the district’s shared administration with King City Elementary School District in June 2009 brought operational changes and coincided with the loss of an experienced director of maintenance, operations and transportation (MOT), making it more challenging to develop policies and procedures to improve the department’s operational efficiency and effectiveness. The presence of the new state administrator is a sign of future stability, and most employees interviewed viewed this as a positive step forward. The district should develop clear lines of authority, with the director of MOT reporting to the chief business official (CBO). The district should also review and revise all board policies and administrative regulations to ensure that they meet legal and professional standards. Staffing The majority of the district’s revenue is used to meet certificated salaries. Positions in the MOT department that were lost due to attrition during the past 10 years have not been replaced, and Greenfield High School was opened without an increase in staffing. As a result, staffing is inadequate and the condition of some facilities and grounds has deteriorated. Most positions that include maintenance work have split job descriptions such as utility/bus driver, grounds worker/bus driver, or maintenance/bus driver. Splitting job assignments is often a byproduct 26 Introduction and Executive Summary of insufficient funding and is not generally viewed as an effective means to accomplish an MOT department’s work and responsibilities. Ideally, the district should be staffed according to standards used in other school agencies of similar size and type, and in accordance with generally accepted theories of organizational structure. The district employs one full-time director of maintenance, operations, grounds and transportation, who has responsibility for management and oversight of all maintenance, custodial and grounds staff, as well as the home-to-school transportation program, including bus repair and maintenance. This is consistent with high school districts of similar size and structure. The director is also responsible for developing and implementing all of the district’s regulatory and legal compliance programs, which are deficient in several areas. A review of comparison districts and interviews with staff indicate that the district should add MOT office support staff and restore full-time custodian, maintenance, and grounds positions. In addition, the district should conduct a review of custodian, bus driver, groundskeeper and maintenance job descriptions to align roles and responsibilities with the appropriate positions and redistribute the workload as needed. The practice of combining job descriptions should be assessed to determine if it most effectively and efficiently meets the district’s needs. The redesign of organizational and operational systems should take place under the direction of the director of MOT and the newly hired CBO. Administrative support and resources will be critical to successfully restructuring the department and providing the leadership and technical guidance required to position the district to develop a comprehensive facility master plan and maintain current facilities. Maintenance, Custodial and Groundskeeping A review of California Association of School Business Officials’ (CASBO) industry-standard staffing ratios indicates that MOT staffing is well below industry standards. The district is understaffed by three full time equivalent positions (FTE) in maintenance. However, because of the state’s unprecedented fiscal crisis, districts are reducing support staff positions to minimum operational standards, and industry standards may change. The district uses an automated work order system that tracks work requests and their status, but the system is not used to deploy staff, forecast supply and equipment needs, or plan for preventive maintenance projects. The district routes all work orders directly to the maintenance worker assigned to that site. The system can be used to route work orders through an approval process and to the director of MOT to be prioritized, and the district should implement this function. Developing a comprehensive written preventive maintenance plan should be a top priority, and the district should improve the current work order system to include scheduling of preventive maintenance work. The district should also develop alternate methods of identifying preventive maintenance needs such as changing filters and extensive cleaning. Custodians are not assigned to either high school during the school day. Three custodians work at each school site in the evenings cleaning classrooms, cafeterias, gymnasiums, and offices. The district is understaffed in custodial positions by at least 1.5 FTE. The district needs to develop systems and procedures for cleaning schools to an acceptable standard. Equipment should be inventoried and maintained to maximize efficiency and effectiveness. Custodians, maintenance and grounds staff should receive formal professional development training and consistent evaluations of their work. Introduction and Executive Summary 27 One full-time grounds worker should be assigned to each of the district’s two schools, and a third full-time grounds worker should be assigned solely to mow the grass on the large sports fields at both schools. The district is understaffed by 1.45 FTE in groundskeeper positions according to industry-standard staffing ratios. At a minimum, the district should consider using a team concept and schedule that allows for biweekly maintenance of all sites and grounds. The district should develop budgets for routine repair and maintenance, scheduled preventive maintenance, replacement of equipment and vehicles, purchase of consumable supplies, and capital expenditures. A five-year deferred maintenance budget should also be developed. The director of MOT should manage budgets in all identified areas, with the support of the CBO. Budget and staffing formulas can be based on several models; factors may include square footage of facilities or the number of students at each site. School Safety The district is in compliance with safety regulations regarding evacuation maps for each site, fire extinguisher condition and placement and designated fire pull stations. However, the district has not completed any campuswide inventory of hazardous substances and lacks a systematic process for collecting and referencing material safety data sheets (MSDS). The district has also not provided the local fire department with a list of hazardous substances stored at district sites, including science laboratories. When the maintenance staff complete the inventory of hazardous substances, the district should provide it to the local fire department. Access to school sites is not secure because the district cannot determine who possesses copies of master and submaster keys. The district’s documentation process does not provide guidelines or procedures for issuing and controlling keys or other forms of access to doors, buildings, cabinets, equipment or vehicles to ensure the security of all district facilities and property. The district should rekey all sites and then immediately implement a systematic process for issuing, tracking and controlling keys. The district cannot locate and may not possess records or documentation supporting an employee safety program. The safety program should address Senate Bill 198, Employee Right to Know Program, as well as first aid training and blood-borne pathogen training. The district does not have a designated safety officer who is responsible for developing safety policies and training employees. The district also lacks an injury and illness prevention plan (IIPP), proper documentation for the care and disposal of asbestos, and proper storage and filing of MSDS sheets. The district should work with the Monterey County Office of Education and its insurance carrier to develop safety policies and an IIPP. Lack of Documented Processes The district lacks written policies and procedures that clearly state its expectation for campus safety and the condition of its physical plants. The district has not consistently reviewed or revised board policies and administrative regulations regarding facilities maintenance and health and safety standards. The district has also been functioning without standard written operating procedures in the MOT department. Inconsistent operating procedures have created systemwide weaknesses in the department, and inconsistent evaluations of staff have led to a lack of accountability and understanding regarding the district’s expectations for campus cleanliness and care. 28 Introduction and Executive Summary There is a significant lack of recordkeeping and accurate filing of district documents, policies and architectural plans. Because the MOT department lacks support staff, many documents and files cannot be located. The district should develop written standards and procedures that clearly articulate expectations for the care of its facilities and grounds. The MOT department should be provided with support staff to develop a system for recording and maintaining files, documents, architectural plans and inventory. Staff should be evaluated at least annually and more frequently if needed. Physical Plant The district’s primary issue in the area of facilities is its inability to properly maintain them. The location, general appearance and function of the district’s campuses are conducive to learning. The facilities are not overcrowded and there is some capacity for student growth. However, the district has several nonconforming buildings that do not meet the requirements of the Field Act. Documented deficiencies at both of the district’s school sites make the district a potential candidate for health and safety hardship funding. Traffic patterns observed by FCMAT indicate that the parking lot and bus-loading zone at King City High School is inadequate and unsafe. The cafeteria at King City High School requires substantial modernization, and the gym roofing should be replaced. Greenfield High School was built more than 10 years ago and still has unfinished sports fields with portable toilets rather than permanent facilities. Greenfield High School also receives old computer and technology equipment that has been retired by King City High School. The district should develop a plan to assess and provide all school sites with equitable facilities, fields, furniture and equipment. The district office administration building has outlived its useful life and presents a health and safety liability. The district purchased the building in a used condition more than 30 years ago and it now has mold, dry rot and termite damage. The district should plan to replace it or move to existing facilities on a school site. Fiscal Issues The district’s financial difficulties have led to significant reductions in staff. For the district to recover in this area, it is essential for MOT and facilities department staffing to be maintained at appropriate levels to ensure compliance with health and safety regulations and standards. Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) statement 34 requires that the district complete and maintain a fixed asset record for accounting purposes. The district implemented fixed asset accounting in fiscal year 2001-02 but has failed to properly maintain records of additions and deletions. The procedures and reporting time lines for fixed assets should be updated, revised and distributed to all departments. The MOT department should be responsible for maintaining a current record of the department’s equipment and coordinating with the business office to maintain a record of fixed assets. Facilities Planning and Construction The district does not have a long-range school facilities master plan or a capital planning budget. More resources and effort should be directed toward assessing district facility needs, developing a long-term facilities master plan and creating a capital funding plan. However, these tasks would Introduction and Executive Summary 29 not be suitable for the district’s current limited and newly hired staff because they do not possess the requisite skills, experience and knowledge. The district should protect its physical assets and assist with both short-term and long-term budget development by creating a five-year facilities master plan. The plan should include the utility infrastructure, a construction schedule containing a list of proposed new construction and modernization projects, and an assessment of items such as roofing systems, paving, carpet and flooring replacement, healing and cooling systems, lighting plans and landscaping. Preliminary phasing plans should include a description of the proposed projects and an analysis section that identifies the campus circulation, zoning and building conditions for seismic, fire and life safety as well as mechanical, electrical, plumbing and deferred maintenance requirements. The facilities master plan should also include sections on student demographics, budget resources or funding alternatives, and community input. The final product should link the facilities master plan with the district’s educational and technology master plans. The district should pursue state School Facilities Program (SFP) hardship and health and safety hardship funding to complete some of the school site projects identified as priorities, and consider using the services of a consultant to conduct a comprehensive facility needs review and develop the facilities master plan. Community Relations and Governance 31 32 Community Relations and Governance 1.1 Communications Professional Standard The LEA has developed a comprehensive plan for internal and external communications, including media relations. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with KRKC 1490AM Radio media contact person 3. Interview with assistant superintendent of business services 4. Board Policy 1100, Communications with Public 5. Interviews with board members 6. Interview with south county newspaper reporter 7. Interviews with school site administrators 8. Interview with previous district superintendent 9. Interview with president of the local chapter of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) 10. Interview with president of King City Teachers Association 11. Interviews with school site council members 12. Interviews with parent representatives Findings 1. The district has no written comprehensive plan for internal and external communication, including media relations, and no strategic plan for communication. 2. There is an outdated Board Policy 1100, Communication with Public, which was adopted in 1991. 3. There is no systematic initiative to contact the media, and the district administrators do not hold scheduled meetings with the media regarding educational issues. 4. The district makes agendas and board packets available to the media but does not post agendas and minutes on the district’s Web site. Community Relations and Governance 33 5. The district does not consistently follow the California School Employees Association (CSEA) Chapter #529 collective bargaining agreement contract language. For example, jobs are posted without prior discussion with the CSEA. There are no scheduled meetings with CSEA leadership regarding labor issues. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a comprehensive plan for internal and external communications, including a media relations component. 2. Designate a media contact representative for the board, district and each school site. 3. Develop district-level regular written communications with all staff regarding district affairs. 4. As the communication plan is implemented, develop documented protocols and procedures and disseminate written procedures to all staff, board members and school sites in a timely and effective manner. 5. As the communication plan is implemented, evaluate its efforts through surveys, focus groups or other methods that encourage participants to freely provide their opinions. 6. Consult with the Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) and the California School Boards Association (CSBA) regarding model communication and media relations plans. 7. Routinely post board agendas and minutes on the Web site for public access. 8. Schedule regular meetings of the administration with the media to review board actions and develop positive media relations. 9. Review and update Board Policy 1100 and related administrative regulations 10. Follow the CSEA contract language regarding communications about job announcements prior to posting. 11. Schedule regular meetings with CSEA representatives to discuss issues of mutual concern and benefit. 12. Schedule regular meetings with teacher association representatives to discuss issues of mutual concern and benefit. 34 Community Relations and Governance Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 35 1.2 Communications Professional Standard Information is communicated to the staff at all levels in an effective and timely manner. Two-way communication between staff and administration regarding the LEA’s operations is encouraged. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business services 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interviews with school site administrators 6. Interview with president of King City Teachers Association 7. Interview with president of the local chapter of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) 8. Internal communication: Letter to staff regarding the state take over and loan August 19, 2009 9. Internal communication: Memo dated September 30, 2009 to all staff regarding community forums and September board meeting highlights, goals of the district, and student attendance article in the local news paper on September 2, 2009 10. Interviews with school site council members 11. Interviews with parent representatives Findings 1. There is no evidence of regular and systematic communications with the staff prior to the appointment of the state administrator. 2. There is a district curriculum committee in operation. 3. No written examples of communication from staff to the district office were provided to FCMAT. 36 Community Relations and Governance 4. Communication is occurring as needed, but there is little evidence that the district has ongoing proactive contact with staff or the public. There are also no routine advisory committee meetings at the district level to encourage communication and transparency and to assist all concerned parties in understanding the district’s operations and status. 5. There has been limited communication between the district staff and school sites from 2002 until the recent assignment of the state administrator. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a system of ongoing two-way communication between the district office and all staff to ensure a timely flow of information. 2. Work to ensure that staff at all levels have regular opportunities to provide written and verbal feedback. 3. Establish additional permanent advisory committees, such as a budget committee and a facilities management committee, that meet at least monthly to advise the district’s administration and board regarding priorities and issues. 4. Schedule regular meetings with the media, employee organization representatives, administrative staff and other community stakeholders. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 37 1.3 Communications Professional Standard Media contacts and spokespersons that have the authority to speak on the LEA’s behalf have been identified. Board spokespersons are skilled at public speaking and communication and are knowledgeable about the LEA’s programs and issues. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business services 3. Interviews with board members 4. Interviews with school site administrators 5. Board Policy 1112 (a), Media Relations, adopted March 1997 6. Interview with KRKC Radio spokesperson 7. Interview with south county newspaper reporter 8. Interview with previous district superintendent Findings 1. The district has clearly identified the state administrator as its representative and single source for contact with the media. Prior to the state administrator, the district’s media contact person was the superintendent. 2. All board members have limited tenure and experience on the board, and lack training, skill and knowledge of proper boardsmanship. The media do not have scheduled opportunities to meet with administrators regarding educational or fiscal issues affecting the district and community. 3. Some board members have presented issues independently on behalf of the district without the authority of the full board and/or the knowledge of the superintendent. Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Ensure that board members attend California School Boards Association (CSBA) training or similar professional development offered by other independent consultants regarding education issues and how to properly communicate those issues to the public. 38 Community Relations and Governance 2. Ensure that board members receive CSBA’s Masters in Governance training regarding their roles and responsibilities, or similar professional development training offered by other independent consultants. 3. Ensure that board members receive the online ethics training provided through the Fair Political Practices Commission. 4. Ensure that individual board members refrain from speaking to the public regarding district issues without the support and authority of the full board. 5. Ensure that individual board members speak publicly on issues only with the knowledge, support and advice of the superintendent or state administrator. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 39 1.4 Communications Professional Standard Individuals not authorized to speak on behalf of the LEA refrain from making public comments on board decisions and the LEA’s programs. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business service 3. Interview with previous superintendent Findings 1. There is no evidence of a board policy providing authorization and direction for individual board members or staff to speak on behalf of the district. 2. Individual board members speak publicly regarding education and fiscal issues without the knowledge or approval of the district’s administration or the board as a whole. 3. On some occasions, the media does not receive information from the district in a timely manner. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. As the district recovers, develop a board policy designating and authorizing certain administrators, in addition to the state administrator, to speak on behalf of the district regarding board decisions, educational programs and fiscal policy matters. 2. Ensure that designated district staff respond promptly to media requests within a specified time. 3. Ensure that individual board members do not speak publicly about decisions or programs without the knowledge and support of the full board and the district’s administration. 4. Provide media training for key administrators such as the superintendent, assistant superintendent and high school principals. 40 Community Relations and Governance Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 41 2.1 Parent/Community Relations Legal Standard Annual parental notice of rights and responsibilities is provided at the beginning of the school year. This notice is provided in English and in languages other than English when 15% or more speak other languages. (EC 48980, 48985) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with school site administrators 5. Student/parent handbook 6. Annual notice of parent rights and responsibilities 7. Interview with president of the local chapter of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) 8. Interview with president of King City Teachers Association 9. Interviews with school site council members 10. Interviews with parent representatives Findings 1. The notice of parent rights is included in both English and Spanish in the parent/student handbook for the 2009-10 school year. 2. In addition to English and Spanish, some Greenfield High School students and parents speak two Aztec dialects, Mixteco and Triqui. Parent representatives indicated that the Aztec dialects present more of a challenge to communication with parents than with students. 3. Households with more than one student sometimes receive multiple copies of the Notice of Parent Rights and Responsibilities. 42 Community Relations and Governance Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the district office and the Greenfield High School principal and vice principal determine the number and percentage of students and parents who speak the Mixteco and Triqui dialects as their primary language. If the percentage exceeds the state benchmark of 15%, the district should translate and provide the Notice of Parent Rights and Responsibilities in these dialects. 2. Reduce printing costs by ensuring that each household receives only one copy of the Notice of Parent Rights and Responsibilities. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 43 2.2 Parent/Community Relations Legal Standard A school accountability report card is issued annually for each school site. (EC 35256) Sources and Documentation 1. King City High School Accountability Report Card 2008-09 2. Candy Butler High School 2007-08 School Accountability Report Card 3. Greenfield High School 2008-09 School Accountability Report Card 4. Interviews with high school principals and vice principal 5. Interview with state administrator 6. Interview with assistant superintendent of business services. 7. Interview with previous district superintendent 8. Interview with president of King City Teachers Association 9. Interviews with school site council members 10. Interviews with parent representatives Findings 1. The district has the 2008-09 accountability report card on file and makes copies available to parents upon request. 2. There is no system for distributing the report card annually, and it is not posted to the district’s Web site. 3. Some teachers serve on the accountability report card committee. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue developing and distributing the report card, and implement a systematic means of distributing the report card to all parents annually. 2. Post the accountability report card on its Web site. 44 Community Relations and Governance 3. Continue having certificated staff serve on the school accountability report card committee. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 45 2.3 Parent/Community Relations Legal Standard The LEA has developed and annually disseminates uniform complaint procedures. (Title 5, Section 4621, 4622) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Board Policy 1312.3 (a), Uniform Complaint Procedures, Adopted September 10, 2008 4. Interview with previous superintendent 5. Administrative Regulation 1312.3 (a), Uniform complaint Procedures, adopted September 10, 2008 6. Interviews with school site administrators 7. Interview with president of the local chapter of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) 8. Interview with president of King City High School District Teachers Association 9. Interviews with school site council members 10. Interviews with parent representatives Findings 1. The district’s board policy and administrative regulations regarding uniform complaint procedures are current, and the complaint procedures are distributed annually as part of the student handbook. 2. There are no complaints on file; however, staff and parents are aware of the complaint procedure. 3. No administrator is designated to be responsible for regularly reviewing the disposition of complaints. 46 Community Relations and Governance Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue systematically distributing the complaint procedure to staff and the community. 2. Continue to hold staff accountable for the fair, consistent and thorough implementation of the complaint procedures. 3. Designate a district-level administrator as the district complaint officer with responsibility for reviewing complaints to ensure that they are dealt with promptly and fairly. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 7 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 47 2.4 Parent/Community Relations Legal Standard Parents and community members are encouraged to be involved in school activities and in their children’s education. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with KRKC radio spokesperson 2. Interview with state administrator 3. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 4. Board Policy 0420 (a), School Plans/Site Councils 5. Board Policy 0420.1 (a), School-Based Program Coordination 6. Letter to parents from King City High School principal, including student information, dated August 2009. 7. Agenda, September 17 2009, to parents announcing school site council 8. Notice to parents regarding principal tours on campus, August 2009 9. Back-to-school night letter to parents from King City High School principal, dated August 2009. 10. Interviews with school site administrators 11. Interview with south county newspaper reporter 12. Interview with previous district superintendent 13. Interview with president of the local chapter of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) 14. Interview with president of King City High School District Teachers Association 15. Interviews with school site council members 16. Interviews with parent representatives 48 Community Relations and Governance Findings 1. The principals communicate with parents regarding what is occurring at the school and encourage parent involvement in school activities. However, principals hold no public open forums to discuss school issues. 2. There is no regular, systematic media coverage and no parent meetings regarding the status of the district. 3. Many parents do not know the correct protocol for participating or becoming involved in school activities, or their involvement is limited because of their own work schedules. Schools attempt to involve parents through newsletters, but there is no proactive, systematic plan to engage parents. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that principals conduct monthly forums with parents and interested community members. 2. Engage local media in scheduled meetings so that schools receive regular positive media coverage of school programs. 3. Develop a section of the district Web site that informs parents about how to get involved in school activities and encourages them to do so. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 49 2.5 Parent/Community Relations Legal Standard The LEA has established procedures for visitor registration and posts registration requirements at each school entrance. (Penal Code 627.2, 627.6) Sources and Documentation 1. Board Policy 1250 (a), Visitors/Outsiders, adopted March 26, 1997 2. Administrative Regulation 1250 (a) adopted March 26, 1997 3. Form for visitor pass 4. Interview with state administrator 5. Interviews with school site administrators 6. Interview with previous district administrator 7. Interview with president of the local chapter of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) 8. Interview with president of King City Teachers Association 9. Interviews with school site council members 10. Interviews with parent representatives Findings 1. The district’s board policy and regulations regarding visitor procedures are not current; they need to be reviewed and revised. 2. The student handbook contains language regarding procedures for visitor registration. 3. Student handbook information regarding visitor registration is outdated. Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Review and update its board policy regarding visitor procedures. 2. Update language in the student handbook regarding visitor registration. 50 Community Relations and Governance Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 51 2.6 Parent/Community Relations Professional Standard Parents’ and community members’ complaints are addressed in a fair and timely manner. Board members refer informal public concerns to the appropriate staff members for attention and response. Sources and Documentation 1. Board Policy, Notice to Parents, Guardians, Pupils and Teachers: Complaint Rights handout Exhibit 1312.4 (a), adopted June 11, 2008 2. Williams Complaint form Exhibit 1312.4 (d), adopted June 11, 2008 (form is in English and Spanish) 3. Interview with state administrator 4. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 5. Interviews with board members 6. Interviews with school site administrators 7. Interview with previous district superintendent 8. Interview with president of the local chapter of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) 9. Interview with president of King City Teachers Association 10. Interviews with parent representatives Findings 1. The district has board policy regarding complaints, and complaints are addressed in a fair and timely manner. 2. Current board members stated that they (and former board members) do not always refer public complaints to the superintendent or the state administrator, and members of the board have a historical practice of bypassing the district’s administration and working outside the board’s authority when listening to complaints about collective bargaining and personnel issues. 3. Board members also have a history of not referring informal concerns to the appropriate administration or district staff for resolution. Board members acting independently of the board have attempted to resolve local school site concerns without the district 52 Community Relations and Governance administration’s knowledge or involvement and without the authority of the full board. Effective complaint procedures usually begin at the level of the affected employee and are referred to supervisory or administrative level employees if the complaint cannot be resolved at the first level. For example, if the complaint is about a teacher, the parent is referred first to the teacher. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that board members receive training in boardsmanship, including the role of a board member in dealing with public complaints that occur outside the board meeting. 2. Ensure that board members refer complaints to the proper staff member or administrator in accordance with the district’s complaint policy and procedures. 3. Provide board members with a copy of the district’s uniform complaint procedures and collective bargaining agreements that detail the grievance procedures. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 53 2.7 Parent/Community Relations Professional Standard Volunteers receive appropriate training and play a meaningful role that contributes to the educational program. Sources and Documentation 1. Board Policy 1240 (a), Volunteer Assistance, March 26, 1997 2. Administrative Regulation 1240, adopted March 26, 1997 3. Interviews with school site administrators 4. Interview with state administrator 5. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 6. Interview with previous district administrator 7. Interview with president of the local chapter of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) 8. Interview with president of King City Teachers Association 9. Interviews with school site council members 10. Interviews with parent representatives Findings 1. The district’s Board Policy 1240 (a) and Administrative Regulation 1240 are out of date based on current laws and regulations. The board policy does not address training for volunteers. 2. No formal training of volunteers is taking place. 3. No staff member had been assigned to coordinate volunteers or volunteer training. 4. There is no systematic outreach program to encourage volunteer participation in the schools, and school staff indicated that there are few volunteers in the district. 54 Community Relations and Governance Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review and update Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 1240. 2. Annually update the policy regarding training for all volunteers. 3. Designate a staff member to be responsible for recruiting, coordinating and training volunteers. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 55 2.8 Parent/Community Relations Professional Standard Board members are actively involved in building community relations. Sources and Documentation 1. Board Policy 1400 (a), Relations Between other Governmental Agencies and the Schools, adopted November 13, 1991 2. Board Policy 1700, Relations Between private Industry and the Schools, adopted November 13, 1991 3. Interview with state administrator 4. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 5. Interviews with board members 6. Interview with previous district superintendent 7. Interviews with parent representatives Findings 1. FCMAT’s review of policies indicates that the district’s board policies regarding community relations are outdated. 2. The current board lacks an understanding of their role and responsibilities with regard to community relations. Board members do not attend school functions regularly, and the board does not have a plan to improve community relations. 3. The district lacks a plan that indicates how board members should be involved in building community relations. Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Review and update board policies regarding the board’s role and responsibility with respect to community relations. 2. Ensure that the board receives ongoing training in building community relations and understands the need for proper communication with community stakeholders. 3. Ensure board representation and visibility at school events and functions by developing a schedule for each board member to attend school functions and events on a rotating basis. 56 Community Relations and Governance 4. Ensure that the board has a plan to work collaboratively with local governments and agencies as well as school organizations. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 57 3.1 Community Collaboratives, LEA Advisory Committees, School Site Councils Legal Standard Policies exist for the establishment of school site councils. The school site council develops a single plan for student achievement at each school, applying for categorical programs through the consolidated application. (EC 52852.5, 64001) Sources and Documentation 1. 2009-10 Consolidated Application for Funding Categorical Programs 2. Board Policy 0420 (a), School Plans/Site Councils, adopted November 9, 2005) 3. Board Policy 0420.1 (a), School Based Program Coordination, adopted November 9, 2005 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with state administrator 6. Interview with assistant superintendent of business services 7. Interview with previous district superintendent 8. Interview with president of the local chapter of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) 9. Interview with president of King City Teachers Association 10. Interviews with school site council members Findings 1. The district has policies for establishing school site councils, and the councils’ memberships are organized in accordance with the law. 2. School site councils have meeting agendas and minutes, and members are genuinely involved in developing a single plan for student achievement (SPSA), which each school site has in place. 3. There is limited evidence that student achievement is the main focus at the school sites, as evidenced by low test scores, single school plans and parent communications. The site councils acknowledge the low test scores and address higher expectations of students, but SPSA goals do not fully address improving low test scores or increasing the level of academic achievement by developing instructional strategies. 58 Community Relations and Governance 4. There is no working budget for the school site councils to develop definitive plans for categorical funding. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue following the law regarding school site councils’ organization, membership, agendas and minutes. 2. Ensure that school site councils address student performance expectations and tie expenditures to district LEA goals for student outcomes. 3. Provide the school site councils with a timely and accurate budget to use for developing the categorical student programs and services. 4. Integrate the SPSA goals and objectives with the district plan’s goals and objectives for student outcomes. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 59 3.2 Community Collaboratives, LEA Advisory Committees, School Site Councils Legal Standard The school site council annually reviews the school plan to ensure it has sufficient content to meet statutory requirements, and the board annually approves the site councils’ plans. (EC 52853, 52855, 64001) Sources and Documentation 1. The Single Plan for Student Achievement, Greenfield High (10/30/08) 2. The Single Plan for Student Achievement, King City High (5/4/08) 3. Interview with state administrator 4. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 5. Interviews with school site administrators 6. Interviews with board members 7. Interview with previous district superintendent 8. Interviews with school site council members Findings 1. The school site council reviews the school plan annually, and the board approves the site council plan annually as required by law. 2. There is uncertainty regarding how much money is in the site council budget for categorical programs at each site, which makes it very difficult to properly implement the single plan for student achievement. There is no specific budget for the school site councils regarding categorical oversight, and the school site councils are uncertain how much is available and when to allocate their budget. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the school site councils continue to review and approve the single plan for student achievement annually. 60 Community Relations and Governance 2. Evaluate the budget development processes to ensure that monthly budgets are provided to the school site councils so they can develop and implement their school-level plans. Regardless of the current fiscal situation, the school site councils should be provided with a timely and accurate operating budget, including any carryover balances. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 61 3.3 Community Collaboratives, LEA Advisory Committees, School Site Councils Professional Standard The board and superintendent support partnerships and collaborations with community groups, local agencies and businesses. Sources and Documentation 1. Board Policy 1400 (a), Relations Between Other Governmental Agencies and the Schools, adopted November 13, 1991 2. Board Policy 1700, Relations Between Private Industry and the Schools, adopted November 13, 1991 3. Interview with state administrator 4. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 5. Interviews with school site administrators 6. Interviews with board members 7. Interview with previous superintendent 8. Interviews with school site council members 9. Interview King City High school site council members Findings 1. The district’s board policies 1400 and 1700, regarding relations with other governmental agencies and with private industry, are out of date. 2. The superintendent attends community meetings and speaks at those meetings when requested; however, there is no formal process for establishing relationships with community groups, local agencies and businesses, and the board does not have a good understanding of its role in supporting such partnerships and collaborations Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review and update board policies 1400 and 1700. 62 Community Relations and Governance 2. Establish a formal process for developing partnerships with constituent community groups, local agencies and businesses 3. Clarify the role of board members in supporting community partnerships and collaborations. 4. Ensure that board members receive training regarding their role in developing relationships with community organizations and groups. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 63 3.4 Community Collaboratives, LEA Advisory Committees, School Site Councils Professional Standard The board and superintendent have established broad-based committees and councils to advise the LEA on critical issues and operations as appropriate. The membership of these committees and councils reflects the full cultural, ethnic, gender and socioeconomic diversity of the student population. Sources and Documentation 1. Regional Occupational Program advisory committee membership list for 2008-09 2. King City High School curriculum council members for 2009- 2010 3. King City High School Junta de ELAC (English language advisory committee) agenda, Sept 29, 2008 4. King City High School site council meeting minutes, Sept 30, 2009. 5. Interview with state administrator 6. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 7. Interviews with school site administrators 8. Interviews with board members 9. Interview with previous superintendent 10. Interview with president of the local chapter of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) 11. Interview with president of King City Teachers Association 12. Interviews with school site council members Findings 1. The district has school site councils but has not established broad-based ongoing districtwide committees, except for the district curriculum committee and site-based curriculum committees. 2. There are liaison committee meetings between district administration and school sites. 64 Community Relations and Governance Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish broad-based committees that reflect the district’s full cultural and ethnic diversity to advise the district on critical issues. It is important that parents and staff be involved in these committees during the recovery process. a. Establish an ongoing budget committee that includes staff and parents. b. Establish an ongoing pupil achievement committee. c. Establish an ongoing facilities committee to advise the district regarding maintenance and facilities priorities. d. Establish other committees as directed by the state administrator. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 65 3.5 Community Collaboratives, LEA Advisory Committees, School Site Councils Professional Standard Community collaborative and LEA and school advisory councils have identified specific outcome goals that are understood by all members. Sources and Documentation 1. School site council membership for 2008-2009 2. Regional Occupational Program advisory committee membership list for 2008-09 3. King City High School curriculum council members for 2009-10 4. King City High Junta de ELAC (English language advisory committee) agenda, September 29, 2008 5. King City High School site council meeting minutes, September 30, 2009 6. Interview with state administrator 7. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 8. Interviews with school site administrators 9. Interviews with board members 10. Interview with president of the local chapter of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) 11. Interview with president of King City Teachers Association 12. Interviews with school site council members 13. Interviews with parent representatives Findings 1. The single plans for student achievement have stated goals. School site councils and principals indicated that the district had written goals for specific outcomes, but staff and administrators could not find them and they were not provided during this review. 66 Community Relations and Governance Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that schools continue to provide goals related to their school programs and to student achievement. 2. Locate and revise the school advisory councils’ goals to include elements in this report’s recommendations for recovery. 3. Ensure that there is a clear link between the district’s goals and the districtwide recovery plan. 4. Perform data analysis of test scores and consequent outcome goals at both the district and site levels. 5. Develop an LEA plan that clearly articulates the district’s goals for student achievement and outcomes. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 67 3.6 Community Collaboratives, LEA Advisory Committees, School Site Councils Professional Standard The LEA encourages and provides the necessary training for collaborative and advisory council members to effectively fulfill their responsibilities and to understand the basic administrative structure, program processes and goals of all LEA partners. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interviews with board members 4. Interview with previous superintendent 5. Interviews with school site administrators 6. Interview with president of King City Teachers Association 7. Interviews with school site council members Findings 1. No training program is provided for advisory and site council members, or for curriculum committee members. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish a formal training program for incoming school site council members. 2. Ensure that curriculum committee representatives receive some training in their subject and role and responsibilities on the committee. 3. Ensure that future committees, such as a budget committee or facilities committee, receive some training in the subject matter, the purpose of the committee, and their role and responsibilities on the committee. 68 Community Relations and Governance Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 69 4.1 Policy Legal Standard The board has adopted all policies mandated by state and federal law. Sources and Documentation 1. September 9, 2009 board meeting agenda regarding action item #7, board Bylaws. 2. Minutes of September 9, 2009 board meeting. 3. Interview with state administrator 4. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 5. Interview with previous superintendent 6. Interviews with school site administrators 7. Interviews with board members 8. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. Site principals and other administrators have not had the opportunity to provide input into policy development. 2. The district is not using the California School Boards Association’s (CSBA’s) Gamut system for updating policies. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue updating board policies until all policies are in compliance with state and federal law. 2. Ensure that the board annually reviews and revises all policies as required. Ensure that the board reviews CSBA advisories and develops and adopts new policies to stay abreast of legislation and changes to the education code. Use the CSBA’s Gamut system to ensure that policies are updated correctly and in a timely manner, and to ensure the inclusion of new policies resulting from new state laws or regulations. 3. As policies are revised, added or deleted, notify staff and the public of changes that affect them, using various means including posting updates on the district’s Web site. 70 Community Relations and Governance Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 71 4.2 Policy Legal Standard The board annually reviews its policies on intra-district open enrollment and extracurricular/co- curricular activities. (EC 35160.5) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. District policy handbook 5. Interviews with board members 6. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. The district has outdated board policies regarding intra-district open enrollment or extracurricular/co-curricular activities. 2. Greenfield High School and King City High School are approximately 11 miles apart in separate cities and geographical areas, so requests for intra-district transfers are limited. Nevertheless, a board policy regarding such transfers is required. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish board policy regarding extracurricular/co-curricular activities to ensure that pupil participation in these activities is conditional upon satisfactory educational progress in the previous grading period, in accordance with Education Code 35160.5. 2. Establish board policy regarding intra-district transfers. 72 Community Relations and Governance Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 73 4.3 Policy Professional Standard Policies are written, organized and readily available to all staff members and to the public. Policies and administrative regulations are up to date and reflect current law and local needs. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with current former board members 5. Interview with previous board member 6. Interviews with parent representatives Findings 1. Board policies are located at the district office and are available to staff and the public upon request but are not posted on the district’s Web site. 2. There is also a copy of the board policy book at the district office, but board members do not have copies of the board policy book. 3. Administrators also do not have their own copy of the board policy book. 4. Many policies and regulations are not up to date and/or do not reflect current law and local requirements. However, the board is now systematically reviewing board policies under the direction of the state administrator to meet requirements for compliance with state and federal law. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that each board member and administrator has a copy of the board policy book. 2. Post board policies on the district’s Web site. 3. Continue updating board policies until all are current. 4. Inform staff and the public of changes to board policy through letters, the district’s Web site and the media. 74 Community Relations and Governance 5. Post board meeting agendas and minutes on the Web site to keep staff and the public informed. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 75 4.4 Policy Professional Standard The LEA has established a system of securing staff and citizen input in policy development and review. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous district superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member 6. Interviews with school site council members 7. Interviews with parent representatives 8. board policy 1100, Communications with the Public, adopted November 13, 1991 Findings 1. The district’s Board Policy 1100 regarding communications with the public is outdated. 2. The system for board policy revision includes first and second readings of each policy under review at board meetings. 3. Other than input at board meetings, at which the public has a right to comment, the district has no system for obtaining staff and community input regarding board policies or policy development. 4. Principals, vice principals, department heads and student representatives receive the board packet and feel they have the opportunity to comment on policy revisions, but there is no systematic way of gathering that input for analysis. 5. The district’s Web site is not used to encourage public involvement in policy development or revision. 76 Community Relations and Governance Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue reviewing and updating board policies at each board meeting. 2. Develop a system outside of board meetings to seek staff and community input regarding board policy development, review and revision. 3. Review and update Board Policy 1100. 4. Ensure that administrators and departments heads have a systematic opportunity to provide input regarding board policy development and review. 5. Use its Web site and e-mail to seek public input on policy review and revision. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 77 4.5 Policy Professional Standard The board supports and follows its own policies once they are adopted. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. The board has a history of not following its own policies. For example, this has occurred in the area of collective bargaining and in dealing with informal complaints. Board members tried to deal with the complaint directly rather than referring the community member to the appropriate staff member. Board members had direct conversations with certificated bargaining unit representatives outside of the negotiating process. 2. Board members do not understand the role and responsibilities of being a board member. One board member indicated that he/she did not intend to follow one of the board policies. 3. The board does not understand that a school board is an ongoing entity regardless of who is on the board, and that policies adopted by previous boards are still in effect until or unless the current board changes those policies in a legal public board meeting. 4. Board members do not understand that their authority rests with the board as a whole and not as a single individual. Based on current legislation, the board does not have authority to govern the district or to speak for the state administrator. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Provide the board members with training regarding their roles and responsibilities. 2. Ensure that the current board members understand that they are obligated as a board to follow the policies set by their predecessors and the policies the board enacts or revises until or unless those policies are changed. 78 Community Relations and Governance 3. Ensure that the present board complies fully with the advice and decisions of the state administrator. 4. Establish documented protocols to ensure that the board is accountable for adhering to the state administrator’s policies and decisions. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 79 5.1 Board Roles/Boardsmanship Legal Standard Each board member meets the eligibility requirements to be a board member. (EC 35107) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with previous superintendent 3. Interviews with board members 4. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. Board members meet all eligibility requirements in accordance with Education Code section 35107, which identifies the following requirements: • 18 years of age or older • A citizen of the state • A resident of the school district • A registered voter • Not disqualified by the Constitution or laws of the state from holding a civil office • Eligible to be elected or appointed as a member of the governing board of a school district without further qualifications. Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 10 Implementation Scale: 80 Community Relations and Governance 5.2 Board Roles/Boardsmanship Professional Standard Board members receive necessary training to better fulfill their roles. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. All board members have served less than one full term in office. 2. Board members have not received any professional development training regarding board responsibilities and do not have a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities. 3. There is confusion and conflict regarding the roles of the board, the staff and the state administrator. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the state administrator coordinates and schedules for all board members the California School Boards Association (CSBA) Master of Governance training, which consists of 11 training modules over 18 months. 2. Ensure that board members consistently attend CSBA workshops and conferences to get a better perspective on how school boards throughout the state operate. 3. Ensure that the state administrator coordinates and schedules for board members the online ethics training provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission. Community Relations and Governance 81 Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 82 Community Relations and Governance 5.3 Board Roles/Boardsmanship Professional Standard The board has established an LEA-wide vision/mission and uses that vision/mission as a framework for LEA action based on the identified needs of the students, staff, and educational community. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. The district’s vision statement is displayed on the district’s Web site, but is antiquated and may be out of date. 2. The district does not use the vision statement to provide a framework for goals to promote academic changes or success. 3. There is minimal information regarding how the current vision statement was developed, and there was limited involvement on the part of school staff and the community in its development. 4. The board’s ability to implement the vision statement is currently limited by a lack of financial and personnel resources. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review and revise its vision statement to be consistent with the recovery plan. 2. Ensure that any revised vision statement is based on the needs of students, staff and the community. 3. Ensure that the board, staff and community are involved in the development of the vision statement under the guidance of the state administrator. Community Relations and Governance 83 4. Use the vision statement as the basis for establishing goals that are consistent with the recovery plan and identified needs. 5. Establish and monitor processes to measure progress toward the goals. 6. Hold district staff accountable for progress toward the goals. 7. Ensure that as long-term strategies and goals are implemented, the state administrator periodically involves the board, staff and community in determining their effectiveness. 8. Update strategies and goals periodically as needed based on ongoing evaluations. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 84 Community Relations and Governance 5.4 Board Roles/Boardsmanship Professional Standard The board makes decisions based on the study of all available data, including the recommendations of the superintendent. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. The board does not make policy decisions because the state administrator assigned to the district is responsible for governance of the district. The board participates in policy discussions but has no decision-making authority at this time. 2. The board has a history of making decisions based on personal relationships with union representatives and individual staff members rather than on fiscal and educational data provided to the board by the district’s administration. 3. Analysis of student testing data has not been a high priority. 4. Board members indicated that in the past they have requested financial data and that it took several months for the superintendent to provide the budget information. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board continues to be involved in policy discussion while respecting the state administrator’s authority and responsibility. 2. Ensure that board members take the opportunity while under state governance to receive training regarding their roles and responsibilities so that when the board’s authority is restored they will be prepared to make responsible decisions in accordance with the law and local needs. Community Relations and Governance 85 3. Ensure that when the board’s authority is restored, the board makes decisions based on objective information and data rather than based on relationships with employee organizations, representatives or individual staff members. 4. Although the board does not have decision-making authority, ensure that the state administrator provides appropriate materials and information to the board to facilitate informed discussion and decisions 5. Ensure that board agenda items and decisions are supported by cost estimates, student test data and staff recommendations so that the board can become accustomed to considering objective information when making decisions. 6. Make financial decisions based on reliable fiscal analyses and budget numbers provided by the district’s business office staff. 7. Ensure that analysis and discussion of student testing data results is a high priority in decisions regarding curriculum and instruction. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 86 Community Relations and Governance 5.5 Board Roles/Boardsmanship Professional Standard Board members maintain functional working relationships. Individual board members respect the decisions of the board majority and support the board’s actions in public. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. Because the district is governed by the state administrator, the board members in their limited capacity are accepting the decisions of the state administrator. 2. Some board members have not respected the authority of the board as a whole in making decisions that affect the district. Some individual board members have met improperly with individual staff members, outside of board meetings or board action, to discuss collective bargaining issues and to become involved in solving the district’s problems instead of referring staff to the district’s administration. 3. In the past, board members have also disregarded the full board’s discussion and confidentiality and have met individually with school staff regarding collective bargaining and personnel issues. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board continues to cooperate with and honor the decisions and directions of the state administrator. 2. Ensure that individual board members understand that they have authority as a board member only during a legal public board meeting, and that as individuals they have no authority when meeting with people outside the board meeting. 3. Ensure that training provided to board members stresses the fact that the board’s authority exists only in the actions and decisions of the board majority. Community Relations and Governance 87 4. Ensure that when individual board members hear about problems from staff members or citizens, they refer those individuals to the district’s administration rather than attempting to provide advice or resolve issues themselves. 5. Ensure that board members respect the confidentiality of the closed sessions and personnel matters. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 88 Community Relations and Governance 5.6 Board Roles/Boardsmanship Professional Standard The board and administrative team maintain functional working relationships. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. Some board members have worked outside the chain of command rather than referring staff and community members’ concerns to the district’s administration. 2. During the time before the state administrator was assigned to the district, some board members met with individual staff members concerning parent complaints, confidential collective bargaining issues and confidential personnel issues instead of referring those matters to the district’s administration. 3. Some past board members have not respected the relationship with the superintendent or the board majority’s decisions regarding implementing districtwide policy. The superintendent provided fiscal data that was in the best interest of the district, but individual board members disregarded this information by sharing information about confidential negotiations with union officials without district or board authority. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board receives training regarding their legal roles and responsibilities. 2. Ensure that board members receive training in differentiating between the board’s role of broad policy guidance and the superintendent’s role of administering the operational details of the district. 3. Ensure that board members refer complaints, collective bargaining issues, personnel issues and other matters to the district’s administration rather than attempting to resolve issues on their own. Community Relations and Governance 89 Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 90 Community Relations and Governance 5.7 Board Roles/Boardsmanship Professional Standard The board demonstrates respect for and support of the LEA and school site staff. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous district superintendent 4. Interviews with school site administrators 5. Interviews with board members 6. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. Currently, the board accepts the authority of the state administrator because of the legislation and restrictions included in the state intervention model. 2. Some board members have improperly involved themselves in school site issues, collective bargaining issues or personnel issues rather than referring these matters to the district’s administration. 3. Some board members have improperly had direct contact with union officials during negotiations, without the authority of the district or the board as a whole. 4. Some board members have independently participated in negotiations with union representatives, without the role or authority of the board as a whole. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that board members are trained regarding their role in negotiations and personnel issues. 2. Ensure that board members receive training in properly differentiating between their role as a policy-making body and the district administration’s role in the operation of the district. Community Relations and Governance 91 3. Ensure that board members receive training in the concept that they as individuals have no authority and that only the board as a whole in a legal public board meeting has authority. 4. Ensure that individual board members do not attempt to deal with school matters independently outside the authority of the state administrator or the board as a whole. 5. Ensure that board members consistently read the California School Boards Association (CSBA) Journal and other materials provided by the CSBA to gain a broader perspective on how school board members should work and act. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 92 Community Relations and Governance 5.8 Board Roles/Boardsmanship Professional Standard The board demonstrates respect for public input at meetings and public hearings. Sources and Documentation 1. Board Bylaws, Board Policy 9130 (a), adopted March 26, 1997 2. Minutes of June 10, 2009 board meeting, referring to public comment section of agenda 3. Interview with state administrator 4. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 5. Interview with previous superintendent 6. Interviews with board members 7. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. Board members do not refrain from discussing items that are not on the agenda. In the past, rather than listening, board members have engaged in discussion with citizens who are speaking on nonagenda items. 2. Board agendas properly indicate the opportunity for citizens to address both agenda items and nonagenda items. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that board agendas continue to provide the public with the opportunity to speak on matters related to the agenda, and on matters that are not on the agenda. 2. Ensure that board members listen to public input regarding agenda items and allow the superintendent or state administrator to guide the discussion. Sometimes the discussion may also be guided by the board president. 3. Ensure that board members do not engage in discussion with the public on nonagenda items. Because feedback on nonagenda items is not required, the board should listen and leave any response to the discretion of the superintendent or the state administrator. Items can be placed on a future agenda. Community Relations and Governance 93 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 94 Community Relations and Governance 5.9 Board Roles/Boardsmanship Professional Standard Board members respect the confidentiality of information shared by the administration. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous district superintendent 4. Interviews board members 5. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. Board members do not understand their role and responsibilities regarding confidential issues, and the board does not respect the confidentially required for the board to function properly. Individual board members sometimes provide information or receive information from union officials and share it with community members before the full board or the superintendent receives the information. 2. Board members discuss collective bargaining and other confidential issues among themselves outside the confines of the board meeting. 3. School Services of California has provided a workshop for the board regarding confidentiality and the role of the board in collective bargaining; however, the board has not received training from the California School Boards Association (CSBA) regarding negotiations and other confidential issues. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that board members refrain from discussing collective bargaining, personnel or any other confidential issues with any employee or citizen. These matters should be reserved for discussions in a public board meeting or confidentially with the superintendent or state administrator. 2. Ensure thatr board members receive significant training regarding their roles and responsibilities with respect to negotiations, personnel issues and the proper handling of confidential information. Community Relations and Governance 95 3. Ensure that board members regularly read the CSBA Journal and other CSBA materials to gain a perspective on effective boardsmanship. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 96 Community Relations and Governance 5.10 Board Roles/Boardsmanship Professional Standard Board members effectively develop policy and set the direction of the LEA while supporting the superintendent and administrative staff in their responsibility to implement adopted policies and administrative regulations. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. Some past school boards have demonstrated a lack of support for the superintendent’s operation of the district in areas such as negotiations, personnel issues and budget-related matters 2. The board has interfered with and undermined former superintendents in the collective bargaining process, personnel matters, parent complaints and implementation of policy. 3. One board member stated that she/he would not adhere to a particular board policy. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board supports the superintendent in handling difficult issues such as negotiations, personnel matters and budget-related issues, and refer any questions or concerns regarding these issues to the superintendent or, currently, the state administrator. 2. Ensure that board members understand that support for the district’s administration means that negotiations and personnel issues should not be discussed anywhere outside of a public board meeting in closed session, or with the superintendent in private. There should be no discussions with staff, union members or members of the public regarding negotiations or personnel matters. Individual board members should also refrain from discussing school business with other individual board members outside of a legal public board meeting. Community Relations and Governance 97 Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 98 Community Relations and Governance 5.11 Board Roles/Boardsmanship Professional Standard The board acts for the community and in the interests of all students in the LEA. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. Board members attend graduation and other high school events, and the board recognizes student achievement at board meetings. This public recognition is important and helps set a positive tone. 2. The board does not systematically use data, criteria for test scores or comparison of similar schools and state norms to evaluate and develop programs to increase student achievement. 3. The board has not established policies or expectations to increase test scores. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that board members continue to attend high school events and programs as part of their role of being visible and supportive of the community. 2. Develop a process to ensure that board members visit school sites regularly to become familiar with site issues. 3. Continue to recognize student achievement at board meetings. 4. At board meetings, regularly review and discuss student test data, criteria for test scores, comparison of similar schools and state norms to evaluate student performance and set educational goals. 5. Establish policies and expectations to improve test scores. Community Relations and Governance 99 6. With the administration, perform ongoing evaluations of the effectiveness of the district’s programs for students. 7. Ensure that board meeting agendas always include some items related to student performance and achievement so that the community knows student learning is the highest priority. 8. Ensure that the district holds staff accountable for test scores. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 100 Community Relations and Governance 6.1 Board Meetings Legal Standard An adopted calendar of regular meetings is published. The calendar specifies the time, place and date of each meeting. (EC 35140) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member 6. December 10, 2008 memorandum to governing board of trustees regarding schedule of board meetings for 2009 7. Minutes of December 10, 2009 board meeting: organizational meeting action approving calendar Findings 1. The district has an adopted schedule of board meetings, and the calendar specifies the time, place and date of each meeting. 2. The calendar is not posted on the district’s Web site but is physically distributed throughout the district. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to publish the annual board meeting calendar and distribute it to school sites, the media and community agencies and organizations. 2. Post the board meeting calendar on the district’s Web site. Community Relations and Governance 101 Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 8 Implementation Scale: 102 Community Relations and Governance 6.2 Board Meetings Legal Standard The board agenda is made available to the public in the manner and under the timelines prescribed by law. (GC 54954.1, 54954.2) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member 6. Bylaws of the Board, Board Policy 9320 (a), Meeting and Notices, adopted April 8, 1998. Findings 1. Board meeting agendas are posted at the district office and sent to school sites, the media, classified and certificated leadership and the county office of education in a timely manner. Agendas are also made available to local agencies upon request. 2. Board meeting agendas are not sent to King City or Greenfield City government offices to keep the city manager and city council apprised of school district matters. 3. Agendas are not posted on the district’s Web site. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue distributing board meeting agendas to school sites, employee organizations’ leadership, the county office of education and the media, and to local agencies upon request. 2. Send board meeting agendas to the King City and Greenfield City government offices. 3. Post board meeting agendas on the district’s Web site. Community Relations and Governance 103 Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 8 Implementation Scale: 104 Community Relations and Governance 6.3 Board Meetings Legal Standard Open and closed sessions are conducted according to the Ralph M. Brown Act. (GC 54950 et seq.) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member 6. September 9, 2009 board agenda, including open and closed session and notice to the public of the right to speak on items that are schedule for discussion during closed session 7. Minutes of September 9, 2009 board meeting, including public comments as well as closed and open session procedures Findings 1. The board conducts both open public board meetings and closed sessions in accordance to the Ralph M. Brown Act, and the district has not been found in violation of the Ralph M. Brown Act requirements. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to hold both open board meetings and closed sessions in compliance with the Brown Act. Community Relations and Governance 105 Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 10 Implementation Scale: 106 Community Relations and Governance 6.4 Board Meetings Legal Standard The board has adopted bylaws for the placement of items on the board agenda by members of the public. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member 6. Bylaws of the Board, Series 9000, adopted March 26, 1997 (Major headings include the Role of the Board; Organization; Limits of board Member Authority; Policy Manual; and Board Self Evaluation) Findings 1. The board has adopted board bylaws that provide direction for how the board is to operate and how board meetings are to be conducted; however, the bylaws need to be updated. 2. The board bylaws are available at the district office but are not posted on the district’s Web site. 3. Neither individual board members nor individual administrators have their own copies of the board bylaws. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to make a copy of the board bylaws available in the district office and provide it to any staff member or member of the public to read at the district office upon request. 2. Provide each board member with a copy of the board bylaws. 3. Provide each administrator with a copy of the board bylaws. 4. Post the board bylaws on the district’s Web site. Community Relations and Governance 107 5. Update board bylaws regarding how the board is to operate and how meetings are to be conducted. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 108 Community Relations and Governance 6.5 Board Meetings Legal Standard Members of the public have an opportunity to address the board before or during the board’s consideration of each item of business to be discussed at regular or special meetings and to bring before the board matters that are not on the agenda. (EC 35145.5) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member 6. Board agenda and minutes of September 9, 2009 Findings 1. The board meeting agendas and minutes indicate that members of the public have an opportunity to address the board regarding agenda items and non-agenda items. Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 10 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 109 6.6 Board Meetings Professional Standard Board members prepare for board meetings by becoming familiar with the agenda and support materials prior to the meeting. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member Findings 1. Some board members review the agenda and support material prior to board meetings, though the depth of reading and review varies. Some board members do not consistently review the agenda or support data prior to the meeting. Board members’ preparations are inconsistent and sporadic, based on FCMAT’s interviews and observations during this review. 2. Some board members did not contact the superintendent, or now the state administrator, prior to the board meeting regarding questions or clarification of board agenda items, which makes the board meetings less effective and efficient. Depending on the question, failure to clarify issues prior to the board meeting can make the board member look unprepared. Also, when the answer to a board member’s question is not available, the superintendent or state administrator may have to ask that the agenda item be tabled until more information is available, which is also an inefficient use of time. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that board members consistently and thoroughly read and review the board agenda and support documents. 2. Ensure that board members contact the superintendent prior to the board meeting for answers to questions or clarification regarding agenda items. 110 Community Relations and Governance Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 111 6.7 Board Meetings Professional Standard Board meetings are conducted according to a set of board-adopted bylaws. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member 6. Review of Board Bylaws, Series 9000, adopted between April 8, 1986 and March 26, 1997 Findings 1. Board meetings are conducted in accordance with a set of board-adopted bylaws; however, the board bylaws are out of date. Because many of the district’s problems are board-related, updating the bylaws should be a high priority. 2. Neither individual board members nor individual administrators have their own copies of the bylaws. 3. The board bylaws are available at the district office for anyone to review upon request, but are not posted on the district’s Web site. Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Review and update board bylaws. Give high priority to this task. 2. Provide each board member and district administrator with a copy of the board bylaws. 3. Continue to make the bylaws available for review upon request at the district office 4. Post the board bylaws on the district’s Web site. 112 Community Relations and Governance Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 113 6.8 Board Meetings Professional Standard Board meetings proceed in a businesslike manner while allowing opportunity for full discussion. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member 6. Review board policies, 9000 Series Findings 1. Past board meetings have not always proceeded in a businesslike manner. For example, members of the public have been allowed to speak out of turn regarding both agenda and nonagenda items. 2. The board does not consistently adhere to Board Bylaw 9323, Meeting Conduct. Instead of listening and noting the content of the public comment, board members engage in discussion with the speaker as if the meeting were a public forum rather than a meeting held in public. This practice makes the board meeting longer, less orderly and less efficient. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board follows the agenda and require the public to address agenda items at the right time and in an orderly manner. 2. Ensure that board members listen to and note the content of public comments on nonagenda items at board meetings, but do not engage in discussion with members of the public during the board meeting. The issue can be placed on a future board agenda for discussion. 3. Strictly follow Board Bylaw 9323, Meeting Conduct. 114 Community Relations and Governance Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 115 6.9 Board Meetings Professional Standard Board meetings focus on matters related to student achievement. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member 6. Regular board meeting agenda, May 13, 2009 7. Minutes of May 13, 2009 board meeting Findings 1. Although the district has consistently low test scores and is one of the lower performing districts in the state, board meetings have historically focused more on business and personnel matters than on items related to test scores and student achievement. 2. The May 13, 2009 board agenda indicates some information and discussion items that deal with curriculum and instruction and one item (the California High School Exit Exam 10th Grade Report) that focuses directly on achievement and test scores. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Include more agenda items that focus directly on test scores and student achievement. 2. Ensure that the board, under the direction of the state administrator, develops goals that focus on higher expectations for student performance and test scores. 3. Ensure that meeting agendas allow for frequent discussions of policies related to student achievement and that there is ongoing evaluation of program effectiveness. 116 Community Relations and Governance Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Community Relations and Governance 117 7.1 Compliance with Public Contracting Laws and Procedures Professional Standard The LEA collects conflict of interest statements annually, keeps them on file and complies with legal requirements in this area. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with assistant superintendent of business 3. Interview with previous district superintendent 4. Interviews with board members 5. Interview with previous board member 6. District conflict of interest statements Findings 1. Form 700 conflict of interest statements are on file at the district office and are completed annually in accordance with legal requirements. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to collect conflict of interest statements from board members and administrators annually. 2. Continue to keep conflict of interest statements on file at the district office. Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 10 Implementation Scale: 118 Community Relations and Governance Table of Community Relations and Governance Ratings Community Relations and Governance 119 120 Community Relations and Governance February Community Relations and Governance Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNICATIONS 1.1 The LEA has developed a comprehensive plan for internal and external 1 communications, including media relations. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNICATIONS Information is communicated to the staff at all levels in an effective and timely 1.2 1 manner. Two-way communication between staff and administration regarding the LEA’s operations is encouraged. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNICATIONS Media contacts and spokespersons that have the authority to speak on the 1.3 LEA’s behalf have been identified. Board spokespersons are skilled at public 2 speaking and communication and are knowledgeable about the LEA’s programs and issues. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNICATIONS 1.4 Individuals not authorized to speak on behalf of the LEA refrain from making 0 public comments on board decisions and the LEA’s programs. LEGAL STANDARD – PARENT/COMMUNITY RELATIONS Annual parental notice of rights and responsibilities is provided at the beginning 2.1 6 of the school year. This notice is provided in English and in languages other than English when 15% or more speak other languages. (EC 48980, 48985) LEGAL STANDARD – PARENT/COMMUNITY RELATIONS 2.2 A school accountability report card is issued annually for each school site. (EC 6 35256) LEGAL STANDARD – PARENT/COMMUNITY RELATIONS 2.3 The LEA has developed and annually disseminates uniform complaint 7 procedures. (Title 5, Section 4621, 4622) LEGAL STANDARD – PARENT/COMMUNITY RELATIONS 2.4 Parents and community members are encouraged to be involved in school 4 activities and in their children’s education. LEGAL STANDARD – PARENT/COMMUNITY RELATIONS 2.5 The LEA has established procedures for visitor registration and posts registration 5 requirements at each school entrance. (Penal Code 627.2, 627.6) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PARENT/COMMUNITY RELATIONS Parents’ and community members’ complaints are addressed in a fair and timely 2.6 1 manner. Board members refer informal public concerns to the appropriate staff members for attention and response. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PARENT/COMMUNITY RELATIONS 2.7 Volunteers receive appropriate training and play a meaningful role that 1 contributes to the educational program. Community Relations and Governance 121 February Community Relations and Governance Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PARENT/COMMUNITY RELATIONS 2.8 1 Board members are actively involved in building community relations. LEGAL STANDARD – COMMUNITY COLLABORATIVES, LEA ADVISORY COMMITTEES, SCHOOL SITE COUNCILS Policies exist for the establishment of school site councils. The school site 3.1 2 council develops a single plan for student achievement at each school, applying for categorical programs through the consolidated application. (EC 52852.5, 64001) LEGAL STANDARD – COMMUNITY COLLABORATIVES, LEA ADVISORY COMMITTEES, SCHOOL SITE COUNCILS 3.2 The school site council annually reviews the school plan to ensure it has 4 sufficient content to meet statutory requirements, and the board annually approves the site councils’ plans. (EC 52853, 52855, 64001) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNITY COLLABORATIVES, LEA ADVISORY COMMITTEES, SCHOOL SITE COUNCILS 3.3 2 The board and superintendent support partnerships and collaborations with community groups, local agencies and businesses. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNITY COLLABORATIVES, LEA ADVISORY COMMITTEES, SCHOOL SITE COUNCILS The board and superintendent have established broad-based committees and 3.4 1 councils to advise the LEA on critical issues and operations as appropriate. The membership of these committees and councils reflects the full cultural, ethnic, gender and socioeconomic diversity of the student population. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNITY COLLABORATIVES, LEA ADVISORY COMMITTEES, SCHOOL SITE COUNCILS 3.5 1 Community collaboratives and LEA and school advisory councils have identified specific outcome goals that are understood by all members. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNITY COLLABORATIVES, LEA ADVISORY COMMITTEES, SCHOOL SITE COUNCILS The LEA encourages and provides the necessary training for collaborative 3.6 1 and advisory council members to effectively fulfill their responsibilities and to understand the basic administrative structure, program processes and goals of all LEA partners. LEGAL STANDARD – POLICY 4.1 4 The board has adopted all policies mandated by state and federal law. LEGAL STANDARD – POLICY 4.2 The board annually reviews its policies on intradistrict open enrollment and 0 extracurricular/cocurricular activities. (EC 35160.5) 122 Community Relations and Governance February Community Relations and Governance Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – POLICY Policies are written, organized and readily available to all staff members and 4.3 3 to the public. Policies and administrative regulations are up to date and reflect current law and local needs. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – POLICY 4.4 The LEA has established a system of securing staff and citizen input in policy 3 development and review. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – POLICY 4.5 0 The board supports and follows its own policies once they are adopted. LEGAL STANDARD – BOARD ROLES/BOARDSMANSHIP 5.1 Each board member meets the eligibility requirements to be a board member. 10 (EC 35107) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD ROLES/BOARDSMANSHIP 5.2 0 Board members receive necessary training to better fulfill their roles. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD ROLES/BOARDSMANSHIP The board has established an LEA-wide vision/mission and uses that vision/ 5.3 1 mission as a framework for LEA action based on the identified needs of the students, staff, and educational community. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD ROLES/BOARDSMANSHIP 5.4 The board makes decisions based on the study of all available data, including 0 the recommendations of the superintendent. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD ROLES/BOARDSMANSHIP Board members maintain functional working relationships. Individual board 5.5 0 members respect the decisions of the board majority and support the board’s actions in public. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD ROLES/BOARDSMANSHIP 5.6 0 The board and administrative team maintain functional working relationships. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD ROLES/BOARDSMANSHIP 5.7 0 The board demonstrates respect for and support of the LEA and school site staff. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD ROLES/BOARDSMANSHIP 5.8 1 The board demonstrates respect for public input at meetings and public hearings. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD ROLES/BOARDSMANSHIP 5.9 Board members respect the confidentiality of information shared by the 0 administration. Community Relations and Governance 123 February Community Relations and Governance Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD ROLES/BOARDSMANSHIP Board members effectively develop policy and set the direction of the LEA while 5.10 0 supporting the superintendent and administrative staff in their responsibility to implement adopted policies and administrative regulations. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD ROLES/BOARDSMANSHIP 5.11 1 The board acts for the community and in the interests of all students in the LEA. LEGAL STANDARD – BOARD MEETINGS 6.1 An adopted calendar of regular meetings is published. The calendar specifies the 8 time, place and date of each meeting. (EC 35140) LEGAL STANDARD – BOARD MEETINGS 6.2 The board agenda is made available to the public in the manner and under the 8 timelines prescribed by law. (GC 54954.1, 54954.2) LEGAL STANDARD – BOARD MEETINGS 6.3 Open and closed sessions are conducted according to the Ralph M. Brown Act. 10 (GC 54950 et seq.) LEGAL STANDARD – BOARD MEETINGS 6.4 The board has adopted bylaws for the placement of items on the board agenda 5 by members of the public. LEGAL STANDARD – BOARD MEETINGS Members of the public have an opportunity to address the board before or during 6.5 the board’s consideration of each item of business to be discussed at regular 10 or special meetings and to bring before the board matters that are not on the agenda. (EC 35145.5) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD MEETINGS 6.6 Board members prepare for board meetings by becoming familiar with the 2 agenda and support materials prior to the meeting. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD MEETINGS 6.7 3 Board meetings are conducted according to a set of board-adopted bylaws. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD MEETINGS 6.8 Board meetings proceed in a businesslike manner while allowing opportunity for 2 full discussion. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BOARD MEETINGS 6.9 1 Board meetings focus on matters related to student achievement. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC CONTRACTING LAWS AND PROCEDURES 7.1 10 The LEA collects conflict of interest statements annually, keeps them on file and complies with legal requirements in this area. 124 Community Relations and Governance February Community Relations and Governance Standards 2010 Rating Collective Average Rating 2.9 Community Relations and Governance 125 126 Community Relations and Governance Personnel Management Personnel Management 127 128 Personnel Management 1.1 Organization and Planning Professional Standard The LEA has clearly defined and clarified roles for board and administration relative to recruitment, hiring, evaluation and discipline of employees. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with school board members 2. Interview with state administrator 3. Interview with chief business official 4. Interviews with district administrative and personnel department staff 5. Interviews with school site administrators 6. Interview with human resources consultant 7. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 8. Board Policy 4111– March 10, 2008 9. Board Policy 4115 – Oct. 11, 2000 10. Board Policy 4118 – Oct 11, 2000 11. Administrative Regulation 4112 – Oct 11, 2000 12. Administrative Regulation 4212 – Oct 11, 2000 13. Administrative Regulation 4118 – Oct 11, 2000 Findings 1. The personnel-related policies in the district’s board policies and administrative regulations (BP 4000[a]) are those developed by the California School Boards Association (CSBA) and were last adopted by the district in October 2000 and March 2008. 2. The district’s personnel policies and regulations retain the standard CSBA generic wording and are not amended to meet the district’s specific operational requirements. 3. Board policies contained in the 4000 series are a detailed manual of policies and regulations but do not contain necessary administrative procedures. The district is not Personnel Management 129 currently following these board policies and administrative regulations; however, some of the board policies and administrative regulations are no longer necessary because of changes in the California Education Code, credentialing laws, and state or federal law. 4. The district has no organizational process for reviewing and updating personnel-related policies. 5. Even though board members’ roles are clearly defined in board policy, the current board members are continually bypassing the administration and interacting directly with staff members. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the personnel department develops a detailed time line for reviewing and revising the 4000 series of board policies related to personnel functions. These policies will form the basis for developing the personnel department’s day-to-day operating procedures. 2. Delete or modify policies that are outdated or no longer followed by purchasing the latest updates to the California School Boards Association’s (CSBA’s) board policies and adapting these to the district’s operational requirements. 3. Develop a process for ongoing review of all board policies and administrative regulations. A sample model process for ongoing review is included as Exhibit A at the end of this section of this report. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 130 Personnel Management 1.2 Organization and Planning Professional Standard The personnel function has developed a mission statement and objectives directly related to the LEA’s goals and provides an annual report of activities and services offered during the year. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with state administrator and business office staff No documentation provided Findings 1. The personnel department has no mission statement, annual report or annual plan. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the personnel department develops a mission statement that aligns with the mission and objectives of the district to provide the services employees require. 2. Develop a template and produce an annual board report regarding the personnel department, including the services it provides to employees and information such as the number of certificated, classified and management staff employed by the district, employees hired during the fiscal year, transfers, grievances, and retirements by classification. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 131 1.3 Organization and Planning Professional Standard The personnel function has an organizational chart and functions chart and a menu of services that include the names, positions and job functions of all personnel staff. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with state administrator, business office staff and personnel department employees 2. List of responsibilities, but no organization chart Findings 1. There was no documented evidence of a functional organizational chart for the personnel department. 2. Staff reported uncertainty about their own roles and responsibilities. 3. There is no department reference manual for employees that documents processes, procedures and duties. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a functional organization chart and make it readily available to all district staff to ensure a clear delineation between various personnel department functions and the employees who are responsible and accountable for those functions. The chart should be updated as changes occur to make the department’s workflow more efficient and effective. 2. Ensure that the personnel department develops a department reference manual that lists the department’s functions and uses it in part to assign personnel department-related duties on the functional organization chart. 3. Survey other districts with similar enrollments and configurations to determine an appropriate staffing level for the personnel department. This staffing comparison should be viewed as providing a minimum; additional staff will be required during the district’s recovery period to implement needed policies and procedures. 132 Personnel Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 133 1.4 Organization and Planning Professional Standard The personnel function head is a member of the superintendent’s cabinet and participates in decision making early in the process. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with educational services and district administrative support staff. 4. Interview with human resources consultant 5. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documents provided Findings 1. Over the past several years, members of the personnel department have not been involved in the superintendent’s cabinet. During the 2008-09 fiscal year, the human resources consultant was involved in cabinet level meetings. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the personnel technician is a member of the cabinet for all discussions related to personnel during the 2009-10 fiscal year and beyond. 2. Review the duties of the personnel technician position to determine if it is a confidential or classified management position. 3. Ensure that the new personnel technician reports to the new chief business official or to the state administrator, who has the requisite expertise in personnel management to work with district staff to define and establish practices, procedures and systems for this department. 134 Personnel Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 135 1.5 Organization and Planning Professional Standard The personnel function has a data management calendar that lists all the ongoing data activities and responsible parties to ensure meeting critical deadlines on CALPADS/CBEDS reporting. The data is reviewed by the appropriate authority prior to certification. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators. 4. Interview with human resources consultant No documentation provided Findings 1. The personnel department does not have a data management calendar or a list of data activities and responsible parties. 2. The personnel department does not provide information to the parties responsible for submitting data to the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS), California School Information Systems (CSIS) or the California Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS). Rather, the data department provides the information to the personnel department. 3. No supervisor reviews data prior to certification of the CALPADS, CSIS and CBEDS information sent from the district to the state of California. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the personnel department develops a data management calendar that identifies critical data elements and tasks that must be completed annually. 2. Ensure that the personnel department takes a leadership role and responsibility for personnel-related data and functions related to CALPADS, CSIS and CBEDS. 3. Ensure that the department supervisor reviews all information before certification to the state of California. 136 Personnel Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 137 2.1 Communications: Internal/External Legal Standard The LEA has adopted and published an employee salary schedule for every position and has in place a system to implement without delays. (EC 45023) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel 8. 2006-07 – Salary schedule, classified 9. 2007-08 - Salary schedules, certificated, administration 10. 2009-10 – Salary schedule, classified management Findings 1. The district has maintained salary schedules for all positions as required by the respective collecting bargaining agreements and the education code. 2. Salary schedules have not been revised to indicate changes for the current fiscal year, and the collective bargaining agreement has not been modified to reflect the current salary schedule. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Update all salary schedules and hourly and stipend rates at the beginning of each fiscal year. Note the last time the salary schedule was changed (e.g., fiscal year 2007-08) if it has not been adjusted since that time. 138 Personnel Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 139 2.2 Communications: Internal/External Professional Standard The personnel function holds regularly scheduled staff meetings. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with director of educational services 3. Interview with personnel technician 4. Interview with executive assistant to the superintendent 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documentation provided Findings 1. The district currently has only one employee in the personnel department; therefore, this standard is not applicable. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. After developing a new organizational structure with more than one staff member in the personnel department, ensure that the department holds weekly staff meetings. Agendas, minutes and discussion topics from the personnel department staff meeting should be reviewed at the meeting with payroll staff, which is discussed in standard 5.7. 2. Present communications from the personnel department staff meetings to the superintendents’ cabinet and related personnel. Standard Implemented: Not Applicable February 2010 Rating: None 140 Personnel Management 3.1 Employee Recruitment/Selection Legal Standard The Governing Board provides equal employment opportunities for all people without regard to actual or perceived race, color, medical condition, veteran status, gender, sex, sexual orientation, religion, ancestry, national origin, age, marital status, residence, pregnancy, or physical or mental disability. (EC 44100-44105, GC 11135) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interview with district and school site administrators and support staff. 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Board Policy 4111, dated March 10, 2004 Findings 1. The district’s human resources consultant stated that an equal employment opportunity policy is in place but is not consistently followed. 2. Board Policy 4111(e), Recruitment and Selection, adopted March 10, 2004, contains a section related to a statement of the district’s commitment to equal employment and identifies questions that cannot be asked regarding issues that might be classified as discrimination, in accordance with federal and state law. 3. Information from interviews and in a review of documents indicates that staff do not recall receiving the required annual legal notices regarding nondiscrimination. 4. None of the personnel files reviewed contained a signed cover sheet from employees indicating receipt of the annual legal notifications regarding nondiscrimination in the workplace. 5. All certificated applications are filed on EDJOIN (www.edjoin.org), which includes an equal opportunity employment statement. The district’s classified applications include an equal opportunity statement. Personnel Management 141 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review existing board policies related to recruitment and selection to ensure that they include the required nondiscrimination statements. 2. Implement a policy regarding an affirmative action program and appoint an affirmative action officer. 3. Issue annual legal notifications regarding nondiscrimination to all employees. 4. Include required annual legal notices regarding nondiscrimination in all employee personnel files with the required coversheet indicating that the notices have been provided to employees and included in personnel files. 5. Provide all staff members with training to ensure that discrimination does not occur in the workplace. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 142 Personnel Management 3.2 Employee Recruitment/Selection Legal Standard All certificated employees hold one or more valid certificates, credentials or life diplomas that license the holder to engage in school services designated in the document or documents and meet the NCLB highly qualified designation, if applicable. Professional growth requirements for maintenance of a valid credential exist (EC 44277, 44006, NCLB, 20 USC 6319, 7801; 5 CCR 6100-6126, cf. 4112.24) The LEA monitors the progress of compliance plans signed by teachers that are working toward highly qualified teacher status; e.g., secondary alternative education, necessary small schools, home school, etc. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel 8. Interviews with Monterey County Office of Education credentials department personnel 9. Letter from Monterey County Office of Education credentials department dated March 11, 2009, and various responses from district staff 10. District’s Assignment Monitoring and Review Report dated June 30, 2009 11. No Child Left Behind (NCLB) teacher action plan dated October 22, 2009 Findings 1. Based on documentation from the Monterey County Office of Education, the district has fully credentialed employees in all positions, and no payroll checks have been held due to credential issues. The district has made significant improvement over the past two years in credentialing in the area of English language learners. 2. The district has no system or documentation to identify staff members who have met the highly-qualified designation under NCLB. Personnel Management 143 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the personnel department fully automates credential-related functions, including reporting on NCLB highly-qualified designations, and provides the information to staff in a timely manner. 2. Annually review credentials in areas such as continuation, adult education and special education to ensure compliance with the appropriate education code and federal regulations (EC 44277, 44006, NCLB, 20 USC 6319, 7801; 5 CCR 6100-6126, cf. 4112.24). Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 144 Personnel Management 3.3 Employee Recruitment/Selection Legal Standard Policies and regulations exist regarding the implementation of fingerprinting requirements for all employees. (EC 44237, 45125, 45125.1, 45125.01, 44332.6, 44346.1, 44830.1, 45122.1) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Administrative Regulation 4112, dated Oct. 11, 2000 8. Administrative Regulation 4212, dated Oct. 11, 2000 Findings 1. The district contracts with King City and Greenfield police departments for Live Scan services and fingerprints all employees as required by the California Education Code (EC 44237, 45125, 45125.1, 45125.01, 44332.6, 44346.1, 44830.1, 45122.1). 2. The district also complies with standards for fingerprinting volunteers for school-related activities. 3. Administrative Regulation 4112 states that fingerprinting shall be done as required by law and refers to Education Code section 44830.1. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue contracting with local police departments for fingerprinting of all employees and developing a system that is able to track when and where employees have been fingerprinted as well as the results. Personnel Management 145 Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 8 Implementation Scale: 146 Personnel Management 3.4 Employee Recruitment/Selection Legal Standard The Governing Board requires every employee to present evidence that they were examined and found free of active tuberculosis as required by state law. (EC 44839, 49406) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. List of employee tuberculosis expiration dates, dated October 24, 2009 Findings 1. The district has a process for tuberculosis testing and recording, and lists of all employees and their tuberculosis exam expiration dates. The district maintains the tuberculosis list in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. The district is effective and efficient in its monitoring and compliance, and in providing required notifications to employees. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Incorporate the list of all employees and their tuberculosis expiration dates into the personnel database so that it can be maintained in an automated database rather than in a spreadsheet. Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 8 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 147 3.5 Employee Recruitment/Selection Legal Standard The LEA has a system in place to routinely monitor teacher assignments for the appropriate credential authorization, including CLAD or other documents necessary to instruct English Language Learner students. (EC 44258.9, 44265.1, 44265.2, and 33126) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel 8. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education credentials department personnel 9. Letter from Monterey County Office of Education credentials department dated March 11, 2009, and various responses from district staff 10. District’s assignment monitoring and review report dated June 30, 2009 11. No Child Left Behind teacher action plan, dated October 22, 2009 Findings 1. Prior to fiscal year 2008-09, the district did not have a procedure or program to routinely monitor teacher assignments for the appropriate credential authorization. 2. Prior to February 2008, the district was out of compliance with regard to teachers requiring Cross-cultural Language and Academic Development (CLAD) certification. 3. To obtain the required number of CLAD-certified teachers, the governing board, through the collective bargaining process, approved an annual payment to all of the district’s teachers if at least two-thirds of the teachers received their CLAD certification. 148 Personnel Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Implement a plan for the personnel department to routinely monitor teacher assignments to ensure that all teachers are teaching in programs for which they are credentialed. 2. During the upcoming collective bargaining process, reduce the costs the district incurs as a result of teachers who receive CLAD certification. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 149 3.6 Employee Recruitment/Selection Legal Standard The LEA has implemented a procedure by which a parent/guardian can file a complaint related to teacher misassignments or vacancies (Williams Uniform Complaint Procedures). (EC 33126) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interviews with Monterey County Office of Education credentials department personnel, and review quarterly reports submitted 8. Williams uniform complaint form, dated June 18, 2008 9. Williams quarterly reports from Monterey County Office of Education, inspected Oct. 28, 2009 Findings 1. The district has completed all of the required Williams postings and quarterly reports, as required by law. The district has reported all filings to the Monterey County Office of Education, with no complaints noted during this review period. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to complete Williams postings and quarterly reports, and update postings in the classrooms with the latest information, as required by Education Code Section 33126. 150 Personnel Management Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 10 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 151 3.7 Employee Recruitment/Selection Legal Standard The LEA has implemented the appropriate procedures when employing short-term classified employees to comply with state legislation and the collective bargaining agreement, including the Governing Board taking action at a regularly scheduled meeting. (EC 45103). Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documentation provided Findings 1. Although the district currently does not employ any short-term classified personnel, there are no policies regarding the employment of short-term employees, including noon duty aides. 2. The district does not have a policy that contains new legal requirements that the governing board, at regularly scheduled meeting, shall specify the service required to be performed pursuant to the definition of “short-term employee” and shall specify the ending date of service. 3. The district does not have a policy defining a short-term employee (including full-time and part-time students who are employed part-time, and any college work-study program) as is now required by law. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Implement a policy consistent with California Education Code section 45103. The policy should include provisions regarding students as workers; provisions regarding noon duty aides as members of the classified service; and procedures requiring the governing board to approve part-time employment before it commences and include an ending date for any service that is less than 75% of a school year. 152 Personnel Management 2. After the new board policy summarized in item 1 is approved, ensure that the personnel department implements procedures to carry out the policy. 3. Upon implementation, communicate information about the new policy and procedures to all school administrators and office staff. 4. Continue with the current hiring and termination policies for short-term employees. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 153 3.8 Employee Recruitment/Selection Legal Standard In merit system LEAs, recruitment and selection for classified service are in compliance with the rules of the Personnel Commission and all applicable requirements are followed. (EC 45240- 45320) Sources and Documentation None Findings 1. This standard is not applicable because the district does not use a personnel commission for classified employees. Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: N/A February 2010 Rating: None 154 Personnel Management 3.9 Employee Recruitment/Selection Professional Standard The personnel function has a recruitment plan based on an assessment of the LEA’s needs for specific skills, knowledge, and abilities. The LEA has established an adequate recruitment budget. Job applications meet legal and LEA needs. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Classified employment application, updated 2005-06 8. Supplement for experienced custodian position – no date provided Findings 1. The personnel department does not have a recruitment plan for fiscal years 2008-09 or 2009-10. 2. The district has no recruitment goals for the current fiscal year. 3. The district hires individuals for positions late in the summer because of inadequate enrollment projections. 4. The district has no formal recruitment process for hiring for classified positions. 5. The district has not recruited classified staff in many years because of reductions in staff. 6. The district has not established a budget for recruiting. 7. The district uses EDJOIN (www.edjoin.org) for certificated staff recruiting but uses paper applications for all classified and administrative positions. The paper application forms should be updated. Personnel Management 155 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the personnel department works cooperatively with the business department and the sites to develop accurate enrollment projections that enable the administration to adequately define the district’s staffing requirements for at least the current and two subsequent fiscal years. 2. Develop a certificated staffing recruitment plan for positions that are needed but are difficult to fill, such as math, speech pathologists, special education and foreign language teachers. 3. Develop written recruitment practices and procedures for both certificated and classified staff. 4. Adopt a common method for all employee recruitment and selection. One possible method is to use EDJOIN for all employment applications. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 156 Personnel Management 3.10 Employee Recruitment/Selection Professional Standard The LEA has developed alternative teacher certification programs and processes (e.g., Verification Process for Special Settings, intern, committee on assignment). (EC 44380-44387) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interviews with Monterey County Office of Education credentials department personnel No documentation provided Findings 1. The district had not developed an alternative certification program at the time of this review. 2. No district employee has been given the responsibility of developing alternative methods of certification. 3. Employees indicated that the district is geographically isolated, making it difficult to travel outside the area to take classes at, or form cooperate programs with, the nearest colleges. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Work in cooperation with the Monterey County Office of Education to develop an alternative teaching certification program and processes (e.g., pre-intern, intern, committee on assignment). Personnel Management 157 2. Even though the district is geographically isolated, establish cooperative program relationships with the nearest colleges and universities so that viable alternative routes to certification can be offered and implemented. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 158 Personnel Management 3.11 Employee Recruitment/Selection Professional Standard Selection procedures are uniformly applied. The LEA systematically initiates and follows up and performs reference checks on all applicants being considered for employment. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district administrators and support staff 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview questions – not dated 8. Position testing documentation – 1/2003, 10/2004 Findings 1. The district has standard interview questions for certificated and classified positions, and interviews with the part-time personnel consultant, the personnel technician and site administrators confirmed that standard interview questions are used in the selection of certificated personnel. There is no evidence that the district conducts background and/or reference checks on job candidates interviewed, or on the candidate recommended for a position, before the individual is hired. 2. The district does not have a form for background and/or reference checks. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a policy and procedure to implement background and reference checks on all future employees. Develop standard questions for background and reference checks, and require employees to complete a form that has places to record the responses of persons contacted and the name, signature and date of the person completing the background or reference check. All forms should be filed in the personnel selection process folders, not the employees’ personnel file if they are hired. Personnel Management 159 Standard Implemented: Fully/Partially/Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 160 Personnel Management 3.12 Employee Recruitment/Selection Professional Standard The LEA recruits, selects, and monitors principals with strong leadership skills, with a priority on placement of strong leaders at underperforming schools. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative No documentation provided Findings 1. The principal of Greenfield high school is a lifelong resident of the city of Greenfield, a graduate of King City high school, and a former teacher and association president in the Greenfield Elementary School District. 2. The principal at King City High School had approximately four years of teaching experience in the Garden Grove Unified School District in Southern California and approximately one year of experience as an assistant principal at King City High School before becoming principal. 3. The assistant principal at Greenfield High School also serves as the principal of Ventana Continuation High School and has several years of experience as a high school teacher in Southern California. While an assistant principal at King City High School, this individual led the high school in regaining accreditation from the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) after it had been lost for one year. 4. The district’s salaries for school administrators are competitive with salaries for similar positions in school districts throughout California. 5. Based on existing salary and employee benefits schedules, the district should be able to recruit and maintain experienced school site administrators. Personnel Management 161 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. When a site administrator position opens in the future, provide the district’s administration with the funds needed to conduct a thorough recruiting process to ensure a broad pool of candidates. 2. Establish minimum criteria for site administrator positions, including number of years of experience in administration, level of education and training. 3. Complete a thorough background check including visiting the current site where the candidate is employed. 4. Review administrative assignments annually to place the strongest administrators at underperforming school sites. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 162 Personnel Management 4.1 Induction and Professional Development Legal Standard LEAs with 50 or more employees provide two hours of sexual harassment training to supervisory employees every two years and in the first six months of new employment in a management position. (GC 12950.1) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview Monterey County Office of Education assistant superintendent, human resources 7. Sign-in sheets from sexual harassment training, November 14, 2007 8. Memo and sign-in sheets from sexual harassment training, March 16 and 22, 2005 Findings 1. The chief business official has not received the required sexual harassment training. 2. The director of maintenance, operations, transportation and facilities (MOTF) has not received sexual harassment training within the past two years. 3. No records were found that indicated that any management training has taken place regarding sexual harassment. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Arrange for sexual harassment training for all supervisory and management personnel immediately, in accordance with Government Code 12950.1. 2. Work with the personnel technician to develop a plan to conduct sexual harassment training for all supervisory and management personnel every two years, and within six months of hire for all new supervisory and management personnel. Personnel Management 163 3. Ensure that the personnel technician develops a form to be signed by all supervisory and management personnel upon completing sexual harassment training and places the signed forms in the employees’ personnel files. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 164 Personnel Management 4.2 Induction and Professional Development Legal Standard The LEA has adopted policies and procedures regarding the recognition and reporting of sexual harassment. (EC 231.5, GC 12950.1, GC 12940). Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Board Policy 4119, dated December 14, 2005 8. Administrative Regulation 4110, dated December 14, 2005 Findings 1. Information from employee interviews indicates that employees are notified annually of board policies related to the recognition and reporting of sexual harassment. 2. There was no documentation indicating that the required information regarding sexual harassment reporting was sent to all employees. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review Board Policy 4119 and Administrative Regulation 4110 and update them as needed to comply with any changes in the law. 2. Ensure that the personnel technician develops and maintains the notification that is sent to all employees annually regarding the requirement to report sexual harassment. Personnel Management 165 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 166 Personnel Management 4.3 Induction and Professional Development Legal Standard The LEA has developed a systematic program for identifying areas of need for in-service training for all employees. The LEA has established a process by which all required notices and in-service training sessions have been performed and documented such as those for child abuse reporting, blood-borne pathogens, drug and alcohol-free workplace, sexual harassment, diversity training, and nondiscrimination. (cf. 4112.9/4212.9/4312.9), GC 11135 EC 56240, EC 44253.7) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documentation provided Findings 1. The district does not have a process to ensure that it provides and documents all required notices and in-service training sessions related to child abuse reporting and blood-borne pathogens. 2. The district had a sign-in sheet that included the names of employees, indicating that employees received training regarding sexual harassment. 3. The personnel files reviewed did not contain any document indicating that the employee received the required training listed in this standard. 4. In interviews, employees indicated that they receive no training related to mandatory reporting of child abuse concerns. Personnel Management 167 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Work with the personnel technician to develop a training program that provides all district employees with the legally required training on child abuse reporting, blood- borne pathogens, drug- and alcohol-free workplace, sexual harassment, diversity training, and nondiscrimination. 2. Ensure that the personnel technician develops a process for sending employees all required notices on these issues, and maintains documentation of these notifications in the personnel office. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 168 Personnel Management 4.4 Induction and Professional Development Legal Standard The LEA’s nondiscrimination policy and administrative regulations and the availability of complaint procedures shall be regularly publicized within the LEA and in the community, including posting in all schools and offices including staff lounges and student government meeting rooms. (cf. 4030, cf. 4031, Government Code 11135). Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel 8. Board Policy 4030, dated February 11, 2004 9. Administrative Regulation 4030, dated March 24, 1993 Findings 1. In interviews, the human resources consultant reported that the required posting of the district’s nondiscrimination policy and available complaint procedures occurred during the 2008-09 fiscal year. 2. Board policy 4030, adopted on February 11, 2004, addresses the nondiscrimination policy but has not been updated since that time. 3. Administrative regulation 4030 regarding implementation of the nondiscrimination policy has not been updated since its adoption in 1993. 4. In interviews, district staff indicated that the district’s nondiscrimination policy is not followed. 5. No annual district publication addresses this subject except the student handbook Personnel Management 169 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Work with the personnel technician to update the board policy on nondiscrimination to ensure that it complies with all federal and state laws. 2. Work with the personnel technician to develop an administrative regulation to implement the board policy on nondiscrimination, including a process for communicating the complaint procedures throughout the district and to the community. 3. Ensure that the personnel technician develops a schedule for annually communicating the nondiscrimination policy and complaint procedures throughout the district and to the community to ensure compliance with the administrative regulation developed in recommendation 2 above. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 170 Personnel Management 4.5 Induction and Professional Development Professional Standard Initial orientation is provided for all new staff, and orientation materials are provided for new employees in all classifications: substitutes, certificated and classified employees. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel Findings 1. Information from interviews with staff indicates that the district did not hold in-service sessions in previous years. 2. The district holds no in-service meetings for classified staff or substitute employees. 3. No packets of materials provided to new hires were available for review, and personnel files contained no evidence that employees had completed all the legally required documents prior to beginning their employment in the district. 4. The district has no handbooks for certificated or classified staff. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Provide in-service meetings for classified and substitute employees as well as new certificated employees. 2. Develop employee handbooks for management, certificated and classified employees, and include the handbooks as part of the employee orientation process. 3. Develop a packet of forms that all new employees must complete, and include these forms and checklist in each employee’s personnel file in the personnel office. Personnel Management 171 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 172 Personnel Management 4.6 Induction and Professional Development Professional Standard The personnel function has developed an employment checklist to be used for all new employees that includes LEA forms, including acceptable use of technology and state and I-9 federal mandated information. The checklist is signed by the employee and kept on file. Employment Development Department reporting is compiled within 20 days of employment. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district administrators 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel 7. Memo to all employees by type regarding required document to finalize employment (3), not dated. Findings 1. Staff interviewed reported that they did not recall receiving any checklist of forms to be completed upon employment. 2. The district provided the study team with an undated memorandum addressed to all employees regarding the documents required to finalize employment. 3. Personnel files reviewed did not contain any documentation indicating that new employees received information that state and federal laws require to be provided, including, but not limited to, an acceptable use policy for technology. 4. There is no evidence that the district is completing the required reporting to the Employment Development Department (EDD) within 20 days of employment in accordance with the instructions in form DE 231Y (http://www.edd.ca.gov/pdf_pub_ctr/ de231y.pdf). Personnel Management 173 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a new hire checklist and a packet of required forms and documents for use with all new employees. The packet should include district forms and state and federal mandated information, with a signature line for the employee to sign acknowledging receipt of the required forms and information. The signed receipts of acknowledgement and checklists should be placed in the respective employees’ personnel files. 2. Ensure that the personnel technician develops a procedure for reporting all new employees to the EDD within 20 days of hire. Use form DE 34 or file through the Internet by accessing the EDD’s online tax services at http://eddservices.edd.ca.gov. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 174 Personnel Management 5.1 Operational Procedures Legal Standard Regulations or agreements covering various types of leaves are fairly administered. (EC 45199, EC 45193, EC 45207, EC 45192, EC 45191) Tracking of employee absences and usage of time off in all categories should be timely and should be reported to payroll for any necessary salary adjustments. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel 8. Report of Absence by type (e.g. sick leave, vacation, etc.) (3), not dated Findings 1. No board policy was provided that addresses certificated or classified personnel absences and leaves or describes a process for reporting teachers’ day-to-day absences. Conflicting statements suggest the district’s practices are not consistent with the requirements found in California Education Code sections 45199, 45193, 45207, 45192 and 45191. 2. No board policy was provided that addresses certificated and classified employees’ personal illness and injury, or the right to sick leave and the process for using sick leave and industrial accident leave. Conflicting statements suggest that the district’s practices are not consistent with the requirements found in California Education Code sections 45199, 45193, 45207, 45192, and 45191. The classified employees’ collective bargaining agreement, Article 12 (CSEA), and the certificated employees’ collective bargaining agreement, Article 13 (CTA), outline all of the leaves of absence for which bargaining unit members are eligible, including catastrophic leave. 3. The district’s leave of absence request form lists all of the available personal leaves and implies that the form is to be submitted in advance. However, procedures in the collective bargaining agreements and board policies explain that there are cases when the leave is taken first and the form submitted later. It is difficult to determine the Personnel Management 175 workflow and tracking of leaves of absence, or if the leave is administered fairly and consistently. 4. The lack of documentation of leave also extends to the use of accumulated compensatory time and overtime; the actual time used is not recorded. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a board policy regarding the use of various types of leave, and distribute the policy to all employees. 2. Ensure that the personnel and payroll departments jointly develop a process for employees to request and take each type of leave, and for the district to monitor, track and report the leave. 3. Have the personnel and payroll departments, with assistance from the Monterey County Office of Education, investigate whether it is possible to track leave on employees’ paychecks monthly. 4. Develop an annual report of all leave earned and taken by each employee and by the district as a whole. 5. Negotiate a change in the certificated collective bargaining agreement to reduce the number of sick days to the statewide average. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 176 Personnel Management 5.2 Operational Procedures Legal Standard The personnel function maintains a certificated seniority list that contains first date of paid service and credentials held. The accuracy of the data shall be verified in writing by certificated staff. (EC 44844-44846) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators 4. Interviews with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel 8. Certificated seniority list, March 9, 2009 Findings 1. The district completed a reduction in the certificated workforce at the end of the 2008-09 fiscal year, which survived challenges raised by the bargaining unit. The district provided a certificated employee seniority list, but it was not produced from an electronic database. 2. Because the reduction in force did not take into account students’ scheduling needs, some teachers were not laid off and others were rehired after the start of the current school year. 3. No information was provided regarding a seniority list for classified employees; however, the agreement with the California State Employees Association (CSEA) lists an exhibit that contains employee hire dates. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the personnel department investigates working with the Monterey County Office of Education to automate the district’s seniority lists for all employee groups. The lists should include the first date of paid service, credentials held, positions held in the district, and any additional training or experience. When the lists are automated, the district should maintain the information and submit up-to-date seniority lists to the board Personnel Management 177 and bargaining units annually. If the Monterey County Office of Education system is unable to perform this function, the district should investigate other suppliers of this type of software to automate the process. 2. Work to improve coordination and communication with the school sites regarding student schedules and course offerings to ensure appropriate staffing. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 178 Personnel Management 5.3 Operational Procedures Legal Standard Transfer and reassignments – LEAs that have been identified as Program Improvement are subject to corrective action including demotion or reassignment of school staff. (EC 52055.57, 20 USC 6316) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with human resources consultant 5. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 6. PowerPoint presentation and letter to parents, dated August 23, 2009 Findings 1. The district did not carry out any demotion or reassignment of school staff related to its Program Improvement status. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Work closely with the Monterey County Office of Education advisors to develop a policy and negotiation strategy for implementing Program Improvement corrective actions. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 179 5.4 Operational Procedures Legal Standard Personnel files contents are complete and available for inspection. (EC 44031, LC 1198.5) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interview with personnel technician 4. Interview with executive assistant to superintendent 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with director of maintenance, operations, transportation and facilities (MOTF) 7. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 8. Sample personnel file, recreated from actual employee files, reviewed on October 28, 2009 Findings 1. The district made a concerted effort in 2008-09 to update and organize its personnel files and systems for inspection. 2. Sample personnel files provided for review lacked the required documentation. The most significant missing items were annual evaluations. 3. Individual personnel files are available for staff to inspect. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the personnel department creates a checklist of annual updates for each type of personnel file and files the appropriate documentation annually. 180 Personnel Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 181 5.5 Operational Procedures Professional Standard Personnel function nonmanagement staff members have individual desk manuals for all of the personnel functions for which they are held responsible, and the department has a process for cross training. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district administrators and classified management. 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documentation provided Findings 1. The personnel department does not have desk manuals for its staff, or any manuals that describe how job functions are to be performed. Because the department has only one employee, desk manuals would be a helpful learning aid for any employees who may be added to the department or those who must fill in temporarily for the current employee. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Request assistance from the Monterey County Office of Education to document personnel processes in the personnel department and develop desk manuals for the various functions in the department. 2. Cross train the personnel department and payroll department staff in the essential functions of the personnel department, at least until additional staff are assigned to the personnel department. 182 Personnel Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 183 5.6 Operational Procedures Professional Standard The personnel function has a process in place to systematically review and update job descriptions. These job descriptions shall be in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act requirements and accurately describe all essential and marginal functions and duties of each position. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Job description, superintendent, dated February 28, 2007 7. Job description, executive assistant, dated June 12, 2002 8. Job description, business manager, dated March 18, 1983 Findings 1. No board policy or an administrative regulation was provided related to classified employee assignment and classification. 2. The district provided three job descriptions, the oldest of which was last updated in 1983 and was for the business manager position. 3. One job description included a heading of “essential function/duty,” designated with an “E” in the job description for purposes of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The other job descriptions listed no essential functions. 4. District staff were not certain how job descriptions are developed or provided to the board for updating, and the district has no process for developing or updating job descriptions. 184 Personnel Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and adopt a board policy and administrative regulation that address the essential elements of a process to update and maintain job descriptions. 2. Develop and ask the board to approve a format for all job descriptions that includes the following information: • Job title, • Work year (hours per day and days per week for classified positions) • Exempt or nonexempt status • Position type (certificated, classified, supervisory, management or confidential), • Pay range (monthly, weekly or hourly) • Summary statement of duties • Specific duties • Required knowledge, skills and abilities • Working conditions 3. Ensure that job descriptions highlight the essential functions of the position. 4. Develop a time line for a complete rewrite of all job descriptions into the updated format. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 185 5.7 Operational Procedures Professional Standard The personnel function has procedures in place that allow for both personnel and payroll staff to meet regularly to solve problems that develop in the processing of new employees, classification changes, employee promotions, and other issues that may develop. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 4. Interview with human resources consultant 5. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documents provided Findings 1. Meetings of the payroll and personnel department staff have been taking place for the past 18 months. 2. Communication between the departments has improved as a result of the regular meetings. 3. The district did not provide a list of dates or agendas for these meetings. 4. Incorrect payment of employees occurs frequently. In fiscal year 2008-2009 the Monterey County Office of Education made 13 adjustments to the master payroll file: two employees were overpaid; seven State Teachers Retirement System (STRS) members were reported as nonmembers; one STRS retiree was reported as a member; two STRS nonmembers were reported as members; and one SDI tax was withheld in error. This does not include adjustments that may have been made internally by the district. 5. The payroll and personnel department maintain separate manual spreadsheets and the data is not consistent. 186 Personnel Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the personnel and payroll departments continue to meet together regularly. 2. Schedule these meetings weekly and provide an agenda to the state administrator for review. 3. Use these meetings as a forum for developing interdepartmental procedures, time lines and deadlines and preparing a schedule that shows these. 4. Use the procedures, time lines and deadlines that are developed as the basis for desk manuals for each department 5. Adopt the automated position control module available through the financial management system (FMS) software. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 187 5.8 Operational Procedures Professional Standard Personnel staff members attend training sessions/workshops to keep abreast of best practices and requirements facing personnel administrators. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interview with chief business official 4. Interviews with district administrators 5. Interview with personnel department staff 6. Interview with human resources consultant 7. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 8. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education assistant superintendent of human resources 9. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documentation provided Findings 1. District staff members have participated in minimal professional development training sessions, and there is a demonstrated lack of adequate training for personnel department employees. 2. There is little or no cross training, especially between departments. 3. District staff have rarely attended training sessions offered by the Monterey County Office of Education. 4. Experienced and trained individuals are essential to the success of any operation. Staff development provides learning opportunities that employees need to maintain and improve competency levels. 5. Because there is only one employee in the personnel department, adequate training is essential. 188 Personnel Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish an ongoing staff development program for personnel department staff. 2. Ensure that the personnel department has a representative at all personnel-related trainings provided by the Monterey County Office of Education. 3. Explore the professional development options for personnel staff that are available from organizations, such as the California Association of School Business Officials (CASBO) and the Association of California School Administrators (ACSA). Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 189 5.9 Operational Procedures Professional Standard The personnel function provides employees with appropriate forms for documenting requested actions (e.g., leaves, transfers, resignations, retirements). Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with school site administrators and district administrative support staff 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel 8. Employee resignation form, not dated 9. Employee retirement form, not dated Findings 1. The personnel department has appropriate forms for leaves of absence, transfers and resignations, but all forms need to be updated. 2. Forms are available at the district office and at some work sites. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a plan to update all forms for actions such as employee leaves, transfers, resignations and retirements. Ensure that all such forms include in the lower right corner of each page a form number and the date the form was last updated. 2. Direct the personnel department to provide work sites with the latest forms and to require the outdated forms to be destroyed 190 Personnel Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 191 5.10 Operational Procedures Professional Standard Established staffing formulas dictate the assignment of personnel to the various sites and programs. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators, classified management, and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documentation provided Findings 1. The district did not provide any board policies or administrative regulations that address staffing formulas for any positions. 2. Staffing allocations are based on enrollment projections; however FCMAT was not able to locate any supporting information indicating how the projections were prepared. 3. King City and Greenfield high schools have almost the same enrollment; however, King City High School has five more teachers funded from the general fund than Greenfield High School, according to the 2008-2009 master schedule for both schools. Decisions regarding staffing increases are made on a case-by-case basis at the request of school sites. 4. There is no evidence of a comprehensive districtwide instructional plan, staffing plan, or plan regarding class sizes for the school year. 5. Both high schools have a number of similar positions; some of these are paid for with categorical funding and others from the unrestricted general fund. 192 Personnel Management 6. The certificated collective bargaining agreement contains maximum class size and student contact parameters and student-to-adult ratios for certificated support personnel. The district’s staffing ratios are well below the contract provisions in the respective collective bargaining agreements. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop an instructional plan for each school, then develop a staffing formula to support the plan. 2. Develop staffing formulas for classified, certificated and management staff members at school sites and the district office to ensure consistency between sites and to manage expenditures. 3. Ensure that staffing formulas indicate the work year and daily hours needed for each program and school site. 4. Complete enrollment projections early in the fall, before the upcoming school year, and adjust the projections in the spring to account for dropouts and other changes in enrollment. 5. Monitor enrollment and class sizes after the school year begins to determine if second semester staffing needs adjustments and to ensure that staffing levels remain constant throughout the school year. 6. Address maximum class size and student-to-adult ratios contained in collective bargaining agreements to provide greater flexibility. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 193 5.11 Operational Procedures Professional Standard The LEA uses appropriate contracts for certificated employees, including temporary employees, interns, short-term staff permit and provisional intern permit employees (if applicable), retirees and categorical positions to reflect employment status and seniority issues. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interviews with school site administrators and district administrative support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel 8. Copy of teacher contract, provided by personnel technician Findings 1. The district has an appropriate contract for certificated staff members who have the appropriate credential. 2. The district does not have a separate contract for teachers employed under a temporary contract, short term staff permit or provisional intern permit. 3. The contract with certificated employees does not indicate whether teaching positions are funded through a categorical program or which fund is used. 4. The personnel technician indicated that the contract for a teacher employed under a provisional intern permit was appropriately modified to indicate the employee’s credential status. 194 Personnel Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Ensure that the personnel technician, with the assistance of the state administrator, develops a separate contract for all teachers who are employed on a temporary basis. The contract language should indicate the individual’s employment status. 2. Ensure that the personnel technician, with the assistance of the state administrator, develops separate contracts for teachers employed under a short term staff permit or provisional intern permit, with appropriate language in the contract that states the requirements of the employee to obtain a clear teaching credential within a specified period of time. 3. Ensure that all contracts for certificated teachers in positions funded by categorical programs or other funds are modified to indicate the funding source for the position. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 195 6.1 State and Federal Compliance Legal Standard Current position descriptions are established for each type of work performed by certificated and classified employees. (EC 35020) In merit system LEAs, duties to be performed by all persons in the classified service and other positions not requiring certification are fixed and prescribed by the Governing Board. (EC 45109) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Job descriptions, superintendent, dated February 28, 2007 8. Job description, executive assistant, dated June 12, 2002, containing industry- standard components. 9. Job description, business manager, dated March 8, 1983 Findings 1. The few job descriptions that were available for review are outdated and do not comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. 2. Job descriptions are in many different styles and formats; there is no uniformity. 3. Except for one employee , district staff who were interviewed did not recall reviewing their job description. 4. District staff who were interviewed did not know how job descriptions are developed. 5. District staff did not know if the district had any processes for developing and updating job descriptions. 6. There has been no effort to maintain job descriptions. 196 Personnel Management 7. The district uses EDJOIN (www.edjoin.org) to advertise open positions. 8. The district’s part-time human resources consultant has started updating job descriptions but much work remains to be done. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a format for all job descriptions that includes the following information: • Job title, • Work year (hours per day and days per week for classified positions) • Exempt or nonexempt status • Position type (certificated, classified, supervisory, management or confidential) • Pay range (monthly, weekly or hourly) • Summary statement of duties • Specific duties • Required knowledge, skills and abilities • Working conditions 2. Ensure that job descriptions highlight the essential functions of the position. 3. Develop a time line for reviewing and rewriting all job descriptions using a consistent format. 4. After rewriting all job descriptions, develop an ongoing process for maintaining and updating them regularly. 5. Develop instructions for creating new job descriptions. 6. Develop a long-term plan to maintain job descriptions in electronic format and publish them on the district’s Web site. 7. After job descriptions are rewritten, provide all current and newly hired employees with a copy of their respective job descriptions Personnel Management 197 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 198 Personnel Management 6.2 State and Federal Compliance Legal Standard The LEA is in compliance with Title IX policies on discrimination and all additional federal and state compliance regulations, including but not limited to the Family Medical Leave Act, California Family Rights Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, Fair Labor Standards Act, and Consolidated Omnibus budget Reconciliation Act. The LEA follows Government Code 12950(a) posting requirements concerning harassment or discrimination. (GC 12940) The LEA has identified a Title IX compliance officer. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview district California Teachers Association (CTA) representative No documentation provided Findings 1. The director of educational services is the Title IX officer. 2. All parties interviewed stated that the district is in compliance with Title IX policies on discrimination and all additional federal and state compliance regulations. 3. Board policies and regulations have been developed regarding some but not all of the required state and federal regulations. 4. The required posting concerning harassment and/or discrimination appears in some required locations throughout the district but not all. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and update board policies and regulations as needed related to Title IX policies on discrimination and all additional federal and state compliance regulations. Personnel Management 199 2. Develop a procedures manual for Title IX policies and discrimination issues that includes all necessary forms, and make it available at all job sites. 3. Post federal and state laws, regulations and policies annually at all job sites. 4. Ensure that the annual legal notice sent to all staff members includes Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA), Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) and other required notices. 5. Require all employees to sign a document annually that acknowledges receipt of the required legal notices regarding Title IX policies on discrimination and all additional required federal and state compliance regulations, and place the signed document in each respective employee’s personnel file. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 200 Personnel Management 6.3 State and Federal Compliance Legal Standard The LEA has properly identified exempt and nonexempt employees and has promulgated rules and regulations for overtime that are in compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act and California statutes. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Article V (hours and overtime) for classified employees, pages 10-17, not dated Findings 1. Article V of the collective bargaining agreement with the classified employee bargaining unit describes the rules and regulations for authorizing overtime. 2. The district has no system for tracking overtime for classified staff. 3. The district has no policies or procedures regarding compensatory time off or requiring that this time off be taken in compliance with federal regulations. 4. The district does not follow Article V, section 5.11 of the collective bargaining agreement when granting and administering compensatory time off. 5. The district does not follow Article V, section 5.12 of the collective bargaining agreement when distributing overtime. 6. Because of the lack of consistent procedures for approving overtime and compensatory time off, there is the possibility of abuse of overtime and/or compensatory time off. 7. There is no evidence that the district has identified positions as exempt or nonexempt. Personnel Management 201 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Strictly enforce Article V of the collective bargaining agreement with the classified bargaining unit. 2. Use the California Labor Law Digest to analyze positions to determine whether they are exempt or nonexempt, and ensure that job descriptions include this information. 3. Develop and provide a training program on the Fair Labor Standards Act to school office managers, principals and managers of school site programs. 4. Develop a procedure for distributing overtime and compensatory time off to all employees. The procedure should indicate which employees are authorized to grant overtime and/or compensatory time off. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 202 Personnel Management 6.4 State and Federal Compliance Legal Standard The LEA has established a process that allows employees to have their concerns heard in an expeditious and unbiased manner including “whistleblower” complaints. (GC 53296-53299, EC 44112-44113) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with human resources consultant 6. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 7. Uniform complaint procedure related to Board Policy 1312, not dated Findings 1. The board does not have a policy regarding whistleblower complaints; however, information from interviews with employees and board members indicates that employees have direct access to board members. 2. Board Policy 1312, which does not include the date it was initially adopted and/or modified by the board, addresses the uniform complaint procedure for members of the public. 3. Board Policy 1312 is also used for employees’ complaints. 4. A one-page form is available to employees and the public to make their complaint known to the superintendent and the board. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and approve a board policy that establishes a procedure for employees to file a formal complaint. Ensure that the policy includes an administrative regulation regarding how the complaint will be handled and a statement regarding whistleblower complaints. Personnel Management 203 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 204 Personnel Management 6.5 State and Federal Compliance Legal Standard New or renewed contracts for deputy, associate, or assistant superintendent or any other person holding a position requiring an administrative credential should not exceed four years. (EC 35030, 35031, 44929.20) Employee contracts must include a provision limiting the maximum cash settlement the employee may receive upon termination of the contract. (GC 53260-53264) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district administrators and support staff 4. Interviews with personnel department staff 5. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel 6. Contract for state administrator’s employment 7. Contract for the former superintendent 8. Contract for the former Assistant superintendent No other contracts provided Findings 1. The board approved employment contracts for the superintendent and the chief business official. 2. The employment contracts for the superintendent and chief business official comply with state law regarding the maximum length of the contract and the maximum cash settlement upon termination of the contract. 3. The district does not have contracts with any other member of the administrative staff. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to ensure that any contracts for employees who hold an administrative credential are in compliance with the relevant state laws. Personnel Management 205 Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 10 Implementation Scale: 206 Personnel Management 7.1 Use of Technology Professional Standard An online position control system is utilized and is integrated with payroll/financial systems. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documentation provided Findings 1. The district does not have an automated position control system that is integrated with the payroll and financial reporting system software. 2. The district uses a manual position control system that staff do not understand. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Implement an automated position control system for all positions as soon as possible. In the interim, develop position control procedures and provide training on the manual position control system. 2. Work with the Monterey County Office of Education to determine if their software will meet the district’s position control needs. If it does not, research and evaluate the feasibility of third party software products. 3. Develop and implement procedures to ensure that all departments involved in position control are involved and positively engaged in any new position control system that is implemented. Personnel Management 207 Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 208 Personnel Management 7.2 Use of Technology Professional Standard The LEA provides professional development in the appropriate use of technological resources that will assist staff in the performance of their job responsibilities when need exists and when budgets allow such training. (cf. 4131, 4231, 4331) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 6. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documentation provided Findings 1. The district’s does not have a professional development plan for the personnel department. 2. The district has not provided any training on the various software products its employees use, though the Monterey County Office of Education provides some training. 3. All employees interviewed discussed the lack of adequate training on the personnel and payroll systems provided through the Monterey County Office of Education and the fact that this makes it difficult to produce adequate reports. 4. The district provides no cross training, in-district training or outside training for personnel department employees. Business office employees believe this is because their workload is so heavy that they are rarely able to attend training sessions on any new system, which puts them further behind. Personnel Management 209 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a professional development plan and schedule to ensure the highest level of performance by the individuals in the personnel department. Ensure that the plan and schedule specify who is to provide the training and how it is to be accomplished. 2. Conduct an assessment of employees’ skill levels in all technology systems, including Microsoft Office applications and the personnel system provided by the Monterey County Office of Education. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 210 Personnel Management 7.3 Use of Technology Professional Standard The personnel function’s employee database system is capable of capturing, maintaining, and reporting required data for state and federal reporting, including but not limited to: credentials, seniority, evaluations, personnel by funding source, program, Statewide Educator ID, location, and demographic data as required for CBEDS (CALPADS). Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district administrators 4. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel 5. Certificated staff information sheets for four employees for the 2009-10 school year Findings 1. The district uses the system provided by the Monterey County Office of Education; however, personnel department staff need more training to make full use of the system. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Work closely with the Monterey County Office of Education to determine what training is required for the personnel department to make full use of the system, and report this information to the state administrator. 2. Create a plan to develop the knowledge required to make full use of the county system, and to provide the appropriate training immediately. 3. Arrange training from a third party if needed to help staff gain the knowledge and skills they need and begin applying them as soon as possible. Personnel Management 211 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 212 Personnel Management 8.1 Evaluation/Due Process Assistance Legal Standard Clear policies and practices exist for the regular written evaluation and assessment of classified (EC 45113) and certificated employees and managers (EC 44663). Evaluations are done in accordance with negotiated contracts and based on job-specific standards of performance. A clear process exists for providing assistance to certificated and classified employees performing at less-than-satisfactory levels. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 6. Article 15 of the certificated staff collective bargaining agreement, regarding certificated employee evaluation, pages 32-35, not dated 7. Article 10 of the classified collective bargaining agreement, regarding evaluation procedures, page 36, not dated 8. Two reports identifying the last date certificated and classified employees were evaluated Findings 1. Article 15 of the collective bargaining agreement with the certificated bargaining unit contains an evaluation process for probationary and tenured teachers. 2. Article 10 of the collective bargaining agreement with the classified bargaining unit details the evaluation procedure for classified employees. 3. The evaluation process for certificated staff does include steps to provide assistance to teachers to correct any cited deficiency. 4. The evaluation procedure for classified staff does not contain any language regarding assisting an employee in correcting any deficiencies. 5. Information from interviews with staff and a review of two reports that identify the last date certificated and classified employees were evaluated indicate that the district is not Personnel Management 213 consistently following the evaluation procedures in the collective bargaining agreements for certificated and classified staff. 6. No evidence was provided regarding evaluations of management personnel, nor were any such evaluations found in the personnel files provided. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a schedule for evaluating certificated staff and holding management and administrative staff accountable for completing evaluations, in accordance with the provisions of the collective bargaining agreement. 2. Comply with the relevant articles in the collective bargaining agreements by developing a schedule for evaluating classified staff and holding management and administrative staff accountable for completing evaluations on time. 3. Develop a procedure and schedule for timely annual evaluations of all management and classified employees who are not subject to the collective bargaining agreement for classified staff. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 214 Personnel Management 8.2 Evaluation/Due Process Assistance Professional Standard The board evaluates the superintendent based upon preapproved goals and objectives. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent No documentation provided Findings 1. The employment contract between the superintendent and the board contains an evaluation procedure that requires the process to start each January and be completed by the end of March. 2. Information from interviews with board members and the former superintendent indicates that there were no preapproved goals and objectives related to the superintendent’s contract. 3. Based on interviews with board members and the former superintendent, the board never completed an evaluation of the former superintendent as required by the employment contract. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that when a new superintendent is selected the employment contract between the board and superintendent includes an evaluation process that is based on preapproved goals and objectives. 2. Ensure that the board evaluates the superintendent annually as required by the employment contract. Personnel Management 215 Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 216 Personnel Management 8.3 Evaluation/Due Process Assistance Professional Standard Management has the ability to evaluate job requirements and match the requirements to the employee’s skills. All classified employees are evaluated on performance at least annually by a management-level employee knowledgeable about their work product. Certificated employees are evaluated as agreed upon in the collective bargaining agreement and California Education Code. The evaluation criteria are clearly communicated and, to the extent possible, measurable. The evaluation includes follow-up on prior performance issues and establishes goals to improve future performance. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district and school site administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Article 15 of the collective bargaining agreement with certificated staff, regarding certificated employee evaluation, pages 32-35, not dated 6. Article 10 of the collective bargaining agreement with classified staff, regarding classified employee evaluation, page 36, not dated 7. Two reports identifying the last date certificated and classified employees were evaluated. Findings 1. Article 15 of the collective bargaining agreement with the certificated employee bargaining unit requires that tenured certificated teachers be evaluated at least once every two years rather than at least once every year. 2. The language contained in Article 15 of the collective bargaining agreement with the certificated employee bargaining unit does not give management the ability to evaluate teachers based on their job requirements. 3. The evaluation criteria in Article 15 of the collective bargaining agreement with the certificated employee bargaining unit are clearly communicated but not clearly measurable. 4. Article 10 of the collective bargaining agreement with the classified employee bargaining unit requires that all classified employees be evaluated at least annually. Personnel Management 217 5. The evaluation criteria for classified employees are not clearly communicated. 6. There is no evidence of any process for evaluating management and confidential employees. 7. Information from employee interviews, a report on the last time all employees were evaluated and a review of personnel files indicate that evaluations of classified and management employees are not completed annually, and evaluations of certificated teachers are not completed every two years. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish a schedule and hold management personnel accountable for completing employee evaluations consistent with the collective bargaining agreements with certificated and classified staff. 2. Attempt to modify the collective bargaining agreement with the certificated employee bargaining unit at the next negotiations. Seek to have the agreement provide management with the ability to consider a teacher’s job responsibilities when performing an evaluation. 3. Adopt a formal policy and schedule for the evaluation of all management personnel, and hold management personnel responsible for implementing this policy. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 218 Personnel Management 9.1 Employee Services Professional Standard The personnel function has information available on programs for retirement counseling and various referral agencies to assist employees in need, including but not limited to behavioral health, long-term care and disability plans. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district administrators and support staff 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 6. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documentation provided Findings 1. The district does not provide any type of retirement counseling to assist employees; the district uses the services of the Monterey County Office of Education for this function. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Because of the size of the district and its personnel department, continue to use the retirement counseling and employee assistance programs provided by the Monterey County Office of Education. 2. Ensure that the personnel department develops and provides to employees who need it a list of the services the Monterey County Office of Education provides, including contact information for appropriate Monterey County Office of Education staff. Personnel Management 219 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 220 Personnel Management 9.2 Employee Services Professional Standard The personnel function has developed recognition programs for all employee groups. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative No documents provided Findings 1. The district has no formal employee recognition program. 2. The district does provide a certificate for years of service at the end of each year. 3. The district’s employee morale is extraordinarily low; introducing an employee recognition program may improve this situation. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board considers implementing an employee recognition program 2. If the board decides to proceed with an employee recognition program, the state administrator should obtain assistance from the personnel department staff and begin developing and implement procedures, including scheduling nominations, judging submissions, and deciding what type of recognitions will be given. Personnel Management 221 Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 222 Personnel Management 9.3 Employee Services Professional Standard Employee benefits are well understood by employees through periodic printed communications provided by the personnel function. Timely notification of annual open enrollment periods is sent to all employees. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 4. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 5. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education fiscal oversight personnel No documentation provided Findings 1. Because the district is small and lacks staffing in the personnel and payroll departments, employees’ health benefits are provided through the Monterey County Schools Insurance Group (MCSIG) Joint Powers Authority (JPA). MCSIG publishes and distributes summary plan descriptions, plan updates, plan brochures and a quarterly newsletter to keep employees informed concerning their health benefits. MCSIG also has in-house customer service to answer members’ questions about their health benefits eligibility and coverage. 2. The district completes employee benefit communications and enrollment packets for medical, dental and vision benefits using information from the MCSIG JPA. Staff members interviewed indicated that they are satisfied with the quarterly communications and open enrollment process and with the level of service provide by the JPA. 3. The MCSIG JPA does not have an open enrollment period for annual employee changes; rather, the JPA allows changes to lesser plans any time during the plan year and has designated a period of time each November when employees may move to better plans. Personnel Management 223 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Take a much more active role in communicating the effect of employee benefits on the district. 2. Ensure that the personnel and business departments form an employee benefits committee to study and make recommendations to all employees regarding the level and cost of district-provided benefits. Communicate the results of the committee’s work to all employees at least annually. Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 8 Implementation Scale: 224 Personnel Management 9.4 Employee Services Professional Standard The LEA follows workers’ compensation laws and has procedures for: Employees are provided the state’s injury report form (DWC Form 1) within one working day of having knowledge of any injury that is work-related. The LEA notifies the third party administrator of an employee’s claim of injury within five working days of learning of the injury and forwards a completed form 5020 to the insurance authority. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district administrators and support staff 4. Interviews with personnel department and business office staff 5. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 6. Workers compensation procedural manual from the Monterey County Schools’ Workers’ Compensation Joint Powers Agency (MCSWS JPA) Findings 1. The district’s workers’ compensation program is administered by the Monterey County Schools Workers’ Compensation (MCSWC) Joint Powers Agency (JPA). District staff members indicated that the district is meeting the requirement and deadlines for workers’ compensation notification. 2. Monterey County Schools Workers’ Compensation (MCSWC) JPA administrative staff have indicated that the district provides injured employees with workers’ compensation claim forms DWC-1 (Employer’s first report of Injury or Illness) and 5020 (Employer’s Report of Occupational Injury or Illness) in a timely manner. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish a process for documenting and tracking all workers’ compensation injuries and their effect on the district both financially and with regard to lost employee time. The superintendent’s cabinet should review all workers’ compensation cases monthly. 2. Review all workers’ compensation claims and settlement offers at the cabinet level to ensure that all claims are investigated and processed in the best interest of the district and the employee. Personnel Management 225 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 226 Personnel Management 9.5 Employee Services Professional Standard The LEA’s workers’ compensation unit is actively involved in providing injured workers with an opportunity to participate in a modified duty/return-to-work program. Updates are regularly provided to the cabinet. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interview with personnel department staff 4. Interview district administrative support staff 5. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 6. Workers compensation procedural manual from the Monterey County Schools’ Workers’ Compensation Joint Powers Agency (MCSWS JPA) Findings 1. There is no evidence of a board policy and/or administrative regulation regarding modified duty and return to work practices. 2. The district has been working with the Monterey County Schools Workers’ Compensation (MCSWC) Joint Powers Agency (JPA) and has been proactive in identifying modified duty opportunities as a means to reduce the cost of lost time due to injuries. 3. The district’s experience modification factor is 1.0, compared to a weighted average for the JPA of 1.490, which indicates the district’s workers’ compensation costs are lower than the average for the JPA. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Create a formal board policy regarding modified duty and return to work for all workers’ compensation claims to ensure a minimum of absence from district business. 2. Ensure that the superintendent’s cabinet reviews all workers’ compensation cases monthly. Personnel Management 227 Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 228 Personnel Management 9.6 Employee Services Professional Standard The LEA maintains the California OSHA log for all work sites, and a copy is posted at each work site during the month of February as required. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district administrators 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. E-mail from FCMAT Fiscal Intervention Specialist Jim Cerreta containing information received from the administrative assistant to the state administrator No documentation provided Findings 1. The administrative assistant to the state administrator indicated that she prepares the required Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) log and posts the annual report in at the appropriate locations in the district office and at all school sites during February as required. 2. No OSHA report was posted in the district office. 3. No OSHA report was made available for review. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to maintain the required OSHA log, and post the annual report in the appropriate locations at the district office and at school sites. 2. Keep a copy of the annual OSHA report in the state administrator’s office. Personnel Management 229 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: 230 Personnel Management 10.1 Employer/Employee Relations Professional Standard The LEA has collected or has access to data that compare the salaries and benefits of its employees with LEAs of similar size, geographic location and other comparable measures. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district administrators 4. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 5. School Services of California’s (SSC’s) comparability analysis of salaries and benefits, dated 2008 Findings 1. School Services of California (SSC) performed a comparative analysis of salary and benefit compensation. The SSC report did not indicate when it was completed; however, the last salaries and benefits analyzed in the report were for fiscal year 2007-08, and the former superintendent stated that the document was completed in 2008. 2. The SSC report included similar districts but also some districts that are quite dissimilar to King City in both size and funding. 3. In interviews, district staff members indicated that studies of total compensation have not been completed for the district’s classified, management or confidential employee groups, and no evidence was provided to indicate that any type of compensation study has been completed for these three groups of employees. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. For any future comparison study of total compensation, select comparison districts that are comparable to the King City Joint Union High School District in funding, size and type of district. In addition, take the districts’ locations into consideration. 2. Complete a study of total compensation in comparable districts before beginning any discussion of salary and employment benefits for any employee group. 3. Collect and review collective bargaining agreements from the comparable districts selected for any comparison study of total compensation. Personnel Management 231 4. Compare major revenue and expenditure categories with those of similar districts either by using the statewide Ed-Data database or collecting financial information directly from the selected comparable districts Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 232 Personnel Management 10.2 Employer/Employee Relations Professional Standard The personnel function provides a clearly defined process for bargaining with its employee groups that involves site-level administrators. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district administrators 4. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative No documentation provided Findings 1. Site administrators are no longer involved in collective bargaining with the certificated employee bargaining unit. 2. Staff members interviewed expressed frustration with the current collective bargaining process and with the existing collective bargaining agreements. 3. The former superintendent and chief business official have represented the district in labor negotiations. 4. In the past, individual board members have involved themselves in the collective bargaining process with the certificated employees association. 5. There is no evidence of a clearly defined process for negotiating with the certificated and classified employee bargaining units. 6. There is no evidence that collective bargaining proposals for both the certificated and classified employees contain a date after which they will no longer be applicable (also known as a sunset provision) as required by the California Education Code. Personnel Management 233 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Include a member of one of the school site leadership teams on each of the district’s negotiating teams, especially the team negotiating with the certificated employee bargaining unit. 2. Exclude individual members of the board from direct involvement in the collective bargaining process. 3. Develop a set of foundational procedures to use in the collective bargaining process with all employee groups. 4. Develop a board policy that addresses the correct process to follow for setting expiration dates (also known as sunsetting) for any initial collective bargaining proposals from the board and the respective collective bargaining units. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 234 Personnel Management 10.3 Employer/Employee Relations Professional Standard The personnel function provides all managers and supervisors (certificated and classified) training in contract management with emphasis on the grievance process and administration. The personnel function provides clearly defined forms and procedures in the handling of grievances for its managers and supervisors. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interviews with district administrators and support staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Interview with district California Teachers Association representative 6. Classified and certificated collective bargaining agreements No documentation provided Findings 1. The district’s grievance procedure is documented in the collective bargaining agreements with certificated and classified employees. 2. Individual employees could not recall being trained in the administration of either of the district’s collective bargaining agreements, nor were they able to confirm that they had received training in how to handle the grievance process. 3. In interviews, management staff reported that both existing collective bargaining agreements are difficult to implement because of the lack of training regarding them, especially as it relates to the interpretation of each agreement’s language. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. With assistance from the personnel technician and other administrative staff, implement a districtwide training program for all management personnel that focuses on the management and administration of the district’s current labor agreements. Personnel Management 235 2. Ensure that in the future all management personnel are provided with training regarding labor agreements and that the training specifically addresses any changes in each agreement’s language. 3. Ensure that in the future all newly hired management personnel are provided with training regarding labor agreements. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 236 Personnel Management 10.4 Employer/Employee Relations Professional Standard The personnel function has a process that provides management and the board with information on the impact of bargaining proposals, e.g., fiscal, staffing, management flexibility, student outcomes. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with state administrator 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interview with former assistant superintendent 4. Interviews with district administrators 5. Collective bargaining agreements with King City Union High School District Teachers Association and King City Union High School District classified employees Findings 1. Evidence indicates that the district has had an ineffective bargaining strategy. As a result, the district’s collective bargaining agreements do not protect the public, have a negative effect on the quality of the educational program offered, and have resulted in staff compensation programs that the district cannot afford based on the amount of general fund revenue the district receives. 2. The collective bargaining agreements’ limitations make it difficult for site and district administrators to effectively administer and operate the district and its individual schools. 3. The collective bargaining agreements include lengthy lists of administrative and governance controls that have a negative effect on the administration’s and board’s administrative, financial and educational decision-making. 4. The collective bargaining agreements are poorly written and contain many appendices and articles that are no longer in effect. 5. The collective bargaining agreements provide teachers and classified employees with exceptionally generous total compensation packages and protections that have often resulted in decreases in both educational programs for students and services to the community. 6. Board members have on occasion overstepped their board responsibilities and become involved in contract negotiations. Personnel Management 237 7. As currently written, the district’s collective bargaining agreements will continue to be a significant impediment to the district’s quality of education and financial recovery. Changes are needed. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Renegotiate the following articles in the collective bargaining agreements to restore the district’s financial health and improve the quality of education. The below items include brief details regarding the nature of the recommended change: Teachers Association Collective Bargaining Agreement: • Article V — Association Rights This article is broad for the teachers association. • Article VI — Management Rights This article is too restrictive for the administration. • Article VII — Grievance Procedure Binding arbitration removes decision-making at the local district level. This article is also lengthy and confusing. • Article VIII — Liaison Committee This does not belong in the collective bargaining agreement. • Article X — Teacher Orientation All new teachers should be required to attend. • Article XI — Teaching Hours This article is lengthy and impedes site administrators’ ability to work with their staff members to meet students’ educational needs. The article prohibits changing the bell schedule or implementing a nontraditional bell schedule. • Article XII — Adjunct/Nonclassroom Duties Assignments should be based on the needs of the student first and foremost. • Article XIII — Leaves This article is lengthy (eight pages), difficult to administer and extremely costly to the district. Teachers statewide have protection regarding leaves under the California Education Code, and every attempt should be made to limit teachers’ leaves to those granted under the education code. • Article XIV — Class Size More flexibility should be made available to site administrators, especially in the area of physical education and performing arts. Item 6 (class size ratio shall not exceed 28 students per teacher average) should be eliminated and item 7 (class size limita- tions can be increased by up to 5 students within the first quarter) should be modified because it limits the increase to 5 students. Although it appears that this article should have sunsetted after 2002-2003, it is not clear that the restriction on class size has improved. • 238 Personnel Management • Article XV — Certificated Employee Evaluations All tenured teachers should be evaluated at least once every two years. The current agreement allows for tenured teachers to be evaluated every two years and includes possible waivers that could result in teachers not being evaluated for five years. • Article XVI — Peer Assistance and Review (PAR) This article grants final decision-making authority to the teachers association rather than to the district. • Article XVII — Salary All aspects of the salary schedules, including the teacher salary schedule, pay for extracurricular duties, hourly pay, stipends and tax-sheltered annuities, need to be rewritten into an format that is easy to understand, includes dollar amounts rather than percentages, and arrives at a level of compensation that the district can afford. • Article XIX — Compensatory Time and Preparation Period Substitution Evidence indicates that this article is extremely difficult to implement and is costly to the district. • Article XX — Employee Benefits Full-time employees should receive a different level of benefits than part-time em- ployees. In addition, section 1D indicates a different amount of life insurance than does section 4. If the total life insurance is $25,000 plus $60,000, it should be better defined. It is unusual for a district to pay for a tax-sheltered annuity for certificated staff. The additional annual cost of $1,225 per teacher beginning 1994-1995 is exces- sive. Section 9 indicates that the district pays for the Medicare benefits for teachers hired before April 1, 1986 who are not otherwise eligible for Medicare part A. This section needs to be modified to indicate current practices regarding the State Teachers Retire- ment System (STRS). • Article XXI — Early Retirement Program Providing health benefits for teachers who are working on early retirement contracts is very expensive. Section 3 of this article should be revised to provide the district with more options. • Article XXII — Part-Time Employment with Full-Time Retirement This very expensive and uncommon benefit contributes to district’s financial difficul- ties. • Article XXIV — Assignment, Reassignment, and Transfer This article limits the administration’s ability to assign teachers to programs and schools that will best meet the needs of the district and students. Seniority should play a role but should not be the sole factor in reassignments and transfers. • Article XXXII — Site-Based Decision Making This article has removed decision-making from the site administrators and staff. Item 2 in under the heading “Process” in this article requires a two-thirds majority vote to approve changes in the operation of the school, making it difficult to implement change needed at the district and the school site. • Article XXXIII — Miscellaneous The district should not be required to mail vacancy notices to teachers during summer and winter breaks. Personnel Management 239 • Appendices dealing with salaries These sections should all be modified to take into account the district’s financial con- dition and aligned with the district’s ability to pay. Classified Employee Collective Bargaining Agreement • Article I — Recognition This provision that no new position be established without prior consultation with the classified bargaining unit limits the district. • Article III — Organizational Rights and Responsibilities District employees should carry out employee association business on association time and not during the work day. • Article V — Hours and Overtime The language in this article limits the district’s ability to perform necessary functions and operate effectively. The compensatory time off and bus driver section should be moved to individual sections. • Article VI — Pay and Allowances Total compensation for employees exceeds the district’s ability to pay. This situation is exacerbated by the fact that the district pays for the employees’ contributions to the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS) and has increased the number of lon- gevity steps for senior employees. In addition, the reclassification process is rigid and favors the association in final implementation of items such as step placement after reclassification. The article regarding professional growth is lengthy and confusing and should be made a separate article. The district also should not consult the association regarding the placement of new employees on the salary schedule. • Article VII — Health and Welfare Benefits This article should differentiate between the level of benefits given to full-time em- ployees and those given to part-time employees, using a graduated scale. Most districts have removed early retirement programs from their collective bargain- ing agreements and do not pay for the district’s share of state disability insurance (SDI). The district should consider making these changes. • Article VIII — Holidays The paid holidays provided in the collective bargaining agreements are excessive. The process provided for California State Employees Association (CSEA) Recognition Day does not benefit the district. • Article IX — Vacation Pay A schedule that addresses both 10-month and 12-month employees should be devel- oped. • Article XI — Promotion/Transfer Procedure Transfers and promotions should always be based on students’ needs first and the adults’ needs second. • Article XII — Leaves This article is lengthy, and the sick leave incentive plan is excessive and is not re- 240 Personnel Management quired in today’s employee marketplace because unused sick leave is credited toward PERS retirement. Bereavement leave is excessive because section 12.6.6 of the article already includes seven days when employees may be absent without being required to give a reason (commonly known as “no tell days”). • Article XIII — Grievance Procedures This article regarding grievance procedures is lengthy and confusing. It should be revised to eliminate the advisory committee and second round of the grievance proce- dure at the board of education level. 2. Form a task force composed of district and site personnel and chaired by the state administrator to conduct further analysis of the collective bargaining agreements beyond that provided in the above recommendations Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Personnel Management 241 242 Personnel Management Exhibit A: Sample Model Process for Ongoing Review of board policies and administrative regulations. fact Governance sheet POLICYSERVICES California School Boards Association June 2006 Effective Policymaking 1. Identification of the need for a new policy or 4. Adoption of the policy by the board the revision of an existing policy The board should discuss the proposed policy and conduct The governance team must assess whether a new policy on a first reading (and second reading if necessary) at a board a certain topic is necessary or a current policy needs to be meeting before formal adoption. revised. The need for a new or revised policy can arise from 5. Implementation of the policy many different situations, including a recommendation from CSBA based on a change in law or a new educational a. Development of administrative trend, a new district vision statement, an incident that has regulations and implementation plan arisen in the district, or a change in the governance team. As necessary, the superintendent or his/her designee 2. Discussion of the policy issues should develop administrative regulations and an implementation plan that describe how the policy In order to ensure that the policy will be effective, the will be implemented, including specific actions, roles governance team must gain an understanding of the and responsibilities of staff, timelines, and/or other issue and hold discussions in order to provide some initial necessary provisions. direction to staff. b. Communication and dissemination • What are the community’s expectations on this of the policy and regulation policy issue? The superintendent should ensure that staff, parents/ • How will the policy contribute to improved student guardians, students, and other stakeholders are notified learning? about the policy and regulations. • How does the policy align with the goals, beliefs, and c. Oversight and support priorities of the district? of the implementation of the policy • What is the fiscal impact? It is the responsibility of the superintendent and • What data does staff need to provide so that the board appropriate staff to ensure that policies and regulations can fully understand the issue? are implemented and enforced. The board also has a responsibility to support implementation by adhering • What is staff’s recommendation? to its own policies and by making other decisions (e.g., • Who else needs to be involved and how (e.g., budget, curriculum, collective bargaining decisions) community forum, staff workshop, other stakeholders)? that facilitate implementation. 3. Development of the draft policy by staff 6. Monitoring and evaluation The superintendent, committee, and/or other appropriate Critical policies should be regularly evaluated based designees will review the draft policy received from CSBA on timelines and measures agreed on by the board and and modify it to reflect district circumstances. If no CSBA superintendent at the time the policy is adopted. Is the draft exists, staff shall develop a draft. A legal review may policy effective in achieving its intended purpose and need to be conducted before submitting the draft policy to the goals and expectations set by the board? If not, the the board. If the policy is noncontroversial or not related implementation of the policy or the policy itself should be to student learning (e.g., in response to a minor change in revised as necessary. The policy also should be periodically law), the district may skip Steps 1-2 above. The board should reviewed and revised for consistency with law and ensure that the policy sets clear goals and expectations. changing district needs. 3100 Beacon Blvd. | P.O. Box 1660 | West Sacramento, CA 95691-1660 | 800.266.3382 | Fax: 916.371.3407 | e-mail: policyservices@csba.org Personnel Management 243 244 Personnel Management Table of Personnel Management Ratings Personnel Management 245 246 Personnel Management February Personnel Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ORGANIZATION AND PLANNING 1.1 The LEA has clearly defined and clarified roles for board and administration relative to 2 recruitment, hiring, evaluation and discipline of employees. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ORGANIZATION AND PLANNING The personnel function has developed a mission statement and objectives directly 1.2 0 related to the LEA’s goals and provides an annual report of activities and services offered during the year. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ORGANIZATION AND PLANNING 1.3 The personnel function has an organizational chart and functions chart and a menu of 0 services that include the names, positions and job functions of all personnel staff. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ORGANIZATION AND PLANNING 1.4 The personnel function head is a member of the Superintendent’s cabinet and 0 participates in decision making early in the process. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ORGANIZATION AND PLANNING The personnel function has a data management calendar that lists all the ongoing 1.5 data activities and responsible parties to ensure meeting critical deadlines on 0 CALPADS/CBEDS reporting. The data is reviewed by the appropriate authority prior to certification. LEGAL STANDARD – COMMUNICATIONS: INTERNAL/EXTERNAL 2.1 The LEA has adopted and published an employee salary schedule for every position 2 and has in place a system to implement without delays. (EC 45023) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNICATIONS: INTERNAL/EXTERNAL 2.2 N/A The personnel function holds regularly scheduled staff meetings. LEGAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION The Governing Board provides equal employment opportunities for all people 3.1 without regard to actual or perceived race, color, medical condition, veteran status, 5 gender, sex, sexual orientation, religion, ancestry, national origin, age, marital status, residence, pregnancy, or physical or mental disability. (EC 44100-44105, GC 11135) LEGAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION All certificated employees hold one or more valid certificates, credentials or life diplomas that license the holder to engage in school services designated in the document or documents and meet the NCLB highly qualified designation, if applicable. 3.2 Professional growth requirements for maintenance of a valid credential exist (EC 5 44277, 44006, NCLB, 20 USC 6319, 7801; 5 CCR 6100-6126, cf. 4112.24) The LEA monitors the progress of compliance plans signed by teachers that are working toward highly qualified teacher status; e.g., secondary alternative education, necessary small schools, home school, etc. LEGAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION Policies and regulations exist regarding the implementation of fingerprinting 3.3 8 requirements for all employees. (EC 44237, 45125, 45125.1, 45125.01, 44332.6, 44346.1, 44830.1, 45122.1) Personnel Management 247 February Personnel Management Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION The Governing Board requires every employee to present evidence that they were 3.4 8 examined and found free of active tuberculosis as required by state law. (EC 44839, 49406) LEGAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION The LEA has a system in place to routinely monitor teacher assignments for the 3.5 appropriate credential authorization, including CLAD or other documents necessary 3 to instruct English Language Learner students. (EC 44258.9, 44265.1, 44265.2, and 33126) LEGAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION The LEA has implemented a procedure by which a parent/guardian can file a 3.6 10 complaint related to teacher misassignments or vacancies (Williams Uniform Complaint Procedures). (EC 33126) LEGAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION The LEA has implemented the appropriate procedures when employing short-term 3.7 classified employees to comply with state legislation and the collective bargaining 5 agreement, including the Governing Board taking action at a regularly scheduled meeting. (EC 45103). LEGAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION In merit system LEAs, recruitment and selection for classified service are in 3.8 N/A compliance with the rules of the Personnel Commission and all applicable requirements are followed. (EC 45240-45320) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION The personnel function has a recruitment plan based on an assessment of the 3.9 0 LEA’s needs for specific skills, knowledge, and abilities. The LEA has established an adequate recruitment budget. Job applications meet legal and LEA needs. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION The LEA has developed alternative teacher certification programs and processes 3.10 0 (e.g., Verification Process for Special Settings, intern, committee on assignment). (EC 44380-44387) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION Selection procedures are uniformly applied. The LEA systematically initiates and 3.11 3 follows up and performs reference checks on all applicants being considered for employment. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE RECRUITMENT/SELECTION 3.12 The LEA recruits, selects, and monitors principals with strong leadership skills, with a 0 priority on placement of strong leaders at underperforming schools. LEGAL STANDARD – INDUCTION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT LEAs with 50 or more employees provide two hours of sexual harassment training to 4.1 0 supervisory employees every two years and in the first six months of new employment in a management position. (GC 12950.1) 248 Personnel Management February Personnel Management Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – INDUCTION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 4.2 The LEA has adopted policies and procedures regarding the recognition and reporting 4 of sexual harassment. (EC 231.5, GC 12950.1, GC 12940). LEGAL STANDARD – INDUCTION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The LEA has developed a systematic program for identifying areas of need for in- service training for all employees. The LEA has established a process by which 4.3 all required notices and in-service training sessions have been performed and 0 documented such as those for child abuse reporting, blood-borne pathogens, drug and alcohol-free workplace, sexual harassment, diversity training, and nondiscrimination. (cf. 4112.9/4212.9/4312.9), GC 11135 EC 56240, EC 44253.7) LEGAL STANDARD – INDUCTION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The LEA’s nondiscrimination policy and administrative regulations and the availability 4.4 of complaint procedures shall be regularly publicized within the LEA and in the 1 community, including posting in all schools and offices including staff lounges and student government meeting rooms. (cf. 4030, cf. 4031, Government Code 11135). PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INDUCTION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 4.5 Initial orientation is provided for all new staff, and orientation materials are provided for 2 new employees in all classifications: substitutes, certificated and classified employees. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INDUCTION AND PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The personnel function has developed an employment checklist to be used for all new employees that includes LEA forms, including acceptable use of technology and state 4.6 0 and I-9 federal mandated information. The checklist is signed by the employee and kept on file. Employment Development Department reporting is compiled within 20 days of employment. LEGAL STANDARD – OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES Regulations or agreements covering various types of leaves are fairly administered. 5.1 (EC 45199, EC 45193, EC 45207, EC 45192, EC 45191) Tracking of employee 2 absences and usage of time off in all categories should be timely and should be reported to payroll for any necessary salary adjustments. LEGAL STANDARD – OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES The personnel function maintains a certificated seniority list that contains first date of 5.2 4 paid service and credentials held. The accuracy of the data shall be verified in writing by certificated staff. (EC 44844-44846) LEGAL STANDARD – OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES Transfer and reassignments – LEAs that have been identified as Program Improvement 5.3 0 are subject to corrective action including demotion or reassignment of school staff. (EC 52055.57, 20 USC 6316) LEGAL STANDARD – OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES 5.4 Personnel files contents are complete and available for inspection. (EC 44031, LC 2 1198.5) Personnel Management 249 February Personnel Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES Personnel function nonmanagement staff members have individual desk manuals for 5.5 0 all of the personnel functions for which they are held responsible, and the department has a process for cross training. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES The personnel function has a process in place to systematically review and update 5.6 job descriptions. These job descriptions shall be in compliance with the Americans 0 with Disabilities Act requirements and accurately describe all essential and marginal functions and duties of each position. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES The personnel function has procedures in place that allow for both personnel and 5.7 payroll staff to meet regularly to solve problems that develop in the processing of new 3 employees, classification changes, employee promotions, and other issues that may develop. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES 5.8 Personnel staff members attend training sessions/workshops to keep abreast of best 0 practices and requirements facing personnel administrators. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES 5.9 The personnel function provides employees with appropriate forms for documenting 6 requested actions (e.g., leaves, transfers, resignations, retirements). PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES 5.10 Established staffing formulas dictate the assignment of personnel to the various sites 0 and programs. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES The LEA uses appropriate contracts for certificated employees, including temporary 5.11 employees, interns, short-term staff permit and provisional intern permit employees 4 (if applicable), retirees and categorical positions to reflect employment status and seniority issues. LEGAL STANDARD – STATE AND FEDERAL COMPLIANCE Current position descriptions are established for each type of work performed by 6.1 certificated and classified employees. (EC 35020) In merit system LEAs, duties to be 3 performed by all persons in the classified service and other positions not requiring certification are fixed and prescribed by the Governing Board. (EC 45109) LEGAL STANDARD – STATE AND FEDERAL COMPLIANCE The LEA is in compliance with Title IX policies on discrimination and all additional federal and state compliance regulations, including but not limited to the Family Medical Leave Act, California Family Rights Act, Americans with Disabilities Act, 6.2 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, Family Educational Rights 4 and Privacy Act, Fair Labor Standards Act, and Consolidated Omnibus budget Reconciliation Act. The LEA follows Government Code 12950(a) posting requirements concerning harassment or discrimination. (GC 12940) The LEA has identified a Title IX compliance officer. 250 Personnel Management February Personnel Management Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – STATE AND FEDERAL COMPLIANCE The LEA has properly identified exempt and nonexempt employees and has 6.3 2 promulgated rules and regulations for overtime that are in compliance with the Fair Labor Standards Act and California statutes. LEGAL STANDARD – STATE AND FEDERAL COMPLIANCE The LEA has established a process that allows employees to have their concerns 6.4 2 heard in an expeditious and unbiased manner including “whistleblower” complaints. (GC 53296-53299, EC 44112-44113) LEGAL STANDARD – STATE AND FEDERAL COMPLIANCE New or renewed contracts for deputy, associate, or assistant superintendent or any other person holding a position requiring an administrative credential should not 6.5 10 exceed four years. (EC 35030, 35031, 44929.20) Employee contracts must include a provision limiting the maximum cash settlement the employee may receive upon termination of the contract. (GC 53260-53264) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – USE OF TECHNOLOGY 7.1 An online position control system is utilized and is integrated with payroll/financial 0 systems. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – USE OF TECHNOLOGY The LEA provides professional development in the appropriate use of technological 7.2 1 resources that will assist staff in the performance of their job responsibilities when need exists and when budgets allow such training. (cf. 4131, 4231, 4331) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – USE OF TECHNOLOGY The personnel function’s employee database system is capable of capturing, maintaining, and reporting required data for state and federal reporting, including but 7.3 5 not limited to: credentials, seniority, evaluations, personnel by funding source, program, Statewide Educator ID, location, and demographic data as required for CBEDS (CALPADS). LEGAL STANDARD – EVALUATION/DUE PROCESS ASSISTANCE Clear policies and practices exist for the regular written evaluation and assessment of classified (EC 45113) and certificated employees and managers (EC 44663). 8.1 3 Evaluations are done in accordance with negotiated contracts and based on job- specific standards of performance. A clear process exists for providing assistance to certificated and classified employees performing at less-than-satisfactory levels. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EVALUATION/DUE PROCESS ASSISTANCE 8.2 The board evaluates the superintendent based upon preapproved goals and 0 objectives. Personnel Management 251 February Personnel Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EVALUATION/DUE PROCESS ASSISTANCE Management has the ability to evaluate job requirements and match the requirements to the employee’s skills. All classified employees are evaluated on performance at least annually by a management-level employee knowledgeable about their work product. 8.3 1 Certificated employees are evaluated as agreed upon in the collective bargaining agreement and California Education Code. The evaluation criteria are clearly communicated and, to the extent possible, measurable. The evaluation includes follow- up on prior performance issues and establishes goals to improve future performance. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE SERVICES The personnel function has information available on programs for retirement 9.1 5 counseling and various referral agencies to assist employees in need, including but not limited to behavioral health, long-term care and disability plans. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE SERVICES 9.2 0 The personnel function has developed recognition programs for all employee groups. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE SERVICES Employee benefits are well understood by employees through periodic printed 9.3 8 communications provided by the personnel function. Timely notification of annual open enrollment periods is sent to all employees. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE SERVICES The LEA follows workers’ compensation laws and has procedures for: Employees are provided the state’s injury report form (DWC Form 1) within one working day of 9.4 5 having knowledge of any injury that is work-related. The LEA notifies the third party administrator of an employee’s claim of injury within five working days of learning of the injury and forwards a completed form 5020 to the insurance authority. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE SERVICES The LEA’s workers’ compensation unit is actively involved in providing injured workers 9.5 0 with an opportunity to participate in a modified duty/return-to-work program. Updates are regularly provided to the cabinet. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE SERVICES 9.6 The LEA maintains the California OSHA log for all work sites, and a copy is posted at 6 each work site during the month of February as required. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE RELATIONS The LEA has collected or has access to data that compare the salaries and benefits 10.1 4 of its employees with LEAs of similar size, geographic location and other comparable measures. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE RELATIONS 10.2 The personnel function provides a clearly defined process for bargaining with its 2 employee groups that involves site-level administrators. 252 Personnel Management February Personnel Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE RELATIONS The personnel function provides all managers and supervisors (certificated and 10.3 classified) training in contract management with emphasis on the grievance process 0 and administration. The personnel function provides clearly defined forms and procedures in the handling of grievances for its managers and supervisors. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYER/EMPLOYEE RELATIONS The personnel function has a process that provides management and the board with 10.4 0 information on the impact of bargaining proposals, e.g., fiscal, staffing, management flexibility, student outcomes. Collective Average Rating 2.55 Personnel Management 253 254 Pupil Achievement Pupil Achievement 255 256 Pupil Achievement 1.1 Planning Processes Legal Standard Categorical and compensatory program funds supplement and do not supplant services and materials to be provided by the LEA. (20 USC 6321) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students. 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Title I and EIA Budgets Findings 1. Documents reviewed and interviews with district staff and site councils do not indicate that categorical and compensatory program funds have supplanted other services and materials the district is to provide. However, the difficulty encountered in obtaining accurate categorical budgets and funding patterns makes it almost impossible to ascertain if supplanting is an issue. 2. The director of educational services currently manage all activities related to developing and managing the instructional support budget. Because the district does not maintain site-level budgets, it is difficult to determine accurately the extent to which this standard is addressed. 3. The services and materials provided by categorical funding are difficult to determine and are not aligned with any single plan for student achievement, district plan, and WASC accreditation or school improvement efforts. 4. No categorical fund budgets were provided. 5. The budget development process does not include consultation with the school site council. Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Provide clearly defined categorical budgets for school site councils in a format that parents, staff, and community members can easily understand. Pupil Achievement 257 2. Make school site budget information available for school site councils in a timely manner. 3. Obtain and provide to school site councils additional useful information from the California Department of Education’s (CDE’s) Web site at the following address: http:// www.cde.ca.gov/nclb/sr/le/documents/spsaguide.doc. 4. Provide annual training to school site council members on the purpose and effective practices of a school site council. 5. Develop and adopt an LEA plan, and ensure that it is reviewed annually by a committee of parents, staff, and administrators. 6. Ensure that the single plans for student achievement align with and support the LEA plan. 7. Align the consolidated application and use of funding with the mission, goals and priorities identified in the LEA plan. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 258 Pupil Achievement 1.2 Planning Processes Legal Standard Each school has a school site council, comprised of teachers, parents, principal and students, that is actively engaged in school planning. (EC 52050-52075) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents, and students. 2. Single School Plan for Student Achievement, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report. 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Title I and emergency impact aid (EIA) budgets 5. School site council meeting agendas and minutes 6. Greenfield High School student site council membership 2008-2009, agenda and meeting minutes Findings 1. School site councils are comprised of students, teachers, parents and the principal. 2. There is uncertainty regarding amounts of funding from the district to the sites. Without a working knowledge of budget allocations and available resources, school site councils’ planning efforts are limited. 3. The school plans focus on compliance more than on efforts to meet the needs of the school, students, and staff. The high school site plans and the WASC accreditation plans are not aligned with a local educational agency (LEA) plan in an effort to focus on improving student learning outcomes. 4. Staff development efforts are minimal, and there is no coordination between school site planning and efforts to improve instruction. Staff development is isolated by site and organized by individual teachers or departments rather than systematically districtwide. Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Ensure that the school site councils routinely coordinate and monitor all school improvement efforts. The annual single plan for student achievement (SPSA) should Pupil Achievement 259 indicate the coordination and priorities for school improvement and should be aligned with the LEA plan. 2. Ensure that parents, students, teachers and staff are adequately represented on the school site councils. 3. Provide annual training for school site council members. 4. Ensure that professional development planning and funding meet staff needs identified in the LEA plan and SPSA. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 260 Pupil Achievement 1.3 Planning Processes Professional Standard The LEA’s vision, mission, values, and priorities focus on the achievement and needs of all students with the goals of closing the achievement gap and helping all students meet their full potential. Sources and Documentation 1. Mission/vision statement on King City Union High School District Web site, which states the following: King City Joint Union High School district has one singular focus, our mission, our goal: Maximize student academic achievement in a culture of caring. All of our resources, planning and preparation, instructional activities, homework, assessments, and curricular activities are designed to help us attain this goal. At King City Joint Union High School District we seek to provide our students with engaging and meaningful instructional activities that will maximize achievement and retention of the California Content Standards. (http://www.kingcity.k12.ca.us/King_City_High_School_District/Home.html) 2. Goals for King City Joint Union High School District, undated, provided by the district 3. Local educational agency (LEA) plan for July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2013, revised January 19, 2009. 4. Interviews with teachers, site administrators and district staff 5. Master Schedule 2009-2010, King City and Greenfield high schools Findings 1. The district’s vision/mission statement focuses on the California content standards and on maximizing student achievement but does not address closing the achievement gap. The district’s overall average 2009 API is 639, compared to the Monterey County average API of 707 and the state average API of 755. Gaps in achievement are significant and growing. In 2008-09 the average API score for the district’s white students was 766 compared to an average score of 621 for Hispanic students. Achievement gaps are further illustrated by the district’s average API score of 438 for students with disabilities compared to an average score of 639 for all students districtwide. The API for students with disabilities declined by 43 points, or almost 10%, in the 2008-09 school year. Although the district has made progress toward narrowing the achievement gap, it remains a concern. The district’s goals include increasing the number of students who score at the level of proficient or higher on the California Standards Test (CST) and increasing student achievement among each underperforming ethnic group. However, the goals do not address narrowing the achievement gap for any subgroup. Pupil Achievement 261 2. The district’s local education agency (LEA) plan identifies priorities, but they do not include addressing the achievement gap. 3. Current practices to provide support for struggling students are not consistent. Teachers and students reported that each teacher determines the amount and type of support that he or she will provide to struggling students. 4. The master schedule has few intervention classes to support struggling students. Double periods of core classes are the primary intervention tool. 5. Staff members indicated that school sites did not make use of the LEA plan when developing site plans. Some school site council members were unfamiliar with the term and stated they had never seen a LEA plan. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a revised vision that includes reference to narrowing the achievement gap between subgroups. 2. Develop goals for narrowing achievement gaps, including one that focuses on the gap between white and Hispanic students and between students who are fluent in English and students who are English language learners, and another that focuses on the gap between students with disabilities and those without. 3. Develop a common vision, common goals and common expectations related to meeting the needs of all students, including struggling students. 4. Ensure that the LEA plan is used and followed when developing site plans and that site plans and site budgets are consistent with the direction set in the LEA Plan. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 262 1.4 Planning Processes Professional Standard The LEA’s policies, culture and practices reflect a commitment to implementing systemic reform, innovative leadership, and high expectations to improve student achievement and learning. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. Interviews with Monterey County Office of Education personnel 3. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 4. Expected schoolwide learning results (ESLRs) 5. Board Policy 6141 (a) and administrative regulations 6. Student achievement data Findings 1. There is little focus on academic achievement in the schools and limited evidence that a quality education is a high priority for the district. 2. There is little evidence of a coordinated and planned instructional program that challenges all students, or of district leadership and guidance in providing a challenging educational program. 3. There is no clear and consistent direction from the district office regarding what is expected of students. Because of budget constraints, the district dedicated few resources to developing and implementing a cohesive districtwide plan for the delivery of educational services. The district has one director of educational services, who is responsible for special education, curriculum development, professional development, assessment and accountability, and educational services. There is no staff support for this position. 4. The district’s board policies and administrative regulations are outdated and therefore inadequate to provide the framework for communicating standardized and high expectations to staff and students. 5. There is a lack of clear organizational structure and policy to promote and communicate high expectations for learning. This has created a lack of coherence in systems, operations and actions. Pupil Achievement 263 6. The district has little or no articulation and communication within departments at each site, between the two comprehensive high schools, with the two continuation schools, or with the feeder elementary school districts. 7. There is no consistent, ongoing, coordinated staff development program to provide teachers with techniques and strategies to improve students’ academic achievement. 8. There is little evidence that data is reviewed and used to influence and shape instructional practices and student learning. School sites review annual state testing results and make some program adjustments; however, ongoing review of summative and formative assessment has not been completed. 9. Greenfield High School is in its fourth year of program improvement status; however, there is no clearly defined district-level plan or coordinated effort that contains strategies and measurable targets to change the school’s status. 10. There is no districtwide vision for or coordination of the two high schools’ master schedules. 11. Some non-core academic subject areas are overstaffed. For example, in 2008-09 the district’s master schedules had enough physical education class sections to accommodate almost 80% of the students at each high school, but only two years of physical education courses are required to graduate. Despite the low class sizes and the availability of physical education classes, the 2007-08 grade 9 physical fitness test results indicate that only 21.8% of students at Greenfield High School and 44.2% of students at King City High School measure as fit in five of six health and fitness zones, which is far below the state average of 62.7% 12. The district is beginning to develop common benchmark assessments within departments and subject areas at the two high schools, and the district is in the first stages of developing a professional learning community. Greenfield High School is further along in this practice under the leadership of the vice principal and in preparation of the self- assessment for the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) review. 13. The two high schools have begun to use a program called SChoolPlan to help staff use data to drive instruction. However, staff members need training to increase use of the program at both sites. 14. Administrators have attended AB75 principal training. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board revises and develops new board policies for instructional and curriculum management that reflect current state and federal requirements and that provide a blueprint for staff professional development, collaboration and expectations. 264 Pupil Achievement 2. Ensure that its board policies are easily accessible. The California School Board Association’s (CSBA’s) Gamut online system allows school districts to post all of their board policies and administrative regulations online for easy access by the staff and public. 3. Ensure that changes in policies, expectations, assessment and evaluation are clearly communicated to staff verbally and in writing. Teachers, parents and administrative staff should be engaged in reviewing and developing policies that directly affect the district’s core mission. 4. Ensure that policy statements include short- and long-range planning to build trust and confidence among the staff and community. 5. Implement a districtwide plan that clearly establishes the development of high expectations for student learning and academic achievement. 6. Review staffing formulas at each school site in each subject area. Place a priority on delivering core curriculum and intervention classes to support struggling students, Reduce the number of full-time equivalent staff in overstaffed areas such as physical education. Provide staff members with training in use of the SChoolPlan program to increase its use at both school sites. 7. Increase efforts at collaboration among the comprehensive high schools, the alternative high schools and the feeder districts. Focus on data that establishes benchmarks to help improve student outcomes. 8. Ensure that collaboration plans are coordinated, ongoing and communicated to all staff. Regular collaboration time should be scheduled during the school day. 9. Ensure that efforts and strategies for the upcoming WASC accreditation study at Greenfield High School are aligned with the plans to bring the school out of program improvement status. Strategies should be measurable and should provide a time line for school improvement. 10. Develop a districtwide plan to create and implement common assessments in subject areas. 11. Provide districtwide staff development in using data to influence and shape instruction. Send leadership teams to intensive training or a conference to develop their expertise and knowledge in data and professional learning communities. 12. Provide administrators with coaches to help develop and support professional learning communities at their school sites. 13. Ensure that coaches provide administrators with guidance and tie funding to reform efforts as they develop single school plans and strategies to support staff members’ efforts to use data to inform instruction and develop intervention strategies. Pupil Achievement 265 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 266 Pupil Achievement 1.5 Planning Processes Professional Standard The LEA has fiscal policies and a fiscal resource allocation plan that are aligned with measurable student achievement outcomes and instructional goals including, but not limited to, the Essential Program Components. (Revised DAIT) Sources and Documentation 1. Board policies 2. Interviews with district staff 3. LEA plan revised Jan. 19, 2009 4. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 5. District and site budgets Findings 1. Current written fiscal policies do not include an allocation plan that is aligned with student achievement outcomes and instructional goals. 2. Current policy does not reference the essential program components (EPCs). The EPCs are the foundation for the implementation of state accountability measures. A district’s plans and single plans for student achievement (SPSAs) require instructional goals based on the nine EPCs. 3. The governing board policies do not include current state and federal accountability requirements and expectations. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a policy regarding the distribution of categorical funds that all involved parties can understand and that is based on measurable student achievement outcomes and instructional goals based on the nine EPCs, as outlined in district plans and single plans for student achievement (SPSA). 2. Develop written fiscal policies that include an allocation plan that is aligned with student achievement outcomes and instructional goals. 3. Revise governing board policies to include current state and federal accountability requirements and expectations Pupil Achievement 267 Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 268 Pupil Achievement 1.6 Planning Processes Professional Standard The LEA has policies to fully implement the State Board of Education-adopted Essential Program Components for Instructional Success. These include implementation of instructional materials, intervention programs, aligned assessments, appropriate use of pacing and instructional time, and alignment of categorical programs and instructional support. Sources and Documentation 1. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 2. Board Policy 6190 (a) 3. Interviews with site and district administrators and teachers 4. Local Educational Agency (LEA) plan 5. Student achievement data Findings 1. The district’s policies do not reference the nine essential program components (EPCs) and are not aligned with current accountability requirements included in the full implementation of the EPCs. 2. The single plans for student achievement (SPSAs) include a reference to the EPCs, and Greenfield High School is using the academic program survey (APS) to ensure alignment. However, this is not a district policy requirement and as a result, the use of the EPCs in planning the instructional program is not consistent across the district. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a policy that requires the use of the APS at both sites to establish a baseline for planning full implementation of the nine EPCs. This policy should also require the use of the baseline data from the APS in the annual development and update of the LEA plan and each site’s SPSA. 2. Ensure that its policy includes a time line for completing the APS annually at each school site. 3. Develop a plan for purchasing and implementing instructional materials and intervention programs that are aligned with the EPCs. Pupil Achievement 269 4. Based on the results of the annual APS, implement appropriate use of pacing and instructional time, and align categorical programs and instructional support with identified student needs. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 270 Pupil Achievement 1.7 Planning Processes Professional Standard The LEA uses student achievement data, graduation and dropout rates, attendance and discipline data to establish and communicate instructional priorities and strategies for improved student learning and achievement. (DAIT) Sources and Documentation 1. Local educational agency (LEA) plan for July 1, 2008 to June 30, 2013, revised January 19, 2009. 2. Interviews with teachers, site administrators and district staff Findings 1. The priorities included in the district’s LEA plan focus on the following: • Meeting or exceeding annual yearly progress (AYP) and academic performance index (API) targets. • Creating and analyzing benchmark assessments. • Using the Santa Clara County Office of Education’s SChoolPlan software and the Aeries software programs to examine student performance data to drive instructional practices. • Implementing ongoing professional learning communities; • Working toward incorporating the nine essential program components (EPCs). 2. Both the English language arts and the mathematics monitoring sections of the LEA plan focus on using standards-based assessments. 3. As required, the LEA plan includes a truancy performance indicator and a goal regarding students graduating from high school. The LEA plan does not include other performance measures indicators related to attendance or discipline data. 4. Staff members review the results of state assessments and discuss how this information can influence and shape improvement efforts. 5. Staff members at each high school are working collaboratively to establish common standards-based benchmark assessments within their departments. The district’s director of educational services provided the sites with a template to use when developing benchmark assessments and pacing calendars. Some departments have begun using these common assessments and examining the results. The current focus is on developing the site-based common assessments, not using the results to establish and communicate instructional priorities and strategies for improvement. Pupil Achievement 271 6. Staff members did not express a consistent understanding regarding how or when benchmark assessment results would be entered into the SChoolPlan software program or who would perform this task. 7. During the 2008-09 school year, teachers had common planning time; however, the schedule has changed this year and common planning time is no longer provided. The planning time was not used to assess student achievement but to prepare for the WASC review. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Visit high-achieving districts to gain a broader perspective on how the district can use data to help improve instructional strategies and student achievement as well as to establish and communicate priorities. 2. Ensure that results from the benchmark assessments are entered into a software program to facilitate collaborative examination of results for all students, for specific classes and for subgroups. 3. Plan for assessment result uploading to ensure that the employee responsible for uploading assessment results has the time to complete this task in a timely manner and that the assignment of this work is as cost-effective as possible. 4. Examine disaggregated student achievement data, graduation and dropout rates, and attendance and discipline data to gain additional insights into the academic performance of specific subgroups. 5. Use disaggregated data to establish districtwide instructional priorities and goals. 6. Use disaggregated data to identify areas in which additional strategies are needed to narrow the district’s achievement gaps and improve student achievement. 7. Provide time for staff to collaborate regarding data analysis and strategies for improving student learning and achievement. 8. Provide all staff with training regarding the purpose and practices of effective professional learning communities (PLCs). Training is available through many sources including Solution Tree. Robert Eakers, Richard and Rebecca DuFour, and Doug Reeves are recognized leaders in the field. 9. Identify and develop teacher leaders within each subject area to lead the professional learning communities. These leaders do not have to be the department chairs. They should receive additional training and support in facilitation and the purpose and best practices of PLCs. 272 Pupil Achievement 10. Establish regular opportunities for the teacher leaders to meet as a leadership team to discuss practices, share strategies and solve problems. 11. Provide the administrative team with coaches to help develop and support best practices in PLCs, including using data to make informed decisions. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 273 1.8 Planning Processes Professional Standard The LEA provides and supports the use of information systems and technology to manage student data, and provides professional development to site staff on effectively analyzing and applying data to improve student learning and achievement. (DAIT) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers, site administrators and district staff. 2. LEA Plan, revised January 19, 2009 3. Technology Plan Findings 1. The district uses the Aeries software program as its student information system and the SChoolPlan software application as a tool to analyze student achievement data. 2. Staff members have access to the equipment needed to use these systems. 3. Staff members responsible for managing student data have had the opportunity to attend training in the use of the Aeries system. 4. Teachers have received training in how to access SChoolPlan reports, but staff members indicated that their focus has been on developing common benchmark assessments, not on analyzing and using data to improve student learning and achievement. 5. Interviews with teachers and district staff resulted in conflicting information about how and even whether results from benchmark assessments would be loaded into the SChoolPlan application. 6. Information technology department staff members are assigned to provide technical support to the district office and both high schools. 7. Data collected does not include a critical analysis of how much class time is spent on grade-level standards versus standards from lower grades. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Visit high-achieving districts to gain a broader perspective on how the district can use data to help improve instructional strategies and student achievement as well as to establish and communicate priorities. 274 Pupil Achievement 2. Provide professional development in the use of disaggregated student achievement data, graduation and dropout rates, attendance data, and discipline data to set instructional priorities and goals and improve classroom practices. 3. Ensure that results from the benchmark assessments are entered into a software program to facilitate collaborative examination of results for all students, for specific classes and for subgroups. 4. Plan for assessment result uploading to ensure that the employee responsible for uploading assessment results has the time to complete this task in a timely manner and that the assignment of this work is as cost-effective as possible. 5. Use disaggregated data to identify areas in which additional strategies are needed to improve student achievement and narrow achievement gaps. Encourage teachers who are achieving better results to share strategies with other teachers, and/or provide additional professional development on these strategies. 6. Conduct a curriculum audit to gather baseline data and provide feedback regarding the percent of time spent on grade-level content and on remediation. If the percentage of class time spent on remediation is high, examine data to determine if all students need this remediation or if it would be better to provide more targeted remediation to ensure that students spend sufficient time on grade-level standards. 7. Develop a plan and provide support staff to upload results into SChoolPlan, and provide disaggregated data reports to professional learning communities as requested for use in their discussions. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 275 1.9 Planning Processes Professional Standard The LEA holds teachers, site administrators, and LEA personnel accountable for student achievement through evaluations and professional development. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers, site administrators, district staff and students 2. Board policies 3. Collective bargaining agreements 4. Greenfield High School Single Plan for Student Achievement, dated October 30, 2008 5. King City High School Single Plan for Student Achievement, dated May 14, 2008 6. 2009-2010 English department professional development proposal 7. Evaluation and observation forms Findings 1. The district’s employee evaluations do not hold site administrators, teachers or other personnel accountable for student achievement. The teacher evaluation form does not include any reference to student performance. 2. Teachers do not examine common benchmark assessment results to determine who is achieving better results, nor do they work collaboratively to determine which strategies the teachers with better results are using that other teachers might adopt. 3. The district does not analyze test results or student grades by teacher to determine if there are teachers whose students consistently have lower performance than others. 4. The district does not provide additional professional development to teachers whose students consistently perform lower than other students to help these teachers achieve better results. 5. Teachers, administrators and students reported that support for struggling students varies greatly among teachers. Teachers are not held accountable for developing interventions for students who are not meeting expectations. The master schedule indicates that the district offers few intervention classes to support struggling students. 6. Some staff interviewed indicated that evaluations are not completed regularly. One teacher stated that they have only been evaluated twice in the past 30 years. The district 276 Pupil Achievement does not have a systematic process to inform supervisors of staff who need evaluation or to monitor the completion of evaluations in a timely manner. 7. Student grading policies are inconsistent within departments and grade levels. Some instructors grade students without using common grading standards related to similar courses or within a department. 8. The collective bargaining agreement does not support evaluating teachers based on student performance or outcomes. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Analyze student outcome data by teacher to determine which teachers need additional support. 2. Provide additional professional development and support to teachers whose students are consistently receiving lower grades and/or assessment results. 3. Hold site administrators accountable for developing single plans for student achievement that include specific, measurable student-focused goals that align with the LEA plan and with the district’s goals and priorities. 4. Hold teachers and school site administrators accountable for reviewing site goals periodically (e.g. after the end of each semester) to determine if the site is meeting its goals. 5. Hold teachers and school site administrators accountable for developing and implementing intervention strategies when the school does not meet its site goals. 6. Evaluate teachers at least once every two years. Evaluate administrators and other staff at least annually. Revise the evaluations so that they hold staff accountable for student achievement data. 7. Revise the collective bargaining agreement to link teacher evaluations to student outcomes, and hold teachers accountable for improved student outcomes. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0. Pupil Achievement 277 Implementation Scale: 278 Pupil Achievement 1.10 Planning Processes Professional Standard The LEA has a current board-approved Safe Schools Plan and a clearly defined discipline policy. Both the plan and policy have been communicated to parents, students, staff, board, and the community. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. Safe Schools Plan 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Site Level Emergency Operation Plan, revised 2006 Findings 1. The district’s Safe Schools Plan is outdated and has not been completely reviewed for at least six years. 2. The district’s evacuation plan was updated in 2006. 3. There are no standard districtwide expectations for student discipline or student safety. 4. Each high school has developed and implemented its own discipline plan. No districtwide policies or guidance have been provided. 5. The schools do not provide consistent, formal communication to parents regarding student discipline and school safety 6. Staff and community members at both high schools expressed concerns about the influence of gangs. There have been recent incidents of gang violence on and off the school campus. The district has a contract with the King City Police Department to provide a school resource officer but does not have such a contract with the city of Greenfield. 7. The results of the 2007-08 California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) showed that 46% of Greenfield High School’s ninth grade students and 39% of King City High School’s students felt safe at school, compared to 52% of students countywide. Pupil Achievement 279 Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Establish committees at both high schools to review, rewrite and update safe school plans. The committees should begin their tasks no later than the spring of 2010 so that new plans are in place for the start of the 2010-11 school year. The committee should be composed of students, staff, administration, a school resource officer, and community members. Consider using as a guide the safe schools planning checklist available online from the California Department of Education at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ss/vp/ sschecklist.asp. 2. Review and update board policies related to student discipline to reflect current state law and education code. 3. Develop a clear districtwide vision for student behavior expectations and safety and communicate it effectively to affected parties. 4. Communicate the policy regarding student discipline and behavioral expectations to students, parents, and staff through districtwide and school site meetings, the district’s Web site and the local media. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 280 Pupil Achievement 2.1 Curriculum Legal Standard The LEA provides and fully implements SBE-adopted and standards-based (or aligned for secondary) instructional textbooks and materials for all students, including intervention in reading/language arts and mathematics, and support for students failing to demonstrate proficiency in history, social studies, and science. (EC 60119, DAIT) Sources and Documentation 1. Textbook inventory, dated August 28, 2009 2. Interviews with teachers and site and district administrators 3. Student achievement data 4. Board resolution regarding sufficiency of instructional materials 5. 2007 training materials/ instructional materials Williams survey Findings 1. The district does not have a system to evaluate textbooks or build a standards-based program that is consistent with the state instructional materials and framework adoption cycles. 2. The use of instructional materials is not consistent districtwide. The publisher, publication date and title of the instructional materials for the same courses vary from one school site to another. Recently amended sufficiency requirements for instructional materials specify that “sufficiency” means that all students in the district who are enrolled in the same course have identical standards-aligned textbooks and instructional materials from the same adoption cycle. 3. Training of teachers and administrators to fully implement core and intervention standards-aligned materials is not consistent districtwide. The district is not required to provide the SBE-approved training in accordance with Senate Bill (SB) 472 because it is not currently in corrective action. However, such training would address the issue of compliance if the district is identified for corrective action in the future. 4. Planning for professional development is not coordinated or effective. Greenfield High School is in year four and King City High School is in year one of program improvement. In 2008-09, staff attended state board of education-approved professional development for math; the training was based on a textbook that was discarded that same year and replaced with the newly adopted math text. Pupil Achievement 281 5. There is no formal, consistent districtwide process to hold administrators accountable for monitoring the appropriate use of adopted instructional materials (see standard 4.10). Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and implement a system for routinely examining textbooks for standards alignment and ensure that they are consistent with the current State Board of Education (SBE) content frameworks and adoption cycles (toolkits for this are available through the Monterey County Office of Education.). 2. Revise policies to indicate the recently amended sufficiency requirements for instructional materials. (Reference: CSBA sample policy E6161.1(a)). 3. Even though it is not required, ensure that a qualified expert in the specific content area provides SBE-approved training for teachers and administrators regarding fully implementing textbooks and instructional materials. 4. Develop and implement a process for monitoring the appropriate and consistent use of district-approved instructional materials. The process should include evidence of student engagement and learning, and should hold site administrators accountable for implementation (see standard 4.10). Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 282 Pupil Achievement 2.2 Curriculum Legal Standard HIV prevention instruction occurs at least once in junior high or middle school and once in high school and is consistent with the CDE’s Health Framework. (EC 51930) Note: The standard’s requirements regarding junior high and middle schools are not applicable because the district serves only high school students. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report. 3. California Education Code and California Department of Education (CDE) health frameworks 4. Documents such as newsletters, registration material, and mailings used to communicate with parents and students 5. Human Biology 9a-Il; 10 a-f Health Class curriculum 6. Master Schedule 2009-2010 Findings 1. Health classes, which included state-required HIV prevention and related instruction, were eliminated two years ago. The topics required by the state are now addressed in specified science classes. 2. Students in grade 12 must voluntarily attend an eight-hour Saturday class or take a one-hour class after school for eight weeks to meet the health requirement for graduation. 3. Because of current bell schedules and the implementation of double periods in English and math for many ninth graders, it is unlikely that the district will reinstate health as a standalone class. Pupil Achievement 283 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that site administrators monitor the science curriculum to ensure that the classes adequately address the state-required expectations for the health instruction framework provided in the California Education Code. Information on state required health instruction is available from the CDE at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/he/cf/. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 284 Pupil Achievement 2.3 Curriculum Professional Standard The LEA has planned, adopted and implemented an academic program based on California content standards, frameworks, and SBE-adopted/aligned materials, and articulated it to curriculum, instruction, and assessments in the LEA plan. (DAIT) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers and site and district administrators 2. LEA plan adopted January 19, 2009 3. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) Findings 1. The governing board has not formally reviewed and adopted the academic program since 1997, and current policy does not indicate the adoption of state content standards, frameworks or standards-aligned materials, or the articulation of these requirements with the LEA plan requirements. 2. The recent update of the LEA plan does indicate a more current understanding of state and federal accountability; however, the LEA plan is not consistently shared with site administrators and school site councils (SSCs) to be used as the guiding document for developing the single plan for student achievement (SPSA) at each of the district’s schools. 3. The current LEA plan does not include specific deadlines for accomplishing district goals. 4. No formal system of planning and monitoring is in place to ensure districtwide alignment of curriculum, instruction and assessments. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Conduct a comprehensive review and analysis of its academic program. Examine districtwide policies, practices, and procedures for aligning standards-based curriculum, instruction, and assessment. The review should focus on meeting all students’ learning needs, with a special emphasis on English learners (EL) and students with disabilities. 2. Use the results of the review and an analysis of the data to guide the development of an LEA plan that is grounded in sound research-based instructional practices that will meet all learners’ identified needs. Pupil Achievement 285 3. Update the LEA plan annually based on state and local student achievement data, and require that each school site use the plan as a basis for developing, monitoring and evaluating its SPSA. 4. Establish a district and site leadership team (DSLT) at each school site to monitor the implementation of the LEA plan and to participate in the plan’s annual review and revision. The DSLT should also serve as the link between the development of the LEA plan and the SPSA. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 286 Pupil Achievement 2.4 Curriculum Professional Standard The LEA has developed and implemented common assessments to assess strengths and weaknesses of the instructional program to guide curriculum development. Sources and Documentation 1. State testing reports 2. Interviews with teachers and site and district administrators 3. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 4. LEA plan, revised January 19, 2009 5. Sample lessons plans, benchmarks, and grade level summative and formative assessments. Findings 1. The district administers all assessments required by the state and uses the results to analyze student achievement among all subgroups. 2. Both school sites are independently developing common assessments. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and implement a policy that requires the regular collection and analysis of common formative and summative assessment data to establish instructional priorities and inform classroom instruction. 2. Ensure that the common formative and summative assessments currently under way are developed districtwide by course based on essential content standards identified for each course, and administered using an agreed-upon pacing guide or calendar. Collaborative teams should do this work. 3. Ensure that collaborative teams of teachers analyze the results of the common assessments and use them to improve instruction and ensure that all students are achieving at high levels. Pupil Achievement 287 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 288 Pupil Achievement 2.5 Curriculum Professional Standard The LEA has adopted a plan for integrating technology into curriculum and instruction at all grade levels to help students meet or exceed state standards and local goals. Sources and Documentation 1. District technology plan for July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2013 2. Interviews with teachers, site administrators and district staff. Findings 1. The district has a technology plan for 2005 through 2010 and recently developed an updated plan for July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2013. 2. The director of technology developed the revised technology plan with input from site administrators, teachers, community members, the director of instruction and assessment, the network technology specialist and the California Technology Assistance Program (CTAP). Input was provided through questionnaires, informal discussions and written feedback. Parents had a limited role in the plan’s development. 3. The plan includes goals and measurable objectives for integrating technology to support student achievement. However, because of some of the objectives, it is unclear if the goals will be met. For example, Goal 3e states, “Students will use technology as tools for problem solving, conceptual development, data analysis, communication, research and critical thinking.” However, the supporting objectives only address basic computer and technology use and use of Microsoft Office applications to develop documents and presentations that communicate effectively. It is unclear what tools will be used to develop problem-solving abilities and how technology will be used to support conceptual development and critical thinking. In addition, Objective 3e3 indicates that 40% of the district’s students will be able to create, format, save, delete, edit and print databases and spreadsheets in year 1, 70% of students will be able to do these tasks in year 2, and 100% in year 3. However, it is not clear if these percentages for students are realistic because objective 4b2 calls for only 20% of teachers to be proficient in database and spreadsheet use in year 1, 45% in year 2 and 70% in year 3. 4. The technology plan assumes that there will be technology committees at each school site and that teachers are committed to using technology to help students meet state standards. The plan also requires each teacher to submit a plan for technology use at the beginning of each year and a year-end report describing how technology was used. The plan assumes teachers will use technology to support student learning and for interventions when students need this support. It is unclear how realistic these plans are because technology committees do not exist and were not used to provide input into the plan itself, and the number of teachers who reviewed the plan and provided feedback Pupil Achievement 289 is not specified, so it is not possible to determine the degree of teacher commitment. In interviews, staff members indicated that some teachers use technology regularly and others make limited use of it as a tool for teaching and learning. Staff estimated that approximately 80% of teachers at King City High School consistently use technology for teaching and learning, but 20% do not use it a regularly. 5. Some teachers have students post their papers on the Web site turnitin.com. This Web site can be helpful in identifying plagiarism; however, students and staff report that, other than referring them to the school library or public library, teachers make no accommodations for students who do not have technology at home. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Form site and district technology committees. 2. Ensure that teachers support the district’s technology plan and establish common expectations for their use of technology for teaching and learning. Revise the technology plan as needed to address teacher feedback, including any input regarding professional development teachers need to implement the plan. 3. Examine due dates and times for papers to be turned in via turnitin.com to ensure that students who do not have an Internet-connected computer at home have adequate access to technology. For example, unless these students are given class time to submit their papers on the day they are due, they may have one less night to complete their work than students who have Internet access at home. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 290 Pupil Achievement 2.6 Curriculum Professional Standard The LEA optimizes state and federal funding to support the use of instructional technology in its schools. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers, site administrators and district staff 2. District technology plan Findings 1. One staff member spends a significant amount of time performing tasks related to E-rate documentation, application and funding requirements; however, the district could take greater advantage of E-rate discounts. Applying for E-rate discounts is complex, and users must be thoroughly familiar with technology and the numerous strict application filing deadlines. A large and increasing number of school districts contract with an E-Rate consultant to maximize their discounts and minimize the delays associated with inquiries from representatives of the organization overseeing this federal discount program. E-Rate consultants typically charge either a flat rate per year or a small percentage of the discount the district receives, with a “not to exceed” amount established in advance. 2. The district’s technology plan indicates that the district plans to use general fund resources, program improvement funds, enhancing education through technology (EETT) funding and K-12 voucher funding for technology. 3. The district has applied for and received approximately $60,000 in Microsoft K-12 settlement funding. Approximately $40,000 of this money has been spent, and approximately $20,000 remains unallocated. District staff indicated that the district has tentatively earmarked the remaining $20,000 to update the Greenfield High School library’s computer lab. However, the district has tentatively postponed the work until approximately 2012 because of concerns about its financial condition. 4. The district’s technology plan indicates the district will purchase only software that has been adopted by the state or reviewed by the California Learning Resource Network (CLRN) and found to be aligned with state standards. 5. The district is using resources from the California Technology Assistance Program (CTAP) to help improve its use of education technology. 6. Several staff members commented that computer equipment at Greenfield High School is usually older than the technology at King City High School. Pupil Achievement 291 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Consider contracting with an experienced E-rate consultant to help complete applications accurately and ensure that critical time lines and submission deadlines are met. 2. Conduct a detailed inventory of the computer equipment in use at Greenfield High School. Based on this inventory, immediately allocate the remaining $20,000 from the Microsoft K-12 settlement funding to replace the oldest and most obsolete computer equipment at that site. 3. Conduct a detailed inventory of all the district’s instructional technology equipment and software. Establish a replacement schedule that allocates equipment and software equitably between school sites. 4. Continue using a variety of funding sources to support the use of technology to improve teaching and learning. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 292 Pupil Achievement 3.1 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard The LEA provides equal access to educational opportunities to all students regardless of race, gender, socioeconomic standing, and other factors. The LEA’s policies, practices, and staff demonstrate a commitment to equally serving the needs and interests of all students, parents, and family members. (EC 51007) Sources and Documentation 1. LEA plan 2. Interviews with site and district staff, parents and students 3. Board Policy 6143 (a), dated April 9, 1997 4. Board Policy 0430 (a), Comprehensive Local Plan for Special Education, dated October 14, 2009 5. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 6. Student achievement data 7. Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents Findings 1. There is no evidence that the district has a defined and monitored system of interventions to ensure it is meeting all students’ learning needs or making opportunities to learn equally available districtwide. The district’s vision/mission statement focuses on the California content standards and on maximizing student achievement but does not address closing the achievement gap. Details are contained in standard 1.3, finding 1. 2. Average class sizes at King City High School are significantly lower than at Greenfield High School, as indicated by the following table Average class size by subject area, 2007-08 King City HS Greenfield HS English 23.2 25.8 Mathematics 27.0 32.5 Science 29.2 30.8 Social Science 27.6 29.1 Pupil Achievement 293 3. The district is not consistently or systemically addressing language, cultural, and social barriers to active participation by parents and families in the education of their children. Success in this area currently depends on individual teachers, administrators and students rather than on a districtwide plan or system of support. 4. There is no visible effort or communication with feeder districts to develop a common academic calendar. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and implement a policy and practices to ensure that all students, especially English learners, students with disabilities, and other high priority students, have access to the core curriculum and, based on assessed needs, to English language development, strategic interventions and intensive interventions. 2. Develop and implement a policy and practices that address the language, cultural, and social barriers that discourage or prevent parents and families from participating in the education of their children. Base these policies and practices on successful research-based practices in schools and districts that serve similar students and their families. 3. Develop a plan to transform the district from a traditional system of high school education to one which focuses on every student meeting standards and succeeding at high levels. Establish common times for collaborative teams to identify the essential standards for each course, develop summative assessments with acceptable performance levels, and develop a series of formative assessments to assess progress toward mastery. 4. Consider creating a common academic calendar in cooperation with the feeder schools. 5. Avail itself of and seek to implement the recommendations contained in existing research, which strongly supports the power of schools and districts to transform teaching and learning (including parent and family participation) when they operate as highly functioning professional learning communities,1 and which indicates that establishing common times for collaborative teams to identify standards and develop assessments is a powerful first step toward becoming a true professional learning community.2, 3 1. Whatever It Takes – How Professional Learning Communities Respond When Kids Don’t Learn, by Rebecca DuFour, Robert Eaker, Gayle Karhanek and Richard DuFour, 2004, Solution Tree Press, Bloomington, Indiana. 2. Power Standards – Identifying the Standards that Matter the Most, by Larry Ainsworth, 2003, Advanced Learning Press, Englewood, Colorado. 3. Professional Learning Communities at Work – New Insights for Improving Schools, by Richard DuFour, 2008, Solution Tree Press, Bloomington, Indiana. 294 Pupil Achievement Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 295 3.2 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard The LEA employs certificated staff that possess the appropriate credential or permit from the CTC and meet the highly qualified designation of NCLB. (20 USC 6319, 7801; 5 CCR 6100-6126) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges accreditation report and other documents 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Master schedules of courses 5. Bargaining agreement with certificated employees Findings 1. The district has not completed a credential audit in several years to verify that staff are teaching subjects authorized by their credentials or to determine if courses are offered by highly qualified and properly credentialed educators. 2. All but two of the district’s teachers are cross-cultural language and academic development (CLAD)-certified, but little evidence is available that the certification and training is used in the classroom or that it provides improvement for students that are struggling. 3. Stipends for obtaining CLAD certification were excessive compared to similar districts, and ongoing stipends are not the norm. Stipends included $650 for materials and course fees, $1,500 upon successful completion of the CLAD by January 2008, and 3 1/3 semester units credit and advancement on the salary schedule. In addition, when two-thirds of the bargaining unit members have obtained CLAD certification or the equivalent, each bargaining unit member with the CLAD or equivalent certification receives 1.23% of Column 1, Step 1 of the salary schedule, or $487.38 in 2009-10, as an ongoing annual stipend. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Complete further analysis of data regarding fluent English proficient and limited English proficient (FEP/LEP) students using the California English Language Development 296 Pupil Achievement Test (CELDT) to enable teachers to apply the skills they have learned in CLAD training programs to help increase achievement for all students. 2. Complete a districtwide audit by subject area, section and grade level to determine certificated staffing needs for the 2010-11 school year. 3. Update staff seniority lists and ensure that they include credentialing, current and past assignments, and supplemental training and certifications. 4. Request that the Monterey County Office of Education conduct a credential audit of the district’s instructors and teaching assignments. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 297 3.3 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard The LEA’s teachers and parents participate in decisions affecting school and categorical programs. (EC 51100-51102) Sources and Documentation 1. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 2. Interviews with teachers, school site council (SSC) members and board members 3. LEA plan 4. Greenfield High School site council meeting minutes dated October 30, 2008 and October 28, 2009 Findings 1. Each of the district’s two schools has a school site council (SSC) that participates in the development of the single plan for student achievement (SPSA). 2. The governing board approves the SPSAs each year but does not allocate funding to the sites to support these plans. 3. One school is designated as a Title I schoolwide program (SWP) and the other school is designated as a Title I targeted assistance school (TAS), but there is no evidence that the state and federal criteria for operating these two programs are being followed. 4. Existing board policies do not address current education code (EC) requirements regarding the rights of parents to access information about their child or to participate in the educational process. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Allocate funds to each school site annually to support activities outlined in the SPSA, and based on students’ needs. 2. Review the criteria for designating a school as SWP or TAS, and ensure that the two schools have been appropriately designated as SWP or TAS. 3. Ensure that the program delivered at the designated school sites aligns with the state and federal criteria for SWP and TAS. 298 Pupil Achievement 4. Develop and implement policies that ensure compliance with California Education Code sections 51101 and 51101.1 by clearly outlining the rights of all parents, including those who lack English fluency, to access information and participate in the educational process. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 299 3.4 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard The LEA complies with and monitors implementation of the instructional time for the adopted core programs for reading, language arts and mathematics. (EC 32212) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers, students and support staff 2. Observation 3. Bell schedule Findings 1. Instructional time for the core programs is protected from interruptions. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review existing policies to ensure that they are current with California Education Code section 32212, including the use of public address systems. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 300 Pupil Achievement 3.5 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard All incoming kindergarten students are admitted following board-approved policies and administrative regulations (EC 48000-48002, 48010, 48011). Sources and Documentation None. Not applicable. Findings None. Not Applicable. Recommendations for Recovery None. Not Applicable. Standard Implemented: Not Applicable February 2010 Rating: None Pupil Achievement 301 3.6 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard The LEA provides students with the necessary courses to meet the high school graduation requirements. (EC 51225.3) The LEA provides access and support for all students to complete UC and CSU required courses (A-G requirement). Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 3. Board policies and regulations E 1312.4 a and c 4. Student registration materials and course catalog Findings 1. Course content and offerings need to be further aligned between the two high schools and within the district. 2. It is difficult to determine if course standards are aligned with state expectations or post-secondary institutions. Syllabi provided did not reference course standards, and interviews with teachers indicated that little work had been done to align courses with state standards. 3. The minimal state high school graduation requirements are in place, but no requirements exceed the state minimums. 4. Course identification numbers in the Aeries student information system are not uniform at the two high schools, which makes courses more difficult to manage. 5. There is no music program at Greenfield High School and only one foreign language offering at King City High School. 6. Greenfield High School reported that 61.9% of 2007-08 graduates had enrolled in courses to meet the University of California (UC) and California State University (CSU) A-G requirements for admission, but 11.4% of students completed all required courses. King City High School reported that 51.7% of 2007-08 graduates had enrolled in courses to meet UC and CSU admission requirements, but only 12.5% of students completed all A-G courses. 302 Pupil Achievement 7. The district’s students are directed to the local satellite community college program if they fail a class and are making it up to earn a high school diploma, or are requesting college instruction versus instruction by a teacher at the high school. There is no opportunity for students to be concurrently enrolled in the high school district and the community college. 8. The district is exploring opportunities for students to be enrolled concurrently in community college. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the high schools share and coordinate programs that prepare students for high school graduation and enrollment in college. A template of high school graduation requirements is available from the California Department of Education’s Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/gs/hs/hsgrtable.asp. 2. Ensure that course offerings at the two comprehensive high schools are similar, and offer courses that prepare students to enter the California State University or University of California system after graduation. 3. Consider changes in course scheduling to provide students with more options. For example, several vocational courses may be taught at one site or the other but offered and made available to students from both schools to maximize enrollment and teaching assignments. 4. Provide students with opportunities for concurrent enrollment in community college courses for advancement and for college credit. 5. Provide avenues for a greater percentage of students to enroll in colleges or other post-secondary schools. Make information about post-secondary opportunities available to all students and the community at the start of high school to help overcome the barriers of poverty, ethnicity or language. Pursue a partnership with a post-secondary institution. 6. Conduct an assessment and evaluation of the high school guidance program to determine if the district’s goals are being met and if current counseling staff reductions leave enough resources to adequately and reasonably meet improved academic expectations. 7. Conduct a periodic survey of students and an assessment of outcomes to determine the helpfulness of the counseling services for career and college decisions. 8. Complete a review of open periods for students and the number of times a student is a teacher’s assistant (TA) to determine if this is the best use of time during the school day. 9. Ensure that the two high schools have the same districtwide graduation requirements. Pupil Achievement 303 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 304 Pupil Achievement 3.7 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard The LEA provides an alternative means for students to complete the prescribed course of study required for high school graduation. (EC 51225.3) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Title I and economic impact aid (EIA) budgets Findings 1. Each of the two comprehensive high schools has a continuation school located adjacent to its campus. However, since both continuation schools have let their accreditation status lapse, they can no longer issue high school diplomas. Therefore, students can earn their high school diplomas only by returning to the comprehensive high school at some point during their senior year. 2. This arrangement is not conducive to high student outcomes. The state’s minimum requirements for graduation are listed on the California Department of Education’s Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/gs/hs/hsgrmin.asp. 3. Neither of the two alternative education programs has a consistent organizational structure. The district has no clearly defined supervision of the programs or accountability for instruction and student outcomes. 4. Teachers at the continuation high schools were transferred there from the comprehensive high schools this year and have no previous experience in alternative education. They must also be willing to take the assignment (Education Code section 44258). 5. Approximately 30 to 40 students at each high school are in independent study programs. Independent study contracts are inconsistent and often completed in a manner that does not comply with state requirements. Teachers work and are paid extra hours outside of the normal school day to provide instruction to independent study students. The district’s independent auditor found the district to be out of compliance, and $106,462 in funding was disallowed in fiscal year 2008-09. Pupil Achievement 305 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Begin seeking accreditation for the alternative education programs. Students should not need to transfer to the comprehensive high schools to earn a diploma. 2. Implement and follow accountability components to ensure that alternative education programs teach all curricula and that it meets the same standards as the courses taught in the comprehensive high schools. 3. Develop a more structured independent study program that is more available to students. 4. Review the reasons for and the interest in the alternative program to determine if students’ needs could be met through other approaches. 5. Consider hiring staff to train and implement the alternative education and independent study program according to district policy and education code requirements. 6. Research the long-term benefits of a full independent study program and hiring the necessary staff, and the potential to reduce costs and increase funding by maintaining accurate records in compliance with regulations. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 306 Pupil Achievement 3.8 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard Supplemental instruction is offered to students who do not demonstrate “sufficient progress” toward passing the California High School Exit Exam. (EC 37252, EC 60851) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Student achievement data 5. Title I and EIA budgets 6. 2009-10 master schedule 7. Notice of student eligibility for California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) assistance 8. School Level Student Notice and Service Delivery Data Summary 2007-2008 Findings 1. In the last four years, the district’s pass rate for the English Language Arts (ELA) portion of the CAHSEE) has varied, from 42.7% in 2006-07 to 46.9% in 2007-08 and back to 42.7% in 2008-09, while the countywide and statewide pass rates have increased slightly. 2. The pass rate for the mathematics portion of the CAHSEE has improved slightly, from 46.9% in 2006-07 to 47.4% in 2007-08 and 48.7% in 2008-09. The countywide and statewide pass rates during this same period increased by 2.1% and 3.6%, respectively 3. The district has double instructional periods for math and/or English classes for ninth grade students whose assessment scores are lower than the range that indicates proficiency. 4. The district and its high schools have no systematic program or support for students who have failed or who are in danger of failing the CAHSEE. Pupil Achievement 307 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Analyze data and establish benchmarks to confirm that double periods in English and math are assisting students in their efforts to be successful on the CAHSEE. 2. Identify intervention and support strategies that have successfully improved CAHSEE pass rates in other districts with similar demographics. 3. Seek additional information regarding supplemental instruction from the California Department of Education’s Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/re/lr/pr/faqsi. asp. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 308 Pupil Achievement 3.9 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard The general instructional program adheres to all requirements put forth in EC 51000-52950. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with students, parents, teachers, and site and district administrators 2. LEA plan 3. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 4. Master schedule 5. District graduation requirements Findings 1. The general instructional program does not include a districtwide system of career awareness in which all students have the opportunity to participate. 2. The district has active California Student Opportunity and Access (Cal-SOAP) and Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID) programs, but they are site-specific and are not available to all eligible students. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and implement a districtwide program for career awareness, and ensure that there is equal opportunity for all students to participate. Include events such as career fairs, college fairs and guest speakers. 2. Develop and support a plan to implement AVID at both schools. 3. Collaborate with the feeder schools (where applicable) to ensure the continuation of the Cal-SOAP program. Pupil Achievement 309 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 310 Pupil Achievement 3.10 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard The LEA has adopted systematic procedures for identification, screening, referral, assessment, planning, implementation, review, and triennial assessment of students with special needs. (EC 56301) Sources and Documentation 1. Local service plan for special education students 2. Student study team process documents 3. Individualized education program (IEP) documents 4. Board Policy 6159, dated Sept 30 1998 – board policy missing; only Administrative Regulation 6159.1 found, adopted Oct 12. 2005 5. Board Policy 4 6164.4, dated April 8, 1998, and Administrative Regulation 6. Administrative regulations 6164.5 and exhibit, dated May 11, 2005; and 6164.6, dated January 10, 1996 7. Interviews with certificated staff 8. Interviews with administrators, 9. Interview with students and parents 10. Interviews with Monterey County Office of Education staff, assistant superintendent of special education, program specialist and special education local plan area (SELPA) director Findings 1. The district has outdated board policies. 2. The district holds a transitional IEP when a student moves into the school district or enters the high school from a feeder elementary school district. The district held 33 transitional IEPs for students moving from Greenfield Elementary School District to Greenfield High School in fall 2009. 3. Annual and triennial assessments for students served by the Monterey County Office of Education are scheduled and held within the legal time lines. Pupil Achievement 311 4. Services for students served by the Monterey County Office of Education are provided in accordance with the written IEP. 5. Categorical program monitoring findings indicate that the district’s resource specialist program (RSP) services to students are not consistently in compliance with required assessment and service provisions. 6. Assessment, screening and referral is conducted on an individual basis; students identified by teachers or parent referral are assessed. 7. School principals manage referrals for special education assessment through the student study team. Although Greenfield High School developed a comprehensive and complex process last year, no students have completed the assessment process. The process is lengthy and involves significant paperwork for the teacher and parent; this potentially reduces the number of referrals. 8. The student study team and referral process is developed individually and administered at each site rather than being systematic and districtwide. 9. Planning of the delivery model for special education services was completed under the direction of the King City Elementary School District’s director of special education, who consulted with the King City High School District until July 2009. 10. The district’s director of special education position is currently vacant, so the director of educational services has been assigned the duties of this position. However, the director of educational services does not have the time to perform these duties, has no previous experience in this area, and lacks the requisite knowledge of special education legal requirements. 11. Both of the district’s comprehensive high schools will undergo an accreditation review from the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) in the next 18 months. 12. Greenfield High School is in year four, and King City High School is in year one, of program improvement. 13. The director of educational services is responsible for guiding the district and school sites through the WASC review process and the development and monitoring of the program improvement plan. 14. Parents are given a copy of their rights and procedural safeguards annually, or upon initial referral, or upon parental request for assessment by the Monterey County Office of Education and district. 15. The district contracts with the Monterey County Office of Education to maintain student records in the California Special Education Management Information System (CASEMIS) and to produce the required special education reports. 312 Pupil Achievement Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Because of the school sites’ program improvement status and the upcoming WASC reviews, assign the director of educational services to his area of expertise: curriculum development, assessment and accountability systems, and professional development. 2. Hire a director of special education or reassign the duties to a certificated staff member with the experience and training to develop and maintain systematic procedures for planning and implementation of special education programs and services, including the identification, screening, referral, assessment, review and triennial assessment of students with special needs. 3. Update all board policies related to planning and implementation of special education programs and services, including the identification, screening, referral, assessment, review, and triennial assessment of students with special needs. 4. Consult with the SELPA program specialist to provide guidance to the district as it develops policies and procedures to deliver RSP and newly transferred special education programs. 5. Develop and adopt a districtwide referral process that is administered and monitored at the district level. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 313 3.11 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard Curriculum and instruction for special education students is rigorous and appropriate to meet special education students’ learning needs. (EC 56205, EC 56345) Sources and Documentation 1. Curriculum and instruction materials 2. Sample lesson plans 3. Interviews with special education certificated staff, resource specialist 4. Interviews with administrators 5. Interviews with site staff 6. Interviews with Monterey County Office of Education staff 7. Interview with SELPA director 8. Board policies 9. Certificated staff evaluation form 10. Greenfield High School initial referral forms Findings 1. The district adopts and provides rigorous and appropriate curricula and instruction to meet special education students’ needs. 2. The Monterey County Office of Education’s Williams report indicates that the district provides sufficient books and special education instructional materials. 3. The district provides resource specialist services to approximately 240 students districtwide. Each school site is staffed with five full-time equivalent (FTE) certificated resource specialist and instructional support aides. The district employs one FTE district psychologist to complete assessments and one speech and language pathologist to provide direct services and assessments. The delivery model is different at each school site. Greenfield High School operates a school within a school concept, in which single- subject credentialed teachers deliver instruction in their credentialed area. Students are not mainstreamed except in physical education and elective classes. King City High School provides a push-in model, in which teachers collaborate on student instruction. 314 Pupil Achievement The district is a member of the special education local plan area (SELPA), and the Monterey County Office of Education currently provides special education services to students with severe disabilities. Two programs for students with severe disabilities are currently under review for transition back to the district: the special day class at Greenfield High School and the transitional program for young adults ages 18-22. The district also contracts with nonpublic schools to provide services for students whose needs cannot be met by the district’s or SELPA’s programs. 4. The district provides minimal professional development for district special education staff. 5. The district provided AB466 training for the entire mathematics department based on an older math textbook, then purchased new materials at the end of the same fiscal year, which rendered the training no longer valid. 6. Lessons plans that were reviewed are fully articulated and tied to standards. It is not clear from the weekly planner that the samples provided are indicative of the daily delivery of instruction. 7. The special education budget required a contribution of $ $773,358.78 from the general fund in fiscal year 2008-09. 8. The district’s community advisory committee does not meet regularly. The SELPA community advisory committee meets regularly and contributes to decisions about the service delivery model. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue providing rigorous and appropriate curricula to meet special education students’ needs. 2. Provide certificated and classified support staff with continuing professional development in instructional strategies based on identified needs. 3. Conduct a review of special education services and program and delivery to determine in which areas the district may be able to reduce operational costs while maintaining quality program delivery. 4. Ensure that the community advisory committee meets regularly and maintains regular meeting minutes and agendas. 5. Develop a comprehensive procedural manual that includes but is not limited to the following sections: • Parents’ rights Pupil Achievement 315 • Continuation of services, • Initial referral and assessment process, • Least restrictive environment, • Annual Individualized Educational Program (IEP) guidelines and legal time lines, • Scheduling process • Program transition process • Extended school year guidelines • Staff development recommendations • Student study team purpose and processes, including the following: • IEP procedures • Pupil placement summary forms • Annual goals and objectives • Nonpublic schools and nonpublic agency services, • Special education parent handbook 6. Provide professional development training regarding strategies for modifying and differentiating curriculum and instructional practices to meet special education students’ needs. 7. When planning for the transition of the classes for severely disabled students from the Monterey County Office of Education operation to district operation, audit the current program to determine areas of need in curriculum, materials, equipment, facilities and professional development. 8. Ensure that all programs are operating in compliance with state and federal requirements. 9. Consider hiring or assigning a different certificated employee to take on the duties of the director of special education. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 316 Pupil Achievement 3.12 Instructional Strategies Legal Standard Programs for special education students meet the least restrictive environment provision of the law and the quality criteria and goals set forth by the California Department of Education and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (EC 56000, EC 56040.1, 20 USC Sec. 1400 et. seq.) Sources and Documentation 1. Board policies 2. Interviews with special education certificated staff and resource specialist 3. Interviews with administrators and site staff 4. Interviews with Monterey County Office of Education staff 5. Interview with SELPA director 6. Individualized Educational Program (IEP) sample review Findings 1. The district provides resource specialist services to approximately 240 students districtwide. Each school site is staffed with five full-time equivalent (FTE) certificated resource specialist and instructional support aides. The district employs one FTE district psychologist to complete assessments and one speech and language pathologist to provide direct services and assessments. The delivery model is different at each school site. Greenfield High School operates a school within a school concept, in which single- subject credentialed teachers deliver instruction in their credentialed area. Students are not mainstreamed except in physical education and elective classes. King City High School provides a push-in model, in which teachers collaborate on student instruction. The district is a member of the special education local plan area (SELPA), and the Monterey County Office of Education currently provides special education services to students with severe disabilities. Two programs for students with severe disabilities are currently under review for transition back to the district: the special day class at Greenfield High School and the transitional program for young adults ages 18-22. The district also contracts with nonpublic schools to provide services for students whose needs cannot be met by the district’s or SELPA’s programs. 2. Greenfield High School operates a school within a school for special education students, with minimal mainstreaming. Single-subject credentialed teachers deliver instruction to students as they move from one to the other of five teachers throughout the day. Students Pupil Achievement 317 are mainstreamed with regular education students during physical education and elective classes. 3. King City High School provides a push-in model in which a resource specialist collaborates with the general education teacher to develop differentiation strategies and deliver modified instruction. Programs for special education students minimally meet the legal provision requiring the least restrictive environment. Students served by the Monterey County Office of Education are housed on the Greenfield campus as of the 2008-09 school year and progress has been made in meeting least restrictive environment provisions. 4. Board policies are outdated and are not consistently adhered to districtwide. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review and revise all board policies related to the legal requirements for a least restrictive environment. 2. Conduct an audit of facilities and program delivery to ensure that students are receiving the best education model in the least restrictive environment. 3. Review programs and services delivered by the Monterey County Office of Education and the SELPA, and coordinate to maximize opportunities for appropriate mainstreaming. If the program transfer proposal is approved by the SELPA, use the remainder of the school year to review county office operations, develop policies and procedural manuals, and conduct a full assessment of the district’s capacity to serve students with special needs. Consult with the SELPA program specialist and the county office to provide support and guidance while building the capacity of district leadership and staff to provide services. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 318 Pupil Achievement 3.13 Instructional Strategies Professional Standard Students are engaged in learning, and they are able to demonstrate and apply their knowledge and skills. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 3. Expected schoolwide learning results (ESLRs) 4. Board policies and regulations 5. Bargaining agreement with certificated employees 6. Student focus groups Findings 1. Students expressed the opinion that most lessons primarily involved lectures and/ or worksheets with little engagement or discussion, though research shows the latter develops higher order critical thinking skills. 2. Textbooks are not current in all areas; King City High School uses more recent adoptions than Greenfield High School. Forty percent of social science texts and 75% of science texts for the same classes differed from one high school to the other. For example, King City High School uses Glencoe’s Economics: Principles and Practices, and Greenfield High School uses McDougal Littell’s Economics: Concepts and Choices; Greenfield High School chemistry course uses Houghton Mifflin’s Introductory Chemistry, published in 2000, and King City High School uses Glencoe’s Chemistry: Matter and Change, published in 2005; Greenfield High School uses Scott Foresman’s Conceptual Physics, published in 1999, and King City High School uses Glencoe’s Physics: Principles & Problems, published in 2005. 3. Special Education text materials at the two schools appear to be aligned. 4. Parents reported unfair grading practices that discourage students from taking specific courses with specific instructors. 5. Students who were interviewed stated that some teachers have low expectations for their learning and achievement. However, the California Healthy Kids Survey results Pupil Achievement 319 for 2007-08 indicated that at Greenfield High School 37% of ninth grade students and 49% of 11th grade students reported that they perceived high expectations from adults, compared to 47% of ninth grade students and 46% of 11th grade students at King City High. This is higher than the Monterey County average of 36% of ninth grade students and 39% of 11th grade students. The results of FCMAT’s focus group of 20 Greenfield and eight King City high school students may be indicative of a downward trend in the relationship between adults and students. 6. In the area of total school connectedness, Greenfield students’ results were higher than King City and Monterey County averages, with 41% of ninth grade and 46% of 11th grade students reporting feeling connected to school. This is compared to 34% of ninth grade and 36% of 11th grade students at King City High School and 36% of ninth and 11th grade students countywide. 7. Students who participated in the focus group indicated that there are few opportunities to learn of colleges, universities and career options outside of King City and Monterey County. Students expressed a strong interest in learning more about career opportunities and post-secondary education. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Design a districtwide staff development program based on an analysis of student achievement data. Staff development should include improved instructional techniques and strategies to increase student engagement. 2. Conduct a districtwide survey of students and parents to assess opinions for current classes, techniques, current class offerings, and overall effectiveness of current curricula and instruction. 3. Visit school sites with similar demographics that have demonstrated success in engaging students to perform at a high level. 4. Provide opportunities for students to engage in career research, provide career day opportunities, and form partnerships with county industry and businesses to create opportunities for students. 5. Conduct a curricular audit and determine areas in which current texts do not align with state standards. Ensure that future textbooks are adopted districtwide, not isolated by school site. Task the curriculum committee to research and select textbooks for districtwide adoption. 6. Obtain information on staff development planning from the California Department of Education’s Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/pd/ps/rp/documents/learnteachlead.pdf. 320 Pupil Achievement 7. Partner with University of California, California State University, Hartnell Community College and other community colleges, universities and institutes of higher learning to inform parents and students of post-secondary educational opportunities and to encourage students to pursue them. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 321 3.14 Instructional Strategies Professional Standard The LEA works with the teachers’ association to recruit highly qualified teachers and to link evaluations to student success and the effective delivery of curriculum, instruction, and assessment. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Bargaining agreement with certificated employees 5. Teacher evaluation and observation forms Findings 1. District policies and the collective bargaining agreement with certificated staff address evaluations of certificated staff; however, evaluations of teachers are sporadic and inconsistent; they do not help improve lesson delivery and design or student success. 2. There is evidence of administrative support for improving instruction and student learning in isolated instances. Because administrators are tasked with many compliance issues, coordinated program management, WASC review and state testing, little time is dedicated to observation and improving instructional strategies. 3. There is little evidence of regular classroom visits and feedback to teaching staff to improve instructional practices. 4. The current collective bargaining agreement does not link teacher evaluations with student outcomes. 5. Staff and administrators provided no evidence of a policy or plan regarding teacher recruitment. 322 Pupil Achievement Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Carry out regular and consistent evaluations of certificated staff, following established time lines. Implement accountability measures to ensure that evaluations follow existing guidelines. 2. Develop a systemic process for administrators’ classroom visits. Use district-adopted materials and technology to document findings and recommendations. Research-based programs and materials are available to assist with this task. 3. Provide teachers with regular feedback regarding instructional practices. 4. Provide opportunities for teaching staff to observe other teachers within and outside of the district who are succeeding with student learning. 5. Seek additional information regarding highly qualified teachers from the California Department of Education’s Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/nclb/sr/tq/ tiiresources.asp. 6. Negotiate with the collective bargaining unit to link teacher evaluations to student outcomes. 7. Negotiate with the collective bargaining unit to develop a plan to recruit highly qualified teachers. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 323 3.15 Instructional Strategies Professional Standard The LEA optimizes opportunities for all students, including underperforming students, students with disabilities, and English language learners, to access appropriate instruction and standards-based curriculum. (DAIT) Sources and Documentation 1. Student achievement data 2. Interviews with teachers, students, and site and district administrators 3. California English Language Development Test (CELDT) results 4. Master schedule 5. Title III implementation plan 6. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 7. LEA plan Findings 1. There is no evidence of a districtwide system of intervention that does the following: • Ensures the appropriate identification of special needs students (special education, English learners, students not meeting standards and others). • Establishes placement and exit criteria for programs and courses that provide all students the support to they need to access the core curriculum and meet established levels of performance on the essential, agreed upon, content standards. 2. The two comprehensive high schools’ master schedules indicate a number of class offerings designed to meet the needs of students with disabilities and English language learners, including specially designed academic instruction in English (SDAIE), transitional English, English language development (ELE), and special education language and math. The curricular materials in these classes are more recent adoptions than in most core areas. Although the analysis of student outcomes indicates positive movement, the district lags far behind county and state averages. In 2007, 20.9% of the district’s students were proficient/advanced in English language arts. In 2009, 27.2% of the district’s students were proficient or advanced in this area, compared to 38.5% countywide and 49.9% statewide. 324 Pupil Achievement • The percentage of the district’s students who are proficient or advanced in mathemat- ics is increasing but also remain far below countywide and statewide averages. In 2009, only 12.1% of the district’s students scored proficient or advanced in mathemat- ics, compared to 35.8% of students countywide and 45.8% statewide. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and implement a policy and practices to ensure that all students, especially English learners, students with disabilities, and other high priority students, have access to the core curriculum and, based on assessed needs, to English language development, strategic interventions and intensive interventions. 2. Develop a plan to transform the district from a traditional system of high school education to one which focuses on every student meeting standards and succeeding at high levels. Establish common times for collaborative teams to identify the essential standards for each course, develop summative assessments with acceptable performance levels, and develop a series of formative assessments to assess progress toward mastery. 3. Ensure that intervention programs are provided during the regular school day for students who do not meet standards and/or who are English learners. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 325 3.16 Instructional Strategies Professional Standard The LEA makes ongoing use of a variety of assessment systems to appropriately place students at grade level, and in intervention and other special support programs. (DAIT) Sources and Documentation 1. LEA plan 2. Interviews with teachers, board members and site and district administrators 3. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) Findings 1. The district does not have policies, programs or practices that require and support regularly collecting and analyzing common formative and summative assessment data to do the following: establish instructional priorities; inform classroom instruction; place students in and exit students from intervention programs; and monitor student progress in core and intervention programs. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a system to monitor student achievement and provide students, parents, teachers and administrators with timely data to improve instruction and assess student achievement. 2. Ensure that the student achievement monitoring system includes entry-level placement assessments, monitoring of student progress through the use of formative assessments, and summative assessments to gauge instructional effectiveness and identify the support needed to improve practices. 3. Ensure that district and site administrators make certain that the achievement monitoring system is supported by accurate and timely sharing of data that teachers can access easily. 4. Ensure that the student achievement monitoring system includes access to state testing results for tests such as the California Standards Test (CST), California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) and California English Language Development Test (CELDT), and that this data is used appropriately in assessing student achievement. 5. Ensure that the student achievement monitoring system allows both formative and summative assessment data to be used to make decisions about student placement in and exit from both core and intervention classes. 326 Pupil Achievement Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 327 3.17 Instructional Strategies Professional Standard Programs for English-language learners comply with state and federal regulations and meet the quality criteria set forth by the California Department of Education. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers, students, and site and district administrators 2. LEA plan 3. Master schedule 4. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 5. Textbook inventory 6. Title III implementation plan Findings 1. There is little evidence that the district has policies, procedures and practices that are aligned with state and federal regulations to ensure that English learners (EL) have access to and receive instruction in the core curriculum and a districtwide approved English language development (ELD) curriculum. 2. Data from the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) and benchmark assessments are not used districtwide to determine students’ assignments to the correct intervention program and/or daily ELD support. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and implement policies, procedures and common practices that ensure that EL students are identified and placed in programs and classes that align with their level of English proficiency as determined by the CELDT. 2. Ensure that English learner (EL) students have access to the core standards-aligned curriculum and receive daily ELD instruction from qualified teachers. This should include specific classroom support for ELs such as academic language, specially designated academic instruction in English (SDAIE), primary language support, differentiation, direct instruction, and appropriate grouping. 3. Ensure that the student achievement monitoring system discussed in pupil achievement standard 3.16 includes the longitudinal data needed to assess individual EL students’ 328 Pupil Achievement progress, make appropriate student placements in courses and make accurate exit decisions. 4. Ensure that site administrators’ monitoring of EL students’ instruction includes evidence of the following: • student engagement, • strategies to support EL students across content areas and classrooms, • monitoring of student progress, • academic language • opportunities to routinely use expressive language 5. Ensure that site administrators develop master schedules that give EL students adequate and appropriate support. 6. Employ or assign an EL specialist to assist in the assessment, placement, monitoring and exiting of EL students. This employee’s duties should include working with parents and families of EL students regarding their children’s education and serving as a coach and mentor to assist regular classroom teachers. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 329 3.18 Instructional Strategies Professional Standard The LEA employs specialists for improving student learning, including content experts and specialists with skills to assist students with specific instructional needs. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with site and district administrators 2. Certificated and classified staff rosters Findings 1. The district does not employ content experts and/or specialists such as English language development specialists, math coaches and others to help teachers improve practices. 2. The district lacks the fiscal resources to hire such content experts and/or specialists. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a districtwide calendar for collaboration that includes dates for administering common assessments, closely followed by teacher team meetings that focus on analyzing student results and developing responsive action plans. 2. Require district and site administrators to monitor collaborative meeting time to ensure that teachers use the results of these meetings to identify strengths and needs in their instructional practices and to improve their effectiveness in meeting all students’ needs. 3. Use the outcomes of collaborative meeting time to identify staff members who are content experts and thus able to support improvement efforts, then allow the identified experts to serve as resources by providing model lessons and strategies, classroom visits, mentoring and other assistance. 4. Consult with Monterey County Office of Education content area experts and outside consultants to provide staff with on-site support and professional development. 330 Pupil Achievement Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 331 3.19 Instructional Strategies Professional Standard Students are prepared for, and may access, advanced placement or other rigorous courses in core subject areas at all comprehensive high schools. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Student achievement data 5. Student registration material and course catalog 6. Master schedules 7. Gifted and talented education (GATE) budget Findings 1. The district’s economics course is part of the business department, which is not an industry-standard arrangement. The course is usually part of the social studies department and offered by a credentialed teacher. 2. According to the district’s 2008-09 master schedules, King City High School offers seven advanced placement (AP) courses and Greenfield High School offers five AP courses. This is an increase from the reported number of AP courses available in the 2007-08 school year. Greenfield High School reported four course offerings on the 2007-08 school accountability report card (SARC) and indicated that 11.4% of 2007-08 graduates had completed all courses required for UC/CSU admission, compared to the 61.9% of graduates enrolled in those courses. King City High School reported three AP course offerings on the 2007-08 SARC and indicated that 12.5% of 2007-08 graduates had completed all A-G courses required to meet UC/CSU admission, compared to the 51.7% of graduates enrolled in those courses. 3. No data was provided regarding the number of students who have taken the advanced placement test, what their scores were, or whether they qualified for credit at a post- secondary program. 332 Pupil Achievement Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Place the economics courses at both high schools in the social studies departments. 2. Analyze data to determine if current AP courses are effective. 3. Develop a system that includes online or distance learning for AP courses with traditional low enrollments or with a history of low performance on the AP exam. 4. Investigate opportunities to offer students concurrent enrollment at Hartnell Community College. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 333 3.20 Instructional Strategies Professional Standard High school guidance counselors are knowledgeable about individual student academic needs and work to create challenging and meaningful course schedules. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Student achievement data 5. Student registration material and courses catalogs Findings 1. The district reduced the number of counselors at each high school this school year. Each high school now has one counselor for approximately 1,000 students. 2. Some students at Greenfield High School are involved in a program called Gear Up, which begins in the feeder districts and continues through the tenth grade. This program emphasizes study skills, organizational techniques and motivational topics to improve students’ academic performance. 3. Students develop a four-year plan when they begin high school. The plan is designed to help them select courses throughout high school. Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Develop a districtwide vision for counseling services. Despite current budget constraints, the district should assess students’ needs and determine and develop priorities and a plan of services for students under its existing level of staffing. 2. Apply for grants and seek partnerships to help implement the identified goals. 3. Research and implement additional programs to help students develop the skills they need to be successful after high school. The Monterey County Office of Education offers technical assistance and support to implement some of these types of programs. 334 Pupil Achievement 4. Obtain further helpful information regarding counseling from the California Department of Education’s Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/cg/mc/. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 335 3.21 Instructional Strategies Professional Standard High school students have access to career and college guidance counseling prior to the 12th grade. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Student achievement data 5. Student registration material and course catalogs Findings 1. The district offers no college night presentations or college fairs on either campus. 2. Career centers are not available at either campus. The district provides few speakers and little assistance with students’ planning for post-secondary vocations or education at either school. There is little evidence that the four-year plan for students is used to help prepare students for post secondary education opportunities. 3. Supplemental educational services (SES) were implemented last year with the assistance of Bright Futures, an outside agency that serves approximately 90 of the district’s students. The SES program recently held an activity to expose students to post- secondary career and educational options. 4. At both comprehensive high schools, military recruiters provide the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB), which gives students an indication of vocational options they may wish to pursue. 5. The district offers eight different regional occupational program (ROP) courses. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review, reorganize and strengthen its career preparation efforts for students who are not college-bound. Access the recommendations available from California Department of Education’s Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/cg/cc/careercounsel.asp. 336 Pupil Achievement 2. Develop a systematic approach to college and career guidance that provides every student with information regarding opportunities and options available after high school. 3. Ensure that regular communication takes place with each student during their four years of high school to help them accomplish their post-secondary goals. 4. Allow students to take ROP courses at either or both of the district’s high schools, regardless of which high school they attend. Whenever possible, avoid duplication and instead offer a class at one high school or the other. 5. Access additional information regarding ROP programs from the California Department of Education’s Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/ct/rp/documents/mptool. doc. 6. Partner with University of California, California State University, Hartnell Community College and other community colleges, universities and institutes of higher learning to inform parents and students of post-secondary education opportunities and to encourage students to pursue them. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 337 3.22 Instructional Strategies Professional Standard The LEA offers a multiyear, comprehensive high school program of integrated academic and technical study that is organized around a broad theme, interest area, or industry sector. (EC 52372.5, SBE 51226) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Student achievement data 5. Student registration materials and course catalogs 6. Greenfield and King City high schools’ master schedules 7. LEA Plan, July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2013, revised December 9, 2009 Findings 1. There is no districtwide vision that identifies which course offerings and modes of support should be available to students as they go through high school. Information indicates that schedules and support programs are traditional in nature and designed around existing teacher credentials, with no design for future direction or long-range planning. 2. The district does not offer a comprehensive multiyear program of integrated academic and technical study that is organized around a broad theme, interest area or industry sector. 3. Information on the district’s Web site regarding the district and schools is outdated and limited in scope. 4. There is no evidence that the district has a clearly defined vision for student offerings and programs. 5. Although the district’s two comprehensive high schools are similar in size, King City High School has a larger teaching staff (see the table under Standard 3.1 above), more AP courses and more recent textbook adoptions. King City High School also receives 338 Pupil Achievement the majority of new technology. Greenfield High School has a smaller staff, fewer AP courses, older textbooks, and receives the used technology equipment from King City High School. 6. The district’s agricultural course offerings neither adequately reflect the communitywide involvement in this industry and its impact nor meet the needs of this heavily agricultural community. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Update its Web site to include information that is up to date and useful for parents, students, staff and the community. 2. Promote and increase its agricultural department and program offerings to meet the needs of the heavily agricultural community it serves. 3. Establish sequential course offerings that allow students to pursue an identified vocational or academic interest. 4. Consider conducting a survey of industrial opportunities in Monterey County and/ or nearby counties when developing vocational or educational themes. 5. Eliminate the inequities in staffing, course offerings and other resources between the two comprehensive high schools. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 339 4.1 Assessment and Accountability Legal Standard The LEA administers and uses the results of standardized achievement tests to evaluate student performance in achieving academic standards and in comparison to the performance of students across the state. (BP 6162.51, EC 60640-60649) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers, site administrators, district staff and students 2. Board presentation regarding assessment results, September 10, 2008 and August 28, 2009 3. School Accountability Report Card (SARC) reports, 2008-2009 Findings 1. The district administers state assessments as required. Several years ago, the district did not administer the California English Language Development Test (CELDT) in compliance with state mandates. However, the district is now testing English learners at the comprehensive high schools and continuation high schools as required. 2. Administrators and teachers meet annually to review results from state assessments, including how the district performed in comparison with other districts across the state. 3. Assessment results are presented to the board annually. The presentations include data on each school as well as information about countywide and statewide performance. The presentations also include information regarding student subgroups; however, there was no evidence the district is using subgroup data or an analysis of assessment results in the development of improvement efforts. 4. As of August 2009, teachers at both schools were actively engaged in developing common benchmark assessments. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue developing common benchmark assessments, and work to develop districtwide common assessments. 2. Visit high-achieving districts to gain a broader perspective on how data can be used to help improve instructional strategies and student achievement as well as to establish and communicate priorities. 340 Pupil Achievement 3. Set priorities for discussion at board meetings regarding student achievement and programs that address improving student outcomes. 4. Seek the assistance of the Monterey County Office of Education to conduct a complete intervention program evaluation, a curriculum audit, and a professional development audit to determine areas of need. 5. In cooperation with the Monterey County Office of Education, develop and implement intervention strategies to assist students who are at risk of failure; determine areas of the curriculum that require support materials to address state standards; and develop and implement a systemic professional development calendar. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 341 4.2 Assessment and Accountability Legal Standard The LEA informs parents of the test scores of their children and provides a general explanation of these scores. (EC 60720, 60722) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff, site administrators and parents 2. Sample letters to parents communicating state assessment results Findings 1. The district has standard letters that inform parents of their children’s test scores and provide a general explanation of the scores. 2. The district explains test scores at meetings for parents, including board meetings. 3. This district makes materials available to parents in English and Spanish, and provides translators for Spanish-speaking parents at meetings. However, translation services are not available for parents who speak other languages or dialects. District staff members reported that the district has the largest population of individuals outside of Mexico who speak two Aztec dialects from the Mexican state of Oaxaca: Mixteco and Triqui. However, the district has been unsuccessful in its attempts to find translators, so no such services are available for these dialects. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to provide parents with letters that inform them about their children’s test scores and provide a general explanation of these scores. 2. Continue to discuss test results in meetings for parents, including board meetings. 3. Continue efforts to find translators to ensure that all parents have access to information about, and explanations of, test results. 4. Provide written and oral translations for parents who speak the Mixteco and Triqui dialects. 342 Pupil Achievement Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 343 4.3 Assessment and Accountability Professional Standard The LEA has developed summative and frequent common formative assessments that inform and direct instructional practices as part of an ongoing process of continuous improvement. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers, site administrators and district staff 2. Sample summative assessment 3. Sample formative assessment 4. Sample benchmark assessment Findings 1. As of August 2009, staff members at both high schools were working collaboratively to establish common standards-based benchmark assessments. The focus is on developing site-based common assessments, not using the results to establish and communicate instructional priorities and strategies for improvement. 2. Some departments have begun using common assessments at their school. 3. The district’s goal is to develop common benchmark assessments at each site, not to develop districtwide common assessments. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue current efforts to develop benchmark assessments at each school, and work to adopt districtwide common benchmark assessments. 2. Visit high-achieving districts to learn more about how data can be used to help make improvements and to establish and communicate priorities. 3. Provide staff with training in developing and using formative assessments to influence and shape instruction. Training is often available through county offices of education and organizations such as Solution Tree, the Association of California School Administrators (ACSA) and other providers 4. Provide staff members with training in the use of data to influence and shape instruction. 344 Pupil Achievement 5. Use summative and formative assessments to influence and shape instruction. 6. Use assessment results to identify students who need additional support and to identify areas in which teachers need additional strategies. Use this information to help improve student achievement and narrow achievement gaps. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 345 4.4 Assessment and Accountability Professional Standard The LEA provides an accurate and timely school-level assessment and data system as needed by teachers and administrators for instructional decision-making and monitoring. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers, site administrators, and district staff Findings 1. The district uses the Aeries student information system for student data and the Santa Clara County Office of Education’s SChoolPlan software application to help analyze assessment data and results. Teachers and administrators have access to these applications. 2. The district is developing benchmark assessments, but results from these assessments are not yet available to most departments. 3. Staff reported conflicting understandings about how results from the benchmark assessments will be included in the SChoolPlan system and about whether this will occur. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that staff members have a consistent understanding of how the district will enter benchmark assessment results into SChoolPlan. 2. Provide each teacher with results from benchmark assessments for the students they teach, for their entire department, and for subgroups. 3. Use disaggregated data to establish districtwide instructional priorities and goals. 4. Use disaggregated data to identify areas in which additional strategies are needed to improve student achievement and narrow achievement gaps. 5. Use data to help improve instructional practices and to identify teachers who need additional professional development or support to help students meet state standards. 6. Monitor the progress of professional learning community discussions through leadership meetings. Determine the district’s progress in this area and develop strategic plans. 346 Pupil Achievement Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 347 4.5 Assessment and Accountability Professional Standard School staff assesses all students to determine students’ needs, and whether students require close monitoring, differentiated instruction, additional targeted assessment, specific research based intervention, or acceleration. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers, site administrators, district staff and students 2. Single school plan 3. LEA Plan January 19, 2009 Findings 1. Teachers and students reported that intervention practices vary among teachers; some teachers provide targeted interventions or accelerations for students and others do not. 2. Students indicated that grading practices vary greatly among teachers and that some teachers’ students have a much higher failure rate than others. 3. Students who have failed the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) are placed in classes designed to help them pass this exam. 4. No data are available for analysis to determine if interventions are working and what the actual improvement rates are. 5. The district’s English language arts (ELA) longitudinal comparisons indicate that students with disabilities and economically disadvantaged students are improving at a slower rate than all students and English language learners. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop common expectations for determining students’ needs, and for determining whether students require close monitoring, differentiated instruction, additional targeted assessment, specific research-based intervention or acceleration. 2. Hold teachers accountable for determining students’ needs and for monitoring students, as well as for providing differentiated instruction, additional targeted assessments, research- based intervention or acceleration. 348 Pupil Achievement 3. Provide teachers with professional development and support to help them monitor students and determine their needs, and to assist them in providing differentiated instruction, other targeted assessments, research-based intervention or acceleration. 4. Research the feasibility of using the Response to Intervention (RtI) model to assess and assist students who may need targeted intervention to help them succeed academically. 5. Complete an analysis of letter grade distribution in classes and within similar subject areas to determine if grading practices are aligned with student achievement and the course syllabi. Multiple measurements of success (state achievement data, formative and summative assessments, and grades) can help identify grading anomalies within a subject area. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 349 4.6 Assessment and Accountability Professional Standard A process to identify struggling 9-12 students and intervene with additional support necessary to pass the high school exit examination is well-developed and communicated to teachers, students and parents. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Student achievement data 5. California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) intervention, Title I and EIA Budgets Findings 1. The district recently reinstated student study teams (SSTs) at its school sites. 2. There are minimal formal intervention programs or strategies for students who are failing or in danger of failing. 3. The district does not use Response to Intervention (RtI) to meet the needs of students who are at risk of failing. RtI is a systematic, tiered approach to identifying and providing early intervention strategies for students, which may benefit the district. 4. Greenfield High School is in year four of program improvement status and implemented supplemental educational services (SES) during year three. 5. Students whose assessment scores are below the range that indicates proficiency are placed in double-period math and/or English classes in ninth grade. 6. No data is available for analysis to determine if the interventions are working or to measure improvement rates. 350 Pupil Achievement Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a districtwide plan for interventions. The plan should include measurable data to help determine if the interventions are working. 2. Review and analyze data to determine if the double periods of math and English are providing students with the support they need. 3. Provide additional support to the SSTs. More information about SSTs is available on the California Department of Education’s Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/ai/dp/ sb65sst.asp. 4. Research and implement Response to Intervention (RtI) to identify and meet the needs of students who are at risk of failing. 5. Consider obtaining examples of model CAHSEE intervention programs from the California Department of Education’s Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/hs/ cahseematrix.asp. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 351 4.7 Assessment and Accountability Professional Standard The LEA has a process to notify high school students and their parents regarding high school proficiency examination requirements and scores. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Student achievement data 5. Communications to parents and students Findings 1. The district mails state forms to parents that inform them of their children’s California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE) results after the test is completed. 2. Coordination with feeder schools is lacking regarding preparing students to pass the CAHSEE. 3. The district’s Aeries student information system has a Web-based parent portal that allows parents to monitor their student’s progress at any time. The portal is in place at King City High School and is being launched at Greenfield High School. Approximately 20% of the parents of King City High School students use the portal. This technology would provide an effective means of communication with parents if it were further implemented and expanded Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. As intervention strategies are finalized, communicate information about them to parents of students who need additional support to pass the CAHSEE. 2. Make additional efforts to coordinate with feeder schools to ensure that students begin preparing to pass the CAHSEE before they begin high school 352 Pupil Achievement 3. Obtain additional information regarding proper notification to parents from the California Department of Education’s Web site at http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/hs/documents/ cahseentpkt08.doc. 4. Work to expand implementation and increase parents’ use of the Aeries student information system’s parent portal to improve communication with parents. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 353 4.8 Assessment and Accountability Professional Standard Principals and teachers in underperforming schools and/or in schools under mandated improvement programs are provided special training and support by the LEA. Improvement plans are monitored. Sources and Documentation 1. LEA plan 2. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 3. Interviews with teachers and site and district administrators Findings 1. There is no evidence of a districtwide professional development plan for teachers and administrators. 2. Both the recently revised LEA plan and the single plans for student achievement (SPSA) at both sites include statements regarding professional development, but the two are not aligned. 3. Existing professional development opportunities depend on financial resources alone and are not the product of a districtwide needs assessment based on student achievement results. 4. No district-level improvement plan has been developed as a result of Greenfield High School’s program improvement status. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a districtwide professional development plan that addresses the goals and objectives spelled out in the LEA plan and the SPSAs. 2. Ensure that the professional development plan includes a system for evaluating and setting priorities for professional development activities (collaboration time, mentoring, instructional coaching, the use of outside experts) that address the improvement goals outlined in the plan. 3. Ensure that district and site budgets support the professional development activities, starting with those identified as the highest priority. 354 Pupil Achievement 4. Ensure that district and site administrators take responsibility for monitoring the implementation of professional development to ensure that it meets the plan’s goals and the students’ needs 5. Review and evaluate the outcomes of the professional development plan annually, using a timeline that coordinates with the annual update of the LEA plan and the SPSAs. 6. Develop and implement a professional development plan as outlined in Standard 5.1 below. 7. Consult with the Monterey County Office of Education to develop a comprehensive academic improvement plan for Greenfield and King City high schools to address program improvement status. Consider hiring an outside consultant to assess, develop and provide support to implement the improvement plan. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 355 4.9 Assessment and Accountability Professional Standard The LEA communicates systematically and clearly with all stakeholders, especially teachers, students and parents, about student achievement, academic expectations, and accountability requirements. The LEA communicates the availability of options and special services to parents and students. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers, site administrators, district staff and students 2. Letters to parents 3. Single school plans 4. School Accountability Report Card (SARC) Findings 1. The district communicates with teachers, board members and parents regarding its state assessment results and program improvement status. 2. The district sent a letter to parents to inform them that supplemental educational services are available, but the letter did not contain specific information. Instead, the district instructed parents to attend a meeting to learn details about these services. 3. This district makes materials available to parents in English and Spanish, and provides translators for Spanish-speaking parents at meetings. However, translation services are not available for parents who speak other languages or dialects. District staff members reported that the district has the largest population of individuals outside of Mexico who speak two Aztec dialects from the Mexican state of Oaxaca: Mixteco and Triqui. However, the district has been unsuccessful in its attempts to find translators, so no such services are available for these dialects. 4. Expected schoolwide learning results (ESLRs) were posted at Greenfield High School in preparation for the WASC accreditation team’s visit. Students knew what ESLRs were and indicated that they were working to achieve them. 5. Administrators, teachers and students indicated that teachers’ practices vary greatly in the area of intervention and support for struggling students. 6. The parent handbook includes graduation requirements, and the district communicates expectations at meetings with parents. 356 Pupil Achievement 7. Counselors schedule meetings with students and their parents to discuss high school requirements and student progress toward meeting those requirements. Staff report that parent attendance at these meetings is generally good. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish common expectations for teachers regarding assistance for struggling students, and systematically communicate these expectations to teachers. 2. Hold teachers and administrators accountable for student achievement through evaluation and classroom visits. 3. Develop districtwide intervention programs for students at risk of failing. 4. Provide parents with information about the special services available to them and their children without requiring them to attend an informational meeting. 5. Continue efforts to find translators to ensure that all parents have access to information about expectations and services for their children. 6. Continue efforts to ensure that students and their parents understand graduation requirements and their progress toward meeting these requirements. 7. Use the district’s Web site and local media to provide general information to parents. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 357 4.10 Assessment and Accountability Professional Standard The LEA and school site administration monitor fidelity of program implementation in the delivery of content and instructional strategies. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers and site and district administrators 2. Teacher observation form 3. Teacher evaluation form Findings 1. There is no evidence that classroom visits take place frequently (weekly) and routinely to ensure that board-approved standards-based programs are being implemented and that research-based instructional strategies are in use in all classrooms with all students. 2. There is no evidence that pacing calendars are monitored and reviewed regularly to ensure that all students are given the time and opportunity to learn the course-specific standards assessed on the California Standards Test (CST) and the California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE). 3. There is no evidence that teachers and administrators have developed a clear set of expectations for ongoing implementation and monitoring of instructional effectiveness. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop clear expectations for implementing and monitoring district-approved standards- based programs and instructional materials, including those for English language development (ELD) and special education. 2. Ensure that pacing guides are aligned to the instructional materials/textbooks, the California Frameworks, and the CST/CAHSEE blueprints and are discussed and known by all staff to ensure that the agreed upon essential standards are taught systematically across the district. 3. Ensure that clear expectations are in place for implementing and monitoring instructional effectiveness, and that all staff discuss and know them. 4. Provide staff with opportunities and time to increase their knowledge and expertise to meet students’ needs. 358 Pupil Achievement 5. Implement a districtwide classroom visitation schedule that is followed by district and site administrators, and ensure that administrators’ calendars give priority to these visits. Each classroom visit should have a clear program and/or instructional focus that is communicated to teachers. 6. Provide teachers with individual and/or collective feedback following the classroom visits to help improve practices. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 359 4.11 Assessment and Accountability Professional Standard The LEA has policy and procedures detailing the collection and maintenance of ethnicity data and all other demographic data needed for state and federal reporting. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with district staff 2. Data collection form Findings 1. The district has procedures and forms to collect data on ethnicity and other demographics needed for state and federal reporting. 2. The form used to collect students’ ethnicity data does not comply with federal requirements because it lists Hispanic as a possible answer to the question about race. Federal rules require that Hispanic be listed under the question regarding ethnicity. Federal rules required that the data be collected in a two parts as indicated below: The first part must consist of a question about the respondent’s ethnicity with the following allowable responses: • Hispanic or Latino • Not Hispanic or Latino The second part must ask respondents to select one or more races from the following categories: • American Indian or Alaska Native • Asian • Black or African American • Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander • White Federal rules do not allow Hispanic to be included in this list, nor do they allow the include of an “Other” or “Unknown” category. In addition, California Government Code (GC) Section 8310.5 requires that the district collect data for each major Asian and Pacific Islander group, including, but not limited to, Asian Indian, Cambodian, Chinese, Filipino, Guamanian, Hawaiian, Hmong, Japanese, Korean, Laotian, Samoan, Tahitian and Vietnamese. 360 Pupil Achievement Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 3. Revise the student and staff enrollment forms for collecting race and ethnicity data as needed to comply with federal and state requirements. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 361 4.12 Assessment and Accountability Professional Standard Written policies and procedures are in place to ensure that special education processes are conducted pursuant to federal and state laws and that staff is provided appropriate, ongoing training to ensure proper implementation. Sources and Documentation 1. Board Policy 0430(a), Comprehensive Local Plan for Special Education, dated Oct. 14, 2009 2. Board Policy 6143(a), Course of Study, dated April 9, 1997; Board Policy 6162.5(a), Student Assessment, dated May 27, 1998; Board Policy 6164.4(a), Identification of Individuals for Special Education, dated April 8, 1998. 3. Administrative Regulation 6174, Education for English Language Learners, dated January 10, 1996 4. 4. Interviews with teachers, special education teachers, and site and district administrators 5. LEA plan 6. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 7. Interview with SELPA Findings 1. Services delivered by the Monterey County Office of Education and the SELPA meet students’ needs and comply with state and federal laws. The Monterey County Office of Education provides special education instruction to students with severe needs. One class for high school age students is located at Greenfield High School, and a second class for transitioning adults 18-22 years of age is provided in King City off the campus. In both cases the county office has had some difficulty coordinating and providing services while meeting the requirement for the least restrictive education environment. In the past, the high school program was operated at King City High School; however, the facility was found to be noncompliant and was abandoned. The program is now located at a county office-owned building on the Greenfield High School campus. 2. The district is seeking program transfer from the SELPA to the district under the direction of the state administrator. The district is arranging to continue using the county office- owned building on the Greenfield High School site. Administrators feel that the program transfer will support mainstreaming and coordination of student programs. 362 Pupil Achievement 3. The King City adult transition program facility is under negotiation. The Monterey County Office of Education has indicted its support of the program transfer for both programs. 4. The district will need to contract with the Monterey County Office of Education to continue to provide nursing and other designated instructional services (DIS) to meet students’ needs in areas for which the district does not employ professional services. 5. Board policies are outdated and are not consistently followed 6. Written policies and procedures regarding the education of students with special needs were not available for FCMAT’s review 7. Policies and procedures are not uniformly applied and understood. 8. Each school site operates and provides special education services in isolation, without district direction. Prior to June 30, 2009 the director of special education for the King City Elementary School District provided special education support and direction to the King City Union High School District. No contract was in place or available detailing the agreement for this individual’s services. 9. King City and Greenfield high schools offer resource specialist program services to students with identified needs. The district employs one full-time equivalent (FTE) district psychologist and one FTE speech pathologist. 10. The referral process is cumbersome and may reduce the number of parents and staff who pursue evaluation for special needs or services. 11. The district is updating board policies under the direction of the state administrator. 12. Teachers who feel that they have students who need special services go through the following process: 1. Attempt and document intervention strategies 2. Meet with the student study team (SST) to discuss 3. Implement suggested strategies 4. Reconvene SST 5. Refer student to psychologist for testing This process involves significant documentation. Pupil Achievement 363 13. Student study teams have not been meeting regularly this year; however, there is not a backlog of students. A school site administrator scheduled and ran SST meetings, but no parents appeared at the several meetings scheduled and the students remain in regular education classes without assessment or intervention services. 14. The district follows the Monterey County Office of Education’s SELPA plan for special education; however, this plan does not contain a policy regarding how SSTs or Response to Intervention (RtI) should be managed because this is a function of regular education 15. Professional development has not been a priority. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to review and revise board policies and administration regulations 2. Appoint or hire a credentialed staff member with a background and training in special education federal and state legal requirements to fill the director of special education position. 3. Develop an agreement with the SELPA to provide consultation with a SELPA program specialist to support the transition of the county-operated programs to the district and the development of needed professional development and operational processes. 4. Contract with the Monterey County Office of Education to provide students with DIS services in areas for which the district does not employ an individual with the necessary professional credential (such as nursing or services for the blind). 5. Review referral and assessment processes and align them with those of the Monterey County Office of Education and the SELPA to ensure that students with special needs receive timely and appropriate services. 6. Provide staff and the director of special education with professional development and training. 7. Schedule regular weekly or biweekly SST/RtI meetings. Designate an employee, preferably the resource teacher, as the SST/RtI coordinator. Consider providing prep time for this individual to schedule and plan for SST/RTI meetings. The principal is the overall supervisor and should monitor to ensure that the SST/RTI coordinator is scheduling meetings in a timely and effective manner. 8. The SST/RTI should consist of the site principal, the referred student’s classroom teacher, the resource teacher and, when appropriate, the psychologist and/or speech teacher. It can also be helpful to have two experienced classroom teachers as permanent members of the SST. 364 Pupil Achievement 9. If the SST determines that a student should be referred for further assessment, the team should designate a case manager to ensure that testing, follow-up meetings, placement and interventions take place in a timely and effective manner. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 365 5.1 Professional Development Professional Standard The LEA provides a continuing program of professional development to keep instructional staff, administrators, and board members updated on current issues and research pertaining to curriculum, instructional strategies, and student assessment. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers, support staff, board members and site and district administrators 2. LEA plan 3. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 4. Board Policy 4131, Staff Development, dated December 14, 2005 Findings 1. There is no evidence of a districtwide plan or a planning process for professional development for instructional staff, administrators or board members. 2. The professional development that has been provided, such as AB 430, SB 472, Expository Reading and Writing Course (ERWC) and others, is of high quality but is not part of a comprehensive plan based on students’ and staff’s identified needs. In addition, some training was provided on dated curriculum materials that were replaced within six months after the training. 3. The LEA plan includes professional development activities but is not based on a districtwide plan for professional development. The LEA plan also does not include a time line or budget for implementing the professional development activities included in the plan (see standard 5.5). 4. Board members have not been given the opportunity to participate in professional development on current issues and research related to improving student achievement. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a planning process for professional development that includes the following: • Full involvement of all involved • Examination of student achievement data , including the California Standards Test (CST), California High School Exit Exam (CAHSEE), California English Language Development Test(CELDT), benchmark assessments other data, including disaggre- gated data for all subgroups. 366 Pupil Achievement • Analysis of school and district staff experience and knowledge • Alignment with the district’s mission, vision and goals • Identification of research-based professional development models • Time lines and benchmarks for implementation • Methods of evaluation, including data on the effects the professional development is having • Methods for monitoring and adjusting the plan • Identification of the human and fiscal resources needed to support the plan 2. Develop a three- to five-year plan and review it annually, making adjustments to meet the needs of students and staff. 3. Ensure that the professional development plan is compatible with and supports the LEA plan and the SPSA. 4. Use data from evaluations and the effect the plan is having to allocate professional development time, resources and expertise and to determine priorities for implementation. 5. Develop a professional development plan for board members that is linked to the district’s goals, the professional development priorities and the LEA plan. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 367 5.2 Professional Development Professional Standard The standards developed by the California Standards for the Teaching Profession are implemented and supported. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with teachers and site and district administrators 2. Beginning Teacher Support and Assessment (BTSA) program requirements 3. Sample lesson plans Findings 1. The district implements and supports the BTSA program, which is based on the California Standards for the Teaching Profession (CSTP). 2. The King City Union School District, a K-8 district, coordinates the BTSA program. 3. No King City Joint Union High School District secondary certificated staff support the program. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the support providers that assist the new teachers are trained and that they are providing the level of support required by the BTSA program. 2. Engage King City Joint Union High School District staff to provide support to staff enrolled in the BTSA program. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: 368 Pupil Achievement 5.3 Professional Development Professional Standard The LEA provides opportunities and ongoing support for teachers to collaborate on the analysis and improvement of curriculum, instruction, and use of assessment data. Sources and documentation 1. LEA plan 2. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 3. Interviews with teachers, school site council members and district and site administrators Findings 1. There is no formal and districtwide implementation of opportunities for teachers to collaborate. 2. Teachers are requesting support for collaboration time from school site councils (SSCs) for a variety of activities, including developing common assessments and preparing for Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and implement a district schedule of teacher collaboration time that is a part of the regular work calendar and requires the participation of all teachers. 2. Ensure that the district’s schedule of collaboration time includes specific dates for administering assessments, closely followed by teacher team meetings that focus on analyzing student results and developing responsive action plans. 3. Ensure that the district’s guidelines and consistent monitoring of collaboration time shows that teachers are using this time to review student work, analyze common assessment results, and identify strengths and areas that need improved instructional effectiveness. 4. Review collaboration annually to improve it and to assess its impact on improving student achievement. Pupil Achievement 369 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 370 Pupil Achievement 5.4 Professional Development Professional Standard Principals make formal and informal classroom visits. Based on these visits, principals provide constructive feedback and assistance to teachers. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site administrators, teachers, support staff, parents and students 2. School site plans, Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) accreditation report and other documents. 3. Board policies and regulations 4. Certificated bargaining agreement Findings 1. The district’s system for evaluating teachers is inconsistent. Timely feedback, routine observations and evaluations, and accountability are lacking and needed. 2. Site administrators do not consistently hold teachers accountable for instructional strategies or teaching efforts. 3. A lack of consistent leadership has resulted in an absence of accountability. King City High School had five different principals from 1998-2008, and the district has had four superintendents in the last six years. 4. There is little evidence that written or oral feedback regarding instructional methods has resulted in an improved learning environment or positive results in student achievement. 5. Support materials and interviews with teachers and administrators indicate that the vice principal of Greenfield High School is developing a system of accountability, making classroom visits and providing feedback to staff. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Implement systematic goal-setting for teachers as well as observation and evaluations of teachers that closely follow agreed-upon guidelines. 2. Ensure that teacher evaluations help improve learning outcomes and opportunities for students. Pupil Achievement 371 3. Implement and monitor a policy regarding classroom visits by administrators, and set standards and expectations regarding the frequency of classroom visits. 4. Develop written time lines for site administrators to follow regarding the evaluation of certificated staff, and monitor this at the district level. 5. Support administrators’ efforts to build time into their schedule to visit classrooms regularly and provide feedback to teachers. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 372 Pupil Achievement 5.5 Professional Development Professional Standard The LEA plan includes budgeted coherent professional development activities that reflect research-based strategies for improved student achievement and a focus on standards-based content knowledge. Sources and Documentation 1. LEA plan 2. Single plan for student achievement (SPSA) 3. Interviews with site and district administrators and teachers 4. Board Policy 4131 (a), dated December 14, 2005 Findings 1. The LEA plan includes professional development activities but does not include a time line for completion or a plan to monitor its implementation. 2. The LEA plan includes budgets for the activities but not a specific allocation for each activity. There is no budget for professional development in the LEA plan. 3. See findings under standard 5.1 above. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the LEA plan is compatible with and supports the district’s professional development plan (see standard 5.1). 2. Use a budget planning tool that identifies all appropriate and available funding sources for the priorities listed in the professional development plan. 3. See recommendations under Standards 4.8 and 5.1 Pupil Achievement 373 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 374 Pupil Achievement 6.1 Data Management/Student Information Systems Legal Standard The LEA assigns and maintains Statewide Student Identifiers and maintains all data to be reported to the California Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) and the Online Public Update for Schools (OPUS) necessary to comply with No Child Left Behind reporting requirements. (EC 60900(e) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews 2. Reports from OPUS 3. 2009-2010 California Basic Educational Data System (CBEDS) Online Public Update for Schools (OPUS) certified submission, October 28, 2009 Findings 1. Staff assign and maintain statewide student identifiers and are in the process of reconciling data in CALPADS. CALPADS went live statewide in October 2009. District staff have attended CALPADS training and appeared to be on track to report the required data to CALPADS for the fall 1 certification in January 2010 and for fall 2 and spring submission when the state implements this function. 2. The district completed its OPUS submission for 2009-10 on time. 3. The district’s student information system (SIS) manager audits data daily to identify errors and sends school sites information regarding data that needs to be corrected. 4. The SIS manager was recently promoted to ensure that she has sufficient authority to require school site staff’s cooperation regarding data submissions and corrections. 5. Staff members report difficulty in uniformly applying codes, including exit codes. For example, when students leave King City High School they are often given an exit code of 160, which means they transferred to another California public school. However, sometimes this code is used even if the district has not been informed that the student is transferring to another California public school. The SIS manger reports that she is working with staff to increase consistency in coding. 6. Staff report that each school site maintains a separate master course catalog. 7. The district has documented some of the procedures for collecting and maintaining the required data, but not all. Pupil Achievement 375 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue current efforts to collect and maintain CALPADS and OPUS data, including data audits and efforts to ensure that those who code information in the student information system understand and use the correct codes. 2. Develop and use a districtwide master course catalog. 3. Document procedures for collecting and maintaining all required data. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: 376 Pupil Achievement 6.2 Data Management/Student Information Systems Professional Standard Student information systems support users with information that is relevant, timely, and accurate. Assessments are performed to ensure that users are involved in defining needs, developing specifications, and selecting appropriate systems. LEA standards are imposed to ensure the maintainability, compatibility, and supportability of the various systems. The LEA ensures that the student information system is compatible with CALPADS, OPUS, and any other systems with which it must interface. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff Findings 1. The district uses the Aeries student information system, which is compatible with CALPADS and OPUS. 2. Staff reported that the district considers state reporting requirements as well as teachers’ and district staff members’ needs when selecting systems. 3. Staff members indicated that the information in Aeries is accurate and reliable. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue current practices in this area. Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 8. Implementation Scale: Pupil Achievement 377 6.3 Data Management/Student Information Systems Professional Standard The LEA utilizes the technological equipment for the student information system (SIS) that meets or exceeds the vendor’s minimum recommendations. The LEA provides access to the SIS and ongoing training to staff responsible for entering, maintaining, reporting, and certifying student data. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and site staff Findings 1. The district uses the Aeries student information system. 2. The district considers Aeries’ system requirements when purchasing equipment for employees who use this program. Staff members who use Aeries have equipment that meets or exceeds the minimum specifications needed to run the program. 3. Staff have received initial training to use Aeries and attend additional trainings to ensure they stay up to date with changes to the system. 4. Staff members who are responsible for entering data into Aeries have access to the system. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue current practices in this area. Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 8 Implementation Scale: 378 Pupil Achievement 6.4 Data Management/Student Information Systems Professional Standard Required special education reports, including those for the California Special Education Management Information System (CASEMIS) are accurate, compliant, and submitted pursuant to the required timelines. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with administrators, district staff and special education staff 2. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education staff 3. Interview with SELPA director Findings 1. The district contracts with the Monterey County Office of Education for data entry and maintenance of the CASEMIS program. The Monterey County Office of Education provides data entry, maintains the records and systems, and produces annual special education reports on behalf of the district. Required special education reports are accurate, compliant, and submitted in a timely manner. The county office is currently using the SELPA Manager software program but is transitioning to the Spectrum system developed by the San Joaquin County Office of Education. Special Education staff will enter data directly into the system when they are fully trained and implementation is complete. 2. The district has increased its receptionist position’s hours and plans to contract for training and support so that this position will be responsible for entering and maintaining the CASEMIS data and assisting with reporting in the future. Recommendations for Recovery 1. Continue to contract with the Monterey County Office of Education for data entry and reporting. 2. Provide training and support for the receptionist position when transitioning data entry and reporting to this position. 3. Provide ongoing professional development for the receptionist position to ensure continued compliance with state and federal reporting requirements. Pupil Achievement 379 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 6 Implementation Scale: 380 Pupil Achievement Table of Pupil Achievement Ratings Pupil Achievement 381 382 Pupil Achievement February Pupil Achievement Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – PLANNING PROCESSES 1.1 Categorical and compensatory program funds supplement and do not supplant 0 services and materials to be provided by the LEA. (20 USC 6321) LEGAL STANDARD – PLANNING PROCESSES 1.2 Each school has a school site council, comprised of teachers, parents, principal and 2 students, that is actively engaged in school planning. (EC 52050-52075) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PLANNING PROCESSES The LEA’s vision, mission, values, and priorities focus on the achievement and needs 1.3 1 of all students with the goals of closing the achievement gap and helping all students meet their full potential. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PLANNING PROCESSES The LEA’s policies, culture and practices reflect a commitment to implementing 1.4 1 systemic reform, innovative leadership, and high expectations to improve student achievement and learning. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PLANNING PROCESSES The LEA has fiscal policies and a fiscal resource allocation plan that are aligned with 1.5 0 measurable student achievement outcomes and instructional goals including, but not limited to, the Essential Program Components. (Revised DAIT) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PLANNING PROCESSES The LEA has policies to fully implement the State Board of Education-adopted Essential Program Components for Instructional Success. These include 1.6 1 implementation of instructional materials, intervention programs, aligned assessments, appropriate use of pacing and instructional time, and alignment of categorical programs and instructional support. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PLANNING PROCESSES The LEA uses student achievement data, graduation and dropout rates, attendance 1.7 2 and discipline data to establish and communicate instructional priorities and strategies for improved student learning and achievement. (DAIT) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PLANNING PROCESSES The LEA provides and supports the use of information systems and technology 1.8 to manage student data, and provides professional development to site staff on 2 effectively analyzing and applying data to improve student learning and achievement. (DAIT) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PLANNING PROCESSES 1.9 The LEA holds teachers, site administrators, and LEA personnel accountable for 0 student achievement through evaluations and professional development. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PLANNING PROCESSES The LEA has a current board-approved Safe Schools Plan and a clearly defined 1.10 0 discipline policy. Both the plan and policy have been communicated to parents, students, staff, board, and the community. Pupil Achievement 383 February Pupil Achievement Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – CURRICULUM The LEA provides and fully implements SBE-adopted and standards-based (or 2.1 aligned for secondary) instructional textbooks and materials for all students, including 1 intervention in reading/language arts and mathematics, and support for students failing to demonstrate proficiency in history, social studies, and science. (EC 60119, DAIT) LEGAL STANDARD – CURRICULUM 2.2 HIV prevention instruction occurs at least once in junior high or middle school and 4 once in high school and is consistent with the CDE’s Health Framework. (EC 51930) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – CURRICULUM The LEA has planned, adopted and implemented an academic program based on 2.3 1 California content standards, frameworks, and SBE-adopted/aligned materials, and articulated it to curriculum, instruction, and assessments in the LEA plan. (DAIT) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – CURRICULUM 2.4 The LEA has developed and implemented common assessments to assess strengths 2 and weaknesses of the instructional program to guide curriculum development. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – CURRICULUM 2.5 The LEA has adopted a plan for integrating technology into curriculum and instruction 1 at all grade levels to help students meet or exceed state standards and local goals. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – CURRICULUM 2.6 The LEA optimizes state and federal funding to support the use of instructional 4 technology in its schools. LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES The LEA provides equal access to educational opportunities to all students regardless 3.1 of race, gender, socioeconomic standing, and other factors. The LEA’s policies, 1 practices, and staff demonstrate a commitment to equally serving the needs and interests of all students, parents, and family members. (EC 51007) LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES The LEA employs certificated staff that possess the appropriate credential or permit 3.2 5 from the CTC and meet the highly qualified designation of NCLB. (20 USC 6319, 7801; 5 CCR 6100-6126) LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.3 The LEA’s teachers and parents participate in decisions affecting school and 2 categorical programs. (EC 51100-51102) LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.4 The LEA complies with and monitors implementation of the instructional time for the 5 adopted core programs for reading, language arts and mathematics. (EC 32212) LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.5 All incoming kindergarten students are admitted following board-approved policies and N/A administrative regulations (EC 48000-48002, 48010, 48011). 384 Pupil Achievement February Pupil Achievement Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES The LEA provides students with the necessary courses to meet the high school 3.6 2 graduation requirements. (EC 51225.3) The LEA provides access and support for all students to complete UC and CSU required courses (A-G requirement). LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.7 The LEA provides an alternative means for students to complete the prescribed course 2 of study required for high school graduation. (EC 51225.3) LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES Supplemental instruction is offered to students who do not demonstrate “sufficient 3.8 3 progress” toward passing the California High School Exit Exam. (EC 37252, EC 60851) LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.9 The general instructional program adheres to all requirements put forth in EC 51000- 4 52950. LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES The LEA has adopted systematic procedures for identification, screening, referral, 3.10 2 assessment, planning, implementation, review, and triennial assessment of students with special needs. (EC 56301) LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.11 Curriculum and instruction for special education students is rigorous and appropriate 4 to meet special education students’ learning needs. (EC 56205, EC 56345) LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES Programs for special education students meet the least restrictive environment 3.12 provision of the law and the quality criteria and goals set forth by the California 3 Department of Education and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. (EC 56000, EC 56040.1, 20 USC Sec. 1400 et. seq.) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.13 Students are engaged in learning, and they are able to demonstrate and apply their 2 knowledge and skills. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES The LEA works with the teachers’ association to recruit highly qualified teachers and to 3.14 2 link evaluations to student success and the effective delivery of curriculum, instruction, and assessment. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES The LEA optimizes opportunities for all students, including underperforming students, 3.15 1 students with disabilities, and English language learners, to access appropriate instruction and standards-based curriculum. (DAIT) Pupil Achievement 385 February Pupil Achievement Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES The LEA makes ongoing use of a variety of assessment systems to appropriately 3.16 2 place students at grade level, and in intervention and other special support programs. (DAIT) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.17 Programs for English-language learners comply with state and federal regulations and 1 meet the quality criteria set forth by the California Department of Education. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.18 The LEA employs specialists for improving student learning, including content experts 0 and specialists with skills to assist students with specific instructional needs. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.19 Students are prepared for, and may access, advanced placement or other rigorous 4 courses in core subject areas at all comprehensive high schools. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.20 High school guidance counselors are knowledgeable about individual student 3 academic needs and work to create challenging and meaningful course schedules. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES 3.21 High school students have access to career and college guidance counseling prior to 3 the 12th grade. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES The LEA offers a multiyear, comprehensive high school program of integrated 3.22 1 academic and technical study that is organized around a broad theme, interest area, or industry sector. (EC 52372.5, SBE 51226) LEGAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY The LEA administers and uses the results of standardized achievement tests to 4.1 4 evaluate student performance in achieving academic standards and in comparison to the performance of students across the state. (BP 6162.51, EC 60640-60649) LEGAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY 4.2 The LEA informs parents of the test scores of their children and provides a general 5 explanation of these scores. (EC 60720, 60722) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY The LEA has developed summative and frequent common formative assessments that 4.3 2 inform and direct instructional practices as part of an ongoing process of continuous improvement. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY The LEA provides an accurate and timely school-level assessment and data system 4.4 2 as needed by teachers and administrators for instructional decision-making and monitoring. 386 Pupil Achievement February Pupil Achievement Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY School staff assesses all students to determine students’ needs, and whether students 4.5 1 require close monitoring, differentiated instruction, additional targeted assessment, specific research based intervention, or acceleration. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY A process to identify struggling 9-12 students and intervene with additional 4.6 2 support necessary to pass the high school exit examination is well-developed and communicated to teachers, students and parents. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY 4.7 The LEA has a process to notify high school students and their parents regarding high 6 school proficiency examination requirements and scores. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY Principals and teachers in underperforming schools and/or in schools under mandated 4.8 1 improvement programs are provided special training and support by the LEA. Improvement plans are monitored. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY The LEA communicates systematically and clearly with all stakeholders, especially 4.9 teachers, students and parents, about student achievement, academic expectations, 3 and accountability requirements. The LEA communicates the availability of options and special services to parents and students. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY 4.10 The LEA and school site administration monitor fidelity of program implementation in 0 the delivery of content and instructional strategies. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY 4.11 The LEA has policy and procedures detailing the collection and maintenance of 3 ethnicity data and all other demographic data needed for state and federal reporting. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ASSESSMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY Written policies and procedures are in place to ensure that special education 4.12 2 processes are conducted pursuant to federal and state laws and that staff is provided appropriate, ongoing training to ensure proper implementation. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The LEA provides a continuing program of professional development to keep 5.1 0 instructional staff, administrators, and board members updated on current issues and research pertaining to curriculum, instructional strategies, and student assessment. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 5.2 The standards developed by the California Standards for the Teaching Profession are 6 implemented and supported. Pupil Achievement 387 February Pupil Achievement Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 5.3 The LEA provides opportunities and ongoing support for teachers to collaborate on the 1 analysis and improvement of curriculum, instruction, and use of assessment data. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 5.4 Principals make formal and informal classroom visits. Based on these visits, principals 2 provide constructive feedback and assistance to teachers. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The LEA plan includes budgeted coherent professional development activities that 5.5 2 reflect research-based strategies for improved student achievement and a focus on standards-based content knowledge. LEGAL STANDARD – DATA MANAGEMENT/ STUDENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS The LEA assigns and maintains Statewide Student Identifiers and maintains all data 6.1 to be reported to the California Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS) and the 6 Online Public Update for Schools (OPUS) necessary to comply with No Child Left Behind reporting requirements. (EC 60900(e) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – DATA MANAGEMENT/STUDENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS Student information systems support users with information that is relevant, timely, and accurate. Assessments are performed to ensure that users are involved in defining 6.2 8 needs, developing specifications, and selecting appropriate systems. LEA standards are imposed to ensure the maintainability, compatibility, and supportability of the various systems. The LEA ensures that the student information system is compatible with CALPADS, OPUS, and any other systems with which it must interface. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – DATA MANAGEMENT/STUDENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS The LEA utilizes the technological equipment for the student information system (SIS) 6.3 8 that meets or exceeds the vendor’s minimum recommendations. The LEA provides access to the SIS and ongoing training to staff responsible for entering, maintaining, reporting, and certifying student data. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – DATA MANAGEMENT/STUDENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS 6.4 Required special education reports, including those for the California Special 6 Education Management Information System (CASEMIS) are accurate, compliant, and submitted pursuant to the required timelines. Collective Average Rating 2.48 388 Pupil Achievement Financial Management 390 Financial Management 1.1 Internal Control Environment Professional Standard All board members and management personnel set the tone and establish the environment, exhibiting high integrity and ethical values in carrying out their responsibilities and directing the work of others. Appropriate measures are implemented to discourage and detect fraud. (State Audit Standard (SAS) 55, SAS 78, SAS 82: Treadway Commission) Sources and Documentation: 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interviews with board members 3. Board policies 4112.8, 4212.8, 4312.8, Employment of Relatives 4. Board policies 4136, 4236, 4336, Nonschool Employment Findings 1. Board members and management personnel have established general expectations that the organization will operate in an ethical and responsible manner. The evidence of this is found in board policies that limit employment of relatives and employment outside the district. 2. Except for the policy regarding employment outside the district, which the board has reviewed and updated, administrators presented no documented evidence of their efforts to communicate these policies to all staff or to promote ethical and responsible behavior and discourage and detect fraud, misappropriation of funds or other illegal activities. 3. The state administrator has begun an extensive process to revise existing board policies and adopt new board policies. Policy revision including the development of administrative regulations will take several months to complete. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Adopt board policies regarding a code of ethics, and communicate the expectation that board members and employees will conduct themselves with the highest degree of integrity and ethical behavior, complying with all laws, policies, regulations, rules and procedures, and demonstrating a high degree of reliability, trustworthiness, integrity, fairness, accountability, professionalism and civility. 2. Adopt board policies and regulations stating that management will discourage fraudulent activities by periodically evaluating the district’s internal controls and making timely adjustments to correct material weaknesses. Financial Management 391 3. Ensure that administrators demonstrate these expectations for ethical behavior in their conduct at all times, upholding the board’s policies and regulations. 4. Communicate these expectations by reviewing internal controls periodically, reporting on their effectiveness and making adjustments to improve the staff’s ability to detect and deter fraud. 5. Conduct workshops or distribute reading materials to raise awareness throughout the organization that management takes their ethical responsibilities seriously. 6. Hold employees accountable for their actions when they violate board policy regarding ethical and responsible behavior, or when they have committed fraud. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 392 Financial Management 1.2 Internal Control Environment Professional Standard The LEA has an internal audit committee to: (1) prevent internal controls from being overridden by management; (2) ensure ongoing state and federal compliance; (3) provide assurance to management that the internal control system is sound; and (4) identify and correct inefficient processes. In addition, the LEA has formal policies and procedures that provide a mechanism for individuals to report illegal acts and provide a formal investigative process. (SAS-55, SAS-78) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interviews with board members Findings 1. The board has not established an audit committee, although board policies 3400 and 3460 provide the discretion to consider a committee annually. Staff did not provide evidence that the board has formal policies and procedures that provide a mechanism for individuals to report illegal practices or for a formal investigation. Responsibilities of an audit committee typically include the following: • Overseeing financial reporting and disclosures • Overseeing the hiring, performance and independence of the external auditors • Oversight of regulatory compliance, ethics and procedures for reporting illegal acts • Monitoring the internal control process • Overseeing the performance of internal audits • Discussion of risk management policies and practices with management. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish an audit committee of the school board. 2. Ensure audit committee membership includes, at a minimum, representatives of the board, the chief business official and the director of finance or similar position, and community members. 3. Ensure the audit committee provides guidance to the external auditors regarding any particular areas of focus that have been identified during the year. The committee should take full responsibility for monitoring the resolution of all audit findings, and district’s administration should be held accountable for all corrective actions. Financial Management 393 4. Ensure the audit committee provides a full report of all its activities to the state administrator and the board at least at the following four times each year: • Before the start of the annual external audit (the entrance interview) • At the completion of the annual external audit (the exit interview) • At the external auditor’s presentation of the audit report to the board • With district staff members’ presentation of the plan for correcting audit exceptions 5. Ensure that the board adopts and procedures that guide staff regarding a mechanism for reporting illegal activities. These same policies and procedures should provide a process for a formal investigation, including identifying the staff member responsible for carrying out any related investigation and the procedures to be followed. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 394 Financial Management 1.3 Internal Control Environment Professional Standard The organizational structure clearly identifies key areas of authority and responsibility. Reporting lines in each area are clearly identified and logical. (SAS-55, SAS-78) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with maintenance, operations transportation and facilities (MOTF) department staff 3. Interview with information technology department staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff 5. Organizational chart draft Findings 1. The state administrator presented a draft organizational chart that identifies all management positions, their reporting structure, areas of authority and responsibilities. Reporting lines are clearly identified in the proposed organizational structure. However, based upon industry standards, several administrative and support functions are understaffed, which has contributed to the district’s inability to improve student learning and provide a safe and clean learning environment. 2. Business office staffing levels are the subject of a separate FCMAT study. It is clear that the district needs a professional who can provide detailed fiscal management as well as the more complex responsibilities typically carried out by a chief business official. The separate business office study includes a staffing comparison with districts of similar size and comparable organizational structure for the state administrator’s consideration. 3. The district currently has two part-time contracted fiscal experts, but this arrangement has hampered their ability to provide the highest quality work. Both consultants reported frustrations regarding how duties and responsibilities are divided between them and management’s expectations of their positions. Both reported that one full-time consultant would significantly improve the position’s productivity. 4. The maintenance and operations department is understaffed at all levels. No daytime custodians are available for the high schools. 5. The information technology department is understaffed, and as a result systems are not supported effectively. The technology director is responsible for managing the district’s systems and day-to-day support at King City High School. Financial Management 395 6. The human resources and curriculum and instruction departments share support staff, but there are too few support staff to meet the day-to-day needs of schools and other departments. 7. School site support staff reported that disruptive student behavior has increased in recent years because of inadequate consequences for such behavior. This was attributed to understaffing of administrative functions at the schools and resulting apathy among teachers. The number of suspensions and expulsions have fluctuated over the past three years. 8. The district’s organizational chart does not include an internal audit function. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Staff the following schools and departments at the levels needed to efficiently provide necessary services and ensure that student performance is at levels comparable to districts with similar student populations: • School sites: • Instructional programs • Support services • Administration • District-level support services: • Business office • Human resources department • Maintenance, operations, transportation and facilities department • Information technology department • Curriculum and instruction department 2. Create an internal audit function and fill a part-time internal auditor position to fulfill the duties and responsibilities of the position. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 396 Financial Management 2.1 Inter- and Intradepartmental Communications Professional Standard The business and operational departments communicate regularly with internal staff and all user departments on their responsibilities for accounting procedures and internal controls. Communications are written when they affect many staff or user groups, are issues of importance, and/or reflect a change in procedures. Procedures manuals are developed. The business and operational departments are responsive to user department needs. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with maintenance, operations, transportation and facilities (MOTF) department staff 3. Interview with information technology department staff 4. Interview with personnel department staff Findings 1. District staff presented no documentation to indicate the level of communication between staff and departments. In interviews, various staff members indicated most communication is informal and is not provided in writing. Breakdowns in communication between departments were a commonly reported theme. 2. Clerical staff members indicated communications are often inadequate and lacking in specificity. Desk manuals and internal operations memos from administration to support staff were not provided to FCMAT. 3. Staff members indicated the district either does not have or does not use procedural manuals. 4. Some staff members made positive comments about the business and operational departments regarding their responsiveness and willingness to help. However, an equal number of staff reported that obtaining support and assistance from these departments was difficult, particularly with questions about budget allocations. Staff expressed an understanding that budget reductions have decimated staff in these areas and that this is the primary reason for the lack of response. 5. Staff share a perception of the budget as the domain of the business department and thus administrators do not welcome their participation. Staff members would appreciate the opportunity to play a greater role in managing their funding allocations through the budget development process. Financial Management 397 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Implement formal written and easily understandable communication among departments, particularly regarding procedures and internal controls. These communications should include the following topics for all departments: • Summary of significant actions at board meetings • Summary of pertinent cabinet meeting topics • New procedures and internal controls • Significant issues pertaining to staff • Status of audit findings Other relevant topical communications should be provided among departments as needed. 2. Conduct periodic intra and inter-department staff meetings to provide trainings and to discuss and review new policies, procedures and internal controls. Distribute agendas and minutes of these meeting to expected participants, and use sign-in sheets to ensure that all participants are informed. 3. Develop or update desk manuals of procedures for the following departments: • Business services (including information technology and MOTF) • Human resources • Educational services Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 398 Financial Management 2.2 Inter- and Intradepartmental Communications Professional Standard The financial departments communicate regularly with the board and community on the status of the LEA’s finances and the financial impact of proposed expenditure decisions. Communications are written when they affect many community members, are issues of high importance to the LEA and board, and/or reflect a change in policy. Documents developed by the fiscal division for distribution to the board, finance committees, staff and community are easily understood. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interviews with board members 3. Adopted and revised 2009-10 budget reports to the board 4. Adopted, first and second interim 2008-09 budget reports to the board 5. Unaudited actual 2008-09 financial report to the board 6. Memorandum to budget advisory committee members, January 20, 2009 Findings 1. The assistant superintendent, business services provides a memorandum and supplementary information to the board with each state budget report (adopted, revised and interim) and with the unaudited actual report. The memorandum includes details of assumptions used for budgets and analysis of unaudited actual amounts. 2. The district reached a tentative agreement with the King City High School Teachers Association (KCHSTA) in the spring of 2009. The agreement was ratified by both the board and KCHSTA but was rescinded by the superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education in May 2009. Nonetheless, the assistant superintendent, business services prepared the adopted budget with these costs excluded from the line items of the district’s budget and with a corresponding reserve designated in the ending fund balance. The amounts were then taken out of the budget in the budget revisions presented to the board in September 2009. This was confusing to some board members, and they expressed frustration during the presentation about the district’s financial condition changing from report to report. 3. The district used a budget advisory committee in the spring of 2008 and 2009. Committee recommendations during both years consisted primarily of expenditure reductions that were the subject of collective bargaining, providing management with guidance Financial Management 399 indicating that a bargaining agreement solution was the only viable option for resolving the district’s structural deficit. District staff provided no committee agendas or minutes. 4. Staff did not provide evidence that the district uses a budget calendar as a planning, communication and management tool. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board adopts policies and regulations that prescribe the content and format of supplementary information to be presented by staff with each state budget report (adopted, interim and unaudited actuals). The content should include but not be limited to the following: • Comparable local and statewide data to evaluate the district’s fiscal health • Budget priorities and how resource allocations align with the district’s goals and objectives • Trends in pupil enrollment, attendance and achievement, and changes in revenues, expenditures, reserves and surpluses, and/or deficit spending • Staffing ratios • The condition and adequacy of district facilities Ensure that the board and management consult together to format these policies and standards. 2. Direct staff to present the board with a budget calendar no later than December of each year as the first step in budget development for the upcoming fiscal year. The calendar should include critical tasks, indicate which staff member will complete them, and contain deadlines for completion, particularly for tasks with a statutory deadline, such as making the proposed budget available for public inspection. Give careful thought to the order and timing of tasks so that each is completed in logical succession. The calendar should also contain the dates of periodic reports to the board, up to and including budget adoption and submission to the Monterey County Office of Education by July 1. 3. Convene a budget advisory committee each year to solicit staff and community input regarding budget development and to raise awareness of the district’s fiscal condition. Budget committee members should include representatives from the classified and certificated bargaining units from each school site, administrators, business office staff, CBO, and actively engaged parents and community members. Ensure that the committee meets at important points during budget development and thereafter during the fiscal year, and incorporate these meeting dates into the budget calendar. 400 Financial Management Providing all interested and affected parties with the opportunity to present feedback is critical to achieving appreciation, understanding and thus consensus once the budget is presented to the board for adoption in June. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 401 2.3 Inter- and Intradepartmental Communications Professional Standard The board is engaged in understanding the fiscal status of the LEA, for the current and two subsequent fiscal years. The board prioritizes LEA fiscal issues, and expects reports to align the LEA’s financial performance with its goals and objectives. Agenda items associated with business and fiscal issues are discussed at board meetings, with questions asked until understanding is reached prior to any action. Sources and Documentation: 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with board members 3. Adopted and revised 2009-10 budget reports to the board 4. Adopted, first and second interim 2008-09 budget reports to the board 5. Unaudited actual 2008-09 financial report to the board Findings 1. Although board members understand that the district’s financial status is dire, they do not have an adequate understanding of the district’s budget. Board members ask staff few questions during budget report presentations and demonstrate little insight into school budgeting and reporting of finance. Board members expressed frustration with financial reporting, though they acknowledge that it has improved in the last two years. 2. According to board members, staff did not acknowledge the district’s difficult financial position until 2006, and since that time the board has done little to establish expectations regarding a response. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board takes a more active role in understanding and managing the district’s financial position. 2. Adopt board policies and regulations that prescribe the content and format of the supplementary information staff present with each budget report (adopted, interim and unaudited actuals). The content should include but not be limited to the following: • Comparable local and statewide data to evaluate the district’s fiscal health 402 Financial Management • Budget priorities and how resource allocations align with the district’s goals and objectives • Trends in pupil enrollment, attendance and achievement, and changes in revenues, expenditures, reserves and surpluses, and/or deficit spending • Staffing ratios • The condition and adequacy of district facilities Ensure that the board and management consult together to format these policies and standards. 3. Ensure that the board works to develop more understanding of budget presentations. Consider scheduling board sessions to improve board members’ understanding of the district’s budget, including training in pubic school finance concepts to provide board members with the knowledge and skills needed to carry out their responsibilities. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 403 3.1 Staff Professional Development Professional Standard The LEA has developed and uses a professional development plan for training business staff. The plan includes the input of business office supervisors and managers, and identifies appropriate training programs. Each staff member and management employee has a plan designed to meet their individual professional development needs. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interviews with business office staff 4. Performance Evaluation for Classified Employees form 5. Classified staff, Last Date Evaluated form, 2009-2010 – business office Findings 1. The district provided no evidence of a formal professional development plan for the business office staff. Classified and management staff reported that budget reductions have resulted in minimal opportunities for professional development outside the district. 2. The agreement between the district and the King City Chapter #529 of the California School Employees Association (CSEA) includes a sample evaluation form that does not provide for a documented classified staff development plan. 3. The agreement with the CSEA indicates that annual evaluations are required within 60 days of the anniversary of the employee’s date of hire. A form was provided that indicates that no evaluations have been completed for one business office staff member since October 2007 and none for another since June 2006. 4. The assistant superintendent, business services periodically attends workshops and conferences outside the district, but the district has no formal staff development plan, and opportunities to attend such activities have declined sharply in recent years because of budget reductions. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Implement a professional development plan for each of the business office staff, both clerical and management. Ensure that both clerical and management staff have the 404 Financial Management opportunity to provide input regarding the plan, including its goals, objectives and professional development activities. The plan should include workshops, conferences, in-service events and cross-training opportunities. It should also include the time and financial resources required from both employees and the district, as well as expected outcomes for each activity. The district should use a standard form to document the plan and should review the plan at least annually. 2. Include in the plan topics that are relevant to staff members’ responsibilities and that contribute to their overall professional development. Management should support staff members’ interest in and requests for activities that prepare them for promotions inside the organization. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 405 3.2 Staff Professional Development Professional Standard The LEA develops and uses a professional development plan for the in-service training of school site/department staff by business staff on relevant business procedures and internal controls. The plan includes a process to seek input from the business office and the school sites/ departments and is updated annually. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interviews with business office staff 4. Interviews with site staff Findings 1. Staff provided no evidence of a formal professional development plan used by business office staff to support and train site or department staff. Business office classified and management staff reported that budget reductions resulted in minimal professional development opportunities. 2. The fiscal experts and account technicians in the business office indicated that they provide support as time allows when site or department staff request budget or payroll information. 3. Site and department staff reported that business office staff make themselves available periodically to respond to questions about the financial system, though it is sometimes difficult to get a response. Site staff indicated an understanding that the budget reductions and consequent staffing reductions are the cause of this difficulty. 4. Site attendance technicians reported receiving student information system (SIS) support from the manager of student information. This manager reports directly to the director of educational services, not to the business office. The manager of student information reported the following: • Site staff need continual support regarding the SIS system. • Errors in daily attendance recordkeeping are frequent and sometimes the site atten- dance technicians do not discover them. • School site administrators do not provide the attendance technicians with sufficient support in holding teaching staff accountable for attendance reporting errors. • Data and reports that staff generate from the SIS and that the business office relies on when generating funding apportionments would be unreliable without the manager of 406 Financial Management student information’s constant support. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Implement a business services professional development plan for each department and school in the district. Ensure that both clerical staff and management provide input regarding the plan, including its goals, objectives and professional development activities. 2. Ensure that the plan identifies topics and cross-training opportunities as well as the time and financial commitments required of both the department or school and the district. Expected outcomes for each activity should also be included. The district should use a standard form to document the plan, and review the plan at least annually. 3. Ensure that the plan includes topics relevant to the responsibilities that departments and schools have regarding staff members’ business-related job performance. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 407 4.1 Internal Audit Professional Standard The board has adopted policies establishing an internal audit function that reports to and is supervised by an independent body, such as directly to the superintendent/state administrator and the audit committee or, if none, the board. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interviews with board members 3. Board policies 3400 and 3460 Findings 1. Board policies 3400 and 3460 address the process for establishing an audit committee but make no reference to an internal audit function, and the district has no such function. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board adopts policies that establish an internal audit function, including the creation of an internal auditor position filled by an independent contractor. The internal auditor should report to the audit committee, which in turn should report to the state administrator and the board. The internal auditor’s responsibilities should include but not be limited to the following: • Participate as an active member of the district’s audit committee. • Review board policies and regulations related to internal control systems, and present recommendations for improvement. • Coordinate with the district’s external auditor regarding internal and external audit processes and procedures. • Document the status of the district’s corrective actions in response to audit findings. • Perform periodic and unannounced reviews of internal controls for accounts payable, accounts receivable, payroll and position control, fixed asset accounting, ASB activi- ties and attendance accounting, and provide recommendations for improvement. 408 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 409 4.2 Internal Audit Professional Standard Internal audit findings are reported on a timely basis to the audit committee, board and administration, as appropriate. Management then takes timely action to follow up and resolve audit findings. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interviews with board members Findings 1. The district has not established an internal audit function. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Adopt board policies and procedures for an internal audit function. Assign internal auditing responsibilities to a qualified professional who is not an employee of the district. The audit committee should establish the specific procedures that the internal auditor is to use, subject to approval by the state administrator and ratification by the board. 2. Resolve the internal auditor’s findings in a timely manner. 3. Ensure that the internal auditor’s findings are reported to the internal audit committee, which in turn reports to the state administrator and the board. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 410 Financial Management 5.1 Budget Development Process Professional Standard The board focuses on expenditure standards and formulas that meet the goals and maintain the LEA’s financial solvency for the current and two subsequent fiscal years. The board avoids specific line-item focus, but directs staff to design an entire expenditure plan focusing on student and LEA needs. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interviews with board members 3. Adopted and revised 2009-10 budget reports to the board 4. Adopted, first and second interim 2008-09 budget reports to the board 5. Unaudited actual 2008-09 financial report to the board Findings 1. The board does not demonstrate an understanding of the district’s budget sufficient to allow for a meaningful discussion during staff members’ public presentations. Board members ask questions about line-item details periodically, but not frequently enough to be considered an inappropriate focus on such details. 2. The budget reports reviewed did not provide information to help the board focus on the students’ and district’s needs. Rather, they contained typical details regarding changes to revenue, expenditure and reserve assumptions; this information did not encompass the current and two subsequent fiscal years. 3. The board has a general understanding of the district’s fiscal condition Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board members participate in training regarding specific aspects of public school finance that will support them in carrying out their responsibilities as stewards of public funds and help improve student performance. Provide all board members with training from the California School Boards Association’s Masters in Governance program, specifically the modules pertaining to school finance from a board member’s perspective. Supplement these trainings with training from district staff members to ensure that the board can effectively apply the concepts learned to local issues and circumstances. Financial Management 411 2. Conduct budget study sessions led by district staff to improve board members’ understanding of relevant aspects of the district’s budget. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 412 Financial Management 5.2 Budget Development Process Professional Standard The budget development process includes input from staff, administrators, board and community as well as a budget advisory committee. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interviews with school site administrators 4. Interviews with department directors 5. Interviews with board members 6. Adopted and revised 2009-10 budget reports to the board 7. Adopted, first and second interim 2008-09 budget reports to the board 8. Unaudited actual 2008-09 financial report to the board 9. Memorandum to budget advisory committee members, January 20, 2009 Findings 1. Board members report that district staff do not seek their input regarding budget development; instead, staff present allocations of resources for board approval at various times during budget development. Board members also indicated that fiscal estimates change rapidly and by significant amounts, which frequently leaves them confused about the district’s fiscal condition; however, this has been quite common throughout the state this fiscal year because of the number of state budget revisions. 2. Staff reported that the district’s budget is developed by business office staff and that little input is sought from principals, department directors or managers. Some school and department staff reported this has been the practice for many years. 3. Staff reported that the district used a budget advisory committee process to develop the budgets for fiscal years 2008-09 and 2009-10. Staff members provided a memorandum to budget advisory committee members announcing the reconvening of the committee in January 2009, but no documentary evidence such as agendas, meeting announcements or minutes were provided. Staff also indicated that in both years the committee’s input consisted primarily of recommendations for budget reductions that required revisions Financial Management 413 to collective bargaining agreements, thus the district’s structural deficit remained unresolved. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board adopts policies and regulations that establish a budget advisory committee as a formal component of the district’s budget development process. The policies should address the committee’s function, role, responsibilities, governance, membership structure and reporting protocols. 2. Convene a budget advisory committee in conjunction with development of the district’s fiscal year 2010-11 budget. The committee should include representatives from the board, district administration, school administration, departments, bargaining units, parents, students, the non-parent community and the state administrator. 3. Involve managers such as principals and department directors in budget development for their school or department, and provide them with budget worksheets that identify current and budget year allocations by resource. Managers should address specific school or department funding priorities using these worksheets and submit them to the business office. Business office staff should be available to support managers as they develop their worksheets. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 414 Financial Management 5.3 Budget Development Process Professional Standard The LEA has clear policies and processes to analyze resources and allocations to ensure that they align with strategic planning objectives and that the budget reflects the LEA’s priorities. The budget office has a technical process to build the preliminary budget that includes revenue and expenditure projections, the identification of carryovers and accruals, and any plans for expenditure reductions. A budget calendar contains statutory due dates and major budget development milestones. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Adopted and revised 2009-10 budget reports to the board 4. Adopted, first and second interim 2008-09 budget reports to the board 5. Unaudited actual 2008-09 financial report to the board Findings 1. The district provided no evidence that the board maintains policies, processes or strategic planning objectives for use during budget development. There was also no evidence that the board has developed or used any list of priorities for budget resource allocations and expenditure reductions. 2. The fiscal expert responsible for budget development reported that she works closely with and takes direction from the assistant superintendent, business services when developing the district’s budget. Worksheets are used to estimate revenues and expenditures, including staffing allocations. No documented evidence of these worksheets was provided other than a staffing analysis worksheet, which FCMAT could not readily reconcile with the district’s adopted budget. 3. The district included expenditure reductions in its fiscal year 2009-10 budget to offset state funding reductions. These reductions included approximately $2 million in savings associated with a tentative agreement with the district’s certificated staff bargaining unit in February 2009. The tentative agreement was stayed in March 2009 and then rescinded in May 2009 by the superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education because they concluded that the agreement did not resolve the district’s deficit and thus the district was without sufficient opportunity to address its deficit. However, the district determined that rescission of these expenditure reductions would place it in financial jeopardy and so included them in the adopted budget along with an offsetting reserve against the ending fund balance. The board approved this budget as presented. These budget reductions Financial Management 415 were then removed from the district’s revised 2009-10 budget that was submitted to the Monterey County Office of Education in September 2009. 4. The district does not use a budget calendar for budget development. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board develops policies and regulations that provide staff with guidance regarding budget development, strategic planning objectives, and priorities for resource allocations and expenditure reductions. This should include developing and approving a list of priorities for budget reductions so that the administration understands these priorities and how to implement them during budget development. 2. Use industry-standard products, techniques and processes to develop estimates of revenues and expenditures. For revenue estimates, staff should use School Services of California’s (SSC’s) RevLim software for revenue limit estimates and their Dynamic Budget Guide to test categorical program revenue estimates. 3. Use the Monterey County Office of Education financial system’s position control feature to estimate all salary and benefit costs. The district should use a spreadsheet to track position authorizations by full-time equivalencies, and this spreadsheet should be frequently reconciled with the position control system. Develop allocations to schools and departments using spreadsheets with formulas driven by per-student standard allocations approved in board policy. 4. Prohibit the inclusion of carryover assumptions or estimates during budget development without prior approval from the state administrator and the board. 5. Present the board with a budget calendar no later than December of each year as the first step in budget development for the upcoming fiscal year. The calendar should include critical tasks, indicate which staff member will complete them, and contain deadlines for completion, particularly for tasks with a statutory deadline, such making the proposed budget available for public inspection. Give careful thought to the order and timing of tasks so that each is completed in logical succession. The calendar should also contain the dates of periodic reports to the board, up to and including budget adoption and submission to the Monterey County Office of Education by July 1. 416 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 417 5.4 Budget Development Process Professional Standard The LEA has policies to facilitate development of a budget that is understandable, meaningful, reflective of the LEA’s priorities, and balanced in terms of revenues and expenditures. The LEA utilizes formulas for allocating funds to school sites and departments. This may include staffing ratios, supply allocations, etc. Standardized budget worksheets are used to communicate budget requests, budget allocations, formulas applied and guidelines. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interviews with board members Findings 1. The district did not provide board policies or procedures that address development of the district’s budget. 2. The district does not use formulas to allocate funds or positions to school sites and departments. No input is sought from principals or department managers, and no budget worksheets are used to solicit their input and feedback regarding budget requests. The fiscal expert responsible for developing the district’s budget works with and receives direction only from the assistant superintendent, business services. 3. Staff use worksheets to develop the district’s estimates of revenue. However, these worksheets are not shared outside the business office except as supporting documentation for state budget reports filed with the Monterey County Office of Education. Resource allocations are developed by a rollover of prior year amounts; the fiscal expert then determines and makes adjustments and the assistant superintendent, business services approves them. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Create opportunities for inclusion and transparency in the budget development process. The business office should not conduct budget development in isolation, and site and department staffs need to be held accountable for their role in managing budget allocations. 2. Use formulas to allocate all staffing and funds to school sites and departments. The formulas should be based on industry-standard practices of high school districts in the same comparison group that is identified for collective bargaining purposes. 418 Financial Management 3. Provide school principals and department managers with budget worksheets on which they can communicate their staffing and funding needs during budget development. Funding sources should be identified by resource and object code, and details should be provided regarding full-time equivalent positions and annual budget allocations. Current staffing and actual transactions should also be included for comparison. 4. Provide principals and department managers with the financial tools and resources they need to accurately estimate the current cost of salaries, hourly pay and stipends for all positions for which they are responsible. Business office staff should train site and department staff in the proper use of these tools. 5. Take full responsibility for ensuring that sites and departments use financial tools and budget worksheets effectively. District administrators should hold school site and department staff and management accountable for their performance in this area. 6. Ensure that the board adopts policies and regulations regarding budget adoption. These policies and regulations should establish the following: • The process to be used for budget development, • The content and format required for each report, including the link between board goals and the following: • Budget allocations, • Priorities for budget reductions • The expectation that the budget will be balanced. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 419 6.1 Budget Adoption, Reporting, and Audits Legal Standard The LEA adopts its annual budget within the statutory timelines established by EC 42103, which requires that on or before July 1, the board shall hold a public hearing on the budget to be adopted for the subsequent fiscal year. Not later than five days after that adoption or by July 1, whichever occurs first, the board shall file that budget with the county superintendent of schools. (EC 42127(a)) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interview with Interview with Monterey County Office of Education associate superintendent for business services 4. Interviews with Monterey County Office of Education district advisory services for budgets and district reports 5. Adopted 2009-10 budget reports to the board 6. Monterey County Office of Education budget review letter, adopted budget, 2009-10 7. Monterey County Office of Education budget review letter, revised budget, 2009-10 Findings 1. The board held a public hearing and adopted the district’s fiscal year 2009-10 budget on June 30, 2009, within the statutory timelines established by California Education Code (EC) section 42103. The Monterey County Office of Education (county office) staff indicated that their office received the budget on July 6, 2009, after the July 1 statutory deadline required by EC 42127. 2. The county office conditionally approved the district’s budget on August 21, 2009. The county office gave the district until September 8, 2008 to address the deficiencies identified in their review letter and resubmit their budget. District staff presented, and the board approved, a revised budget on September 23, 2009; this budget was submitted to the county office on September 24, 2009, as agreed to by the county office’s chief business official (CBO). 3. The county office issued its formal review letter of the district’s revised budget on November 10, 2009 and recommended that the superintendent of public instruction disapprove the budget. The letter stated, in part, “…these budget figures do not reflect the financial recovery efforts being developed and pursued by the state administrator.” 420 Financial Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Submit its adopted budget to the county office on or before the deadlines established by EC 42127. The district should also submit revised budgets to the county office as requested and in compliance with the statutory and county office deadlines. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 421 6.2 Budget Adoption, Reporting, and Audits Legal Standard Revisions to expenditures based on the state budget are considered and adopted by the board. Not later than 45 days after the governor signs the annual Budget Act, the LEA shall make available for public review any revisions in revenues and expenditures that it has made to its budget to reflect funding available by that Budget Act. (EC 42127(2) and 42127(i)(4)) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education associate superintendent for business services 4. Interviews with personnel from Monterey County Office of Education district advisory services for budgets and district reports 5. Revised 2009-10 budget reports to the board 6. Monterey County Office of Education budget review notes, revised budget, 2009-10 7. Monterey County Office of Education budget review letter, revised budget, 2009-10 Findings 1. The State of California’s budget adoption process for the 2009-10 fiscal year was unique. The state adopted a budget for 2009-10 in February 2009, and then readopted the budget in July 2009. Because the July action was interpreted as a new budget adoption and not a revision, the 45-day revision requirement set forth in Education Code section 42127 did not apply to school districts. 2. However, the Monterey County Office of Education (county office) conditionally approved the district’s 2009-10 adopted budget, citing significant errors in both the 2008-09 and 2009-10 general fund budgets, including the following: • Improper application of revenue limit deficit factors, resulting in an overstatement of revenue by $518,000 • Improper posting of audit adjustments, resulting in overstatement of fund balance by $274,533 • Incorrect budgeting of state emergency apportionments, resulting in overstatement of fund balance by $3.1 million • The exclusion of $2.8 million in certificated staffing costs associated with the a tentative agreement with the certificated bargaining unit, which was rescinded by the 422 Financial Management Monterey County Office of Education, and the inclusion of a reserve against ending fund balance to offset this amount. • Incorrect budgeting of deferred maintenance funding, resulting in an understatement of revenue by $88,147 3. The county office requested that the district submit a revised budget, including corrections to the above errors, by September 8, 2009. District staff presented and the board approved a revised budget on September 23, 2009, and this budget was submitted to the county office on September 24, 2009, as agreed to by the county office’s chief business official (CBO). District staff and consultants reported that failures in connecting with the county office’s financial system contributed to their inability to meet the September 8 deadline and indicated that issues such as this are common. 4. On November 10, 2009 the county office issued its formal letter reviewing the district’s budget. The letter recommended that the superintendent of public instruction (SPI) disapprove the budget because, “…these budget figures do not reflect the financial recovery efforts being developed and pursued by the state administrator…” The county office acknowledged that the district’s revised budget had corrected the errors listed above and was a marked improvement, but cited as the basis for their recommendation the district’s ending fund balance of $260,000 for fiscal year 2009-10 and its continued deficit spending of $3.4 million and $4.5 million respectively in the two subsequent fiscal years. The county office also noted three erroneous revenue assumptions and requested that they be corrected in the district’s first interim budget report. The State Superintendent of Instruction disapproved the district’s budget. 5. Pursuant to provisions of Education Code section 42127 (g) and 42127(i)(3), the governing board of the school district and the county superintendent requested to waive the requirement that a budget review committee be formed to develop a budget for the district. The requested alternative course of action is to use the financial recovery plan developed by FCMAT as the basis for a budget for fiscal year 2009-10. According to district and county office staff, the California Department of Education is expected to approve this request, although no formal action had been taken at the time this report was written. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Submit revised budgets by the deadlines given, as requested by the county office. 2. Present budgets that contain accurate data based on the best information available when the budget and/or revisions are prepared. This will facilitate sound decision making by the state administrator and the board and help the county office complete a timely review. Financial Management 423 The district should exercise greater care when calculating revenue estimates and should post audit adjustments accurately and on time. 3. Consult with business and technology department counterparts at the county office to identify the reasons for the connectivity problems the district has experienced with the county office’s financial system, and implement solutions. In the meantime, whenever connectivity issues occur, district staff and/or consultants should use equipment at the county office to minimize time lost. 4. Use the fiscal recovery plan developed by FCMAT as the basis for the district’s 2009-10 budget. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 424 Financial Management 6.3 Budget Adoption, Reporting, and Audits Legal Standard The LEA completes and files its interim budget reports within the statutory deadlines established by EC 42130, et. seq. All reports are in a format or on forms prescribed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction and are based on standards and criteria for fiscal stability. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education associate superintendent for business services 4. Interviews with personnel from Monterey County Office of Education district advisory services for budgets and district reports 5. First and second interim 2008-09 budget reports to the board 6. Monterey County Office of Education budget review letter, second interim 2008-09 budget report Findings 1. Staff did not provide copies of the interim budget reports for fiscal year 2008-09 directly to FCMAT; however, FCMAT was able to obtain these documents from other sources. The district’s fiscal year 2009-10 first interim budget report was under development as of this writing and due to the board on or before December 15, 2009. 2. District staff provided a copy of the Monterey County Office of Education review letter for the fiscal year 2008-09 first interim budget report. This letter was issued February 15, 2009 and did not indicate the date the report was received from the district. District staff did not provide the county office review letters for the second or third interim budget reports. 3. The first interim budget review letter indicated that the district’s budget included a negative certification. The letter also commented on the large structural budget deficits that resulted in negative fund balances throughout the multiyear financial projection (MYFP) period, and the lack of a plan to address such deficits. The county office also noted errors in the district’s MYFP and submitted a corrected projection to the district, but these corrections did not change the district’s projected fiscal status. Financial Management 425 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. File all budget reports with the Monterey County Office of Education on time, and include a plan to meet all financial criteria and standards for the district’s budget as established by the state. This should include a plan to eliminate the district’s structural budget deficit while maintaining reserves at required levels. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 426 Financial Management 6.4 Budget Adoption, Reporting, and Audits Legal Standard The LEA has complied with Governmental Accounting Standard No. 34 (GASB 34). GASB 34 requires the LEA to develop policies and procedures and report in the annual financial reports on the modified accrual basis of accounting and the accrual basis of accounting. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. 2007-08 audit report 4. Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 3460 Findings 1. The board has adopted policies and regulations that address financial reporting and accountability as required by Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) statement 34. 2. The district prepared its fiscal year 2007-08 unaudited financial statements in a manner consistent with the requirements of GASB 34. Audit adjustments were made to four district funds to address overstatements of accounts payable and accounts receivable. Adjustments were also made to cash accounts. The net total adjustments decreased the district’s ending fund balance by $18,697. 3. The district’s fiscal year 2007-08 audit report includes a management discussion and analysis prepared by the district’s assistant superintendent, business services. 4. District staff incorrectly posted some of the audit adjustments noted above. The Monterey County Office of Education reported this oversight in its review of the district’s next interim budget report. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Prepare audit adjustments correctly and submit to the assistant superintendent, business services for review and approval. Staff should then post adjustments correctly. Financial Management 427 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 428 Financial Management 6.5 Budget Adoption, Reporting, and Audits Legal Standard The LEA has arranged for an annual audit (single audit) within the deadlines established by EC 41020. EC 41020 (c)(d)(e)(g) establishes procedures for local agency audit obligations and standards. Pursuant to EC 41020(h), the LEA submits to the county superintendent of schools, California Department of Education, and State Controller’s Office an audit report for the preceding fiscal year. This report must be submitted annually, no later than December 15. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interviews with Monterey County Office of Education external business services staff Findings 1. The district contracts with an auditor for the annual audit and has met the deadlines established by Education Code section 41020. 2. The December 15, 2008 deadline for the fiscal year 2007-08 audit report was extended at the district’s request. The auditing firm signed the independent auditor’s report on March 24, 2009, and copies of the report were filed with the Monterey County Office of Education, the California Department of Education and the California State Controller’s Office. 3. The fiscal year 2007-08 audit report met the requirements of the education code and was accepted by the State of California. 4. The fiscal year 2007-08 audit report contained a total 20 financial statement findings in the categories below as follows: 10000 – Attendance - 4 20000 – Inventory of Fixed Assets and Equipment – 2 30000 – Internal Control – 12 40000 – State Compliance - 1 60000 – Going Concern – 1 • Two of the attendance findings resulted in a reduction of average daily attendance Financial Management 429 (ADA) by approximately four in the continuation education program; however, these findings did not result in reduced revenue because the district’s enrollment is declin- ing and thus funding is based on the prior year ADA. • One attendance finding resulted in a reduction of approximately 16 ADA in the adult education program, resulting in a reduction of approximately $41,000 in funding. • The fourth attendance finding disallowed all 64 ADA in the district’s independent study program, resulting in a loss of $106,462 in state funding. This amount would have been $428,000 but the district’s loss was limited because prior year ADA was used to determine funding. 5. Many of the auditor’s recommendations commended district staff for implementing procedures to correct some of the conditions indicated, though many others were in need of resolution. One of the district’s responses indicated that resolving the recommendation was not a high priority, while several others were explained as being due to “…the significant lack of support staff…” or “…symptomatic of the complete deterioration of the administrative function in the district.” 6. The district implemented only one of the two recommendations in the fiscal year 2006-07 audit report. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Complete the annual audit on time. 2. Implement all recommendations presented by the district’s auditor. 3. Address staffing issues that are creating or contributing to the conditions identified in the auditor’s findings. 4. Establish an internal audit function and conduct a thorough review of internal controls. 5. Train staff in the appropriate procedures to address all audit findings in a timely manner. 6. Provide the administrative oversight needed to resolve all audit findings. 430 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 431 7.1 Budget Monitoring Professional Standard All purchase orders and/or requisitions are properly encumbered against the budget until payment. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interview with business office staff 4. Budget report for fiscal year 2009-10, dated October 28, 2009 5. Sample purchase order form Findings 1. The district’s sites and departments submit purchase requisitions to the business office. When approved, purchase orders are created in the Financial Management System (FMS) and encumbered against the budget. Purchase orders are released from encumbrance in the system when the related invoice is paid. 2. The district uses a manual system to process purchase requisitions; no automated or online purchase order system is used. Staff indicated this significantly increases the time needed to process requisitions and contributes to increased errors. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Implement an automated purchase requisition system to improve efficiency, response time and accuracy. 432 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 433 7.2 Budget Monitoring Professional Standard The LEA implements budget monitoring controls, such as periodic budget reports, to alert department and site managers of the potential for over-expenditure of budgeted amounts. Revenue and expenditures are forecast and verified monthly. The LEA ensures that appropriate expenditures are charged against programs within the spending limitations authorized by the board. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interview with account technician, accounts payable 4. Interviews with principals 5. Budget Report, 2009-10 fiscal year, dated October 28, 2009 6. Samples, monthly budget report presented to the board Findings 1. A fiscal expert is responsible for monitoring account balances when sites and departments issue purchase requisitions. 2. Site and department staff have access to the Financial Management System (FMS) to monitor their account balances, but most reported they are not proficient at using the system, so many submit their requests and allow the business office to determine if their budget is sufficient to fund the purchase. 3. Business office staff reported they determine if budgeted funds are available and perform budget transfers to pay for unfunded requests if funds are available in other budgets. 4. Staff members present the board with a monthly budget update that identifies available balances for revenues and expenditures by major object code. Staff members also present interim budget reports to the board as required by the education code; these reports include projections of the budget amounts needed to meet the district’s financial obligations. 434 Financial Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Hold site and department staff accountable for monitoring their budgets using FMS. The district should allocate and monitor site and department budgets using an open and visible process that includes site and department input and maximizes their involvement and trust. 2. Review staffing levels and funding allocations in the information technology department to ensure the department has resources needed to adequately support the FMS. 3. Implement a payroll encumbrance system to provide accurate real-time information on the status of personnel budgets. 4. Ensure that it seeks training and support from the Monterey County Office of Education in managing the FMS. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 435 7.3 Budget Monitoring Professional Standard The LEA uses an effective position control system that tracks personnel allocations and expenditures. The position control system establishes checks and balances between personnel decisions and budgeted appropriations. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interview with business office staff 4. Interviews with school site administrators 5. Interviews with department directors, supervisors and managers 6. Staffing analysis for 2009-10, prepared by staff Findings 1. The district does not use the Financial Management System (FMS) application’s position control module. Instead, staff prepare a spreadsheet of all positions included in the budget and use this document to determine position allocations during budget development. Staff update the spreadsheet periodically throughout the year to show personnel changes. 2. It is unclear what types of formal communications occur between the business office and the human resources department regarding authorized full-time equivalent positions, but staff indicated informal communications do occur. While the district makes most hiring decisions using this informal communication, sometimes hiring occurs without district staff members’ input or involvement. Circumstances differ, but staff indicate this occurs as a result of site and department administrators making unilateral personnel decisions without any authorization from the district office. 3. The district’s staffing spreadsheet contains numerous calculation errors and showed some filled positions as vacant. Payroll tax rates had not been updated from the 2008-09 amounts, and it was unclear if the document was reconciled with the district’s budget; several budgeted salary and benefit amounts reviewed did not reconcile with the staffing spreadsheet. 4. It was not clear whether the board approved personnel decisions before or after they were implemented by staff. 436 Financial Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Use the FMS application’s position control module. 2. Present all new positions and position adjustments or eliminations to the board for approval in advance of implementation. When new and adjusted positions are approved, business office staff should update the position control system and the human resources department should implement any approved changes to positions. 3. Develop a position control form to be used by all staff responsible for implementing personnel decisions. To reduce errors and delays, consider using an automated system for position requisitions. 4. Cease unauthorized hiring of any type, and hold accountable any staff who violate directives in this area. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 437 7.4 Budget Monitoring Professional Standard The LEA regularly monitors all revenue and expenditure calculations, at a minimum with each interim financial reporting period, to adjust for any differences between the financial assumptions used in the initial calculations presented to the board and the final actuals. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interim budget reports, 2008-09 presented to the board 4. Unaudited actuals financial report, 2008-09 presented to the board 5. Samples of monthly budget report presented to the board Findings 1. Staff present monthly budgeted revenue and expenditure reports to the board to identify any budget modifications implemented in the previous month. 2. Formal budget modifications are presented for board approval at the interim budget reporting periods and with the unaudited actuals report. 3. Staff members post budget revisions to the Financial Management System (FMS) as they occur, unless they are a component of an interim report or the unaudited actuals report, in which case they are posted to FMS after board approval. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and implement board policies and regulations to limit authorization of budget modifications without prior board approval. The policies and regulations should identify budget modification limits as well as procedures for staff to follow when implementing modifications. 438 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 439 7.5 Budget Monitoring Professional Standard The LEA’s budget reflects LEA policies and is presented in a manner that facilitates communication of those policies. The LEA has the ability to accurately reflect its net ending balance throughout the budget monitoring process. The LEA has financial management systems and processes that ensure an early warning of any discrepancies between the budget projections and actual revenues or expenditures. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Adopted budget report, 2009-10 presented to the board 4. Interim budget reports, 2008-09 presented to the board 5. Unaudited actuals financial report, 2008-09 presented to the board 6. Samples of monthly budget report presented to the board Findings 1. Budget reports presented to the board reflect board policies and regulations, but those policies and regulations lack most requirements other than reporting formats and deadlines required by the education code. 2. Staff budget reports show general fund ending balances that are negative or not sufficient to meet the reserve requirements of the education code. The district has developed no significant plan to address budget deficits or shortfalls. 3. The district negotiated an agreement with its certificated bargaining unit that was rescinded by the Monterey County superintendent of schools as being fiscally harmful to the district. Nonetheless, the district’s assistant superintendent, business services presented a proposed budget that included the effects of the agreement because he disagreed with the county superintendent’s conclusion. The district’s board approved this budget, but the Monterey County Office of Education subsequently disapproved it. Members of the board expressed their frustration that the CBO’s submission of a budget that included the effect of a memorandum of understanding that was rescinded by the county office of education was confusing and left them uncertain about the district’s actual fiscal condition. 440 Financial Management 4. The district uses procedures to detect budgeted revenue and expenditure deficiencies, but it lacks an effective system to respond to externally-imposed financial challenges such as the recent declines in state funding. 5. FCMAT is working to develop a draft fiscal recovery plan as required by Senate Bill (SB) 130, the legislation authorizing a state loan to the district. This plan will be available in the near future. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board develops policies and regulations to guide staff regarding budget policy. These should include the following: • Board goals and objectives • Priorities for resource allocation and expenditure reduction • Limits on structural budget deficits • Reserve requirements • Resource allocation factors, including staffing and site/department funding allocations • A fiscal recovery plan 2. Ensure that budget reports that staff present to the board include information for board members regarding how the budget complies with and supports the above board policies. 3. Ensure that the board accepts and supports a fiscal recovery plan to address the district’s structural budget deficit and restore reserve levels as required by the education code. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 441 7.6 Budget Monitoring Professional Standard Special education programs and services are provided in a cost-effective manner to ensure that the local support for special education programs and services is not higher than is warranted. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Adopted budget report, 2009-10 presented to the board 4. Interim budget reports, 2008-09 presented to the board 5. Unaudited actual financial report, 2008-09 presented to the board Findings 1. Contributions from the unrestricted general fund to the special education program have been increasing at a rate that is faster than all other fund expenditures. The contribution for 2008-09 was $773,359 while the budgeted contribution for 2009-10 is $1,107,488 before the inclusion of one-time American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) program revenues. 2. The district is exceeding its maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements. As a result, expenditures in this area could be reduced without jeopardizing the district’s ability to meet this requirement. 3. District staff have identified billing errors and opportunities to reduce costs in special education transportation. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Strive to maintain growth in special education program expenditures at a rate no higher than expenditures for all district programs. The district should reduce expenditures to minimum levels while maintaining compliance with MOE requirements. 2. Ensure that the director of curriculum and instruction monitors special education program staffing and expenditures and provides periodic reports to the state administrator and the board. The director of maintenance, operations, transportation and food services (MOTF) should monitor transportation expenditures, including reviewing all individualized education programs (IEPs) for their effect on transportation. No IEP should be approved 442 Financial Management until transportation costs are reduced to the minimum possible while still meeting the student’s needs. 3. Correct any billing errors and overpayments by immediately issuing invoices and collecting payments in a timely manner. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 443 8.1 Accounting Professional Standard The LEA forecasts its cash receipts and disbursements and verifies those projections monthly to adequately manage its cash. The LEA reconciles its cash to bank statements and reports from the county treasurer monthly. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Cash flow projections prepared by district staff Findings 1. Staff were preparing cash flow projections monthly but now prepare them as needed, including for interim reports. 2. The county office reconciles the county cash account on behalf of the district. District staff do not review the reconciliations. 3. In June 2009, the state Legislature approved a $13 million emergency state apportionment for the district. The first $5 million in bonds were issued and made available in fiscal year 2009-10. California Department of Education (CDE) staff and Infrastructure Bank (I-Bank) officials indicate the plan is to make the proceeds of the final $8 million bond issuance available to the district in fiscal year 2010-11. 4. General fund cash flow projections prepared by district staff for the October 14, 2009 board meeting indicate the following conditions: • Beginning cash balance of $986 on July 1, 2009 • The budget for fiscal year 2009-10 has a structural deficit of $5,387,255 • Draws against state loan proceeds are projected to be $5 million in fiscal year 2009- 10. • The ending cash balance on June 30, 2010 would be -$4,356,981 if no state loan pro- ceeds were available. • The ending cash balance on June 30, 2010 is projected to be $643,019 after the dis- trict draws from the state loan. • The district drew $2 million from the state loan in July 2009 and is projected to draw another $3 million in April 2010. 5. Because of the district’s fiscal emergency status, it is critical that the board and the public understand the district’s financial situation and the fact that there is sufficient 444 Financial Management cash available to meet the district’s obligations. More frequent cash flow statements and projections would facilitate this understanding and make it possible for the dist rict to decide when interfund cash transfers are needed and when they can be repaid. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Prepare cash flow projections monthly. 2. Review reconciliations of cash in the county treasury prepared by the Monterey County Office of Education to fully understand the reconciling entries and necessary adjustments. 3. Prepare in time for the next $3 million loan draw. 4. Work closely with CDE staff and I-Bank officials regarding timing of the final $8 million bond sale to ensure proceeds are available as needed to meet cash flow needs. 5. Implement a fiscal recovery plan to minimize future cash flow deficiencies. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 445 8.2 Accounting Professional Standard The LEA’s payroll procedures comply with the requirements established by the county office of education, unless the LEA is fiscally independent. (EC 42646) Per standard accounting practice, the LEA implements procedures to ensure timely and accurate payroll processing. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interview with business office staff 4. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education external business services staff Findings 1. The business office is staffed with one payroll technician, who is responsible for all district payroll and benefits processing. The payroll technician processes payrolls, a fiscal expert reviews them for proper account coding, and the assistant superintendent, business services approves them. The payrolls are then delivered to the Monterey County Office of Education (county office) for checks to be produced. Checks are then returned to the district and the payroll technician distributes them. 2. The district processes two payrolls each month: a regular payroll for salaried positions; and a supplemental payroll for hourly employees, stipends and other forms of compensation. The payroll technician routinely works overtime to meet the semimonthly payroll cycle’s deadlines. 3. The payroll technician monitors board meeting agendas and minutes to learn of authorized payroll changes; the district does not use a formal, documented position control system. 4. Payrolls are usually processed on time as required by the county office, but problems occur and recur frequently. Communication between the human resources and business office staffs is often inadequate, resulting in continual payroll corrections and account coding errors. On several occasions in recent years, the payroll technician generated paychecks for employees who were no longer employed by the district because the technician did not have information regarding their departure. Conversely, new employees have been hired but no paycheck generated because the payroll technician did not know of their employment. 446 Financial Management 5. In recent months, a directive was given to the payroll technician that no changes or modifications are to occur to employee payroll without specific written approval from the human resources technician. 6. The payroll technician refers employees to the Monterey County Schools Insurance Group and/or the Monterey County Office of Education for counseling regarding health and welfare benefits and retirement options. 7. Because of budget reductions, the payroll technician is provided infrequent and insufficient training opportunities. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Require an employee other than the payroll technician distribute employee paychecks. 2. Implement a position control system that provides the payroll staff with the information they need to process payroll on time and with minimal errors. 3. Assign a management staff member the responsibility of counseling employees regarding benefits and retirement programs. 4. Provide the payroll technician with supervision and training to ensure that this individual has the most current information on all technical matters relevant to this position. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 447 8.3 Employee Services Professional Standard The LEA does not pay temporary disability benefits during those times when an employee is in an extended non-pay status. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with fiscal experts 2. Interview with business office staff Findings 1. The district provides both the state disability insurance program and a workers’ compensation program for its employees. Staff indicated the district does not pay temporary disability benefits when employees are in non-pay status for an extended time, but no documentation was provided to substantiate these statements. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review claims and payments for temporary disability from the state disability insurance and workers compensation programs to identify any payments to employees in a non-pay status. If any such payments are detected, consider recapturing any benefits to which employees were not entitled. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 448 Financial Management 8.4 Accounting Professional Standard Federal and state categorical programs, either through specific program requirements or through general cost principles included in OMB Circular A-87, require the LEA to have an adequate system to account for those revenues and related expenditures. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interviews with school site administrators 4. Consolidated Application, Parts I & II, 2008-09 Findings 1. The district is not managing restricted funding in a manner that will ensure it uses all state and federal program resources properly. The district updates revenue estimates based on the latest grant award letter. 2. No specific business office staff member is given primary responsibility for determining grant complia nce and overseeing the district’s and sites’ budgets. Instead, district office staff review these budgets as time allows. 3. Site personnel apply for grant funds and often sign commitment letters or contracts without district office or board review or approval. Some grants received required matching funds, but no such funds had been allocated in the district’s budget because business office staff were not given the opportunity to review the application. In one instance the matching amount exceeded $1 million. 4. Staff reported some concern about inappropriate charges of staffing costs to certain categorically funded programs. The district’s administration has been reviewing this issue for several years, but no effective solution had been implemented at the time of fieldwork for this review. In addition, staff indicated the district does not always follow the timekeeping and documentation requirements of Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-87 for staff charged to categorical programs. 5. The funds from at least one grant to the district are being returned to the grantor agency because they were not used within the required time. Because the budget for this grant had not been recorded in the district’s accounts, there was insufficient awareness of the grant’s availability and purpose. Financial Management 449 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Present all grant and categorically funded program applications to the business office, the curriculum and instruction office and the state administrator for review and approval before submitting the application. 2. Present all entitlement and grant award letters to the business office to ensure that all programs are properly recorded for budget and accounting purposes. 3. Provide training for all staff involved in categorically funded programs and grants to ensure that only allowa ble activities are carried out and that expenditures are appropriate and documented. 4. Manage all state and federal programs properly, and keep budgets current so that funds are not underused or overspent. 5. Develop and implement procedures for staff members to document their time to be charged to categorical programs, in accordance with OMB Circular A-87. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 450 Financial Management 8.5 Accounting Professional Standard The LEA utilizes GAAP-compliant standard procedures for closing its financial records at fiscal year end to ensure accurate recording of transactions. The LEA’s year-end closing procedures comply with the procedures and requirements established by the county office of education. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Board policies 4. Independent financial audit reports from prior years Findings 1. The district does not have formal accounting or business office policies or procedure manuals. 2. The district submitted its unaudited actual financial report to the board and the Monterey County Office of Education (county office) by the statutory September 15 deadline. 3. The county office provides all districts with workshops, year-end closing calendars and other information. District staff use these resources. 4. The district does not have a year-end closing checklist. Such a checklist, combined with staff training, would ensure that everyone is on task, that the sequence of events is appropriate and that staff understand the process. Good planning would help the district meet deadlines for reports, data processing, physical inventories and other items. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that business office clerical staff receive training in accounting and general school finance. Provide this training in the near future to help staff develop the technical knowledge they need, and follow up this initial training with annual training to maintain and improve employees’ skills. 2. Develop and provide other training programs and opportunities for each position to en sure that staff have the skills required to perform their jobs. 3. Develop and distribute procedure manuals or desk manuals that identify the functions performed by each position. The manuals should be detailed, including tasks, timing of Financial Management 451 tasks, sources of required information for each task, required app rovals, standardized forms and documents, and examples. 4. Maintain appropriate external reference materials and profess ional guides, and make staff aware of these resources. Much of this information is available online (such as the California School Accounting Manual). 5. Develop a year-end closing checklist to accompany the calendar provided by the county office. The checklist should indicate responsibilities and deadlines for each major event in the closing process. 6. Ensure that reconciliations and other required tasks are completed during the year. 7. Monitor the budget more closely during the year so that the ending balance does not change significantly, causing concern when the unau dited actual reports are presented. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 452 Financial Management 9.1 Attendance Accounting Legal Standard Attendance records are not destroyed until after the third July 1 succeeding the completion of the audit. (Title V, CCR, Section 16026) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and school site staff. Findings 1. The district does not have a board policy regarding the retention of average daily attendance (ADA) records and supporting documents in accordance with Title V of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), sections 16022 and 16023. 2. District office and school site staff are aware that a records retention requirement exists but exhibited little understanding of it. 3. The district keeps attendance records for at least three years. Most district-level attendance records have been stored for more years than required by state law and regulation. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a board policy regarding the retention of attendance records. 2. Destroy attendance records after three years. However, re-evaluate maintenance practices for these records after the board poli cy is adopted to ensure compliance with the policy. 3. Reinforce the attendance records retention requirement with employees during annual in-service trainings. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 453 9.2 Attendance Accounting Professional Standard School sites maintain an accurate record of daily enrollment and attendance that is reconciled monthly. School sites maintain statewide student identifiers and reconcile data required for state and federal reporting. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and school site staff 2. Sample of monthly attendance summaries Findings 1. The district does not have a board policy regarding daily attendance. The district has a method for capturing attendance and reporting it to the district office monthly; however, there are no written policies or procedures for this practice. 2. A district office staff member, not a site staff member, generates daily attendance reports in the attendance system and identifies errors so that they can be corrected in a timely manner. The school sites have the supporting documentations to verify absences and thus are better equipped to perform this function. 3. The district office requires weekly attendance reports at the schools to verify both the accuracy of the data and that staff responsible for taking attendance have signed the reports. 4. Staff provided no evidence that employees responsible for attendance accounting receive annual in-service training. 5. The district has the user manual provided by the attendance system software company but has developed no user manuals regarding district-implemented attendance procedures. 6. The district office reconciles reports at the first and second interim annual reporting periods before submitting them to the state. 7. Staff indicated the district is submitting requested data to the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS); however, no documentation was provided to substantiate this statement. 454 Financial Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Adopt board policies and administrative regulations regarding attendance accounting procedures. 2. Develop written procedures based on board policy as ado pted. The district should also develop an attendance procedures desk manual that adheres to board policy and administrative regulations and can be used in training employees. 3. Require that site staff generate daily audit reports rather than having the district office staff member perform this task. Site staff should then correct their errors before the data is reviewed at the district office. 4. Require that site staff review and reconcile all daily ADA reports with their monthly reports before submitting them to the dist rict office. This will help ensure accuracy and reduce the time needed to make corrections later. 5. Provide an annual in-service for all employees who work with att endance accounting at school sites, including the principals. 6. Hold principals accountable for the accuracy of the ADA reports they submit to the district office. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 455 9.3 Attendance Accounting Professional Standard Policies and regulations exist for independent study, charter school, home study, inter-/intra- LEA agreements, LEAs of choice, and ROC/P and adult education, and address fiscal impact. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and school site staff 2. Review of board policies and administrative regulations provided by staff Findings 1. The district has board policies for all items listed in this standard except for district of choice, regional occupational centers or programs (ROC/P) and adult education; however, the district has not revised these policies in many years. Existing policies related to attendance include the following: • 0420, Charter Schools, adopted March 26, 1997 • 5116.1, Intradistrict Open Enrollment, adopted January 14, 2004 • 5117, Interdistrict Attendance, adopted February 23, 1994 • 6158, Independent Study, revised July 16, 2008 • 6176(a), Weekend/Saturday Classes, adopted January 8, 1992 • 6183, Home and Hospital Instruction, adopted January 14, 1990. 2. During fiscal year 2007-08 the district was penalized for all revenue derived from the independent study program because of a failure to keep all apportionment records. Because of this, a presentation was made to staff in January 2009 to explain independent study program and documentation requirements. Topics included key components, master agreements, assignment records, work assignments, common non-compliance items, district audit findings, immediate needs and consequences. Eight staff members also attended the attendance accounting workshop provided by the California Association of School Business Officials (CASBO) to further develop their understanding of these requirements. 3. The district has corrected most of the audit findings, except the requirement that the master agreement be signed after the student’s first day of absence. Site and business office staff continue to work on this compliance issue. 456 Financial Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Adopt board policies and administrative regulations regarding attendance accounting for district of choice, ROC/P and adult education programs. 2. Revise existing board policies and administrative regulations regularly to ensure that they include proper procedures and relevant current legislation. 3. Require that employees be familiar with and have access to board policies and administrative regulations regarding attendance procedures. 4. Provide staff with training in attendance procedures as needed. 5. Require that the independent study program master agreement be signed before a student enters the program. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 457 9.4 Attendance Accounting Professional Standard Students are enrolled and entered into the attendance system in an efficient, accurate and timely manner. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and school site staff Findings 1. Site personnel enter student data into the Aries student information system and run audit reports daily to highlight conflicts or concurrent enrollment exceptions. 2. Training in the Aeries student information system was provided when the district adopted that system in 2006-07, but no training has been provided since. 3. It is critical for any district to have accurate attendance information to estimate and claim all revenue to which it is entitled. The district’s financial crisis makes this function particularly important. 4. Staff are not using the Aeries student attendance system to produce a report of absences as a percentage of total enrollment. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Require school sites to enroll students as soon as possible to maximize average daily attendance (ADA). 2. Develop an attendance accounting handbook that includes step-by-step instructions from the registration of a student through reporting on the state J18/19 form. The handbook should include attend ance instructions, forms, attendance codes, attendance system operations, enr ollment and disenrollment procedures, legal requirements, education code requirements and other relevant information. Distribute the handbook at the beginning of each school year to principals, assistant principals and school site clerical and support staff at in-service training to reduce inconsistencies. 3. Develop and use management reports in the Aeries student information system to provide the district’s decision-makers with complete and accurate enrollment data. 4. Develop a report to monitor absences as a percentage of total enrollment. 5. Direct staff to attend all training offered, and hold staff accountable if they opt out of training without prior approval. 458 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 459 9.5 Attendance Accounting Professional Standard At least semi-annually, the LEA verifies that each school bell schedule meets instructional time requirements for minimum day, year and annual minute requirements. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and school site administrators and staff 2. Review of independent financial audit reports, prior years Findings 1. The contract with certificated staff includes requirements regarding bell schedules, so they have not changed from year to year. 2. Principals prepare the school calendar, which includes minimum days, and submitted it to the district office for review and verification in the spring before the next school year starts. The district authorizes the number of instructional minutes offered at each school site. 3. The annual audit report indicates that the district complies with annual instructional minutes req uirements. 4. Instructional minute calculations are not verified a second time once the school year begins. Staff reported that sites periodically add minimum days as the school year proceeds. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Include informat ion regarding bell schedules and instructional minute requirements in annual in-service meetings for site staff. 2. To improve compliance with state laws and regulations, ensure that district staff perform additional instructional minute calculations and analyze bell schedules during the year to ensure that the bell schedules submitted match actual practices at school sites. 3. Provide principals with training in the importance of adhering to the req uired number of instructional minutes, and hold them accountable for any unauthorized deviations. 460 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 461 9.6 Attendance Accounting Professional Standard The LEA utilizes standardized and mandatory programs to improve the attendance rate of pupils. Absences are aggressively followed up by LEA staff. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and school site staff Findings 1. The district lacks sufficient standard procedures to improve student attend ance. 2. If a student is absent for more than three days and no communication is received from the parent or guardian, a staff member is sent to the home to determine the student’s whereabouts. 3. Because the district does not always correct attendance accounting errors and omissions, it may be losing ADA revenue. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Improve student attendance by encouraging principals to find ways to provide incentives for students to attend school. 2. Implement more effective methods to address truancy and period absences. 3. Require site staff to validate absences. 4. Provide school administrators and clerical staff with annual training in attendance accounting law, regulations and district procedures. 5. Hold teachers accountable for accurately reporting student attendance. 6. Revise and improve board policies that address truancy, discipline, suspensions and expulsions. 462 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 463 9.7 Attendance Accounting Professional Standard School site personnel receive periodic and timely training on the LEA’s attendance procedures, system procedures and changes in laws and regulations. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and school site staff Findings 1. The district does not have policies and regulations regarding training in student attendance system operations and procedures. 2. Neither training nor training materials have been provided to employees since the district converted to Aeries student information system in 2006-07. 3. School clerical and secretarial staff need additional training in attendance procedures and use of the Aeries system, and all school office personnel need cross training in attendance procedures to provide coverage when another employee is absent. 4. The district has no written policy or procedures regarding a training schedule for district personnel. The district does not provide school site attendance personnel with recurring training, and no formal training is provided for new hires or for temporary personnel. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop policies regarding the student information system and the procedures used to train employees in its use, including new hires, substitutes, and site and district employees. The district should develop and follow an annual training schedule for existing employees and a separate training schedule for new hires to ensure accurate reporting on the J18/19 attendance form and at the first interim, second interim and annual reporting periods. Because the district’s funding is based on these reports, their accuracy is vital. 2. Update training materials for the student information system regularly. School sites should receive the most up-to-date manuals to ensure that the system is being used fully. 3. Hold training sessions at the beginning of each school year. Develop a handbook that includes guidelines for all school sites to follow, and provide it to all principals, vice principals, attendance clerks and school secretaries. 464 Financial Management 4. Encourage school clerical staff to communicate and exchange ideas with each other regarding common issues, challenges and best practices. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 465 9.8 Attendance Accounting Professional Standard The LEA makes appropriate use of short-term independent study and Saturday school programs as alternative methods for pupils to keep current on classroom course work. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and school site staff Findings 1. Board policy 6158 addresses the independent study program. It was last revised July 16, 2008. 2. Saturday school is required for students with behavior and attendance issues. The students are not always doing course work as required for apportionment. 3. Suspensions fall into the same category as expulsions. This is not an appropriate program for students on suspension. An in-house suspension program supervised by certificated personnel is needed at both school sites. The district has such a program at King City high school but not at Greenfield High School. 4. Although the district has board a policy and administrative regulations regarding independent study, audit findings and apportionment issues persist in this area, such as the contract being signed after the student has missed one or more days of school. Statewide, independent study is an area in which school agencies typically receive numerous audit findings. This is a very restrictive program with multiple requirements that need to be documented based on a district’s established policies and procedures. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review and revise the board policy regarding independent study to meet the applicable requirements of Education Code sections 51745 through 51749.3. 2. Offer additional short-term independent study (more than five days of continued absence) and Saturday school programs at all sites to increase average daily attendance (ADA) and provide more learning opportunities for stud ents. 3. Train staff regarding independent study program rules and regulations so that only the proper ADA is claimed. 466 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 467 10.1 Accounting, Purchasing, and Warehousing Legal Standard The LEA adheres to the California School Accounting Manual (CSAM) and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) as required by Education Code Section 41010. This helps to ensure that transactions are accurately recorded and financial statements are fairly presented. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. 2007-08 independent financial audit report Findings 1. The district adheres to the California School Accounting Manual and Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP), and its 2007-08 audit report indicates this compliance. 2. The district’s unaudited financial statements for fiscal year 2007-08 were consistent with the requirements of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) statement 34. Audit adjustments were made to four district funds to address overstatements of both accounts payable and accounts receivable. Adjustments were also made to cash accounts. In total, net adjustments decreased the ending fund balance of all funds by $18,697. 3. The Monterey County Office of Education noted in its review of the district’s 2009-10 adopted budget that audit adjustments from the 2007-08 audit had been posted in error in the district’s general fund and adult education fund, overstating the ending fund balance by $340,705. 4. District staff stated that the district’s past practice has been to code staffing costs to unrestricted general fund accounts during the school year, then transfer those costs to general fund restricted programs after the year is complete and staff assignments are known with certainty. Staff also indicated that the district does not always comply with the requirements of the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB’s) Circular A-87 regarding documentation of staff positions charged to categorically funded programs. 468 Financial Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Post audit adjustments to the appropriate accounts after review and approval by the assistant superintendent, business services. 2. Code salary and benefit costs of all staff positions to the resource codes and programs they serve during the school year. 3. Require all staff who serve programs financed by categorical funds to complete documentation as required by OMB Circular A-87. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 469 10.2 Accounting, Purchasing, and Warehousing Legal Standard The LEA complies with the bidding requirements of Public Contract Code Section 20111. The LEA has controls to ensure that only properly authorized purchases are made and independent contracts approved. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Board Policy 3311 Findings 1. Staff report that since 2006, except in the case of facility modernization projects, the district has not procured any services or products that would require compliance with the bidding requirements of the Public Contract Code. 2. In June 2009 the board approved a policy that implemented the uniform cost accounting procedures provisions of the Public Contract Code. These provisions allow a higher dollar amount threshold for bids. The Public Contract Code’s provisions are intended to ensure that the district receives products and services at the lowest possible price. Because the public contract code applies infrequently to the district’s procurement needs, FCMAT questions this board policy’s benefit to the district other than the avoidance of a formal bidding process. 3. The district requires purchase requisitions to ensure advance authorization for all purchases. However, staff sometimes make purchases and seek authorization after the goods or services are received. In these situations, the invoices are typically paid because the district has received the benefits of the unauthorized purchase. 4. The district requires the hiring of all independent contractors to be approved in advance using a purchase requisition. However, site and department staff sometimes bypass this requirement by using invoices after the services have been provided. 5. Site and department staff reported that purchase requisitions are sometimes delayed in the business office because of what they perceive to be workload issues. Business office staff and the district’s fiscal experts acknowledged that this is the case. 470 Financial Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review the purpose of applying the uniform cost accounting provisions of the public contract code to district procurement practices, and reaffirm that they are in the district’s best interest. 2. Ensure that all purchases are authorized in advance by using an approved purchase requisition form. 3. Implement an automated purchase requisition system to improve efficiency and accountability in procurement. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 471 10.3 Accounting, Purchasing, and Warehousing Legal Standard On or before September 15, the LEA’s board has approved, on a form prescribed by the SPI, a statement of all receipts and expenditures of the LEA for the preceding fiscal year (called the unaudited actuals), and has filed the statement (along with any charter school statements if the LEA is the authorizing entity) with the county superintendent of schools. (EC 42100 (a)) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education associate superintendent for business services 4. Interviews with personnel from Monterey County Office of Education district advisory services for budgets and district reports 5. Unaudited actuals financial report, 2008-09 presented to the board 6. Monterey County Office of Education review letter regarding unaudited actuals financial Report, 2008-09 Findings 1. Staff members presented the 2008-09 unaudited actuals financial report to the board at its September 9, 2009 meeting. The board approved the report and it was filed with the Monterey County Office of Education before September 15, 2009. The report was formatted using forms prescribed by the state superintendent of public instruction (SPI). 2. The Monterey County Office of Education review letter noted that the district’s unaudited actuals required no mathematical or technical corrections. 3. The district has no sponsored and/or operating charter schools. Recommendations for Recovery None. 472 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 8 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 473 10.4 Accounting, Purchasing, and Warehousing Professional Standard The LEA timely and accurately records all financial activity for all programs. GAAP accounting work is properly supervised and reviewed to ensure that transactions are recorded timely and accurately, and allow the preparation of periodic financial statements. The accounting system has an appropriate level of controls to prevent and detect errors and irregularities. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts Findings 1. Staff reported that they continually struggle to meet the financial reporting deadlines imposed by the education code. Reasons for these delays include the following: • The part-time status of the district’s fiscal experts hampers communications and cre- ates delays in information sharing. • There is a lack of clear, consistent guidance regarding important fiscal decisions. • The Financial Management System (FMS) application experiences continual connec- tion failures and report-run errors. 2. Journal entries are routinely prepared and posted to correct coding errors, particularly in salary and benefit accounts. New procedures have been implemented to address this challenge, including prohibiting the payroll technician from making payroll changes without advance approval from the human resources technician. 3. The 2007-08 audit report included adjustments to four funds, which affected accounts receivable and payable as well as cash in county treasury. These adjustments created a net decrease of more than $18,000 to the ending fund balance. District staff posted some of the adjustments to the district’s budget incorrectly. 4. Staff reported that the FMS application prohibits unbalanced postings of entries from subsidiary ledgers and journals. 5. The district does not use the FMS application’s payroll encumbrance feature. 6. The district uses a hard stop feature in FMS, which prevents purchase orders from being issued if the budgeted balance is insufficient. 474 Financial Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Provide staff with guidance regarding budget and financial decisions to facilitate timely completion of their work. 2. Work closely with the Monterey County Office of Education’s (county office’s) information technology department to resolve the frequent connectivity issues and reporting errors experienced when using the FMS application. Create a protocol for assigning district staff to use county office equipment at the county office when these technology failures delay and disrupt the district’s’ ability to meet deadlines. 3. Implement a position control system to eliminate most payroll errors that result from a lack of interdepartmental communication. 4. Implement the FMS application’s payroll encumbrance feature to correct potential payroll overages before they occur. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 475 10.5 Accounting, Purchasing, and Warehousing Professional Standard The LEA has adequate purchasing and warehousing procedures to ensure that: (1) only properly authorized purchases are made, (2) authorized purchases are made consistent with LEA policies and management direction, (3) inventories are safeguarded, and (4) purchases and inventories are timely and accurately recorded. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with fiscal experts 3. Interview with classified management 4. Interview with business office staff Findings 1. Staff reported that purchase orders are required for all purchases, but the process is not automated. The process is as follows: • The originating site or department completes a paper purchase requisition, a supervi- sor authorizes it, and it is forwarded to the business office for processing. • A fiscal expert reviews the account coding and budget and contacts the originator if the budget is insufficient. If this is the case, the authorizing supervisor verbally autho- rizes a budget transfer and the fiscal expert processes it. • The assistant superintendent, business services authorizes a completed requisition for processing. The director of curriculum and instruction also approves any purchase requisition charged to a categorically funded program. • The account technician enters a purchase order into the FMS application, prints pur- chase orders and submits them to the assistant superintendent for signature. • The approved purchase order is then delivered to the originator. 2. Staff reported that few purchase requisitions are processed because purchasing has been severely curtailed by budget constraints in recent years. Purchases that are implemented often take two to three weeks to get through the above process because many of the documents are misplaced, or contain errors or are incomplete. 3. Goods are shipped to the district’s warehouse if their destination is King City High School or any district departments. They are received and then delivered to the originator. Purchases initiated at Greenfield High School are typically delivered to and received at 476 Financial Management that campus, but packing slips indicating the goods’ receipt are rarely returned to the account technician. 4. Staff members do not complete fixed asset accounting procedures during the purchasing process, except in the case of technology and related equipment. Such procedures would include attaching a unique numbered asset tag to the equipment and recording pertinent information in the district’s fixed asset inventory system, as well as conducting a fixed asset inventory at year end to prove the asset record information is accurate. 5. When an approved invoice is received, the accounts payable technician processes it for payment. Accounts payable warrant batches are prepared once a week. The assistant superintendent, business services approves warrant lists in advance, and once approved, they are sent to the Monterey County Office of Education for processing. Warrants are then returned to the accounts payable technician for distribution to the payee. 6. Staff did not provide any evidence that the district uses inventory systems or conducts periodic physical inventories. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Automate the purchasing process by implementing the FMS application’s online purchase requisition feature. 2. Require site and department staff to prepare and submit budget transfer requests, which can also be automated in the FMS. 3. Require the staff member who receives a shipment to sign the packing slip and forward it to the accounts payable technician. 4. Assign a single staff member fixed asset accounting responsibilities for all purchases. 5. Ensure that an employee other than the accounts payable technician receives accounts payable warrants and distributes them to payees. 6. Use an inventory system to track inventory of supplies, and conduct periodic physical counts to verify information in the system. Financial Management 477 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 478 Financial Management 10.6 Accounting, Purchasing, and Warehousing Professional Standard The LEA maximizes its direct and indirect support costs to restricted programs and locally defined grants. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with fiscal experts 2. Unaudited actual report, 2008-09 Findings 1. The district does not always charge the maximum allowable indirect cost to all categorically funded programs and grants that allow such charges. The district provided no indication of the reasons for this practice. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Use the state-approved indirect cost rate published by the California Department of Education. 2. Charge the maximum indirect cost charge allowed by federal and state law and/or regulation for every categorically funded program. 3. Charge the maximum indirect cost rate allowed by all funded grants. Include this maximum amount in all grant applications. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 479 11.1 Student Body Funds Legal Standard The board adopts board policies, regulations and procedures to establish parameters on how student body organizations will be established and how they will be operated, audited and managed. These policies and regulations are clearly developed and written to ensure compliance regarding how student body organizations deposit, invest, spend, and raise funds. (EC 48930- 48938) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and school site staff 2. Prior year independent audit reports 3. Board policies and regulations Findings 1. The district has no board policies or procedures regarding the establishment and oversight of student organizations. Board policies and administrative regulations are needed to provide direction about proper administrative oversight and how student body accounting func tions are managed. 2. Prior year audit reports include many findings related to student body accounting. 3. No written procedures regarding student body funds were found, and staff members have not received training in the proper management of stud ent body funds. Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Adopt board policies and administrative regulations related to student body organizations, ensuring that they address proper business procedures, internal controls, generally accepted accounting principles, and the latest requirements from the state. The responsibilities of district staff and the associated student body (ASB) should be clearly segregated to ensure adequate oversight and maintenance of student body funds. 2. Develop, distribute, and oversee accounting procedures for student body funds. Written procedures should be developed at the site level regarding the many responsibilities associated with student body organizations, such as how to establish clubs, how they will be operated and the appropriate procedures to ensure effective internal controls. In addition, the district should develop procedures for the district office regarding the oversight, management and audits that need to occur to protect the district in this area. 3. Follow generally accepted accounting principles at all times. 480 Financial Management 4. Mandate annual training for staff in the proper management of student body funds. The training should include, but not be limited to, an overview of the district’s board policies, administrative regulations and procedures. 5. Hold employees accountable for following procedures. It is imperative that the district ensure that all staff are aware of, understand and follow procedures. 6. Require that administrators be familiar with proper ASB procedures and that they supervise certificated advisors and classified staff appropriately. 7. Process only student funds through the ASB. 8. Develop and implement proper cash collection controls to ensure that all cash collected by students and/or advisors is submitted to the ASB Book keeper. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 481 11.2 Student Body Funds Legal Standard Internal audits are performed to review the operations at both LEA and site levels. This is in addition to the LEA’s annual independent audit, which includes a review of student body accounts. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and school site staff 2. Review of prior year independent financial audit reports Findings 1. Student body fund audits are part of the district’s external independent audit. There have been no internal audits of student body funds at the school site level. 2. Although the school sites send monthly reports to the district office (e.g. a copy of the bank statement, and cash reconciliation and expenditure reports), no ASB accounting is occurring at the district level. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Regularly conduct random internal audits of stud ent body accounting at both the site and the district level to ensure that proper accounting procedures are being followed. 2. Use FCMAT’s Associated Student Body Accounting Manual and Desk Reference, which contains two internal control checklists for assessing controls at both the school site and district office level. 3. To better support the school sites, assign a single district-level employee the responsibility for oversight of student body funds and activities. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 482 Financial Management 11.3 Student Body Funds Legal Standard The LEA provides annual training and ongoing guidance to site and LEA personnel on the policies and procedures governing Associated Student Body accounts. Internal controls are part of the training and guidance, ensuring that any findings in the internal audits or independent annual audits are discussed and addressed so they do not recur. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district and school site staff 2. Review of prior year independent financial audit reports Findings 1. The district does not have a training schedule for district personnel. 2. The district provides minimal training to staff members when they begin working in ASB clerical positions, and no annual or ongoing training is provided. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Provide annual training regarding ASB accounting procedures. This training should be mandatory for all certificated and classified employees who collect or work with student funds. In addition, employees who are new to student body accounting should receive an in-service training at the start of their new assignment. 2. Require that ASB bookkeepers attend an annual workshop to gain knowledge about ASB fiscal management, laws, best practices and procedures. Many ASB workshops are available from outside organizations, nearby school districts and county offices of education. 3. Provide all employees involved with student activities with access to FCMAT’s Associated Student Body Accounting Manual and Desk Reference, which can be downloaded at no charge from the FCMAT Web site at www.fcmat.org. Financial Management 483 Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 484 Financial Management 12.1 Multiyear Financial Projections Legal Standard The LEA provides a multiyear financial projection for at least the general fund at a minimum, consistent with the policy of the county office. Projections are done for the general fund at the time of budget adoption and all interim reports. Projected fund balance reserves are disclosed and assumptions used in developing multiyear projections that are based on the most accurate information available. The assumptions for revenues and expenditures are reasonable and supported by documentation. (EC 42131) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education associate superintendent, business services 3. Adopted budget report, 2009-10 presented to the board 4. Revised budget report, 2009-10 presented to the board 5. Monterey County Office of Education budget review letter regarding adopted and revised budgets, 2009-10 Findings 1. Multiyear financial projections (MYFP) that the district submitted to the Monterey County Office of Education (county office) with its 2009-10 revised budget report did not include a plan to resolve the district’s structural deficit or restore reserves to the level required by the education code. The MYFP included the following projected amounts: Unrestricted general fund – surplus/-deficit: 2009-10 $1,677,720 2010-11 -$3,450,221 2011-12 -$4,496,094 Unrestricted general fund – ending fund balance: 2009-10 $260,976 2010-11 -$3,189,245 2011-12 -$7,685,339 Financial Management 485 Unrestricted general fund – ending fund balance shortfall: 2009-10 $0 2010-11 -$3,399,751 2011-12 -$8,328,229 The above amounts support the county office’s conclusion that the MYFP does not reflect “ . . . financial recovery efforts being developed and pursued by the state administrator . . .” For this reason, the Monterey County Office of Education recommended that the superintendent of public instruction (SPI) disapprove the district’s budget. The SPI has agreed with the Monterey County Office of Education’s recommendation to disapprove the district’s budget and is working with the district to waive the committee process to develop a budget. All parties agree that the fiscal recovery plan developed by FCMAT will be the basis for the district’s fiscal year 2009-10 budget. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Begin addressing its structural budget deficit as soon as possible. Budgeted expenditures should be reduced to match ongoing revenue projections. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 486 Financial Management 12.2 Multiyear Financial Projections Legal Standard The board ensures that any guideline developed for collective bargaining fiscally aligns with the LEA’s multiyear instructional and fiscal goals. Multiyear financial projections are prepared for use in decision-making, especially whenever a significant multiyear expenditure commitment is contemplated, including salary or employee benefit enhancements negotiated through the collective bargaining process. (EC 42142) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education associate superintendent, business services 3. Multiyear financial projections, 2009-10 adopted budget report Findings 1. The board approved a tentative agreement with the district’s certificated bargaining unit in February 2009 that would have reduced staffing costs by $2 million per year according to the district’s estimates The tentative agreement included the following cost reductions: • Placing a cap on the district’s maximum contribution to health benefits • Removing the cap on class size and class size average • Reducing the instructional day from seven to six periods • Eliminating 13 teaching positions • Reducing or capping stipends and hourly rates for a variety of services The agreement did not decrease salary schedules and prohibited any change to the salary schedule for two fiscal years. District staff worked closely with the board to gain their concurrence regarding the tenets of this agreement, which yielded the equivalent of a 25% reduction in certificated staffing costs during the two-year period of the agreement. 2. In a letter dated May 8, 2009 the Monterey County Superintendent of Schools rescinded the district board’s action, stating, “…approval of the Tentative Agreement/ MOU by the District board is inconsistent with the ability of the District to meet its obligations for the current and subsequent fiscal year.” The reasons given for this rescission were based on the stated conclusion that “…the Tentative Agreement/MOU, even if implemented, still leaves the District with a negative fund balance in the current year and each subsequent year through 2011…” and, “… Moreover, the Districts action…would place a 24-month restriction on any further reductions in salaries and benefits…”. Financial Management 487 3. The tentative bargaining agreement that the board approved in February 2009 did not included a multiyear financial projection to support how the agreement would contribute to resolving the district’s structural deficit and did not indicate how the district would adjust other budget categories to eliminate the structural deficit if the agreement did not accomplish this. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Include a multiyear financial projection with any tentative agreement with its employee bargaining units. The projection should support how the agreement will contribute to resolving the district’s structural deficit, or, if it the agreement does not do this, how the district will adjust other budget categories to achieve that goal. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 488 Financial Management 13.1 Long-Term Debt Obligations Legal Standard The LEA notifies the county superintendent of schools and county auditor at least 30 days prior to the board’s approval of the issuance of certificates of participation (COPs) or other non-voter-approved debt instruments secured by real property. The LEA furnishes the necessary information to assess the anticipated effect of the debt issuance, including repayment schedules, evidence of the ability to repay, and costs of issuance. (EC 17150) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education associate superintendent, business services 3. Independent auditor’s report, 2008-09 4. Adopted budget report, 2009-10 presented to the board 5. Monterey County Office of Education review letters regarding 2009-10 adopted and revised budget reports 6. Loan agreement between the district and Monterey County Office of Education 7. Senate Bill (SB) 130 8. Letter and attachments from the state superintendent of public instruction (SPI) to the board president, July 23, 200, regarding: SB 130 9. SB 130 loan repayment schedule Findings 1. The district has not issued any secured or unsecured non-voter-approved debt since 2006. The debt issuance in 2006 consisted of a $1.2 million emergency apportionment loan from the Monterey County Office of Education that was necessary because of an unfavorable ruling from the Public Employee Relations Board (PERB) and a related settlement agreement with the district’s certificated bargaining unit. The district repaid this loan in full in 2009. 2. In 2009, the State of California provided the district with a $13 million emergency apportionment authorization. The state has issued $5 million of this amount in bonds for fiscal year 2009-10 and is expected to issue the balance in fiscal year 2010-11. Financial Management 489 3. Because the district’s multiyear financial projections did not anticipate annual debt service for the $13 million state loan, the district understated its projected expenditures and structural deficit and overstated the ending fund balance by $277,000 in 2010-11 and by up to $977,000 in 2011-12. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Avoid issuing non-voter-approved debt until it can fully repay its outstanding emergency apportionment loan from the state. 2. Include annual debt service for the $13 million state loan in its multiyear financial projections. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 490 Financial Management 13.2 Long-Term Debt Obligations Legal Standard The LEA does not use the proceeds from COPs and other non-voter-approved debt secured by real property for the LEA’s general operations, regardless of the LEA’s budget certification. Long- term debt financing mechanisms are not used to finance current operations or to capitalize expenses. (EC 42133.5) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with board president 3. Interview with board clerk 4. Independent auditors report, 2008-09 5. Adopted budget report, 2009-10, presented to the board 6. Monterey County Office of Education review letters regarding 2009-10 adopted and revised budget reports 7. Loan agreement between the district and the Monterey County Office of Education 8. Senate Bill (SB) 130 9. Letter and attachments from the state superintendent of public instruction (SPI) to the board president, July 23, 2009, regarding SB 130 10. SB 130 loan repayment schedule Findings 1. The district has not used certificates of participation (COPs) or other non-voter-approved debt for their general operations, with the following exceptions. • In 2006 the district received an emergency apportionment loan of $1.2 million from the Monterey County Office of Education to fund the financial impact of an unfavor- able PERB ruling and the resulting settlement agreement between the district and its certificated bargaining unit. The loan was deemed necessary because the district would not have been able to fund the settlement without it. Terms of the loan required three annual principal payments of $400,000 plus interest at a rate specified each year by the Monterey County Treasurers Office. The district made the final payment in 2009. Financial Management 491 • In June 2009 the state Legislature approved and the governor signed Senate Bill (SB) 130, which provides the district with a $13 million emergency apportionment loan. This loan was determined to be necessary because the district became cash insolvent due in part to its failure to respond to the financial effect of the above-noted settle- ment with its certificated bargaining unit. Near the beginning of fiscal year 2009-10, Infrastructure Bank (I-Bank) issued bonds for the first $5 million of the state loan, $2 million of which has been drawn to date. The balance is expected to be drawn in 2010. Debt service payments on the $2 million draw are due each July through 2029 in the amount of $110,831, which includes 1% interest. FCMAT estimates the annual debt service amount will increase to approximately $277,000 when the next $3 million is drawn. The I-Bank is making arrangements to issue the final $8 million in bonds by the end of fiscal year 2009-10 so that the proceeds will be available in the following fiscal year. The California Department of Education (CDE) and the I-Bank both estimate that interest rates for this loan will be approximately 5-6%, which FCMAT estimates will create additional annual debt service of $640,000 to $700,000 over the next 20 years. 2. Because the district did not anticipate annual debt service for the $13 million state loan in its multiyear financial projections, it understated its projected expenditures and structural deficit and overstated its ending fund balance by $277,000 in 2010-11 and by up to $977,000 in 2011-12. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Refrain from using any form of non-voter-approved debt to fund general operations, except the state loan authorized by SB 130. 2. Include annual debt service for the $13 million state loan in its multiyear financial projections. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 492 Financial Management 13.3 Long-Term Debt Obligations Legal Standard The LEA complies with public disclosure laws of fiscal obligations related to health and welfare benefits for retirees, self-insured workers compensation, collective bargaining agreements and new non-voter-approved debt. (GC 3540.2, 3547.5, EC 42142, 17150.1) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education associate superintendent, business services 3. Interviews with board members 4. Independent auditor’s report, 2008-09 5. Adopted budget report, 2009-10 presented to the board 6. Monterey County Office of Education review letters regarding 2009-10 adopted and revised budget reports 7. Loan agreement between the district and Monterey County Office of Education 8. SB 130 9. Letter and attachments from SPI to the district’s board president, July 23, 2009, regarding SB 130 10. SB 130 loan repayment schedule Findings 1. The district participates in three public entity risk pools, or joint powers authorities (JPAs), for health, property/liability and workers compensation insurance. No representative from the district has been appointed to the executive board of any of these JPAs. 2. Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) statement 45 requires the district to update its actuarial study of retiree health and other post-employment benefits (OPEB) every three years. The last actuarial study was issued September 21, 2006. Staff indicated that they have solicited quotes from actuaries to update the study but provided no documents to support this statement. Financial Management 493 3. The district’s adopted budget report for 2009-10 included a disclosure that the district is not self-insured through its JPA for workers compensation benefits. 4. The district’s last public disclosure report of a tentative settlement agreement was disclosed to the public and submitted to the Monterey County Office of Education in February 2009. District staff provided no documents related to previous public disclosure reports. 5. The district has not entered into any non-voter-approved debt subject to the disclosure requirements of Education Code section 17150.1. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Seek appointment to each of the three JPA boards of which it is a member, and actively participate in the management of these organizations. 2. Update the actuarial study of its retiree health benefit liabilities as soon as possible. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 494 Financial Management 14.1 Impact of Collective Bargaining Legal Standard Public disclosure requirements are met, including the costs associated with a tentative collective bargaining agreement before it becomes binding on the LEA or county office of education. (GC 3547.5 (b)). Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education associate superintendent, business services 3. Interview with board president 4. Interview with board clerk 5. Public disclosure of public bargaining agreement report, February 2009 6. Monterey County Office of Education review letter dated February 25, 2009 regarding public disclosure of public bargaining agreement report 7. Letter dated March 2, 2009 from district assistant superintendent, business services to superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education regarding support for the tentative agreement 8. Letter dated March 3, 2009 from superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education to board president, staying the tentative agreement 9. Letter dated May 8, 2009 from the superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education to the district’s board president, rescinding the tentative agreement 10. Petition for Writ of Mandamus, filed by King City High School Teachers Association against the superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education and the district Findings 1. The district met the public disclosure requirements of Government Code section 3547.5 during its most recent tentative collective bargaining agreement with its certificated bargaining unit in February 2009. The district’s board and the King City High School Teachers Association both approved the tentative agreement in February 2009. 2. The tentative agreement included the following cost reductions: • Placing a cap on the district’s maximum contribution to health benefits Financial Management 495 • Removing the cap on class size and class size average • Reducing the instructional day from seven to six periods • Eliminating 13 teaching positions • Reducing or capping stipends and hourly rates for a variety of services 3. The agreement was to be effective through June 30, 2011. The disclosure indicated an estimated annual cost savings of $2 million. However, the Monterey County Office of Education concluded that the agreement was inconsistent with the district’s ability to meet its financial obligations and rescinded the agreement in May 2009. The County Superintendent cited the following reasons for the rescission: • The tentative agreement still left the district with a negative fund balance through 2010-11 • The agreement prevented further negotiation of compensation until the 2011-2012 fiscal year 4. Following the rescission, The King City High School Teachers Association filed suit in Superior Court to “…enforce concessions it made to its employer, in order to assist the employer in achieving fiscal solvency.” This legal action is still pending. 5. The district provided no other collective bargaining disclosure documents. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Demonstrate how all tentative agreements reached with district’s bargaining units and management contribute to its long-term fiscal recovery. The district should continue bargaining efforts and should not enter into any tentative agreements until this standard is addressed. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 496 Financial Management 14.2 Impact of Collective Bargaining Legal Standard Bargaining proposals and negotiated settlements are “sunshined” in accordance with the law to allow public input and understanding of employee cost implications and, most importantly, the effects on the LEA’s students. (Government Code 3547, 3547.5) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education associate superintendent, business services 3. Interviews with board members 4. Public disclosure of collective bargaining agreement report, February 2009 5. Monterey County Office of Education review letter dated February 25, 2009 regarding public disclosure of public bargaining agreement report 6. Letter dated March 2, 2009 from district assistant superintendent, business services to superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education regarding support for the tentative agreement 7. Letter dated March 3, 2009 from superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education to board president, staying the tentative agreement 8. Letter dated May 8, 2009 from the superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education to the district’s board president, rescinding the tentative agreement 9. Petition for Writ of Mandamus, filed by King City High School Teachers Association against the superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education and the district Findings 1. The district met the public disclosure “sunshine” requirements of Government Code section 3547.5 during its most recent tentative collective bargaining agreement with its certificated bargaining unit in February 2009. The district’s board and the King City High School Teachers Association then approved the tentative agreement. 2. It is not possible to determine what consideration either party gave to the effects of this agreement on the district’s students and their educational opportunities. The agreement included significant class size increases and decreased instructional offerings as a result of reduced graduation requirements. Thus the agreement would have clearly had Financial Management 497 a negative effect on the district’s students, many of whom are already not achieving academically at the level of their peers throughout the county and the state. 3. In addition, support services vital to students’ health, welfare and safety are significantly underfunded in the district. The tentative agreement did not address how these issues would be resolved if the agreement were implemented. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Consider the effects on students’ educational opportunities and the quality of support services when evaluating all tentative agreements with any collective bargaining unit or management. Class sizes and offerings should be evaluated to determine if they are sufficient to meet students’ educational needs. Support services staffing and budget allocations should be evaluated to determine if students are attending school in a safe, clean and educationally functional environment. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 498 Financial Management 14.3 Impact of Collective Bargaining Professional Standard The LEA has developed parameters and guidelines for collective bargaining that ensure that the collective bargaining agreement does not impede the efficiency of LEA operations. Management analyzes the collective bargaining agreements to identify any characteristics that impede effective delivery of LEA services. The LEA identifies those issues for consideration by the board. The board, in developing its guidelines for collective bargaining, considers the impact on LEA operations of current collective bargaining language, and proposes amendments to LEA language as appropriate to ensure effective and efficient service delivery. board parameters are provided in a confidential environment, reflective of the obligations of a closed executive board session. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with assistant superintendent, business services 2. Interview with Monterey County Office of Education associate superintendent, business services 3. Interviews with board members 4. Public disclosure of public bargaining agreement report, February 2009 5. Monterey County Office of Education review letter dated February 25, 2009 regarding public disclosure of collective bargaining agreement report 6. Letter dated March 2, 2009 from district assistant superintendent, business services to superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education regarding support for the tentative agreement 7. Letter dated March 3, 2009 from superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education to board president, staying the tentative agreement 8. Letter dated May 8, 2009 from the superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education to the district’s board president, rescinding the tentative agreement 9. Petition for Writ of Mandamus, filed by King City High School Teachers Association against the superintendent of the Monterey County Office of Education and the district Findings 1. Members of the district’s management who negotiated the most recent tentative agreement with the district’s certificated bargaining unit challenged the Monterey County Office of Education in writing regarding the effect that the agreement would have on Financial Management 499 the district. The district’s management stated in a letter that the agreement would help the district progress toward resolving its significant structural budget deficit; however, the county superintendent’s office responded in on May 8, 2009 stating, “The Tentative Agreement/MOU eliminates the flexibility to bring the District’s fiscal operations into balance, continues a salary schedule that is unaffordable for the district, and is inconsistent with meeting a goal of development and implementation of a fiscal recovery plan.” 2. There was no evidence to indicate what parameters, if any, the board identified regarding this tentative agreement; however, because the board voted to approve the agreement it can be inferred that they agreed with district management’s assessment of the effects on the district’s programs and finances. The district provided no documents pertaining to any other tentative agreement. 3. Board meeting minutes indicate that the district’s management and the board met in closed session to discuss confidential matters regarding collective bargaining agreements. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board provides the district’s administration with clear and precise guidance regarding the parameters for negotiations with collective bargaining units. These parameters should take into consideration the above-noted issues of low student proficiency and inadequate support services. 2. Consider the effects on students’ educational opportunities and the quality of support services when evaluating all tentative agreements with any collective bargaining unit or management. Class sizes and offerings should be evaluated to determine if they are sufficient to meet students’ educational needs. Support services staffing and budget allocations should be evaluated to determine if students are attending school in a safe, clean and educationally functional environment. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 500 Financial Management 15.1 Management Information Systems Professional Standard The LEA has policies and procedures that ensure the privacy and confidentiality of data and that detail the process for releasing free and reduced lunch eligibility status data to school officials for reporting to the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS). Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff 2. Board policy Findings 1. The district has an acceptable use policy (AUP); however, not all staff members have signed one. The district mails an AUP to every staff member annually, but there is no requirement that employees sign and return the AUP before network resources are made available to them. A copy of the AUP is placed in every employee’s personnel file, but there is no verification that the employee has read and accepted the terms of the AUP. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that every employee has signed an AUP to affirm acceptance of its terms and conditions. Every employee should sign the AUP annually as part of employee orientation. The district should keep signed AUPs in employees’ personnel files. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 501 15.2 Management Information Systems Professional Standard Management information systems support users with information that is relevant, timely, and accurate. Assessments are performed to ensure that users are involved in defining needs, developing specifications, and selecting appropriate systems. LEA standards are imposed to ensure the maintainability, compatibility, and supportability of the various systems. The LEA ensures that all systems are SACS-compliant, and are compatible with county systems with which they must interface. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff Findings 1. During interviews, district staff indicated that it has been difficult to develop and enforce uniformity in the use of various student information system codes. For example, at King City High School, students are coded as 160 when they leave the district. However, code 160 is inappropriate because it merely indicates that the student is no longer attending King City High School. Some staff indicated that problems with uniformity in data are more prevalent at King City High School. Staff indicated that uniformity of attendance codes is also a problem. Understanding and using uniform codes would help eliminate variances in data and reduce confusion. 2. The district has a separate main course catalog for each of the two high school campuses. This creates the potential for discrepancies in course and graduation requirements. 3. An interface has been developed that would allow the district to establish an electronic connection among the district’s human resources system, the district’s student information system and the state’s student information system. However, because the district has not purchased the interface application, data sharing among these three software applications is extremely difficult. 4. The district uses financial management software provided by the Monterey County Office of Education that complies with the standardized account code structure (SACS) for uniform statewide financial reporting. 5. Staffing reductions in the information technology department in recent years have caused a decrease in service and support for information systems districtwide. Response time is often unsatisfactory because the workload exceeds the department’s capacity with current staffing. According to the Education Data website, in 2008-09 the district’s student- to-computer ratio was 2.7:1 while the combined ratio for all Monterey County school districts was 4.2:1. This indicates that the district’s information technology department staff is supporting 56% more computers than the average Monterey County school district. 502 Financial Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that all employees who use the district’s student information system understand codes and use them uniformly. 2. Combine the course catalogs for each high school into a single districtwide master course catalog. 3. Consider purchasing the system interface application to allow the district’s human resources and student information system and the state’s student information system to share data more easily. 4. Increase information technology department staffing to meet workload demands as fiscal conditions improve. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 503 15.3 Management Information Systems Professional Standard Automated systems are used to improve accuracy, timeliness, and efficiency of financial and reporting systems. Needs assessments are performed to determine what systems are candidates for automation, whether standard hardware and software systems are available to meet the need, and whether or not the LEA would benefit. Automated financial systems provide accurate, timely, relevant information and conform to all accounting standards. The systems are designed to serve all of the various users inside and outside the LEA. Employees receive appropriate training and supervision in system operation. Appropriate internal controls are instituted and reviewed periodically. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff Findings 1. A district employee maintains the district’s teacher credentials data in a Microsoft Access database. District staff indicated that it is easier to maintain teacher credentials data separately rather than use the Monterey County Office of Education’s (county office’s) system because in the past they have experienced long wait times when posting data to that system. Staff also indicated that certain fields, such as Date of Issue, Document Number and Renewal Code, are missing from the county office’s credentials system, and the fields are needed for California basic educational data system (CBEDS) reporting. 2. Until June 2007, the district maintained its human resources and position control data using a third-party position control application. Following that date, district staff began to clean up the data to prepare it for migration to the county office human resource and position control systems. However, the staff member responsible for the data migration departed and the project halted in June 2009. 3. The district maintains minimal human resources data in the county office human resources and position control -module. Only fields such as pay rate, withholdings, benefits, and retirement options are maintained in the module because these are the minimum fields required to successfully process payroll. The district maintains the majority of its human resources and position control data in the Microsoft Access database mentioned above. Using Microsoft Access instead of the county office systems to track human resources and position control data duplicates work and increases the possibility of errors because data must be entered manually into separate systems numerous times. For example, the employee who maintains the Microsoft Access database generates the following reports or data for various district staff members: • A hard copy report containing data extracted from the Access database is provided to a staff member, who then re-entered into the Aeries student information system. 504 Financial Management • A hard copy report containing personnel action items, such as new hires and separations, is provided to a business office staff member, who then inputs the data into the county office financial system. • A hard copy report containing personnel action items is provided to a payroll office staff member, who enters it into a Microsoft Excel spread- sheet, which serves as the district’s position control system. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Discontinue using the Microsoft Access database to track and maintain teacher credentials data. This data should be provided to and maintained by county office staff members who are trained in maintaining credentials data and credentialing requirements. 2. Discontinue using the Microsoft Access database to track and maintain human resource and position control data. All human resources and position control data should be maintained using the county office system’s position control modules. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 505 15.4 Management Information Systems Professional Standard Selection of information systems technology conforms to legal procedures specified in Public Contract Code 20118. A process exists to ensure that needs analyses, cost/benefit analyses, and financing plans are in place prior to commitment of resources. The process facilitates involvement by users, as well as information services staff, to ensure that training and support needs and costs are considered in the acquisition process. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff Findings 1. At the time of fieldwork, the technology director had recently completed the steps to acquire a new automatic dialer for the district. In preparation for the purchase, the technology director surveyed systems from several major vendors and obtained quotations on competing products. In addition, the director obtained an estimate of the cost required to repair the district’s current automatic dialer. Information on the various quotations and system capabilities, and a recommendation based on the best combination of price and functionality, were presented to a district administrator for approval. The administrator accepted the director’s recommendation and is proceeding to acquire the recommended system. 2. The district has implemented a process to route all requests for computer hardware purchases to the technology director for prior approval. However, instructional staff members occasionally purchase software independently and expect that technology staff will be able to help install and configure it. As a result, software has sometimes been purchased for computers that do not meet the software’s minimum system specifications. The reduction in information technology department staffing in recent years has decreased the department’s ability to support software acquisitions. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the technology director continues the current practice of fully evaluating system options to support users’ needs. The director should also continue to survey multiple systems, obtain multiple quotes and prepare cost-benefit analyses. 2. Ensure that all requests for computer hardware and software purchases are routed to the technology director prior to purchase. The district should increase instructional staff members’ awareness of the assistance that is available from the technology director regarding system evaluation and selection to ensure that purchases are compatible with existing equipment. 506 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 507 15.5 Management Information Systems Professional Standard Major technology systems are supported by implementation and training plans. The cost of implementation and training is included with other support costs in the cost/benefit analyses and financing plans supporting the acquisition of technology systems. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff Findings 1. The technology director has taken steps to ensure that costs associated with supporting and implementing new systems are included with the purchase price. For example, quotations for the automatic dialer system referenced in FCMAT standard 15.4 included additional amounts for the cost of training, implementation and configuration. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the technology director continues to include implementation, training and other associated costs when acquiring new technology. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 7 Implementation Scale: 508 Financial Management 15.6 Management Information Systems Professional Standard The LEA has an adequate disaster recovery plan for its mission critical data and software components. A process of backing up critical data includes a rotation schedule and off-site storage. There is adequate uninterruptible power supply or alternate power protection. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff Findings 1. According to staff, all of the district’s servers are protected by uninterruptible power supply (UPS) devices. The technology director has implemented a reliable third-party vendor solution for backing up student information system (SIS) data and for e-mail backup and retention. All data is backed up daily to tape and stored in a fireproof safe in a separate building. Friday backups are retained for one month to ensure multiple levels of backup protection at all times. 2. The district’s SIS data is protected by UPS and is backed up daily. The technology director has acquired a backup server that could be deployed in place of the original SIS server in case of a major system failure or catastrophe. The backup server is located in a separate building from the original SIS server to minimize the risk of loss or damage. At the time of fieldwork, the technology director was preparing a disaster recovery document that would detail the steps needed to replace the SIS server, reinstall the structured query language (SQL) database, reinstall the SIS software, and reload backup data from tapes in case there is ever a need to rebuild the system. 3. The Monterey County Office of Education maintains and supports the district’s financial management system (FMS). Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue providing UPS devices for every server, and continue current data backup and storage practices. 2. Ensure that the technology director is supported in the efforts to complete the disaster recovery plan and document the steps required to rebuild the SIS server in the event of a major system failure. The CBO should receive a copy of this plan, and another copy should be stored in the district’s fireproof safe. The technology director should periodically test the steps documented in the plan to ensure that full recovery of the SIS can be accomplished should the need arise. Financial Management 509 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 510 Financial Management 15.7 Management Information Systems Professional Standard Hardware and software purchases conform to existing technology standards. Standards for network equipment, servers, computers, copiers, printers, fax machines, and all other technology assets are defined and enforced to increase standardization and decrease support costs. Requisitions that contain hardware or software items are forwarded to the technology department for approval before being converted to purchase orders. Requisitions for nonstandard technology items are approved by the information management and technology department(s) unless the user is informed that LEA support for nonstandard items will not be available. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff 2. Site inspections Findings 1. A district staff member spends a significant amount of time performing tasks related to E-rate documentation, application, and funding requirements. The process of applying for E-Rate discounts is complex, and users must be thoroughly familiar with technology and the numerous strict application filing deadlines involved in completing applications. School districts increasingly contract with an E-Rate consultant to maximize their discounts and minimize the delays associated with inquiries from representatives of the organization overseeing this federal discount program. E-Rate consultants typically charge either a flat rate per year or a small percentage of the discount the district receives with a “not to exceed” cap amount established in advance. 2. Several staff members indicated that most of the computer equipment at Greenfield High School is older than the equipment at King City High School. 3. The district has applied for and received approximately $60,000 in Microsoft K-12 settlement funding. Approximately $40,000 of this money has been spent and $20,000 remains unallocated. District staff indicated that the remaining $20,000 has been tentatively allocated to update the Greenfield High School library computer lab. However, the work has been tentatively postponed until approximately 2012 because of concerns about the district’s financial condition. 4. The district lacks a technology committee to guide technology initiatives. Financial Management 511 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Contract with an experienced E-Rate consultant to help complete applications accurately and ensure that the district meets critical deadlines. 2. Conduct a detailed districtwide inventory of the computer equipment in use. This can be accomplished by using an electronic inventory tracking system that collects system information automatically whenever users login. Based on the preliminary results of the electronic inventory, the district should target the oldest equipment for replacement first. 3. Immediately allocate the remaining $20,000 of Microsoft K-12 settlement funding to purchase computer equipment to replace the oldest and most obsolete computer equipment identified in the electronic inventory. 4. Establish a technology committee to help guide technology initiatives. Best practices for technology planning include a technology committee consisting of a diverse membership that represents students, parents, teachers, library media specialists, site administrators, district administrators for curriculum and technology, classified staff, community leaders, business representatives, and partners from higher education. Replacement of obsolete equipment should be the technology committee’s first priority. The technology committee should also be assigned to establish standards for implementing and using the instructional technology materials that accompany new textbooks. Instructional staff members should be supported in their efforts to integrate technology that improves instruction. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 512 Financial Management 15.8 Management Information Systems Professional Standard An updated inventory includes item specification for use in rotating out obsolete equipment. Computers and peripheral hardware are replaced based on a schedule. Hardware specifications are evaluated yearly. Corroborating data from work order or help desk system logs is used when this data is available to determine what equipment is most costly to own based on support issues. The total cost of ownership is considered in purchasing decisions. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff Findings 1. The district may be understating the number of students at Greenfield High School who qualify for free or reduced-price meals. District staff indicated the problem is related to a paperwork processing issue. This condition reduces eligibility for E-rate funding, which is a significant source of funding for computer equipment replacement. 2. The district lacks an equipment replacement schedule. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Use the direct certification process to collect accurate free and reduced-price meal count data from Greenfield High School. This data will be important when the district submits new E-Rate funding applications for 2010 and will improve financial resources for certain categorically funded programs at the school. 2. Develop an equipment replacement schedule based on the information obtained from the electronic inventory recommended in standard 15.7 above, and demonstrate a budget commitment to this schedule by identifying a stable and reliable funding source for it. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 513 15.9 Management Information Systems Professional Standard Access to administrative systems is reliable and secure. The network system is protected by a stable firewall that segregates internal, external, and demarcation zone traffic. All internal IP addresses are protected. The network boundary contains content filtering that is used for all outbound Internet access and spam-virus protection for all inbound e-mail. Virtual private networks (VPNs) are used to separate administrative networks from teacher/student (academic) networks. A password-protected database is used to maintain all network passwords. The LEA follows these network standards established for LEAs: • The LEA follows the Electronic Industries Alliance/Telecommunications Industry Association (EIA/TIA) 568-B telecommunications standards for all network cabling. • Login banners are added to all network elements that will support them. • The LEA has transitioned from all non-TCP/IP protocols. • The LEA uses a VPN for any access to the internal network from the outside. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff Findings 1. Many students are assigned to teachers and school offices as teacher’s assistants (TAs) and are commonly asked to perform tasks that require access to the teacher’s classroom computer. However, the district has not established formal guidelines for teachers to follow regarding workstation security and access to teacher and student data. 2. Access to information is not adequately controlled. For example, district staff indicated that a site staff member gave a student information system user account to a substitute teacher. Substitute teachers should not have standard user accounts on the student information systems. 3. No employee is assigned to oversee system-, screen- and field-level security for the student information system. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish workstation and data security guidelines for teachers to follow when working with students assigned as teacher’s assistants. 2. Increase employees’ awareness of expectations related to confidential information, including an understanding that providing access to private or confidential information is prohibited and may result in disciplinary action. 514 Financial Management 3. Give the student information system supervisor responsibility for overseeing system-, screen- and field-level security for the student information system. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 515 16.1 Maintenance and Operations Fiscal Controls Legal Standard Capital equipment and furniture is tagged as LEA-owned property and inventoried at least annually. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff Findings 1. There is no evidence that the district updates its equipment inventory list. Staff reported that no staff member tags equipment when it is purchased or any time thereafter. 2. Staff did not provide evidence that the district has adopted or used a formal procedures for disposing of surplus property. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Adopt board policies and regulations regarding equipment inventory procedures and criteria to define asset capitalization thresholds. 2. Adopt board policies and regulations regarding the disposal of surplus equipment. 3. Route equipment purchases to one staff member who will be responsible for tagging equipment and updating the inventory list. 4. Conduct a physical inventory of equipment each year to verify that each item is on the premises and to note its present condition and usefulness. 5. Track equipment purchases by resource to ensure proper reporting for federally funded programs. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 516 Financial Management 16.2 Maintenance and Operations Fiscal Controls Legal Standard The LEA adheres to bid and force account requirements found in the Public Contract Code (PCC) Sections 20111 and 20114. These requirements include formal bids for materials, equipment and maintenance projects that exceed amounts established in PCC Section 20111 as adjusted for inflation; capital projects of $15,000 or more; and labor when the job exceeds 750 hours or the materials exceed $21,000. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff 2. Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 3311 3. Board resolution 22–2008-09: Uniform Public Construction Cost Accounting Procedures Findings 1. Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 3311 regarding purchasing procedures have not been updated since 1997. 2. Staff reported that the district has not sought bids for several years because there have been no purchases that are subject to the requirements of the public contract code. 3. The board approved a resolution in June 2009 subjecting the district to the public contract code’s uniform public construction cost accounting procedures, which increase dollar amounts at which competitive bids must be sought for public works projects (known as bid thresholds) and impose complex accounting procedures for those projects. Increasing bid thresholds to avoid public bidding, if that was the purpose of this adoption, is not generally accepted good public policy. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Update board policies and regulations so that they are compatible with current procurement law and best practices in the industry. 2. Ensure that the board reviews the criteria by which it determined that the uniform public construction cost accounting procedures benefit the district. 3. Review its procurement practices and seek advance approval from the state administrator for any purchases that exceed bid thresholds, in accordance with existing law. Financial Management 517 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 518 Financial Management 17.1 Food Service Fiscal Controls Professional Standard To accurately record transactions and ensure the accuracy of financial statements for the cafeteria fund in accordance with GAAP, the LEA has purchasing and warehousing procedures to ensure that these requirements are met. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff 2. Adopted budge report, 2009-10 Findings 1. The district contracts with King City Union School District (KCUSD), a local K-8 district, for food service operations and management. 2. KCUSD staff prepare food in the King City High School kitchen, serve it to students at King City High School, and transport and serve it to students at Greenfield High School. 3. KCUSD staff provide all purchasing, warehouse and management services, including meal counts and cash collection. 4. The district has no cafeteria fund; the district uses funds from its general fund to pay KCUSD for its services. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Investigate the feasibility of operating and/or managing its own food service program. Topics for review should include but not be limited to the following: • Kitchen maintenance and operation costs • Additional staffing needs • Additional supervision needs • Point of purchase system implementation • Possible increase to workers’ compensation insurance premiums • Procurement requirements for food and supplies Financial Management 519 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 520 Financial Management 17.2 Food Service Fiscal Controls Professional Standard The LEA operates the food service programs in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff 2. 2007-08 independent financial audit report Findings 1. The district contracts with the King City Union School District (KCUSD) for food services. Compliance with federal and state laws and regulations is the responsibility of the service provider. 2. The district’s independent audit report for fiscal year 2007-08 contained no findings related to child nutrition program compliance or internal controls. 3. District staff did not provide any reports prepared by outside regulatory agencies regarding compliance auditing of the food service program. Recommendations for Recovery None. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 521 17.3 Food Service Fiscal Controls Professional Standard Food service software permits point of sale transaction processing for maximum efficiency. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff Findings 1. The district contracts with the King City Union School District (KCUSD) for food service production and management. KCUSD staff collect food sale proceeds and federal and state meal reimbursements and deposit them in a KCUSD bank account. KCUSD uses the funds from these deposits to offset the cost of operating and managing the high school district’s food service program; any costs in excess of the deposited amount are billed to the high school district. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Verify that federal and state laws and regulations allow the high school district’s food sale and meal reimbursement proceeds to be deposited directly into KCUSD’s bank accounts. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 522 Financial Management 17.4 Food Service Fiscal Controls Professional Standard The LEA develops food service program financial plans that minimize contributions from the LEA’s general fund. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff Findings 1. The district contracts with the King City Union School District (KCUSD) for food service operations and management. The district pays KCUSD a management fee for these services. This fee consists of the difference between KCUSD’s actual cost to operate and manage the high school district’s food service program and the food sale and reimbursement proceeds of that program. 2. The management fee is paid from the district’s general fund, and district staff annually evaluate any increase in this fee. 3. The district may be understating the number of students at Greenfield High School who qualify for free or reduced-price meals. District staff indicated the problem is related to a paperwork processing issue. This condition reduces eligibility for E-rate funding, which is a significant source of funding for computer equipment replacement. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Investigate the feasibility of operating and/or managing its own food service program and determine the potential cost savings. If savings are projected, the district should take steps needed to resume management of its program. 2. Collect accurate free and reduced-price meal count data from Greenfield High School. This data will be important when the district submits new E-Rate funding applications for 2010 and will improve financial resources for certain categorically funded programs at the school. Financial Management 523 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 524 Financial Management 18.1 Charter Schools Professional Standard In the process of reviewing and authorizing a charter school petition and the memorandum of understanding, the LEA identifies/establishes financial management and reporting standards that the charter school will follow. These standards/procedures provide the required level of assurance that finances will be managed appropriately, and allow the LEA to monitor the charter. The LEA continually monitors the financial management and performance of the charter schools to ensure that the resources are appropriately managed. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with the district ‘s fiscal advisor 2. Board policies and regulations Findings 1. The district has no charter petitions or approved charter schools. 2. Board policy and administrative regulations regarding charter schools are dated March 26, 1997. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review and update board policies and regulations regarding charter schools to ensure that they are compatible and comply with current laws and regulations. The process of granting a charter often takes up to 18 months, and an updated policy and administrative regulation should be in place before a petition is submitted. The board should ensure that its charter school policy addresses specific educational and fiscal accountability issues between the charter school and the district. The regulation should specify the district’s expectations for the charter school. The district’s services and oversight expectations should be outlined either in the policy or in a draft memorandum of understanding (MOU) so that the charter school petitioners can know which operations may be contracted directly from the district, as well as the district’s expectations for student performance and fiscal accountability. 2. Develop a sample MOU so that it is available before any charter school petition is submitted. 3. Include a clause in charter agreements that requires the charter school to submit certain fiscal reports to the district office regularly for monitoring. The reports should include a cash flow statement, an income statement (e.g. operating statement), a multiyear financial Financial Management 525 projection and the annual external financial audit report. The clause should specify how often the charter school is to submit these reports. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 526 Financial Management 19.1 State-Mandated Costs Professional Standard The LEA has procedures that provide for the appropriate oversight and management of mandated cost claim reimbursement filing. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with staff 2. Contract with mandated cost program claims consultant Findings 1. The district uses an outside consultant to gather supporting documents and prepare and file mandated cost claims. 2. The state currently provides no funding for these mandated cost claims, but the state is legally responsible for reimbursing the district, so the district continues to file the claims. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue using an outside consultant to document, prepare and file mandated cost claims. Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 8 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 527 20.1 Special Education Professional Standard The LEA actively takes measures to contain the cost of special education services while providing an appropriate level of quality instructional and pupil services to special education students. The LEA meets the criteria for the maintenance of effort requirement. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff 2. Monterey County Office of Education special day class (SDC) and community court school average daily attendance (ADA) reports, 2008-09. 3. Prior year budget reports, comparing budgeted and actual revenues and expenditures Findings 1. A review of the general fund contributions to special education over the previous three years indicates inconsistency in coding expenditures. Actual expenditures charged to special education for fiscal years 2006-07 and 2008-09 are consistent with each other, but there was a 71% increase in these actual expenditures in fiscal year 2007-08. 2. The district is reviewing the invoices it receives for services (also known as “bill-backs”) from the Monterey County Office of Education (county office) and is validating revenues apportioned by the special education local plan area (SELPA). However, from time to time billing errors are identified after the invoice has been received and paid and/or related services provided. 3. Staff members did not describe any significant efforts to increase special education program revenues and lower expenditures; reduce ongoing contributions from the unrestricted general fund; or identify opportunities or obligations to meet maintenance of effort requirements. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Evaluate federal maintenance of effort (MOE) requirements and determine if the district can reduce special education program costs without jeopardizing MOE compliance. Review each bill from the Monterey County Office of Education to ensure that the charge is for the correct students and services. 2. Involve district staff in managing revenue allocations at the SELPA level to ensure that the district receives its fair share. 528 Financial Management 3. Review contracted special education services provided by nonpublic schools and agencies (NPS and NPA) and special education transportation providers to determine if the district could provide these services at a lower cost. 4. Review all special education programs to optimize staffing allocations and workloads. 5. Require the director of maintenance, operations, transportation and facilities to review and approve all transportation provided in special education students’ individualized education programs (IEPs) to ensure maximum efficiency. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 529 21.1 Transportation Professional Standard The LEA actively takes measures to control the cost of transportation services and limit the contribution from the general fund while providing safe and reliable transportation to the students. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district staff 2. Budget reports, current and prior years Findings 1. The district provides home-to-school transportation as well as busing for extra-and co-curricular activities. According to staff members, the district has determined that managing its own transportation department is more economical than contracting for these services. However, the district’s financial reports indicate contributions from the general fund to the transportation program have increased over the last three years. 2. In recent months, staff have presented several recommendations to consolidate bus routes to reduce operating costs. The board has implemented most of these recommendations. 3. Staff report that special education transportation charges from the Monterey County Office of Education (county office) are under review because some billing errors may have occurred in fiscal year 2008-09. It appears one student included in the county office invoice for fiscal year 2008-09 and purportedly transported by the county office was in fact transported by the district. To date, this issue has not been resolved. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Conduct a formal study to determine if contracting with an outside provider for transportation management services could reduce costs. 2. Continue to assess current bus routes for maximum efficiency. 3. Review all invoices from the county office for accuracy and seek reimbursement for overpayments in a timely manner. 530 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 531 22.1 Risk Management – Other Post-Employment Benefits Legal Standard LEAs that provide health and welfare benefits for employees upon their retirement, and those benefits will continue past the age of 65, shall provide the board an annual report of actual accrued but unfunded costs of those benefits. An actuarial report should be performed every three years. (EC 41240) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with staff 2. Actuarial study of retiree health benefits, September 2006 Findings 1. The district pays full medical benefit premiums for its certificated staff retirees who are 55 years of age or older and have 10 or more years of district service. Coverage terminates at age 65. Premiums for the 2009-10 fiscal year for retirees and their family members without Medicare are $21,001. 2. The district pays prorated contributions to medical benefit premiums for its classified staff retirees who are 50 years of age or older and have 10 or more years of district service. Contributions are provided for a maximum of six years and terminate at age 65. Premiums are the same as noted above. 3. The actuarial study the district contracted for and received in September 2006 estimated the district’s annual required contribution (normal costs plus unfunded actuarial accrued liability) at $333,446 and its annual pay-as-you-go costs at $204,310. The district has chosen to fund the pay-as-you-go obligation. 4. The actuarial study is to be updated every three years. District staff stated that they sought quotes from qualified actuaries to update the study; however, staff provided no documentation to support this statement. 5. The district has participated in the State Teachers Retirement System’s Golden Handshake program. As of June 30, 2009, outstanding obligations were $510,076 including interest. These obligations are paid from the district’s general fund on a pay-as- you-go basis. The obligations are scheduled to be retired in full in fiscal year 2014-15. 532 Financial Management Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Contract with a qualified actuary to update the actuarial study of retiree benefits. 2. Develop a plan to manage retiree benefit costs so that the district can fund its annual required contribution. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 533 22.2 Risk Management – Other Programs Professional Standard The LEA has a comprehensive risk-management program that monitors the various aspects of risk management including workers’ compensation, property and liability insurance, and maintains the financial well being of the LEA. In response to GASB requirements, the LEA has completed recent actuarial reports for workers’ compensation and property and liability. The actuarial assumptions properly track to the LEA’s budget assumptions and include the benefits being provided under existing plans. Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with district, county office and joint powers authorities’ (JPAs’) staff 2. Actuarial reports, 2009-10 3. Program coverage binders, 2009-10 Findings 1. The JPAs provide actuarial studies each year that identify risk exposure and program rate recommendations to a confidence level authorized by the JPA. The JPAs also provides each member district with risk management services including, but not limited to, safety inspections, hazardous materials inventories and individual loss analyses. 2. The district is a member of a JPA that offers workers’ compensation, property and liability insurance; however, the district is not using the above risk management services offered by the JPA Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Work closely with the workers’ compensation insurance program JPA to ensure the maximum use of training and resources to help avoid workplace accidents and injuries. 2. Work closely with the property and liability insurance program JPA to ensure that the district is implementing preventive measures to minimize property and liability losses. 534 Financial Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Financial Management 535 23.1 Facility Planning Legal Standard The LEA assesses its local bonding capacity and monitors its legal bonding limits, including processes to determine debt capacity for all long-term obligations. The LEA is aware of and monitors the assessed value of the taxable property within its boundaries. (EC 15100-15111) Sources and Documentation 1. Calculation of 2009-10 bonding capacity for King City Joint Union High School District, prepared by the Monterey County Auditor-Controller’s Office Findings 1. The total assessed valuation of property within the district’s boundaries is nearly $3.3 billion according to the Monterey County Assessors Office 2009-10 assessment roll. The district’s maximum debt capacity is 1.25% of this amount, or approximately $41 million, which is more than the district’s $14 million in outstanding general obligations bonds. 2. The original calculation provided by the Monterey County Auditor-Controller’s Office was in error. FCMAT reported the error to the Monterey County Office of Education, which acknowledged it. The county auditor-controller’s office is preparing a corrected report. 3. District staff did not provide evidence that the district is monitoring the assessed valuation and its bonding capacity, nor did staff report the error noted above to FCMAT. However, it has been several years since the district last issued general obligation bonds for facilities, and the district has no plans to do so in the near future. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Monitor its local bonding capacity annually and document its monitoring efforts. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 536 Financial Management Table of Financial Management Ratings Financial Management 537 538 Financial Management February Financial Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INTERNAL CONTROL ENVIRONMENT All governing board members and management personnel set the tone and establish the environment, exhibiting high integrity and ethical values in carrying 1.1 1 out their responsibilities and directing the work of others. Appropriate measures are implemented to discourage and detect fraud. (State Audit Standard (SAS) 55, SAS 78, SAS 82: Treadway Commission) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INTERNAL CONTROL ENVIRONMENT The LEA has an internal audit committee to: (1) prevent internal controls from being overridden by management; (2) ensure ongoing state and federal 1.2 compliance; (3) provide assurance to management that the internal control system 0 is sound; and (4) identify and correct inefficient processes. In addition, the LEA has formal policies and procedures that provide a mechanism for individuals to report illegal acts and provide a formal investigative process. (SAS-55, SAS-78) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INTERNAL CONTROL ENVIRONMENT The organizational structure clearly identifies key areas of authority and 1.3 3 responsibility. Reporting lines in each area are clearly identified and logical. (SAS- 55, SAS-78) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INTER- AND INTRADEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS The business and operational departments communicate regularly with internal staff and all user departments on their responsibilities for accounting procedures 2.1 0 and internal controls. Communications are written when they affect many staff or user groups, are issues of importance, and/or reflect a change in procedures. Procedures manuals are developed. The business and operational departments are responsive to user department needs. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INTER- AND INTRADEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS The financial departments communicate regularly with the Governing Board and community on the status of the LEA’s finances and the financial impact of 2.2 proposed expenditure decisions. Communications are written when they affect 3 many community members, are issues of high importance to the LEA and board, and/or reflect a change in policy. Documents developed by the fiscal division for distribution to the Governing Board, finance committees, staff and community are easily understood. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INTER- AND INTRADEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATIONS The Governing Board is engaged in understanding the fiscal status of the LEA, for the current and two subsequent fiscal years. The board prioritizes LEA fiscal 2.3 1 issues, and expects reports to align the LEA’s financial performance with its goals and objectives. Agenda items associated with business and fiscal issues are discussed at board meetings, with questions asked until understanding is reached prior to any action. Financial Management 539 February Financial Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – STAFF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The LEA has developed and uses a professional development plan for training business staff. The plan includes the input of business office supervisors and 3.1 1 managers, and identifies appropriate training programs. Each staff member and management employee has a plan designed to meet their individual professional development needs. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – STAFF PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT The LEA develops and uses a professional development plan for the in-service 3.2 training of school site/department staff by business staff on relevant business 0 procedures and internal controls. The plan includes a process to seek input from the business office and the school sites/departments and is updated annually. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INTERNAL AUDIT The Governing Board has adopted policies establishing an internal audit function 4.1 that reports to and is supervised by an independent body, such as directly to 0 the superintendent/state administrator and the audit committee or, if none, the Governing Board. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INTERNAL AUDIT Internal audit findings are reported on a timely basis to the audit committee, 4.2 0 governing board and administration, as appropriate. Management then takes timely action to follow up and resolve audit findings. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The Governing Board focuses on expenditure standards and formulas that meet the goals and maintain the LEA’s financial solvency for the current and two 5.1 2 subsequent fiscal years. The Governing Board avoids specific line-item focus, but directs staff to design an entire expenditure plan focusing on student and LEA needs. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS 5.2 The budget development process includes input from staff, administrators, board 3 and community as well as a budget advisory committee. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The LEA has clear policies and processes to analyze resources and allocations to ensure that they align with strategic planning objectives and that the budget reflects the LEA’s priorities. The budget office has a technical process to build 5.3 2 the preliminary budget that includes revenue and expenditure projections, the identification of carryovers and accruals, and any plans for expenditure reductions. A budget calendar contains statutory due dates and major budget development milestones. 540 Financial Management February Financial Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BUDGET DEVELOPMENT PROCESS The LEA has policies to facilitate development of a budget that is understandable, meaningful, reflective of the LEA’s priorities, and balanced in terms of revenues 5.4 and expenditures. The LEA utilizes formulas for allocating funds to school 1 sites and departments. This may include staffing ratios, supply allocations, etc. Standardized budget worksheets are used to communicate budget requests, budget allocations, formulas applied and guidelines. LEGAL STANDARD – BUDGET ADOPTION, REPORTING, AND AUDITS The LEA adopts its annual budget within the statutory timelines established by EC 42103, which requires that on or before July 1, the governing board shall hold 6.1 a public hearing on the budget to be adopted for the subsequent fiscal year. Not 2 later than five days after that adoption or by July 1, whichever occurs first, the Governing Board shall file that budget with the county superintendent of schools. (EC 42127(a)) LEGAL STANDARD – BUDGET ADOPTION, REPORTING, AND AUDITS Revisions to expenditures based on the state budget are considered and adopted by the governing board. Not later than 45 days after the governor signs the 6.2 2 annual Budget Act, the LEA shall make available for public review any revisions in revenues and expenditures that it has made to its budget to reflect funding available by that Budget Act. (EC 42127(2) and 42127(i)(4)) LEGAL STANDARD – BUDGET ADOPTION, REPORTING, AND AUDITS The LEA completes and files its interim budget reports within the statutory 6.3 deadlines established by EC 42130, et. seq. All reports are in a format or on 3 forms prescribed by the Superintendent of Public Instruction and are based on standards and criteria for fiscal stability. LEGAL STANDARD – BUDGET ADOPTION, REPORTING, AND AUDITS The LEA has complied with Governmental Accounting Standard No. 34 (GASB 6.4 34). GASB 34 requires the LEA to develop policies and procedures and report in 4 the annual financial reports on the modified accrual basis of accounting and the accrual basis of accounting. LEGAL STANDARD – BUDGET ADOPTION, REPORTING, AND AUDITS The LEA has arranged for an annual audit (single audit) within the deadlines established by EC 41020. EC 41020 (c)(d)(e)(g) establishes procedures for 6.5 local agency audit obligations and standards. Pursuant to EC 41020(h), the 2 LEA submits to the county superintendent of schools, California Department of Education, and State Controller’s Office an audit report for the preceding fiscal year. This report must be submitted annually, no later than December 15. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BUDGET MONITORING 7.1 All purchase orders and/or requisitions are properly encumbered against the 4 budget until payment. Financial Management 541 February Financial Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BUDGET MONITORING The LEA implements budget monitoring controls, such as periodic budget reports, to alert department and site managers of the potential for overexpenditure of 7.2 2 budgeted amounts. Revenue and expenditures are forecast and verified monthly. The LEA ensures that appropriate expenditures are charged against programs within the spending limitations authorized by the Governing Board. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BUDGET MONITORING The LEA uses an effective position control system that tracks personnel 7.3 1 allocations and expenditures. The position control system establishes checks and balances between personnel decisions and budgeted appropriations. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BUDGET MONITORING The LEA regularly monitors all revenue and expenditure calculations, at a 7.4 minimum with each interim financial reporting period, to adjust for any differences 3 between the financial assumptions used in the initial calculations presented to the Governing Board and the final actuals. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BUDGET MONITORING The LEA’s budget reflects LEA policies and is presented in a manner that facilitates communication of those policies. The LEA has the ability to accurately 7.5 reflect its net ending balance throughout the budget monitoring process. The LEA 2 has financial management systems and processes that ensure an early warning of any discrepancies between the budget projections and actual revenues or expenditures. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – BUDGET MONITORING Special education programs and services are provided in a cost-effective manner 7.6 2 to ensure that the local support for special education programs and services is not higher than is warranted. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ACCOUNTING The LEA forecasts its cash receipts and disbursements and verifies those 8.1 1 projections monthly to adequately manage its cash. The LEA reconciles its cash to bank statements and reports from the county treasurer monthly. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ACCOUNTING The LEA’s payroll procedures comply with the requirements established by the 8.2 county office of education, unless the LEA is fiscally independent. (EC 42646) Per 2 standard accounting practice, the LEA implements procedures to ensure timely and accurate payroll processing. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – EMPLOYEE SERVICES 8.3 The LEA does not pay temporary disability benefits during those times when an 3 employee is in an extended nonpay status. 542 Financial Management February Financial Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ACCOUNTING Federal and state categorical programs, either through specific program 8.4 requirements or through general cost principles included in OMB Circular A-87, 0 require the LEA to have an adequate system to account for those revenues and related expenditures. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ACCOUNTING The LEA utilizes GAAP-compliant standard procedures for closing its financial 8.5 records at fiscal year end to ensure accurate recording of transactions. The LEA’s 1 year-end closing procedures comply with the procedures and requirements established by the county office of education. LEGAL STANDARD – ATTENDANCE ACCOUNTING 9.1 Attendance records are not destroyed until after the third July 1 succeeding the 5 completion of the audit. (Title V, CCR, Section 16026) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ATTENDANCE ACCOUNTING School sites maintain an accurate record of daily enrollment and attendance that 9.2 3 is reconciled monthly. School sites maintain statewide student identifiers and reconcile data required for state and federal reporting. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ATTENDANCE ACCOUNTING Policies and regulations exist for independent study, charter, home study, inter-/ 9.3 1 intra-LEA agreements, LEAs of choice, and ROC/P and adult education, and address fiscal impact. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ATTENDANCE ACCOUNTING 9.4 Students are enrolled and entered into the attendance system in an efficient, 3 accurate and timely manner. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ATTENDANCE ACCOUNTING At least semi-annually, the LEA verifies that each school bell schedule meets 9.5 4 instructional time requirements for minimum day, year and annual minute requirements. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ATTENDANCE ACCOUNTING 9.6 The LEA utilizes standardized and mandatory programs to improve the 1 attendance rate of pupils. Absences are aggressively followed up by LEA staff. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ATTENDANCE ACCOUNTING 9.7 School site personnel receive periodic and timely training on the LEA’s attendance 1 procedures, system procedures and changes in laws and regulations. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ATTENDANCE ACCOUNTING The LEA makes appropriate use of short-term independent study and Saturday 9.8 3 school programs as alternative methods for pupils to keep current on classroom course work. Financial Management 543 February Financial Management Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – ACCOUNTING, PURCHASING, AND WAREHOUSING The LEA adheres to the California School Accounting Manual (CSAM) and 10.1 Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) as required by Education Code 2 Section 41010. This helps to ensure that transactions are accurately recorded and financial statements are fairly presented. LEGAL STANDARD – ACCOUNTING, PURCHASING, AND WAREHOUSING The LEA complies with the bidding requirements of Public Contract Code Section 10.2 5 20111. The LEA has controls to ensure that only properly authorized purchases are made and independent contracts approved. LEGAL STANDARD – ACCOUNTING, PURCHASING, AND WAREHOUSING On or before September 15, the LEA’s Governing Board has approved, on a form prescribed by the SPI, a statement of all receipts and expenditures of the 10.3 8 LEA for the preceding fiscal year (called the unaudited actuals), and has filed the statement (along with any charter school statements if the LEA is the authorizing entity) with the county superintendent of schools. (EC 42100 (a)) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ACCOUNTING, PURCHASING, AND WAREHOUSING The LEA timely and accurately records all financial activity for all programs. GAAP 10.4 accounting work is properly supervised and reviewed to ensure that transactions 2 are recorded timely and accurately, and allow the preparation of periodic financial statements. The accounting system has an appropriate level of controls to prevent and detect errors and irregularities. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ACCOUNTING, PURCHASING, AND WAREHOUSING The LEA has adequate purchasing and warehousing procedures to ensure that: 10.5 (1) only properly authorized purchases are made, (2) authorized purchases are 1 made consistent with LEA policies and management direction, (3) inventories are safeguarded, and (4) purchases and inventories are timely and accurately recorded. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – ACCOUNTING, PURCHASING, AND WAREHOUSING 10.6 3 The LEA maximizes its direct and indirect support costs to restricted programs and locally defined grants. LEGAL STANDARD – STUDENT BODY FUNDS The Governing Board adopts board policies, regulations and procedures to establish parameters on how student body organizations will be established, and 11.1 0 how they will be operated, audited and managed. These policies and regulations are clearly developed and written to ensure compliance regarding how student body organizations deposit, invest, spend, and raise funds. (EC 48930-48938) LEGAL STANDARD – STUDENT BODY FUNDS Internal audits are performed to review the operations at both LEA and site levels. 11.2 0 This is in addition to the LEA’s annual independent audit, which includes a review of student body accounts. 544 Financial Management February Financial Management Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – STUDENT BODY FUNDS The LEA provides annual training and ongoing guidance to site and LEA personnel on the policies and procedures governing Associated Student Body 11.3 0 accounts. Internal controls are part of the training and guidance, ensuring that any findings in the internal audits or independent annual audits are discussed and addressed so they do not recur. LEGAL STANDARD – MULTIYEAR FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS The LEA provides a multiyear financial projection for at least the general fund at a minimum, consistent with the policy of the county office. Projections are done for the general fund at the time of budget adoption and all interim reports. Projected 12.1 1 fund balance reserves are disclosed and assumptions used in developing multiyear projections that are based on the most accurate information available. The assumptions for revenues and expenditures are reasonable and supported by documentation. (EC 42131) LEGAL STANDARD – MULTIYEAR FINANCIAL PROJECTIONS The Governing Board ensures that any guideline developed for collective bargaining fiscally aligns with the LEA’s multiyear instructional and fiscal goals. 12.2 Multiyear financial projections are prepared for use in decision-making, especially 1 whenever a significant multiyear expenditure commitment is contemplated, including salary or employee benefit enhancements negotiated through the collective bargaining process. (EC 42142) LEGAL STANDARD – LONG-TERM DEBT OBLIGATIONS The LEA notifies the county superintendent of schools and county auditor at least 30 days prior to the Governing Board’s approval of the issuance of certificates 13.1 of participation (COPs) or other non-voter-approved debt instruments secured 3 by real property. The LEA furnishes the necessary information to assess the anticipated effect of the debt issuance, including repayment schedules, evidence of the ability to repay, and costs of issuance. (EC 17150) LEGAL STANDARD – LONG-TERM DEBT OBLIGATIONS The LEA does not use the proceeds from COPs and other non-voter-approved 13.2 debt secured by real property for the LEA’s general operations, regardless of the 3 LEA’s budget certification. Long-term debt financing mechanisms are not used to finance current operations or to capitalize expenses. (EC 42133.5) LEGAL STANDARD – LONG-TERM DEBT OBLIGATIONS The LEA complies with public disclosure laws of fiscal obligations related to health 13.3 and welfare benefits for retirees, self-insured workers compensation, collective 5 bargaining agreements and new non-voter-approved debt. (GC 3540.2, 3547.5, EC 42142, 17150.1) LEGAL STANDARD – IMPACT OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING Public disclosure requirements are met, including the costs associated with a 14.1 1 tentative collective bargaining agreement before it becomes binding on the LEA or county office of education. (GC 3547.5 (b)). Financial Management 545 February Financial Management Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – IMPACT OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING Bargaining proposals and negotiated settlements are “sunshined” in accordance 14.2 with the law to allow public input and understanding of employee cost implications 1 and, most importantly, the effects on the LEA’s students. (Government Code 3547, 3547.5) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – IMPACT OF COLLECTIVE BARGAINING The LEA has developed parameters and guidelines for collective bargaining that ensure that the collective bargaining agreement does not impede the efficiency of LEA operations. Management analyzes the collective bargaining agreements to identify any characteristics that impede effective delivery of LEA services. The LEA identifies those issues for consideration by the Governing Board. The 14.3 2 Governing Board, in developing its guidelines for collective bargaining, considers the impact on LEA operations of current collective bargaining language, and proposes amendments to LEA language as appropriate to ensure effective and efficient service delivery. Governing Board parameters are provided in a confidential environment, reflective of the obligations of a closed executive board session. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS The LEA has policies and procedures that ensure the privacy and confidentiality 15.1 of data and that detail the process for releasing free and reduced lunch eligibility 1 status data to school officials for reporting to the California Longitudinal Pupil Achievement Data System (CALPADS). PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS Management information systems support users with information that is relevant, timely, and accurate. Assessments are performed to ensure that users are involved in defining needs, developing specifications, and selecting appropriate 15.2 3 systems. LEA standards are imposed to ensure the maintainability, compatibility, and supportability of the various systems. The LEA ensures that all systems are SACS-compliant, and are compatible with county systems with which they must interface. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS Automated systems are used to improve accuracy, timeliness, and efficiency of financial and reporting systems. Needs assessments are performed to determine what systems are candidates for automation, whether standard hardware and software systems are available to meet the need, and whether or not the LEA 15.3 0 would benefit. Automated financial systems provide accurate, timely, relevant information and conform to all accounting standards. The systems are designed to serve all of the various users inside and outside the LEA. Employees receive appropriate training and supervision in system operation. Appropriate internal controls are instituted and reviewed periodically. 546 Financial Management February Financial Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS Selection of information systems technology conforms to legal procedures specified in Public Contract Code 20118. A process exists to ensure that 15.4 needs analyses, cost/benefit analyses, and financing plans are in place prior to 4 commitment of resources. The process facilitates involvement by users, as well as information services staff, to ensure that training and support needs and costs are considered in the acquisition process. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS Major technology systems are supported by implementation and training plans. 15.5 The cost of implementation and training is included with other support costs in the 7 cost/benefit analyses and financing plans supporting the acquisition of technology systems. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS The LEA has an adequate disaster recovery plan for its mission critical data and 15.6 software components. A process of backing up critical data includes a rotation 4 schedule and off-site storage. There is adequate uninterruptible power supply or alternate power protection. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS Hardware and software purchases conform to existing technology standards. Standards for network equipment, servers, computers, copiers, printers, fax machines, and all other technology assets are defined and enforced to increase standardization and decrease support costs. Requisitions that contain hardware 15.7 0 or software items are forwarded to the technology department for approval before being converted to purchase orders. Requisitions for nonstandard technology items are approved by the information management and technology department(s) unless the user is informed that LEA support for nonstandard items will not be available. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS An updated inventory includes item specification for use in rotating out obsolete equipment. Computers and peripheral hardware are replaced based on a 15.8 schedule. Hardware specifications are evaluated yearly. Corroborating data 0 from work order or help desk system logs is used when this data is available to determine what equipment is most costly to own based on support issues. The total cost of ownership is considered in purchasing decisions. Financial Management 547 February Financial Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MANAGEMENT INFORMATION SYSTEMS Access to administrative systems is reliable and secure. The network system is protected by a stable firewall that segregates internal, external, and demarcation zone traffic. All internal IP addresses are protected. The network boundary contains content filtering that is used for all outbound Internet access and spam- virus protection for all inbound e-mail. Virtual private networks (VPNs) are used to separate administrative networks from teacher/student (academic) networks. A 15.9 2 password-protected database is used to maintain all network passwords. The LEA follows these network standards established for LEAs: • The LEA follows the Electronic Industries Alliance/Telecommunications Industry Association (EIA/TIA) 568-B telecommunications standards for all network cabling. • Login banners are added to all network elements that will support them. • The LEA has transitioned from all non-TCP/IP protocols. • The LEA uses a VPN for any access to the internal network from the outside. LEGAL STANDARD – MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS FISCAL CONTROLS 16.1 Capital equipment and furniture is tagged as LEA-owned property and inventoried 0 at least annually. LEGAL STANDARD – MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS FISCAL CONTROLS The LEA adheres to bid and force account requirements found in the Public Contract Code (Sections 20111 and 20114). These requirements include formal 16.2 bids for materials, equipment and maintenance projects that exceed amounts 4 established in PCC Section 20111 as adjusted for inflation; capital projects of $15,000 or more; and labor when the job exceeds 750 hours or the materials exceed $21,000. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FOOD SERVICE FISCAL CONTROLS To accurately record transactions and ensure the accuracy of financial statements 17.1 5 for the cafeteria fund in accordance with GAAP, the LEA has purchasing and warehousing procedures to ensure that these requirements are met. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FOOD SERVICE FISCAL CONTROLS 17.2 The LEA operates the food service programs in accordance with applicable laws 5 and regulations. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FOOD SERVICE FISCAL CONTROLS 17.3 Food service software permits point of sale transaction processing for maximum 3 efficiency. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FOOD SERVICE FISCAL CONTROLS 17.4 The LEA develops food service program financial plans that minimize 3 contributions from the LEA’s general fund. 548 Financial Management February Financial Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – CHARTER SCHOOLS In the process of reviewing and authorizing a charter school petition and the memorandum of understanding, the LEA identifies/establishes financial management and reporting standards that the charter school will follow. These 18.1 2 standards/procedures provide the required level of assurance that finances will be managed appropriately, and allow the LEA to monitor the charter. The LEA continually monitors the financial management and performance of the charter schools to ensure that the resources are appropriately managed. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – STATE-MANDATED COSTS 19.1 The LEA has procedures that provide for the appropriate oversight and 8 management of mandated cost claim reimbursement filing. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – SPECIAL EDUCATION The LEA actively takes measures to contain the cost of special education services 20.1 while providing an appropriate level of quality instructional and pupil services to 1 special education students. The LEA meets the criteria for the maintenance of effort requirement. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – TRANSPORTATION The LEA actively takes measures to control the cost of transportation services 21.1 3 and limit the contribution from the general fund while providing safe and reliable transportation to the students. LEGAL STANDARD – RISK MANAGEMENT – OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS LEAs that provide health and welfare benefits for employees upon their retirement, 22.1 4 and those benefits will continue past the age of 65, shall provide the board an annual report of actual accrued but unfunded costs of those benefits. An actuarial report should be performed every three years. (EC 41240) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – RISK MANAGEMENT – OTHER POST EMPLOYMENT BENEFITS The LEA has a comprehensive risk-management program that monitors the various aspects of risk management including workers’ compensation, property 22.2 and liability insurance, and maintains the financial well being of the LEA. In 2 response to GASB requirements, the LEA has completed recent actuarial reports for workers’ compensation and property and liability. The actuarial assumptions properly track to the LEA’s budget assumptions and include the benefits being provided under existing plans. LEGAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING The LEA assesses its local bonding capacity and monitors its legal bonding limits, 23.1 including processes to determine debt capacity for all long-term obligations. The 0 LEA is aware of and monitors the assessed value of the taxable property within its boundaries. (EC 15100-15111) Collective Average Rating 2.22 Financial Management 549 550 Financial Management Facilities Management 1.1 School Safety Legal Standard The LEA has adopted policies and regulations and implemented written plans describing procedures to be followed in case of emergency, in accordance with required regulations. All school administrators are conversant with these policies and procedures. (EC 32001-32290, 35295-35297, 46390-46392, 49505; GC 3100, 8607; CCR Title 5, Section 550, Section 560; Title 8, Section 3220; Title 19, Section 2400) Sources and Documentation 1. Board policy 2. Emergency operations plan 3. School site crisis plans 4. Building evacuation plans 5. Emergency exit signage 6. First aid kits 7. Interviews with administrators 8. Intrusion alarm system 9. Exterior lighting 10. Perimeter fencing 11. Key issuance procedure Findings 1. The district has an emergency preparedness plan that was last updated in 2007. 2. There is adequate exterior lighting at each of the schools, but there are problems with the exterior lighting at the Greenfield High School parking lot. 3. There is no evidence or record of training for staff and students in emergency preparedness or first aid. 4. Each of the sites has adequate security cameras. There is no alarm system at King City High School however, and the alarm system at Greenfield High School is not being used to full capacity because of system malfunctions and a lack of adequate staff training. Facilities Management 553 5. First aid kits are not distributed and inventoried regularly throughout the district. 6. The sites have inadequate perimeter fencing and access control. Greenfield High School has an open public access point to its asphalt hard court area. 7. There is standard signage for directing visitors from the parking lot areas of each campus, and there is appropriate signage regarding trespassing, no smoking, and drug-free zones. 8. The district maintains visitor logs at each campus. 9. There is board policy and a system in place for creating and distributing keys for each of the campuses, but there have been many lost keys since the last time each school replaced the locks and there is concern that there could be unauthorized possession and use of keys. 10. Board policies are outdated and should be revised to reflect new laws and regulations. Board Policy 3516.5 (a), Emergency Schedules, was last revised in May 2005; Board Policy 3516 (b), Emergencies and Disaster Preparedness Plan, was last revised April 2005; and Board Policy 45, Comprehensive Safety Plan, was last revised in April 2005. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review and update emergency preparedness plan as needed. 2. Repair the exterior lighting at the Greenfield High School parking lot. 3. Provide ongoing emergency preparedness and first aid training by scheduling workshops and school disaster drills at least once per year, and maintain records of these activities. 4. Install an alarm system at King City High School. 5. Repair the alarm system at Greenfield High School and provide the staff with training so it can be used fully. 6. Inventory the first aid kits throughout the district and provide kits where necessary. 7. Consider completing the perimeter fencing and placing an additional gate at Greenfield High School to prevent public access to the asphalt play area during school hours. 8. Review and revise board policies as regulations change to keep current those policies and practices that ensure student and staff safety. 554 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 555 1.2 School Safety Legal Standard The LEA includes all legally required security devices in new and modernized buildings. (EC 32020, 35294.12-35294.13) Sources and Documentation 1. Inspections of the King City High School and Greenfield High School campuses 2. Interviews with school site administrators and classified management. 3. Board policies Findings 1. Both King City and Greenfield high schools have security cameras in strategic locations. The camera systems are web-based and accessible by computer. 2. King City High School has no alarm system. 3. There were no door sensors at either campus. 4. The alarm system at Greenfield High School is not being fully used. 5. During past modernizations, the district installed lock systems and door hardware, most of which have been upgraded to current industry standards. 6. Board policies related to security devices were not found. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish a priority list of security issues in a five-year master facilities plan. 2. As funds become available, upgrade and expand the use of security equipment and devices to cover all areas of the facilities, including adding an alarm system at King City High School and adding door sensors to the existing alarm system at Greenfield High School. 3. Repair the alarm system at Greenfield High School, including replacing faulty motion detectors. 4. Train staff in correct alarm system use. 556 Facilities Management 5. Annually inspect the district’s design standards to ensure continued incorporation of security devices to meet the district’s needs. 6. Update board policies and administrative regulations regarding security devices. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 557 1.3 School Safety Legal Standard The LEA has developed a comprehensive safety plan that includes adequate measures to protect people and property. (EC 32020, 32211, 32228-32228.5, 35294.10-35294.15) Sources and Documentation 1. Board policies 2. Interview with classified management 3. Interviews with school site administrators 4. Site visits and observations 5. Comprehensive safety plan 6. Key issuance log Findings 1. The district’s comprehensive safety plan was last amended in 2006 and the district is currently revising it. 2. Board policies 0450 and 3516 pertaining to the District Comprehensive Safety Plan were last updated in April 2005 3. Security perimeter fencing at both high schools is adequate; however, fencing at Greenfield High School is incomplete. 4. Outside lighting is not sufficient and needs be addressed. 5. Gate hinges need to be tested for operability. 6. Visitor logs and ID badges are used. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Make the development and administration of the district’s comprehensive safety plan a high priority, and assign this task to an administrator who is knowledgeable about legal requirements and safety issues and has time to oversee the plan’s development and administration. 558 Facilities Management 2. Update board policies 0450 and 3516 pertaining to the district’s comprehensive safety plan. 3. Conduct a facility perimeter fencing audit and make recommendations for improvements. Restrict access to specific points at each school site. Consider additional fencing at Greenfield High School behind the industrial arts building or in front of the fence that backs up to the housing on the northern perimeter of the western playing field area. 4. Conduct an evaluation of exterior lighting for each site and develop recommendations for improvements in the five-year facility master plan. 5. Maintain accurate school visitor logs and records. 6. Coordinate closely with the Monterey County Office of Education and access resources for developing a comprehensive safety program. 7. Work with the Monterey County Schools Insurance Group (MCSIG) as an additional resource when developing and managing the safety program. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 559 1.4 School Safety Legal Standard The LEA ensures that all employees who have access and/or authorization to use chemical compounds are regularly informed of restrictions on the storage and disposal of chemical compounds, hazardous substances, and flammable or toxic materials. (EC 49341, 49401.5, 49411; F&AC 12981; H&SC 25163, 25500-25532; LC 6360-6363; CCR Title 8, Section 5194) Sources and Documentation 1. Board Policy 3514.1 2. Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) 3. Evidence of training programs or sessions 4. Inspection of science classroom materials storage areas 5. Interviews with certificated and classified staff Findings 1. There is minimal written evidence of training in the safe storage and disposal of chemicals, hazardous substances and flammable or toxic materials. 2. The hazardous communications program meets minimum requirements per board policy. 3. High school science laboratories are in compliance with legal requirements. 4. The King City High School science laboratory was in exemplary condition; Chemicals and flammable materials are stored and labeled properly. 5. The Greenfield High School science laboratory should be cleaner and better organized. Chemicals and flammable materials are stored and labeled properly, but the storage areas are cluttered. 6. Custodial compliance with legal requirements for chemical, hazardous, flammable and toxic materials storage and disposal is inconsistent and disorganized. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Schedule regular annual training for all custodial and maintenance employees in the use of chemicals and hazardous materials and how to respond to emergencies related to these materials. 560 Facilities Management 2. Provide additional employee and public communication about the use, location, storage and disposal of hazardous materials contained at the school sites. 3. Pursuant to Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 5194(e) (1) (A), include a complete list of hazardous substances in the written hazard communication program, preferably with an indication of the work area where the substances are found. The district must develop such a list. 4. Provide the appropriate fire department for each school with a list of hazardous materials stored on site, including those in science laboratories. 5. Inform all outside contractors of hazardous substances that are present on the site. It is the contractor’s responsibility to disseminate this information to its employees and subcontractors. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 561 1.5 School Safety Legal Standard Each elementary, intermediate and secondary school sounds the fire alarm signal every calendar month. Each elementary and intermediate school conducts a fire drill at least once every calendar month. Each secondary school conducts a fire drill at least twice each school year. (CCR Title 5, Section 550) Sources and Documentation 1. District documents 2. Interviews with school staff 3. Visits to and inspection of King City and Greenfield High Schools 4. Board policies Findings 1. Both King City and Greenfield high schools have regularly scheduled fire drills twice each year. 2. Both sites have modern fire alarm systems that are checked annually by local fire jurisdictions. Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 10 Implementation Scale: 562 Facilities Management 1.6 School Safety Legal Standard The Governing Board, upon receiving a building examination report, prioritizes repairs to ensure that buildings meet health and safety requirements. (EC 17367) Sources and Documentation 1. District files and board meeting minutes. 2. Interview with classified management 3. Board policies Findings 1. Systematic, comprehensive documented site inspections are not occurring. Custodians are assigned to spot check the buildings daily, and building and grounds staff conduct brief inspections when they visit the schools. However, there is no systematic method of conducting building inspections to develop a comprehensive list of repairs across all trades. 2. In the absence of regular inspections, custodians and principals report unsafe conditions to the MOT department as problems arise. 3. MOT department staff evaluate requests and place a high priority on those related to health and safety. 4. The district has no written evidence of a facilities repair plan or of discussions with the board regarding facility repairs. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Consider hiring an independent inspector with skills in many trades to conduct quarterly safety inspections of each site. 2. Develop an evaluation tool to examine and assess facilities for needed repairs, reconstruction or replacement. Sample tools can be obtained from the state’s Office of Public School Construction. 3. Ensure that all other site administrators and custodial and maintenance staff members clearly understand their responsibilities with regard to regular and systematic building inspections for health and safety hazards. Facilities Management 563 4. Ensure that the director of MOT convenes the staff to review all outstanding work orders, and develop a policy for prioritizing outstanding and future requests. This procedure should be documented and shared with all district and site staff. 5. Develop a written board policy that requires the director of MOT and business office staff to create an annual prioritized list of needed building and grounds repairs and an estimated budget for them, and issue this report to the board annually. 6. Use the information acquired from the facility examination and report to develop a system of priorities for the repair, reconstruction or replacement of unsafe school buildings. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 564 Facilities Management 1.7 School Safety Legal Standard Each school that is entirely enclosed by a fence or wall has an access gate of sufficient size to permit emergency vehicles to enter. Locking devices are designed to permit ready entrance. (EC 32020) Sources and Documentation 1. Interviews with staff members 2. Interviews with school site administrators and classified management 3. Site visits and observations 4. Board Policy 3515 (a) Findings 1. The district does not have complete perimeter fencing at Greenfield High School. 2. All district sites had access gates of sufficient size to permit emergency vehicles, and equipment to enter. 3. Emergency access devices are not installed. 4. Some gate hinges are less than adequate. Recommendations for Recovery The district should 1. Complete perimeter fencing. Funding is available through state’s School Facility Program. 2. Create a board policy to comply with E.C.32020 3. Install emergency access devices at all required locations 4. Repair gate hinges and all other deficiencies found. Facilities Management 565 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 566 Facilities Management 1.8 School Safety Legal Standard School premises are sanitary, neat, clean and free from conditions that would create a fire or life hazard. (CCR Title 5, Section 630) Sources and Documentation 1. Site visits before, during and after regular school hours 2. Interviews with staff 3. Board Policy 3514.1 4. Staff duty schedules Findings 1. The district does not have sufficient staff to adequately clean the sites each day. The custodial staff do not perform a detailed cleaning of each classroom every night. 2. The cleaning staff do not maintain cleaning logs. 3. The district does not maintain staff training records. 4. The equipment in the industrial arts storage area needs to be organized and stored properly. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Consider hiring additional custodial staff or reassigning duties within similar job descriptions to provide more adequate daily cleaning of the school. 2. Develop custodial cleaning logs for the custodial staff. 3. Develop and implement regular custodial training in proper cleaning techniques, and maintain records of training. 4. Using the work order system, clean and organize the classrooms in the Greenfield High School industrial arts area. 5. Develop a checklist for quarterly inspections by the director of MOT and lead custodians. Provide feedback to staff on their efforts to keep the sites clean and safe. Facilities Management 567 6. Develop staff accountability for the cleanliness of their assigned areas through annual evaluations. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 568 Facilities Management 1.9 School Safety Legal Standard The LEA complies with Injury and Illness Prevention Program requirements. (CCR Title 8, Section 3203) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Interviews with school site administrative staff 3. Board Policy 4157 Findings 1. No injury and illness prevention plan (IIPP) or implementation was found. 2. Board Policy 4157 was last updated in 1991 Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Update Board Policy 4157, Employee Safety, to reflect current regulations and requirements. 2. Develop additional board policies and administrative regulations regarding injury illness and prevention. 3. Develop an IIPP that is in accordance with Senate Bill 198 and that addresses the following: • Employer information • Responsible persons • Communication • Hazard evaluation and control • Injury investigation • Training • Labor management safety committee • Record keeping 4. Emphasize to all staff the importance of the IIPP document. The site administrator should know the location, purpose, and use of the document and its contents. Facilities Management 569 Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 1.10 School Safety Legal Standard Each building has fire extinguishers as required, and current inspection information is available. (CCR Title 8, Section 1922) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. On-site inspection of fire extinguishers and tags 3. Evidence of inspections Findings 1. All classrooms and other occupied areas are equipped with fire extinguishers. 2. An outside vendor inspects the fire extinguishers annually to ensure compliance. 3. There were no records of employee training in the use of fire extinguishers. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Provide staff with training in the use of fire extinguishers. 2. Provide a backup extinguisher whenever an extinguisher is serviced or discharged. 3. Establish a staff education and inspection process to ensure that access to extinguishers is not blocked. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 571 1.11 School Safety Legal Standard Requirements pertaining to underground storage tanks are followed. (H&SC 25280-25299.8; CCR Title 23, Section 2620) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management Findings 1. The district has no underground fuel tanks. Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: Not Applicable February 2010 Rating: Not Applicable 572 Facilities Management 1.12 School Safety Legal Standard All required asbestos inspections are complete, and work is performed by Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA)-accredited individuals. (EC 49410-49410.7; 40 CFR Part 763) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Board Policy 3514 3. AHERA inspection reports Findings 1. The district’s initial asbestos inspection document could not be located. 2. The last asbestos inspection was performed for a modernization project certification on King City High School and may not be considered a comprehensive asbestos reinspection document under AHERA Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Adopt board policies and regulations to ensure compliance with AHERA regulations. 2. Perform a comprehensive review of the district’s asbestos program, including the location of the original AHERA asbestos inspection report. 3. Perform the required three-year inspection as soon as possible. Any extensive asbestos inspection or abatement must be completed by a state-certified contractor in compliance with state and federal standards. 4. Ensure that maintenance staff are trained in the proper cleaning and ongoing maintenance of asbestos-containing materials. They should also be trained in the removal and decontamination of small amounts of the materials when needed to repair pipes or perform small projects. 5. Provide each site with an asbestos abatement management plan and three-year recertification. 6. Place a copy of the AHERA report for each site in the MSDS cabinet. Facilities Management 573 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 574 Facilities Management 1.13 School Safety Legal Standard All playground equipment meets safety code regulations and is inspected regularly to ensure students’ safety. (H&SC 115725-115775; PRC 5411) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Interviews with maintenance staff 3. Site visits and observations of playground apparatus 4. Board policies Findings 1. The district lacks records of ongoing inspections of playground equipment. 2. The district has no written policies regarding playground equipment safety or inspections. 3. The asphalt play surface at King City High School is deteriorated. 4. Although the district has limited play facilities, regular scheduled inspections of backstops, basketball backboards, soccer goals and other athletic equipment are needed. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a more efficient recordkeeping system for playground equipment safety inspections. 2. Perform regular scheduled inspections of backstops, basketball backboards, soccer goals and other athletic equipment. 3. Establish a program for the regular inspection of cushioning material and apparatus, loose bolts, paving irregularities and maintenance needs. Identify persons responsible for inspections and the regularity of inspections. 4. Replace the asphalt play surface at King City High School. Facilities Management 575 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 576 Facilities Management 1.14 School Safety Legal Standard The LEA has safe work practices with regard to boiler and fired pressure vessels. (CCR Title 8, Section 782) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations Findings 1. The district has no boilers. Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: Not Applicable February 2010 Rating: Not Applicable Facilities Management 577 1.15 School Safety Legal Standard The LEA maintains updated Material Safety Data Sheets for all required products. (LC 6360- 6363; CCR Title 8, Section 5194) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Bargaining agreement with California State Employees Association 4. Board Policy 3514.1 Findings 1. The district maintains copies of material safety data sheets (MSDS) at high school science labs. 2. Most MSDS are located in custodial equipment areas. 3. Cabinets did not have a lip to prevent spillage in an earthquake Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a procedure for storing and filing MSDS forms. 2. Update board policies and administrative regulations relating to MSDS. 3. Ensure that all custodial equipment areas contain MSDS for reference. 4. Develop policies for training employees in the use of hazardous materials. 5. Train employees in the cleanup of toxic materials. 6. Ensure that all grounds, maintenance and custodial staff receive in-service training regarding hazardous substances in their work area at the time of their assignment and training regarding any new substances introduced to their work area. 7. Ensure that the manufacturer has provided MSDS as required by law for any new materials or chemicals purchased. 8. Post new information and train all employees in the use of each new substance. 578 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 579 1.16 School Safety Professional Standard The LEA has a documented process for issuing and retrieving master and sub-master keys. All administrators follow a standard organization wide process for issuing keys to and retrieving keys from employees. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with school staff 4. Board policies and administrative regulations Findings 1. Current board policy and administrative regulations are being followed for the issuance and receipt of keys. 2. The district has no complete inventory of existing keys. 3. The process for issuing and retrieving keys is lacking at King City High School. 4. Some staff members have keys that should not be assigned to them. 5. Building security is lacking because unauthorized persons have keys. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop board policy and administrative regulation relating to the issuance, storage and control of master and sub-master keys. Language should include penalties for loss or misuse of keys and state who should have access to master and sub-master keys. 2. Develop a more comprehensive key control procedure and key inventory program. The procedure should outline the specific process for requesting and distributing keys, identifying or numbering individual keys, and identifying each of the individuals responsible for the keys. 3. Develop and provide key control standards. These standards should include proper storage of all spare keys in a secure, locking cabinet; proper numbering so that if a key is lost it is not easy to determine from the key which door it opens; and a standard process for issuing keys. 580 Facilities Management 4. Rekey all locks at King City High School after developing a more comprehensive key distribution system. 5. Ensure that all keys are checked into the school office at end of school year. 6. Ensure that only site administrators, administrative staff, and custodial staff have access to master keys. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 581 1.17 School Safety Professional Standard Bus loading and unloading areas, delivery areas, parking areas and parent loading/unloading areas are monitored regularly to ensure the safety of students, staff and members of the community. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations during loading and unloading times 3. Board Policy and Administrative Regulation 3543(a) 4. Bus schedules and routes Findings 1. Both of the district’s school sites have properly marked and designated pupil pick-up and drop-off zones, though striping was faded. 2. Bus drivers perform regular loading and unloading drills. 3. Bus drivers and school staff provide adequate supervision at crosswalks and intersections; however, loading areas present congested traffic and potential safety issues for pedestrians. 4. The parking area at King City High School is insufficient to allow orderly loading of the bus while parents and staff are leaving the parking area. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Restripe and mark loading and unloading zones every three years. 2. Assign additional supervision at loading and unloading zones. 3. Perform regular bus evacuation drills. 582 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 583 1.18 School Safety Professional Standard Outside lighting is properly placed and is monitored periodically to ensure that it functions and is adequate to ensure safety during evening activities for students, staff and the public. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations before, during, and after school 3. Interviews with administrative staff 4. Board policies and administrative regulations Findings 1. Both high schools have deficiencies in exterior lighting. There are defective lights in the parking lot of Greenfield High School, and there is almost no exterior lighting in the interior quad at King City High School. 2. The district has no board policies or administrative regulations regarding the sufficiency of exterior lighting. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Schedule and carry out annual monitoring of exterior lighting as well as regular maintenance and repair of existing lighting. 2. Make corrections to exterior lighting annually, including replacing bulbs, replacing lenses and addressing other electrical issues as needed. 3. Develop a priority list of areas that need additional lighting and include this in the five-year facilities plan. Take into consideration areas between buildings, open fields, and areas identified as concerns in the safe schools plan. 4. Include the facilities department in the design and modernization of facilities. 584 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 585 1.19 School Safety Professional Standard The LEA has a graffiti and vandalism abatement plan and sufficient resources to support it. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff 4. Board policies 3515(a) #3 and 5131.5 Findings 1. No board policy or administrative regulations regarding graffiti and vandalism abatement could be found. 2. Both of the district’s school sites are relatively free of graffiti. 3. Chewing gum on walkways and under tables and desks in classrooms is a significant problem. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Update board policies and administrative regulations regarding graffiti and vandalism abatement to include the procedure for the abatement of vandalism and graffiti and to identify the administrative responsibility, the person responsible for the abatement, and the specific process the staff should follow. 2. Cease selling chewing gum at student stores. 3. Purchase a machine for removing gum from corridors and walkways. 4. Provide annual in-service training for staff responsible for graffiti and vandalism reporting and abatement. 586 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 587 1.20 School Safety Professional Standard The LEA maintains a comprehensive employee safety program. Employees are made aware of the LEA’s safety program, and the LEA provides in-service training to employees on the program’s requirements. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff 4. Board policies 3514 and 4157 5. Article XIV of the collective bargaining agreement (CBA) with classified staff Findings 1. FCMAT was unable to locate any records, files or board policies that outline or support a comprehensive employee safety program. 2. The classified CBA delineates required training for classified staff. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop board policies and administrative regulations that provide an overview of the comprehensive safety plan and the district’s process to communicate the plan and provide in-service training to employees. 2. Designate an administrator as the person responsible for oversight of the district’s safety program. 3. Work closely with the district’s insurance provider and the Monterey County Office of Education to develop a safety program for employees. 4. Maintain and keep current all safety-related files and records, including records of safety training provided to staff. 588 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 589 1.21 School Safety Professional Standard The LEA conducts periodic first aid training for employees assigned to school sites. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff 4. Collective bargaining agreements Findings 1. The district provided no documentation regarding a first aid training program for staff 2. Bus drivers are the only employees who receive first aid training. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop and implement first aid training for those staff members most likely to benefit from it, such as physical education staff, shop or industrial arts staff, security personnel, cafeteria workers and classified aids. 2. Assign an administrator to coordinate all staff first aid training. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 590 Facilities Management 2.1 Facility Planning Legal Standard The LEA has standards for real property acquisition and disposal. The LEA complies with California Department of Education (CDE) recommendations regarding school site size. (EC 17230-17234, 17251-17251.5) Sources and Documentation 1. Board policies 2. Interviews with administrators and site personnel Findings 1. The district’s board policy regarding real property acquisition and disposal is outdated. 2. The district is in compliance with the California Department of Education’s (CDE) recommendations for school site size. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Update board policy regarding real property acquisition and disposal to include current site acquisition standards and education code requirements, as well as any relevant local criteria. 2. Develop a comprehensive long-term facilities master plan before developing any standards for real property acquisition and disposal, and ensure that any standards developed are consistent with the master plan. 3. Develop an asset management plan that complements the long-term facilities plan. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 591 2.2 Facility Planning Legal Standard The LEA seeks and obtains waivers from the State Allocation Board for continued use of any nonconforming facilities. (EC 17284-17284.5) Sources and Documentation 1. Site inspection 2. Interview with classified management 3. Board policies Findings 1. The district has several nonconforming buildings at all sites that are used for administrative or other purposes. 2. The district was unable to produce documentation indicating that the nonconforming buildings have waivers allowing noncompliance with the Field Act. 3. The district has not pursued a waiver from the State Allocation Board for continued use of buildings that do not conform to regulations. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Inventory all buildings at each site and determine their compliance status. The district should consult an inspector qualified by the Division of the State Architect (DSA) or a licensed architect to assist with this task. 2. Organize its records to determine if it has waivers for its noncompliant buildings. 3. Apply for waivers from the State Allocation Board for all buildings identified as noncompliant but that it plans to continue using. 4. Develop a plan to replace any nonconforming buildings. 592 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 593 2.3 Facility Planning Legal Standard The LEA has established and uses a selection process to choose licensed architectural/ engineering services. (GC 4525-4526) Sources and Documentation 1. Board policies 2. Interview with chief business official Findings 1. The district did not use an architectural/engineering services selection process for its most recent planned modernization project because it is using the same architect that it used for the first phase of the project, which was completed in 2007. 2. The board policy regarding the selection of licensed architectural/engineering services is outdated. 3. The district does not have written policies or procedures for selecting architects, engineers or other building consultants. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Update its board policy and procedures for selecting architects, engineers and other building consultants to include current education code and state facilities program requirements. 2. Use its updated board policy and procedures for any future construction projects. Sample Request for Qualifications (RFQ) and processes for selecting professional services can be obtained from the district’s legal counsel, the California Association of School Business Officials (CASBO) and other organizations. 594 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 595 2.4 Facility Planning Legal Standard The LEA collects statutory fees on construction within its boundaries. (EC 17620; GC 65995, 66000) Sources and Documentation 1. Board policy 2. Interview with chief business official Findings 1. Board Policy 7210 addresses the collection of developer fees but is 12 years old. 2. The district is imposing the maximum statutory Level I school fees for residential and commercial/industrial development. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Prepare an updated residential development school fee justification study and an updated commercial/industrial development school fee justification study. 2. Engage in discussions with King City departments to identify the amount of residential and commercial/industrial development that is expected to occur within the district’s boundaries over the next five to 20 years. 3. Retain a consultant to prepare a school facilities needs analysis. 4. Continue to levy the maximum allowable fees for residential and commercial/ industrial development. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 596 Facilities Management 2.5 Facility Planning Legal Standard If the LEA has passed a general obligation bond measure under Proposition 39, it has created a citizens’ oversight committee to ensure the appropriateness of expenditures related to that bond measure. (EC 15278-15282) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interview with state administrator 4. Board policy Findings 1. The district has not passed a general obligation bond measure under Proposition 39. Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: Not Applicable February 2010 Rating: Not applicable Facilities Management 597 2.6 Facility Planning Professional Standard The LEA has a long-range school facilities master plan that that has been updated in the last two years and includes an annual capital planning budget. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. Interview with former superintendent 4. Interview with state administrator Findings 1. The district does not have a long-range school facilities master plan or capital planning budget. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a long-range facilities master plan that projects enrollment trends, housing development patterns and education programs desired by the community. Career technical education program development should be considered when creating this plan. 2. Create capital outlay and development budgets based on its long-range facilities master plan. The long-term facilities funding plan should estimate the costs of modernizing existing facilities and constructing new facilities, and should identify a funding source or sources. The district should consider retaining a school facilities consulting firm to develop the facilities master plan, including development of funding mechanisms. 3. Hire a school facilities consulting firm to assist with the Office of Public School Construction applications needed to establish eligibility for funding. 4. As part of its five-year plan, perform needs assessments of roofing and paving systems. 598 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 599 2.7 Facility Planning Professional Standard The LEA seeks state and local funds. The LEA has pursued state funding for joint-use projects by filing applications with the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) and the State Allocation Board. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. State Allocation Board application forms 3. Office of Public School Construction Web site Findings 1. The district has pursued state funding but has not sought funding for joint-use projects. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Meet with representatives of the cities of King City and Greenfield and/or the County of Monterey to determine if those entities are interested in any potential and feasible joint- use projects. 2. For any joint-use projects identified, file an application with the state for joint-use project funding. 3. Consider exploring optional sources of facility funding such as parcel taxes, grants and stimulus funds. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 600 Facilities Management 2.8 Facility Planning Professional Standard The LEA has a facility planning committee. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. Interview with former superintendent 4. Interview with the state administrator 5. District Web site Findings 1. The district does not have a facilities planning committee. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Create a facilities planning committee based on the recommendations in the California Department of Education’s Facilities Planning and Construction Guide. The committee minimally should include board members, the superintendent, the chief business official, site administrators, the director of maintenance, teachers and community members. 2. Ensure that facilities are developed, maintained and modernized in an equitable manner. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 601 2.9 Facility Planning Professional Standard The LEA has a properly staffed and funded facility planning department. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. Interview with former superintendent 4. Interview with state administrator Findings 1. The district does not have a facility planning department because it is not large enough to justify the cost of a full department. 2. The district has not assigned responsibility for facility planning to any district staff members or administrators. 3. The district has not engaged the services of a facility planning consultant. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Assign responsibility for facility planning to the chief business official or other administrator designee. 2. Assign preparation of key facility planning documents, such as facility master plans, maintenance plans and developer fee justifications, to other staff or hired consultants. 3. Direct more resources and effort to assessing the district’s facility needs, developing a long-term facility master plan and creating a capital funding plan. Current staff do not have the experience and capacity to undertake this effort. Because there are documented deficiencies in both site facilities and the district office, the district should pursue School Facility Program hardship and health and safety hardship funding to complete some of the school site projects identified as a priority. 602 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 603 2.10 Facility Planning Professional Standard The LEA has developed an asset management plan. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management Findings 1. The district has no asset management plan or inventory of excess property or buildings that would be considered for an asset management plan. 2. The district has not maintained its fixed asset inventory. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Examine the condition of all real property assets and determine if any of them will be declared surplus in the future. If any assets are identified, the district can develop a plan for the systematic removal and replacement of obsolete buildings, or the sale of real property. 2. Update its fixed asset inventory. This may require using an outside vendor to re-establishing the asset list and its value. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: 604 Facilities Management 2.11 Facility Planning Professional Standard The LEA has established and uses an organized method of prioritizing and scheduling projects and distributes facility funding to all LEA facilities equitably. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. Interview with former superintendent 4. Five-year deferred maintenance plan Findings 1. The district has no organized method of prioritizing and scheduling projects. Priority is determined by the director of maintenance based on the level of immediate urgency. 2. The district has no method of distributing all of its facilities funding equitably. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to use the current work order system to prioritize and schedule routine facility projects. 2. Establish a method for prioritizing and scheduling larger capital improvement projects, and for equitably distributing facility funding between sites based on their current needs. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 4 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 605 3.1 Facilities Improvement and Modernization Legal Standard The LEA maintains a plan for maintaining and modernizing its facilities. (EC 17366) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. Five-year deferred maintenance plan 4. Board Policy 7000 5. District documents Findings 1. The district has a current five-year deferred maintenance plan. 2. The district has no facilities master plan to guide the facilities program. 3. The district is reactive rather than proactive in providing badly needed improvements to its facilities. 4. Significant health and safety needs continue to go unmet. 5. The present district office building has outlived its usefulness and is a health and safety liability for the district. The building was purchased in a used condition more than 30 years ago and now has mold, dry rot and termite damage. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to update its five-year deferred maintenance plan annually to reflect current needs. 2. Hire a consultant to develop a comprehensive facilities master plan. The business office staff has little experience with this process and an insufficiently small staff to engage in this process. 3. Contract with an architect to develop a plan for replacing the district office administration building. 4. Update Board Policy 7000. 606 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 607 3.2 Facilities Improvement and Modernization Legal Standard The LEA obtains approval of plans and specifications from the Division of the State Architect, and from the Office of Public School Construction when required, before awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder. (EC 17263, 17267) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Interview with chief business official Findings 1. The district obtains approvals from the Division of the State Architect (DSA) and Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) prior to awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder. Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 10 Implementation Scale: 608 Facilities Management 3.3 Facilities Improvement and Modernization Legal Standard All relocatable buildings in use meet statutory requirements. (EC 17292) Sources and Documentation 1. Site inspection 2. Interview with classified management 3. Interview with chief business official 4. Board policy 5. Review of district records Findings 1. The district has relocatable buildings at all sites that are used for administrative or other purposes but that do not meet statutory requirements. 2. The district was unable to produce documentation to indicate that buildings have met statutory requirements. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Inventory all buildings at each site and determine their compliance status. The district should consult a DSA-qualified inspector or a licensed architect for this purpose. 2. Organize its records to determine if there is documentation to substantiate that the relocatable buildings meet statutory requirements. 3. Retain an architectural/engineering firm to help prepare the plans and documents needed to pursue and obtain DSA approval of any nonapproved facilities that it plans to continue occupying. 4. Develop a plan to replace any relocatable buildings that do not meet statutory requirements. 5. Provide 1-A diagrams that indicate each building’s history, square footage and Office of the State Architect numbers. Facilities Management 609 Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 610 Facilities Management 3.4 Facilities Improvement and Modernization Professional Standard The LEA has a restricted deferred maintenance fund, from which funds are expended for maintenance only. The LEA annually transfers the required state matching funds. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. Five-year deferred maintenance plan 4. District’s general ledger for the deferred maintenance fund 5. Form 14 deferred maintenance fund budget and unaudited actuals document Findings 1. The district has a policy for the transfer of funds to the deferred maintenance fund. 2. There is no board policy stating the district’s goals for the use of the deferred maintenance funds or indicating which facilities will be given the highest priority. 3. The district updates the five-year deferred maintenance plan regularly and submits it to the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) for approval under the state’s deferred maintenance program. 4. In previous years, the district has annually transferred funds from the general fund to the deferred maintenance fund; however, it recently took advantage of a one-time waiver of the requirement to provide matching funds to participate in the program. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish board policy that states the district’s goals for the use of deferred maintenance funds and prioritizes projects. 2. Continue to update the five-year deferred maintenance plan annually to remove maintenance completed during the year and include projects that have become eligible for deferred maintenance funding. Although state funding will never reach the level needed to meet all of the district’s needs, the district should have a plan to take advantage of all available funding. Facilities Management 611 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 612 Facilities Management 3.5 Facilities Improvement and Modernization Professional Standard The LEA has pursued state funding for all applicable projects and consistently reviews and monitors its eligibility to maximize state funding opportunities through the Office of Public School Construction. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. State Allocation Board (SAB) application forms Findings 1. The district has applied for state hardship funding for a modernization project at King City High School. 2. The district has filed an application for Career Technical Education (CTE) grant funding for an agriculture career track facility but has not completed the steps needed for OPSC funding. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to pursue state funding approval for its modernization project 2. Complete the steps needed to finalize its CTE funding application, or withdraw the application. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 613 3.6 Facilities Improvement and Modernization Professional Standard The LEA establishes and implements interim housing plans for use during the construction phase of modernization projects and/or additions to existing facilities. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management Findings 1. There is no need for an interim housing plan because there are currently no construction or modernization projects or additions to existing facilities. Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: Not Applicable February 2010 Rating: Not Applicable 614 Facilities Management 3.7 Facilities Improvement and Modernization Professional Standard The LEA has established and maintains a system for tracking the progress of individual projects. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. Division of the State Architect (DSA) records Findings 1. The district currently has no construction projects. 2. The district uses a computerized work order system 3. The district has several DSA projects that were closed either without certification or with exceptions. 4. The district submitted an application to the OPSC for career technical education (CTE) grant funding but has not taken the steps needed to complete the application. 5. The district is insufficiently staffed to handle anticipated facilities planning and administration needs. 6. The district’s leaders lack knowledge of project tracking and DSA and OPSC regulations and processes, and they do not possess the skills required to manage projects. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review the DSA Web site to determine the tracking status of its projects that have been closed. Contact the architect on each closed project and have them submit the documents needed to close the projects with DSA certification and without exceptions. If the architect of record for those projects is not available, the district should hire another architect to complete the certification process. 2. Take the steps needed to complete the CTE grant application, or withdraw the application from OPSC. 3. Consider the significant project management and tracking needs associated with its list of future facilities projects and become better prepared to effectively track the progress and successful closeout of individual projects. Facilities Management 615 4. Schedule and hold regular project status meetings that include all involved parties to promote project articulation and to develop a more uniform understanding of the status of individual projects. If and when future project/construction managers are employed, they should attend these meetings and provide concise and up-to-date written reports that indicate the status and needs of projects for which they are responsible. 5. When hiring a chief business official, seek candidates with experience with construction project management and OPSC and DSA regulations and procedures. Standard Implemented: partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: 616 Facilities Management 3.8 Facilities Improvement and Modernization Professional Standard The LEA routinely includes technology infrastructure, furniture and equipment needs in the scope of modernization projects. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. State Allocation Board (SAB) modernization application Findings 1. The district does not routinely include technology infrastructure or furniture and equipment needs in the scope of modernization projects. An important element in any modernization project is the inclusion of furniture and equipment. While it is beneficial to update the building structures, it is important to also consider the upgrade of furniture and equipment within any given school modernization project. 2. The lack of furniture and equipment replacement in a finished modernization project diminishes the overall quality of the project and lessens the positive impact on the school’s instructional program and delivery of educational services to its students. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Determine its technology infrastructure and furniture or equipment needs and incorporate them in its modernization application for King City High School. 2. Make a concerted effort to attempt to replace furniture and equipment in its modernized schools and to include furniture and equipment budgets/allocations as a standard element in future modernization project budgets. Funding deficiencies may limit the amount and types of furniture and equipment that can be systematically replaced, but this type of improvement is an important element in refurbishing and upgrading the learning environment at any school. 3. Establish a standard for school furniture and equipment for each grade level and subject area. The standard should identify the replacement benchmarks for general categories of furniture and equipment, such as indicating that desks should be replaced after a certain number of years of use. 4. Make an assessment of the furniture and equipment in all classrooms at all schools. The assessment should include information such as the age and condition of items. Facilities Management 617 5. Compare the condition of existing furniture and equipment with the established district standards for replacement. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 618 Facilities Management 3.9 Facilities Improvement and Modernization Professional Standard The LEA manages and annually reviews its five-year deferred maintenance plan and verifies that expenditures made during the year are included in the plan. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. Five-year deferred maintenance plan Findings 1. The district has a current five-year deferred maintenance plan. 2. The district verifies that expenditures are made according to the adopted plan. 3. The district had not updated the deferred maintenance plan prior to the 2009-10 school year. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to update the five-year deferred maintenance plan annually to reflect current needs. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 619 3.10 Facilities Improvement and Modernization Professional Standard The LEA’s staff is knowledgeable about procedures in the Office of Public School Construction and the Division of the State Architect. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. Interview with former superintendent 4. Interview with state administrator 5. Job description for assistant superintendent Findings 1. The district’s chief business official at the time of fieldwork was knowledgeable about procedures in the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) and the Division of the State Architect (DSA), but resigned on December 31, 2009. 2. No other individuals in the organization are knowledgeable about OPSC and DSA procedures. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the new chief business official and the director of maintenance receive training on OPSC programs and procedures by reviewing their publications and attending workshops and conferences. 2. Augment training by using outside professionals who have experience in working with OPSC staff and who are well versed in OPSC procedures. 3. Continue to require advance approval by the DSA and the OPSC for all construction plans to maintain maximum funding eligibility. 620 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 621 4.1 Construction of Projects Professional Standard The LEA maintains a staffing structure that is adequate to ensure the effective management of its construction projects. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. Interview with former superintendent 4. Interview with state administrator Findings 1. The district currently has no construction projects and does not maintain sufficient staff to ensure effective management of construction projects; the district is not large enough to maintain a facilities construction and modernization staff. 2. The director of maintenance does not have adequate knowledge to ensure effective management of construction projects Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Provide its current director of maintenance, and possibly its new chief business official, with additional training in construction and project management before undertaking any further projects. 2. Consider using professional construction management for any projects in the near future. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 622 Facilities Management 4.2 Construction of Projects Professional Standard The LEA maintains appropriate project records and drawings. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Review of district records Findings 1. The district’s maintenance of project records and drawings is inconsistent. Records are disorganized and FCMAT was unable to determine if some facilities meet statutory guidelines. 2. An improved system for storing and maintaining project records and drawings is needed to support future repairs and/or modifications to existing facilities. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop an organized system for proper storage and maintenance of records and drawings. 2. Create a storage area and acquire storage equipment adequate to store and maintain project drawings and specifications. 3. Develop and implement a system for recording the check-out and check-in of plans to ensure accountability. 4. Require records and drawings in all contracts. 5. Assign the director of facilities the responsibility of monitoring plan availability and use. Facilities Management 623 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 624 Facilities Management 4.3 Construction of Projects Professional Standard Each Inspector of Record assignment is approved by the Division of State Architect. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Review of district records Findings 1. The district has ensured that each inspector of record assignment is approved by the Division of the State Architect. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a process for hiring and selecting inspectors of record. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 625 5.1 Compliance with Public Contracting Laws and Procedures Legal Standard The LEA complies with requirements for formal bidding procedures and has a procedure for requests for quotes/proposals. (GC 54201-54205; PCC 20110-20118.4) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Review of district records 4. Board Policy 3312 Findings 1. The district appears to have complied with requirements for formal bidding procedures in the past and has a procedure for requests for proposals (RFPs); however, the district has not purchased anything using this procedure recently. 2. Some district employees have undertaken construction projects and facility modifications without the district’s consent. 3. School-related organizations have undertaken facility modifications in the district without meeting statutory requirements. 4. The district’s board policies 3310, 3311, and 3312 have not been updated since 1997. 5. Based on an interview with the assistant superintendent and a review of relevant documents, the district has in place an appropriate quote request process that includes defining when the district will request quotes or bids for projects. 6. There are no established dollar limits to determine when the district should use quotes via telephone or informal bidding. Written procedures need to be developed and provided to district staff, schools and vendors. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a purchasing process and amend current board policy to reflect the process. 626 Facilities Management 2. Ensure that all district employees are aware that facility modifications require district approval and control. 3. Develop procedures for acquiring the services of outside contractors, including bidding procedures. 4. Inspect site modifications undertaken without district knowledge and administrative oversight to determine compliance with state and federal guidelines. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 627 5.2 Compliance with Public Contracting Laws and Procedures Legal Standard Change orders are processed and receive approval from authorized personnel before they are implemented. (PCC 20118.4) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Review of district records 4. Board policies Findings 1. Former administrative staff claim that change orders are processed and receive approval from authorized personnel prior to implementation. 2. No records of written change order procedures were found. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop written district change order policies and procedures. The policy should specify the following: • All change orders must be developed by the project architect. • The change order must adequately describe the change to be made to the scope or materials of the project and include a comprehensive cost breakdown of the total cost of the proposed change. • The change order must be reviewed and approved by the following parties prior to its final execution: • Project architect; approved contractor of record • Project inspector of record; Department of State Architect (DSA), if ap- plicable • Office of Public School Construction (OPSC), if applicable • State administrator or, upon return of authority, the board of trustees 2. Maintain all records of project change orders with the project files. 628 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 629 6.1 Facilities Maintenance and Operations Legal Standard The LEA is in compliance with requirement of the Williams case settlement. The Governing Board provides clean and operable flush toilets for students’ use; toilet facilities are adequate and maintained. All buildings and grounds are maintained. (EC 17576, 17592.70-17592.73, 35186; CCR Title 5, Section 631, Section 4683, Section 14030) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff 4. Board Policy 1312.3 5. Monterey County Office of Education inspection records 6. Williams facilities inspection documents Findings 1. The district is in compliance with Williams Act legislation with regard to facilities inspection. 2. The Monterey County Office of Education provides annual inspections of Williams Act compliance. 3. Most of the Monterey County Office of Education’s findings have been in the areas of roofing and painting. The district has addressed or is in the process of addressing many of the findings, including the need for various roof repairs at King City High School. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a plan for repairing or correcting deficiencies identified in Williams Act assessments. 2. Correct the remainder of the findings in the annual inspection report from the Monterey County Office of Education. 630 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 631 6.2 Facilities Maintenance and Operations Legal Standard The LEA has established the required account for ongoing and major maintenance. (EC 17014, 17070.75) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff 4. Board policies Findings 1. The district has established the account for ongoing and major maintenance. 2. Under revisions to the state budget act, the district is no longer required to make contributions to the routine restricted maintenance account (RRMA)for a period of five years beginning in fiscal year 2008-09 and continuing through 2012-13, as long as the district maintains its facilities in good repair. Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 8 Implementation Scale: 632 Facilities Management 6.3 Facilities Maintenance and Operations Professional Standard The LEA uses and maintains a system to track utility costs and consumption and to report on the success of its energy program, reducing the cost of utilities. An energy analysis has been completed for each site. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff Findings 1. There is no written documentation of a system to track utility costs and consumption. 2. There is no evidence that an energy analysis has been completed for each site. 3. The district has participated in an energy lighting and controls retrofit program. 4. Utility bills are observed monthly but are not compared to past months or past years. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Contact Pacific Gas and Electric Company and request an energy audit of electrical use at both high schools. 2. Review the energy contract it entered into with Indoor Environmental Services (IES) several years ago and attempt to calculate any savings from that program. 3. Establish a system in the business office to log utility consumption and cost as part of the bill paying process. 4. Prepare regular reports for review and possible action. Items to review include billing errors, billing tariffs, sizeable changes in consumption and cost, projects’ effects on consumption, and tracking of the energy program. Facilities Management 633 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 634 Facilities Management 6.4 Facilities Maintenance and Operations Professional Standard To safeguard items from loss, the LEA keeps adequate maintenance records and reports, including a complete inventory of supplies, materials, tools and equipment. All employees who are required to perform custodial, maintenance or grounds work on LEA sites are provided with adequate supplies, equipment and training to perform maintenance tasks in a timely and professional manner. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site inspections 3. Board policies Findings 1. Recordkeeping for the items indicated in this standard is very poor and the district was unable to produce the records requested by FCMAT. District maintenance employees do not have access to adequate equipment and tools to provide the best service to the schools. 2. Site custodial personnel have sufficient supplies and equipment to perform the duties expected of them. 3. Cleanliness of the classrooms, hallways, lunch areas and bathrooms is inconsistent across the district, primarily due to current staffing levels. 4. Some site personnel commented that the night custodial crews are not performing adequate cleaning, so the classrooms are not ready for students the following morning. FCMAT observed inconsistent cleaning throughout the campuses and classrooms. However, night custodians (utility/bus driver) also serve as substitute bus drivers and drive the buses during field trips. This takes an average of five to eight hours once every two to three weeks, with a higher frequency of substitute driving at King City High School because that site has two more bus routes. 5. The district has not adequately staffed custodial positions for several years as part of its attempt to address continued budget shortfalls. The district is understaffed in custodial positions districtwide by at least 1.5 FTE according to industry-standard staffing formulas. However, because the district splits job descriptions and duties and because the utility/bus drivers that work the night shift act as substitute bus drivers, the actual FTE needed may be higher. The additional factor of split job descriptions and substitute bus driver duties allows fewer total custodial hours. Utility/bus driver and other MOT positions receive a paid 30-minute lunch and two statutory 15-minute breaks, so the Facilities Management 635 actual FTE for each position is 0.875. When this is factored into the staffing formula, the total district need rises to 2.25 FTE utility/bus driver positions. 6. Most of the positions in the department are organized under split job descriptions, such as utility/bus driver, utility/bus driver/campus supervisor, maintenance/bus driver, school safety coordinator/utility/bus driver, lead custodian/bus driver, custodial technician, maintenance/bus driver, or mechanic/bus driver. The splitting of job assignments is not generally viewed as an effective means to accomplish the department’s work and responsibilities and is many times a byproduct of insufficient funding. Because the district is in a rural area, the need for qualified certified bus drivers and substitute bus drivers to be available has resulted in the creation of full time positions with split job descriptions and duties and negotiated paid meal periods. 7. King City High School has one staff member who spends four hours per day and another who spends three hours per day on grounds work, for a combined seven hours daily, or 0.875 FTE. Greenfield High School has one full time groundskeeper and one staff member who allocates four hours per week to grounds work, for a total of 1.1 FTE. Picus/Odden recommends classified staffing ratios of 1.6 groundskeepers per 1,000 students. Under this model King City High School should be staffed at 1.7 FTE groundskeepers, and Greenfield High School should be staffed with 1.72 FTE groundskeepers. Greenfield High School is understaffed by 0.62 FTE groundskeepers, and King City High School is understaffed by 0.825 FTE groundskeepers. 8. King City High School has a 0.55 FTE maintenance worker, and Greenfield High School has one staff member who spends four hours per day four days a week on maintenance, or 0.4 FTE. Picus/Odden recommends classified staffing ratios of 1.8 maintenance staff per 1,000 students. Under this model, King City should have 2.0 FTE maintenance workers and is currently understaffed by 1.45 FTE; Greenfield should be staffed at 1.9 FTE and is understaffed by 1.5 FTE maintenance staff. 9. The district employs two mechanic/bus drivers with a total of eight hours (1.0 FTE) per day dedicated to fleet maintenance. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Take a complete inventory of current equipment and tools. Whenever possible, assign tools and equipment to specific individuals, and develop a check-out system for shared equipment to ensure accountability. 2. Continue to provide custodial staff with adequate supplies and equipment to keep the facilities clean and presentable. 3. Develop minimum cleaning standards for all schools, and provide in-service training at the beginning of each school year to stress the importance of meeting these standards. 636 Facilities Management 4. Ensure that site administrators document instances in which night custodians are not providing proper cleaning and report these to the director of MOT. 5. Hire additional custodial, maintenance and groundskeeper staff as fiscal recovery permits. 6. Complete a time study of duties within each position and evaluate current job descriptions to align duties with job descriptions. Reorganize the department to improve efficiency. 7. Evaluate the school safety coordinator/utility/bus driver position to determine if the title and job description should be revised to more accurately reflect the job. 8. Ensure that all site personnel responsible for cleaning a site receive training at that site so that they gain a complete understanding of the chemicals and equipment that must be used to maintain a clean and safe campus. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 637 6.5 Facilities Maintenance and Operations Professional Standard Procedures are in place for evaluating the quality of the work performed by maintenance and operations staff, and evaluations are completed regularly. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Interview with personnel department staff 3. Personnel files 4. Board policies 5. Collective bargaining agreement Findings 1. The district has no evidence or documentation to indicate that employees are evaluated annually. 2. Evidence indicates that the director of MOT has not been given the training or resources to evaluate employees properly and regularly. 3. The District is not following Article X, item 10.1 of the agreement with California State Employees’ Association (CSEA), which indicates that employees shall be evaluated at least annually. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the director of MOT receives professional development training in the various processes and legal requirements of employee evaluations. 2. Ensure that the director of MOT performs annual employee evaluations prior to June 30, 2010 3. Ensure that employee evaluations are placed in the personnel file at the district office. The director of MOT should have written standards for employee evaluations. 4. Ensure that standards for custodians and maintenance staff are clearly written and communicated to all affected staff as well as to supervisors and administrators responsible for evaluating staff or reporting deficiencies in performance. 638 Facilities Management 5. Ensure that supervisors evaluate staff in the proper use of the supplies and equipment to verify that staff are following their training and established guidelines. 6. Ensure that any findings of misuse or noncompliance with training and established guidelines are included in the employee’s evaluation. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 639 6.6 Facilities Maintenance and Operations Professional Standard The LEA has identified major areas of custodial and maintenance responsibility and specific jobs to be performed. Written job descriptions for custodial and maintenance positions delineate the major areas of responsibility for each position. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff Findings 1. Currently, all maintenance staff except one are working under the bus driver/maintenance worker job position. 2. Job descriptions are outdated and need to be revised to reflect the district’s needs. 3. The district provides a video training to new staff regarding cleaning processes and standards. However, the district does not have adopted cleaning standards for maintenance, operations and transportation department employees, including custodians, maintenance personnel or grounds workers. 4. There is no organizational chart for the maintenance, operations and transportation (MOT) department. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Review and revise all MOT department job descriptions. 2. Develop a work standards handbook for all members of the MOT department, including maintenance, custodial and grounds workers. 3. Develop an organizational chart for the MOT department that clearly identifies roles, responsibilities and the chain of command. 4. Evaluate the current level of school cleanliness and determine if it is adequate to meet health and safety standards. The district should consider industry cleaning standards and staffing ratios for custodial and maintenance departments. 640 Facilities Management 5. Examine options to the split current staff members’ assignments and duties to use staff more efficiently. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 641 6.7 Facilities Maintenance and Operations Professional Standard The LEA has an effective written preventive maintenance plan that is scheduled and followed by the maintenance staff and that includes verification of work completed. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff Findings 1. There is no evidence of a written preventive maintenance plan. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a comprehensive written preventive maintenance plan. 2. Develop methods for identifying preventive maintenance categories. 3. Develop a component of the current electronic work order system to schedule preventive maintenance work. 4. Develop a system to routinely verify that work is completed satisfactorily. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 642 Facilities Management 6.8 Facilities Maintenance and Operations Professional Standard The LEA has planned and implemented a maintenance program that includes an inventory of all facilities and equipment that will require maintenance and replacement. Data should include estimated life expectancies, replacement time lines and the financial resources needed to maintain the facilities. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff 4. Board policies Findings 1. There are no documents indicating that the district is meeting this standard. 2. The district’s maintenance department does not have a vehicle replacement schedule. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop an inventory program that identifies all equipment, vehicles and buildings, including the current age, value, location and replacement value of each. 2. Ensure that the inventory program also includes a plan for the care, maintenance and scheduled replacement or repair of these items. 3. Develop a vehicle replacement schedule. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 643 6.9 Facilities Maintenance and Operations Professional Standard The LEA has a documented process for prioritizing and assigning routine repair work orders. The LEA has a work order system that tracks all maintenance requests, the employee assigned, dates of completion, labor hours and the cost of materials. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff Findings 1. The district uses an automated work order system that creates, tracks and maintains a history of work orders, allowing the district to track and report on routine maintenance work. 2. It is not clear that the information in the system is used to deploy staff, forecast supply and equipment needs, or plan for preventive maintenance projects. 3. The current work order system is not used to schedule preventive maintenance. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Consider expanding the capabilities of the work order system to include preventive maintenance and inventories of all buildings and equipment. 2. Ensure that work orders are put in order of priority based on health and safety needs. 3. Review the current work order system with all users and determine deficiencies. 4. Research the feasibility of enhancing the current work order system to mitigate the deficiencies identified in recommendation 3 above. If current software is insufficient, research alternative programs. 5. Begin tracking the volume of work orders to determine staffing needs. 6. Provide any additional training and support needed. 644 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 645 6.10 Facilities Maintenance and Operations Professional Standard LEA-owned vehicles are used only for LEA purposes. Fuel is inventoried and its use is monitored. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff 4. Board policies Findings 1. All district vehicles are used only for district purposes, and all fuel, oil and maintenance is recorded and kept on file. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to require that all employees follow the written fueling procedures to allow the district to monitor and track each vehicle’s cost and efficiency. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 646 Facilities Management 7.1 Instructional Program Issues Legal Standard The Governing Board provides a warm, healthful place where children who bring their own lunches to school may eat their lunch. (EC 17573; CCR Title 5, Section 14030) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management. 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Site inspection 4. Board policy Findings 1. The district provides warm, healthful places where children who bring their own lunches may eat their lunch. 2. The comfort level of lunch areas is not consistent. 3. Most cafeterias and multipurpose rooms have appropriate capacity signage. 4. Eating areas are generally clean; however, the facilities at King City High School are old and thus do not always appear clean. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Consider building a covered outdoor eating area at King City High School similar to the one at Greenfield High School. 2. Ensure that, in addition to complying with Education Code section 17573, all facilities plans conform to standards specified in the California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Section 14030. These standards are summarized in part as follows: • Auxiliary areas, such as multipurpose cafeterias, administrative offices, and library/ media centers, shall be adequately sized to accommodate the student population and allow adaptation for changing uses. • Lighting shall be designed to provide comfortable and adequate levels of illumina- tion. • Delivery and service areas shall be located so as to provide vehicle access without jeopardizing the safety of students and staff. Facilities Management 647 Plans shall also comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act and its requirement that facilities be designed and constructed so that they are readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities (42 USC 12101-12213, 28 CFR 35). 3. Complete the gradual replacement and upgrade of aged cafeteria facilities as funds become available through modernization projects, deferred maintenance or other sources. 4. Continue to train maintenance, custodial and cafeteria staff in industry cleaning and safety standards. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 648 Facilities Management 7.2 Instructional Program Issues Legal Standard The LEA has developed and maintains a plan to ensure the equality and equity of all of its school site facilities. (EC 35293) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interview with former superintendent 4. Interview with state administrator 5. Site inspection 6. Board policies 7. Interviews with parents, students and staff Findings 1. The district has not developed and maintained a plan to ensure the equality and equity of all its school site facilities. 2. There are inequalities and inequities in facilities. King City High School has new computer equipment, and discarded older computers from King City are installed at Greenfield High School. The Greenfield High School football field still has portable restrooms for students and guests rather than permanent facilities. 3. Facility improvements are needed to achieve equality and equity of facilities throughout the district. 4. The junior varsity girls’ softball diamond at King City High School is substandard, particularly the fencing and dugout areas. 5. The current system for selecting improvements to be made is somewhat arbitrary. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop a process through which to address the equality of facilities, identifying key areas of inequity. Facilities Management 649 2. Create a systematic plan for selecting and carrying out facilities improvements equitably based on district priorities and community needs. 3. Develop clear and easily understood standards for the number and quality of facilities required to accommodate the delivery of instruction. 4. Identify and develop an estimate of the cost to remediate specific facility discrepancies at sites 5. Play junior varsity girls’ softball games on the varsity field, or improve the junior varsity field to include adequate fencing and dugout areas. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: 650 Facilities Management 7.3 Instructional Program Issues Legal Standard Classrooms are free of interruptions and other barriers to instruction. (EC 32212) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Interviews with school site administrators 3. Site inspection Findings 1. The classrooms are free of interruptions and other barriers to instruction. Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: Fully Implemented February 2010 Rating: 10 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 651 7.4 Instructional Program Issues Professional Standard The LEA’s grounds are appropriately landscaped and maintained to enhance an educational environment. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff 4. Board policies Finding 1. The district’s grounds and landscaping plans are average based on comparable California school districts. 2. Basic areas of care have been overlooked because of inadequate staffing. For example, the lawns are edged once per year. 3. Any lack of commitment to attractively landscaped areas appears to be based on funding deficiencies, physical site limitations and the potential effect on grounds staffing. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Inventory grounds equipment to ensure that the latest and most modern equipment is available to care for landscaping at its two high school campuses as funding becomes available. 2. Consider developing a plan to continue improving the landscaping at district facilities while taking into account the lack of grounds staff. 3. Conduct an inventory/assessment to determine the actual landscaping conditions at individual district sites. 4. Develop standards for desired landscaping. 5. Measure the findings of the inventory/assessment in recommendation 3 against the standards developed in recommendation 4 to determine needs and deficiencies. 652 Facilities Management 6. Develop a broad range of potential funding sources to help implement a district landscaping plan. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 653 8.1 Community Use of Facilities Legal Standard The LEA follows state regulations by establishing terms and conditions for community organizations’ use of school facilities, including the requirement to establish direct cost and fair market rental rates and to specify which groups have which priorities and fee schedules, in accordance with Civic Center Act. (EC 38130-31839) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. District use of facilities form 4. Board policy Findings 1. The district’s facilities form did not indicate current costs or charge appropriate fees for facility use. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Re-evaluate rates periodically to ensure that the facilities use form accurately indicates the costs of custodial services, utilities and other services, thus avoiding a cycle of encroachments followed by large increases. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: 654 Facilities Management 8.2 Community Use of Facilities Professional Standard The LEA has a plan to promote community involvement in schools. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. Interview with former superintendent 4. Interview with state administrator 5. Interviews with school site administrators 6. Board policy Findings 1. The district has no plan to promote community involvement in schools. 2. Members of the community use the district’s facilities extensively. 3. The facilities use form is available only in English. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Promote additional community use of its facilities by making efforts to inform all community groups of the availability of district facilities. 2. Make information available in Spanish. Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 2 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 655 8.3 Community Use of Facilities Professional Standard The LEA maintains comprehensive accounting records and controls when implementing the Civic Center Act. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with classified management 3. District records 4. Board policy 5. Internal accounting records 6. District facility use permit Findings 1. The district maintains some records and controls for implementing the Civic Center Act. 2. Payments are made at school sites and carried to the business office daily. 3. Site-by-site records are maintained of each facility use permit. 4. Each site maintains a master calendar for facilities use. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue to maintain activity logs to provide an adequate transaction history and to project use rates and demand for particular facilities. 2. Ensure that the business office develops a written procedure for the receipt and accounting for all cash transactions from the time cash is received until it is deposited in the county treasury. 3. Develop a systemic process for facility use requests that includes clear communication among the district office, school sites and the director of MOT. Delineate the responsibilities of each department and individual in the process. 4. Incorporate master calendar information for each site into a computer-accessible master calendar so the information is available districtwide. 656 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 3 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 657 9.1 Communication Professional Standard The LEA fully apprises students, staff and community of the condition of its facilities and its plans to remedy any substandard conditions. The LEA provides access to its facilities staff, standards and plans. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Interview with former superintendent 4. Interview with state administrator 5. Board policy 6. District Web site 7. Interviews with local media Findings 1. The annual Williams Act report to the board is the only communication the district has with the students, staff, and community regarding the condition of its facilities and its plans to remedy any substandard conditions. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Establish a public relations program that includes internal and external district newsletters, press releases and regularly scheduled public forums. The communications should be in both English and Spanish, and Spanish translation should be provided at the public forums. Efforts to inform the public will be beneficial should the district determine to place a general obligation bond on the ballot in the future. 2. Use board meetings to review quarterly facility inspection reports and discuss the need to modernize King City High School facilities and upgrade facilities at Greenfield High School. 658 Facilities Management Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 659 10.1 Charter Schools Legal Standard The LEA meets the audit and reporting requirements of Proposition 39 as it relates to charter schools. (EC 47614; CCR Title 5, Sections 11969.1-11969.10) Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with chief business official 2. Interview with former superintendent 3. Interview with state administrator Findings 1. The district has no charter schools Recommendations for Recovery None Standard Implemented: Not Applicable February 2010 Rating: Not Applicable 660 Facilities Management 11.1 Redevelopment Agency Legal Standard The LEA accounts for redevelopment agency funds as required by regulations. (HSC 33401, 33676, 33607.5, 33607.7; EC 2558, 42238, 84751) Sources and Documentation 1. Greenfield redevelopment agency (RDA) agreement 2. Interview with chief business official 3. Board policy Findings 1. There is an RDA plan in effect in the city of Greenfield. 2. The district has received RDA funds and has accounted for them properly. 3. The Monterey County auditor has incorrectly calculated the amount and type of RDA funds the district should have received. 4. The district is in the process of investigating and recovering the correct amount of funding 5. The district has received an invoice from the California Department of Education (CDE) for RDA funding it reportedly received and has contracted with an outside consultant to contest the invoice. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Continue using an outside consultant in its efforts to determine the accuracy and appropriateness of all revenues received from the Monterey County Auditor’s Office. 2. Once the accuracy of the records is determined, continue to pursue the appropriateness of the CDE’s claim for a return of funds received. Facilities Management 661 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 5 Implementation Scale: 662 Facilities Management 12.1 Policies and Regulations Professional Standard The Governing Board has adopted, and keeps current, policies and regulations regarding its facilities. Sources and Documentation 1. Board policy Findings 1. The board policies pertaining to facilities have not been updated since 1997. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Ensure that the board updates all board policies pertaining to facilities to reflect current laws and regulations. Standard Implemented: Not Implemented February 2010 Rating: 0 Implementation Scale: Facilities Management 663 13.1 Maintenance and Operations Fiscal Controls Professional Standard The LEA controls the use of facilities and charges fees for usage in accordance with LEA policy. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Board policies and administrative regulations 3. District facility use permit 4. District facility master schedule 5. Invoice process and accounting records Findings 1. The district recently revised its facilities use form to include current costs and charge appropriate fees for facilities use. Recommendations for Recovery None. Standard Implemented: Fully February 2010 Rating: 10 Implementation Scale: 664 Facilities Management 13.2 Maintenance and Operations Fiscal Controls Professional Standard The Maintenance and Operations departments follow standard LEA purchasing protocols. Open purchase orders may be used if controlled by limiting the employees authorized to make the purchase and the amount. Sources and Documentation 1. Interview with classified management 2. Site visits and observations 3. Interviews with administrative staff 4. Purchase orders and invoices Findings 1. The MOT department does not have standard practices or procedures for procuring tools, equipment and materials. 2. The maintenance department regularly uses open purchase orders for parts and materials, in conjunction with work order requests or operational requirements. 3. All open purchase orders are submitted and approved on the consent agenda at regularly scheduled board meetings. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Develop standard policies and procedures for procuring tools, materials and equipment, and clearly communicate them to all departments. 2. Organize the MOT department’s purchasing record files by vendor and fiscal year. 3. Update the board policy regarding purchasing using open purchase orders to include maximum dollar amounts, capital equipment transactions and signature authorization requirements. Facilities Management 665 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 666 Facilities Management 13.3 Maintenance and Operations Fiscal Controls Professional Standard Materials and equipment/tools inventory is safeguarded from loss through appropriate physical and accounting controls. Sources and Documentation 1. Board policy 2. Interview with classified management 3. Site visits and observations 4. Interviews with administrative staff Findings 1. The maintenance department does not use any tracking system for tools assigned to various employees. 2. The district has no equipment inventory. 3. The district’s fixed asset inventory has not been updated. 4. Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement 34 requires the district to maintain complete and current fixed asset records for accounting purposes. The district implemented fixed accounting in the 2001-02 fiscal year but has failed to properly maintain records of additions and deletions. Recommendations for Recovery The district should: 1. Conduct a complete inventory of equipment and tools. 2. Assign tools and equipment to specific individuals whenever possible, and/or develop a check-out system for equipment and tool use. The maintenance department should automate its process for tracking and monitoring all power and hand tools that are either checked out or located permanently on district vehicles. 3. Update the fixed asset inventory procedures and reporting time lines, and distribute them to all departments. Facilities Management 667 Standard Implemented: Partially February 2010 Rating: 1 Implementation Scale: 668 Facilities Management Table of Facilities Management Ratings Facilities Management 669 670 Facilities Management February Facilities Management Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY The LEA has adopted policies and regulations and implemented written plans describing procedures to be followed in case of emergency, in accordance with 1.1 2 required regulations. All school administrators are conversant with these policies and procedures. (EC 32001-32290, 35295-35297, 46390-46392, 49505; GC 3100, 8607; CCR Title 5, Section 550, Section 560; Title 8, Section 3220; Title 19, Section 2400) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY 1.2 The LEA includes all legally required security devices in new and modernized 4 buildings. (EC 32020, 35294.12-35294.13) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY The LEA has developed a comprehensive safety plan that includes adequate 1.3 4 measures to protect people and property. (EC 32020, 32211, 32228-32228.5, 35294.10-35294.15) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY The LEA ensures that all employees who have access and/or authorization to use chemical compounds are regularly informed of restrictions on the storage and 1.4 4 disposal of chemical compounds, hazardous substances, and flammable or toxic materials. (EC 49341, 49401.5, 49411; F&AC 12981; H&SC 25163, 25500-25532; LC 6360-6363; CCR Title 8, Section 5194) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY Each elementary, intermediate and secondary school sounds the fire alarm signal 1.5 every calendar month. Each elementary and intermediate school conducts a fire drill 10 at least once every calendar month. Each secondary school conducts a fire drill at least twice each school year. (CCR Title 5, Section 550) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY 1.6 The Governing Board, upon receiving a building examination report, prioritizes 0 repairs to ensure that buildings meet health and safety requirements. (EC 17367) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY Each school that is entirely enclosed by a fence or wall has an access gate of 1.7 3 sufficient size to permit emergency vehicles to enter. Locking devices are designed to permit ready entrance. (EC 32020) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY 1.8 School premises are sanitary, neat, clean and free from conditions that would create 3 a fire or life hazard. (CCR Title 5, Section 630) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY 1.9 The LEA complies with Injury and Illness Prevention Program requirements. (CCR 0 Title 8, Section 3203) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY 1.10 Each building has fire extinguishers as required, and current inspection information 5 is available. (CCR Title 8, Section 1922) Facilities Management 671 February Facilities Management Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY 1.11 Requirements pertaining to underground storage tanks are followed. (H&SC 25280- N/A 25299.8; CCR Title 23, Section 2620) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY All required asbestos inspections are complete, and work is performed by Asbestos 1.12 3 Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA)-accredited individuals. (EC 49410- 49410.7; 40 CFR Part 763) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY 1.13 All playground equipment meets safety code regulations and is inspected regularly 3 to ensure students’ safety. (H&SC 115725-115775; PRC 5411) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY 1.14 The LEA has safe work practices with regard to boiler and fired pressure vessels. N/A (CCR Title 8, Section 782) LEGAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY 1.15 The LEA maintains updated Material Safety Data Sheets for all required products. 1 (LC 6360-6363; CCR Title 8, Section 5194) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY The LEA has a documented process for issuing and retrieving master and sub- 1.16 2 master keys. All administrators follow a standard organizationwide process for issuing keys to and retrieving keys from employees. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY Bus loading and unloading areas, delivery areas, parking areas and parent loading/ 1.17 5 unloading areas are monitored regularly to ensure the safety of students, staff and members of the community. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY Outside lighting is properly placed and is monitored periodically to ensure that it 1.18 1 functions and is adequate to ensure safety during evening activities for students, staff and the public. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY 1.19 The LEA has a graffiti and vandalism abatement plan and sufficient resources to 5 support it. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY The LEA maintains a comprehensive employee safety program. Employees are 1.20 0 made aware of the LEA’s safety program, and the LEA provides in-service training to employees on the program’s requirements. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – SCHOOL SAFETY 1.21 2 The LEA conducts periodic first aid training for employees assigned to school sites. 672 Facilities Management February Facilities Management Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING The LEA has standards for real property acquisition and disposal. The LEA complies 2.1 3 with California Department of Education (CDE) recommendations regarding school site size. (EC 17230-17234, 17251-17251.5) LEGAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING 2.2 The LEA seeks and obtains waivers from the State Allocation Board for continued 0 use of any nonconforming facilities. (EC 17284-17284.5) LEGAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING 2.3 The LEA has established and uses a selection process to choose licensed 1 architectural/engineering services. (GC 4525-4526) LEGAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING 2.4 The LEA collects statutory fees on construction within its boundaries. (EC 17620; 4 GC 65995, 66000) LEGAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING If the LEA has passed a general obligation bond measure under Proposition 39, 2.5 N/A it has created a citizens’ oversight committee to ensure the appropriateness of expenditures related to that bond measure. (EC 15278-15282) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING 2.6 The LEA has a long-range school facilities master plan that that has been updated in 0 the last two years and includes an annual capital planning budget. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING The LEA seeks state and local funds. The LEA has pursued state funding for joint- 2.7 0 use projects by filing applications with the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) and the State Allocation Board. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING 2.8 0 The LEA has a facility planning committee. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING 2.9 0 The LEA has a properly staffed and funded facility planning department. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING 2.10 4 The LEA has developed an asset management plan. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITY PLANNING 2.11 The LEA has established and uses an organized method of prioritizing and 4 scheduling projects and distributes facility funding to all LEA facilities equitably. LEGAL STANDARD – FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT AND MODERNIZATION 3.1 1 The LEA maintains a plan for maintaining and modernizing its facilities. (EC 17366) Facilities Management 673 February Facilities Management Standards 2010 Rating LEGAL STANDARD – FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT AND MODERNIZATION The LEA obtains approval of plans and specifications from the Division of the State 3.2 10 Architect, and from the Office of Public School Construction when required, before awarding a contract to the lowest responsible bidder. (EC 17263, 17267) LEGAL STANDARD – FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT AND MODERNIZATION 3.3 0 All relocatable buildings in use meet statutory requirements. (EC 17292) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT AND MODERNIZATION 3.4 The LEA has a restricted deferred maintenance fund, from which funds are 5 expended for maintenance only. The LEA annually transfers the required state matching funds. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT AND MODERNIZATION 3.5 The LEA has pursued state funding for all applicable projects and consistently 5 reviews and monitors its eligibility to maximize state funding opportunities through the Office of Public School Construction. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT AND MODERNIZATION 3.6 N/A The LEA establishes and implements interim housing plans for use during the construction phase of modernization projects and/or additions to existing facilities. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT AND MODERNIZATION 3.7 3 The LEA has established and maintains a system for tracking the progress of individual projects. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT AND MODERNIZATION 3.8 0 The LEA routinely includes technology infrastructure, furniture and equipment needs in the scope of modernization projects. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT AND MODERNIZATION 3.9 5 The LEA manages and annually reviews its five-year deferred maintenance plan and verifies that expenditures made during the year are included in the plan. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES IMPROVEMENT AND MODERNIZATION 3.10 0 The LEA’s staff are knowledgeable about procedures in the Office of Public School Construction and the Division of the State Architect. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – CONSTRUCTION OF PROJECTS 4.1 The LEA maintains a staffing structure that is adequate to ensure the effective 0 management of its construction projects. 674 Facilities Management February Facilities Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – CONSTRUCTION OF PROJECTS 4.2 2 The LEA maintains appropriate project records and drawings. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – CONSTRUCTION OF PROJECTS 4.3 5 Each Inspector of Record assignment is approved by the Division of State Architect. LEGAL STANDARD – COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC CONTRACTING LAWS AND PROCEDURES 5.1 The LEA complies with requirements for formal bidding procedures and has a 3 procedure for requests for quotes/proposals. (GC 54201-54205; PCC 20110- 20118.4) LEGAL STANDARD – COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC CONTRACTING LAWS AND PROCEDURES 5.2 0 Change orders are processed and receive approval from authorized personnel before they are implemented. (PCC 20118.4) LEGAL STANDARD – FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS The LEA is in compliance with requirement of the Williams case settlement. The Governing Board provides clean and operable flush toilets for students’ use; toilet 6.1 5 facilities are adequate and maintained. All buildings and grounds are maintained. (EC 17576, 17592.70-17592.73, 35186; CCR Title 5, Section 631, Section 4683, Section 14030) LEGAL STANDARD – FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS 6.2 The LEA has established the required account for ongoing and major maintenance. 8 (EC 17014, 17070.75) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS The LEA uses and maintains a system to track utility costs and consumption and to 6.3 2 report on the success of its energy program, reducing the cost of utilities. An energy analysis has been completed for each site. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS To safeguard items from loss, the LEA keeps adequate maintenance records and reports, including a complete inventory of supplies, materials, tools and equipment. 6.4 1 All employees who are required to perform custodial, maintenance or grounds work on LEA sites are provided with adequate supplies, equipment and training to perform maintenance tasks in a timely and professional manner. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS 6.5 Procedures are in place for evaluating the quality of the work performed by 0 maintenance and operations staff, and evaluations are completed regularly. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS The LEA has identified major areas of custodial and maintenance responsibility and 6.6 2 specific jobs to be performed. Written job descriptions for custodial and maintenance positions delineate the major areas of responsibility for each position Facilities Management 675 February Facilities Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS 6.7 The LEA has an effective written preventive maintenance plan that is scheduled and 0 followed by the maintenance staff and that includes verification of work completed. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS The LEA has planned and implemented a maintenance program that includes 6.8 an inventory of all facilities and equipment that will require maintenance and 0 replacement. Data should include estimated life expectancies, replacement time lines and the financial resources needed to maintain the facilities. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS The LEA has a documented process for prioritizing and assigning routine repair 6.9 2 work orders. The LEA has a work order system that tracks all maintenance requests, the employee assigned, dates of completion, labor hours and the cost of materials. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – FACILITIES MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS 6.10 LEA-owned vehicles are used only for LEA purposes. Fuel is inventoried and its use 5 is monitored. LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM ISSUES The Governing Board provides a warm, healthful place where children who bring 7.1 5 their own lunches to school may eat their lunch. (EC 17573; CCR Title 5, Section 14030) LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM ISSUES 7.2 The LEA has developed and maintains a plan to ensure the equality and equity of all 0 of its school site facilities. (EC 35293) LEGAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM ISSUES 7.3 10 Classrooms are free of interruptions and other barriers to instruction. (EC 32212) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAM ISSUES 7.4 The LEA’s grounds are appropriately landscaped and maintained to enhance an 5 educational environment. LEGAL STANDARD – COMMUNITY USE OF FACILITIES The LEA follows state regulations by establishing terms and conditions for community organizations’ use of school facilities, including the requirement to 8.1 2 establish direct cost and fair market rental rates and to specify which groups have which priorities and fee schedules, in accordance with Civic Center Act. (EC 38130- 31839) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNITY USE OF FACILITIES 8.2 2 The LEA has a plan to promote community involvement in schools. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNITY USE OF FACILITIES 8.3 The LEA maintains comprehensive accounting records and controls when 3 implementing the Civic Center Act. 676 Facilities Management February Facilities Management Standards 2010 Rating PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – COMMUNICATION The LEA fully apprises students, staff and community of the condition of its facilities 9.1 0 and its plans to remedy any substandard conditions. The LEA provides access to its facilities staff, standards and plans. LEGAL STANDARD – CHARTER SCHOOLS 10.1 The LEA meets the audit and reporting requirements of Proposition 39 as it relates N/A to charter schools. (EC 47614; CCR Title 5, Sections 11969.1-11969.10) LEGAL STANDARD – REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 11.1 The LEA accounts for redevelopment agency funds as required by regulations. (HSC 5 33401, 33676, 33607.5, 33607.7; EC 2558, 42238, 84751) PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – POLICIES AND REGULATIONS 12.1 The Governing Board has adopted, and keeps current, policies and regulations 0 regarding its facilities. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS FISCAL CONTROLS 13.1 10 The LEA controls the use of facilities and charges fees for usage in accordance with LEA policy. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS FISCAL CONTROLS 13.2 The Maintenance and Operations departments follow standard LEA purchasing 1 protocols. Open purchase orders may be used if controlled by limiting the employees authorized to make the purchase and the amount. PROFESSIONAL STANDARD – MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS FISCAL CONTROLS 13.3 1 Materials and equipment/tools inventory is safeguarded from loss through appropriate physical and accounting controls. Collective Average Rating 2.74 Facilities Management 677 678 Facilities Management