On October 9 I posted a blog with my view on consolidating school districts in DE. This week, State Auditor Thomas Wagner released a report suggesting that consolidating the 16 regular districts into 3 would save more than $45 million in "administrative costs."
The report suggests that Lake Forest would become part of a Central District that would stretch 45 miles from Milford to Middletown, a district I would estimate at around 35,000 students. The folks who put the numbers together for this report used actual school districts elsewhere in the country for comparison. I understand that Norfolk City Schools and Pittsburgh City Schools were two that were viewed as comparable to the Central School District.
Most people think of positions like mine that will be eliminated in consolidation. Going from 6 superintendents down to one is obviously a big savings. But after that, the report has some funny numbers. So funny, that it begins to lack credibility.
What they call "administrative costs" includes more than the professional leadership team. It also includes clerks, secretaries, cafeteria supervisors and maintenance staff. He're a few examples:
There are presently 19 clerks employed from Milford to Appoquinimink. The auditor's report suggests we would need no clerks when we consolidate into one.
There are presently 72 secretaries employed from Milford to Appoquinimink. The auditor's office suggests we would need only two.
There are presently 48 financial secretaries (processing purchases and payroll). The auditor's office suggests we would need only two.
OK. So, my understanding of this report suggests we'll close the central offices of Milford, Lake Forest, CR, Capitol, Smyrna and Appoquinimink and open a new one somewhere to support and serve 35,000 students, 2500+ teachers and 1500+ support staff. That central office will have 2 secretaries and 2 financial secretaries.
I don't mind Mr. Wagner suggesting that we could reduce superintendents when combining school districts. It is common to think that there are too many at the upper end of the pay scale. But, I've got to draw the line and call him out when he starts picking on the secretaries. This report makes no sense. There is no way an operation that big functions with 4 secretaries total.
Makes it hard to take the report seriously.
I refer you to the October 9 writing in this blog for more thoughts on consolidation. No doubt, some regional cooperation will help reduce administrative costs, but the auditor's plan is just numbers. And most of the numbers just don't add up.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Dr. Curry,
Last night, I was reading something about the whole consolidation idea on-line and there was a link that took me to this page, http://www.doe.k12.de.us/reports_data/lead.shtml, and the data gathered and put together by The Boston Consulting Group for the LEAD Committee. I do not feel that consolidating districts is the best answer for our state, communities or schools. I was interested though in some of the ideas they had for shared services that would still keep our school districts ours and also save some money. Some of the ideas they presented just seem to make sense to me such as the bidding and purchasing of technology and instructional supplies, and purchases of buses. Quite frankly, there is more, but too much too mention from a 195 page document. I was wondering about your thoughts on this.
I also recall reading somewhere in their report that consolidation or sharing services should be implemented over a three to five year period. Yet this certainly does not sound like what the state is planning at this time or am I incorrect in this?
You are right about that. We have provided the Dept of Ed a list of tasks that we think might work well from a regional office. The problem is the state needs start up money to open a regional operation before any savings would be realized. We do joint purchasing and buy from state bid lists. I think we could also explore sharing positions between districts, like hiring a physical therapist to work for LF and Woodbridge.
From what I understand, in spite of the auditors report, there doesn't appear to be any big push for consolidation from the Governor or Legislature.
I understand the point that districts may be 'top-heavy,' but education is a local issue and decisions need to stay at the local level. I envision a typical day in school when a student informs me there is no toilet paper in the bathroom, and my response would be: "I'll notify the central office and some will be sent over in the next supply run - 30 days from now!" Another point to ask - will the money saved be distributed to improve teacher pay so as to equal the private sector of those with bachelor's degrees and master's?
What the state would be saving in money is what students will be loosing in their education. Besides, the savings that the state expects could be lower, and it definitely would not be immediate. I don't think this would be the right move for the students. Besides what would happen to sports? only playing 2 other districts and a couple of private schools/ and polytech?
Post a Comment