“Launch” might be the start of a new school year or the unveiling of a new initiative, but it’s all about moving forward. “Close” might be a leadership transition or a celebration of outstanding achievement results, but it’s about reflection and learning.

“Reset” has a bit of both. It raises the question: “We know what to do, but are we actually doing it?” This is the perfect time of year to reset.

More from DA: Districts charge into 2024 with a diverse group of new leaders

At midyear, principals, and principal supervisors can step back to check on systems, culture, instruction and people. What do student attendance and discipline data look like? Which students need intervention? Which teachers need to improve their Tier 1 instruction? Are teacher evaluations on track? How are unfilled teaching positions harming student equity? Where has leadership attention slipped away from PLCs? Is each school optimizing its spending?

It’s worth taking time as a district team to create reflection prompts for principals, establish a process for reporting back, and then discuss what needs to be improved between the district and schools for the rest of the year.

District-level reset is more strategic. It requires:

• A focus on the future
• Sustained attention to strategic priorities
• Distributed leadership

Focus on next year’s outcomes

Begin with a robust discussion of what next year will look like. What will next year look and sound like? What opportunities will present themselves? Who will the “stars” be? What will outcomes look like in June 2025?

This vision of the future is your time horizon. At midyear, a principal’s time horizon is the current year. Superintendents, boards and district leaders are already focused on next year.

Strategic priorities

With that time horizon in mind, identify 3-5 strategic priorities for the next year, not further out than that. Fewer than three and there won’t be enough forward energy; more than five and the energy will be too dispersed and unfocused. The priorities might be in your strategic plan but they are just as likely to come from your state’s new initiatives or board discussion. Conduct a pulse check on the progress of each initiative underway this year, based on the milestones you set earlier in the year.

Have other district leaders prepare brief but rigorous presentations of year-to-date progress for their work:

• Budget and financial projections, including federal and philanthropic funds
• Operational data such as facility, technology, and transportation
• Workforce trends and projections
• Student inputs such as enrollment and attendance
• Student outcomes by subgroup

We’ve provided an example of a tool for this purpose in the adjacent sidebar.

Using that data, with your top leaders map the forces that are moving the district in the direction of your priorities and the forces that may be inhibiting progress. Do this for each priority and then for the set of priorities. Refine the priority statements as needed to reflect these realities.

Distributing leadership

The budget process is detailed, demanding and distracting. Check your capacity. Who on the Board or cabinet will be going through this annual process for the first time? How will you teach them about the process? What support will all members need to move smoothly through debate and decision-making? Who has the best access to key stakeholders? What is the best timing for each step in the process and how can you avoid getting bogged down?

Assign clear roles and responsibilities to cabinet members and other key leaders. Have them identify data sources, create timelines, and design streamlined processes that enhance cross-team work and reduce the burden on principals. Consolidate this information into a coherent and transparent plan for planning FY25: calendars, specific meetings, stakeholder engagement and transparent processes. While the board will be the final approver of the district budget, various other leaders will be responsible for key decisions along the way. Name those decisions and those leaders as part of this process.

Name the reset

Be explicit about the reset. In all your messaging, talk about next year’s priorities. Celebrate this year’s successes and challenges. Acknowledge resource constraints beyond your direct control, such as the loss of ESSER funds, reduced state funding, hiring challenges, smaller student enrollment, and so on. Use stories to get your points across.

All stakeholders—staff members, family, students, community members, local and state policymakers, and potential applicants—should be able to find the planning, budgeting, and staffing processes easily online and in hard copy.

As the process advances, extend your stories into scenarios: clear If-Then statements. Balance aspiration with reality. Keep the Board and internal leaders on message by returning to the priorities, the specific choices to be made, and the need for contingencies. Clear communication starting now, at midyear, is the key to success.

The post Have you tried restarting? Now is the ideal time to think about what next year will look like appeared first on District Administration.

The final fiscal year of ESSER invites us to do this by crafting a compelling vision for well-resourced schools with improved efficiencies. There are some predictable trends in this invitation to adjust, based on our results and the system’s response to the influx of these resources.

More often than not when the K12 system receives additional funding, it responds by spending that money on labor: new positions, new support roles, and increased compensation (including, as we saw, retention bonuses). We see this investment show up across school district strategic plans.

In 2023, we conducted a national scan of large urban school districts and found labor initiatives as second only to instructional interventions in over 80% of these plans. As pressure increases, districts also put funds into “promising practices” or innovative approaches intended to make things easier or improve performance.

During the pandemic, these practices included facility upgrades, new technologies, social and emotional learning activities, and high-quality instructional materials. Each of these expenditures needs to be tested using the Learning on Investment (LOI) measure.

Budget season to-do list

We offer these suggestions, based on our work with dozens of states and school systems:

1. Map wins. Rigorously assess the LOI of each ESSER expenditure. In most districts, these include new interventionist positions, enhanced after-school and summer school offerings, increased student support, and the scaling of instructional technology. Find sustainable funds for those with a high LOI and “strategically abandon” those with low LOI. As strong innovative practices get institutionalized (e.g., the science of reading; instructional technology), intentionally reduce the high initial costs of innovation and launch such as training and equipment purchases.
2. Go lean. Step back and take a hard look at ongoing – and often redundant – costs you’ve built into your budget as various assessment and information systems have been adopted. Just as cable and cellphone plans take up an increasing percentage of our household budgets, these annual costs often receive too little scrutiny in district budgeting. (Note: These redundancies create other ‘costs.’ For example, duplicative assessment and reporting practices take time away from student learning and burden staff.) These cost savings can fund some of the high-LOI activities originally funded through ESSER.
3. Rethink walls. No doubt the hardest and longest conversations will be about the size of your educator workforce. Nearly every district and school has unfilled teacher and paraprofessional positions. Even with grow-your-own approaches and increased state flexibility, it is unlikely that our current educator workforce is sustainable at the national, state, local and school levels. Right-sizing the workforce is likely to consume the remainder of most superintendents’ careers and the loss of ESSER is an important trigger. Solutions will likely include adopting innovative instructional and staffing models that ensure that all students are taught by expert teachers, reducing course/program offerings in secondary grades, increasing class sizes and closing schools.
4. Listen. Design and routinely use stakeholder engagement activities—not just at the governance level conducting parent engagement, community and business partner meetings, and at the school level—that encourage family engagement to understand the LOI and the trade-offs of budget choices. Routinely report on these activities and how they are informing your strategy.
5. Landscape. Move beyond annual budgeting by using scenario planning to take a “what if” approach. Scenario planning smooths out short-term decision-making and helps stakeholders better understand the trade-offs. The capacity to project student enrollment by subgroup, teacher retention and recruitment by certification, capital needs and fiscal resources by source will be needed, but these will build a system-wide culture of data-driven decision-making.

In the wake of ESSER closeout, the need to improve efficiency will certainly be painful. This is a normal cycle of rebalancing similar to the one many of us experienced when the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act expired. Resilient school systems are those that adapt, innovate and become agile enough to overcome challenges. We think though that this cycle is exacerbated by the acuteness of student learning loss and the growing threat of the teacher shortage. The latter is an opportunity to prepare for another season: hiring. In the coming months, we will spotlight how states and districts are thinking about recruitment and retention in compelling ways and getting results.

Remember the adage, “Never let a good crisis go to waste.” If you oversee resource allocation, now is the time to admire the view from the cliff and find a safe path down to the valley, not step off.

Dr. Dana Godek is a seasoned expert in educational policy, social wellness, and community engagement. Her extensive career encompasses roles as a teacher, public school administrator, national researcher, and leader in federal and state policy. In her current role as the CEO of EduSolve, she applies her wealth of experience tackling intricate educational challenges in collaboration with local communities. Dana is a dedicated policy advisor to the Collaborative for Social and Emotional Learning and serves as a Data Currency Advisor to Credential Engine. She has contributed her expertise as a board member of the National Association for Federal and State Program Administrators and is a sought-after keynote speaker on matters related to federal investment in public education. Dana holds a doctorate in organizational leadership with a specialization in public policy and is a certified fundraising executive.

Michael Moore has been a national leadership and organizational development consultant and executive coach for 20 years, following a successful career as a high school principal and Superintendent of Schools. He works in school districts with ‘Directors and above’ to prioritize strategy, manage change, and build organizational capacity. As an expert in principal supervision and development, Michael co-designs culturally responsive, job-embedded leadership pathways and support models. As an expert in talent strategy and team building, he coaches executives and their teams across a wide range of organizations. Michael is a partner at the Urban Schools Human Capital Academy and works frequently with the Partnership for Leaders in Education at the UVA Darden School of Business.

The post ‘Tis the season to reflect on better budgeting appeared first on District Administration.

As we travel the country, we’ve been increasingly worried that superintendents and boards are waiting too long to confront the upcoming fiscal cliff. The reporting season is here, as the U.S. Department of Education just released financial reporting dates as early as March 2024 for all states.

Chief financial officers and Grants Administration leaders have been patching budgets with one-time fixes as schools returned from pandemic disruptions. Year-to-year, short-term solutions are not only causing the avoidance of hard decisions about the loss of ESSER funds but, we’d argue, they are also masking deeper, longer-term crises such as declining student enrollment, an educator workforce that is too large to sustain, and instructional offerings that are too diffuse to close learning gaps. It’s like going on a fad diet rather than making the necessary lifestyle changes.

Like getting to a healthy and sustainable weight, you’ll need to adjust both your intake and your level of activity. Communicating a compelling vision of success shared with a wide range of stakeholders will ensure better results, more satisfied families and educators, and predictable fiscal planning.

Measuring investment

ROI is a financial metric used to evaluate the profitability or efficiency of an investment relative to its cost. ROI is measured by dividing a company’s net profit by its initial investment and then multiplying the result by 100 to express the ratio as a percentage. But how to measure learning on investment (LOI)?

An LOI measure divides net student learning gains by the investment needed to generate that gain. This is a versatile process that can be applied to various scenarios, such as evaluating the performance of academic interventions, assessing the effectiveness of training programs, or comparing curricula. It guides decision-makers as they allocate resources effectively and informs choices about where to invest time, money and effort. It also identifies initiatives that need to be strategically shed to make room for fresh approaches based on the current needs of students, families and our workforce.

The fundamental challenge of public services

“Public services”— road maintenance, public safety and K12 education, for example—don’t have a “profit motive.” That absence makes it challenging but not impossible to measure the effectiveness of a public service. Historically, a particular public service will expand in scale or scope in response to political pressure and will be reduced or constrained when resources (usually tax dollars) are limited.

This push-pull dynamic can be seen as a back-and-forth between resiliency and efficiency. Resiliency in this context is the ability to respond quickly to things that aren’t predictable, such as post-pandemic student learning loss. Efficiency is simply getting the “most bang for the buck” in the most expedient ways.

There’s a negative correlation between resiliency and efficiency: when one goes up, the other goes down. Think of restaurants: they plan for efficiency, but customer volume is unpredictable and some diners want changes to what’s on the menu. School systems are facing similar changes with volume (enrollments) and modifications (requests for new services such as intervention and student well-being). That’s the challenge presented by the fiscal cliff.

ESSER was intended to improve the resiliency of K12 operations, providing for 1:1 technology, increased staffing, facility upgrades, and innovative methods and materials. The narrative of ESSER’s expiration is: “We gave you additional resources to help you through the pandemic and return to school. These resources improved your resiliency but reduced your efficiency. That’s not sustainable. Now we need you to continue moving toward a ‘new normal’ by improving your efficiency and to do that, we need to reduce your resilience.”

This superintendent’s challenge

While CFOs and federal programs directors have done a good job guiding districts through the last three years of budget tailoring, now it’s time for superintendents, cabinet members and board members to take a longer-term, strategic approach to ensure that only the most effective strategies—those with the strongest LOI—are retained as resiliency is drained from the system.

Researchers of corporate governance refer to this as “repositioning the core” of the business. LOI is not as clear-cut as ROI. Superintendents are subjected to more public scrutiny and political pressure than corporate CEOs. As such, it’s important to design a comprehensive decision-making model, maximize appropriate stakeholder engagement, push for data-driven decisions, prioritize equity, and communicate a clear and compelling vision of the future emphasizing the investment, not the reductions.

This will test even the most experienced superintendents. In our next article, we will offer practical, actionable ideas on how to get this done. But, before you stop eating all carbs, push your team to show the data wins for each initiative. It will become very clear quickly: If you can’t put it on a scale, it’s going to derail the weight loss.

Dr. Dana Godek is a seasoned expert in educational policy, social wellness, and community engagement. Her extensive career encompasses roles as a teacher, public school administrator, national researcher, and leader in federal and state policy. In her current role as the CEO of EduSolve, she applies her wealth of experience tackling intricate educational challenges in collaboration with local communities. Dana is a dedicated policy advisor to the Collaborative for Social and Emotional Learning and serves as a Data Currency Advisor to Credential Engine. She has contributed her expertise as a board member of the National Association for Federal and State Program Administrators and is a sought-after keynote speaker on matters related to federal investment in public education. Dana holds a doctorate in organizational leadership with a specialization in public policy and is a certified fundraising executive.

Michael Moore has been a national leadership and organizational development consultant and executive coach for 20 years, following a successful career as a high school principal and Superintendent of Schools. He works in school districts with ‘Directors and above’ to prioritize strategy, manage change, and build organizational capacity. As an expert in principal supervision and development, Michael co-designs culturally responsive, job-embedded leadership pathways and support models. As an expert in talent strategy and team building, he coaches executives and their teams across a wide range of organizations. Michael is a partner at the Urban Schools Human Capital Academy and works frequently with the Partnership for Leaders in Education at the UVA Darden School of Business.

The post End of ESSER: Why short-term fixes could create long-term crises appeared first on District Administration.