M I N U T E S

Select School Finance Committee

 

 

First Interstate Bank Building                                                                                  April 18 and 19, 2005

222 South Gillette Ave                                                                                                 Gillette, Wyoming

 

 

PRESENT:      Senator Hank Coe, CoChairman;

                        Representative Jeff Wasserburger, Cochairman;

Senators John Hines, Kit Jennings, Rae Lynn Job and Phil Nicholas;

Representatives Ross Diercks, Debbie Hammons, Owen Petersen and Lorraine Quarberg.

 

                        Other Legislators In Attendance: Senator Tex Boggs and Chuck Townsend.

                        State's Counsel for School Finance Litigation: Michael O'Donnell and Tania Hytrek;

                        Legislative Service Office: Mary Byrnes and Dave Nelson.

 

                        Others:  See attached Appendix A.

 

*  *  *  *  *

 

Monday, April 18, 2005

 

Senator Hank Coe convened the Select School Finance Committee at 1:10 p.m.  Roll call of member attendance followed.  A copy of the meeting agenda is attached at Appendix B.

 

Senator Hines moved the election of Senator Coe and Representative Wasserburger as Select Committee CoChairmen.  Senator Job seconded the motion and the motion carried.

 

Recalibration Parameters and Timelines.

 

Information on the genesis of recalibration and previous recalibration efforts was provided by Select Committee staff.  Attached at Appendix C is a document summarizing statutory provisions and Supreme Court holdings on the matter.

 

Also noted was a 2004 report provided by the State Board of Education to the Joint Education Interim Committee on the evaluation and review of the uniformity and quality of the statewide educational program as required by statute and the Wyoming Supreme Court.  The report was provided prior to legislation directing recalibration and documents action taken by the State Board to ensure the educational program is proper and appropriate for the times, as required by the Court.  A copy of the letter from the State Board to the Education Committee CoChairs regarding the report is attached at Appendix D.  A copy of the complete report is on file with the Legislative Service Office.

 

Select Committee staff also discussed the scheduling of recalibration activities over the interim, and the sequential completion of necessary tasks to develop recalibration recommendations in sufficient time for delivery to the 2006 Legislature.  Relationships between the identified tasks and components of the scope of work provided within the study contract approved by Management Council were identified.  A copy of the tentative schedule of activities is attached at Appendix E.  A copy of the scope of work attachment to the recalibration contract is on file with the Legislative Service Office.  Representative Hammons suggested opportunity for public input be provided following the August/September completion of model design work, as referenced in the attached tentative schedule of activities.

 

Executive Session.

 

At 1:30 p.m., the Select Committee resolved itself into executive session to discuss school finance litigation matters with Michael O'Donnell, State's Counsel.  At 3:25 p.m., CoChair Coe reconvened the Select Committee in open session.

 

Dr. Lawrence O. Picus and Dr. Allan Odden.

 

Picus and Associates were selected by the Legislature to undertake 2005 model recalibration.  Subsequent to approval by the Management Council, contractual agreement between Picus and Associates and the Legislature was entered into and effectuated as of March 4, 2005.  In accordance with the contractual scope of work, a project work plan was submitted to the Select Committee for review and finalization.  A copy of the work plan working draft is attached at Appendix F.

 

Dr. Picus commenced discussion by presenting the conceptual framework for proposed recalibration efforts.  Step one involves identifying resources necessary to provide the required educational program, followed by costing the identified resources.  From this work, a funding model is developed which generates funding necessary to cover the costs of providing the program, often called the basket of educational goods and services.  A diagram of this fundamental approach is provided within the presentation materials attached at Appendix G.

 

In determining cost, Dr Picus indicated the recommended evidence-based approach augments the professional judgment approach by adding value provided by evidence.  Evidence is generated through various levels of research and through best practices as codified in school design or determined through studies.  The work plan also includes use of professional judgment panels in determining resources necessary to provide the basket.  All components will be used by the consultant in providing cost recommendations to the Select Committee.

 

Following agreement to necessary resources and the determination of cost of identified resources, a model design will be developed.  The design will be presented to the Wyoming education community and public in general through a series of meetings held throughout the state prior to final action by the Select Committee.  In addition to input on model design, it is the hope of consultants to build an understanding of the model, model components and how funding will be distributed under the model.

 

Data needs for the recalibration effort have been discussed with the Department of Education.  March deliberations between the consultants and the department indicated data needs are being addressed by the department through resources provided by the 2005 Legislature.  Data is a large and necessary component of the recalibration process.

 

A proposed project timeline was presented to Select Committee members, which relates to the contract scope of work and is in accord with the schedule presented by Select Committee staff.  A copy of the timeline is contained within attached Appendix G.  The paramount goal is to complete model building in sufficient time for the Select Committee and other legislative Committees to assemble legislative recommendations for consideration in the 2006 Budget Session.  Tentative completion for model building is set for November 30.

 

Recalibration efforts commence with a review of the current model prototypes and the fit of the prototypes to current resource requirements for the delivery of the basket.  Resources within the current prototypes are compared to resource items identified within recalibrated prototypes.  Resource items are developed through state constitutional and court determined requirements, professional judgment, evidence and legislative policy.

 

In response to comments by Senator Nicholas pertaining to enhanced model transparency and the ability of the Legislature to direct district usage of model generated funds under a recalibrated model, Dr. Picus indicated the recalibrated model continues to be based upon the "block grant" approach providing latitude to districts on expenditures.  Although the components of the model will be more transparent, and through enhanced transparency and upgraded data, district expenditures will be more visible in relation to model generated amounts, ultimate expenditure authority will continue to remain with districts.  Performance indicators exist with which to address district accountability.  The recalibration project does not specifically delve into accountability measures, although certain resources provided within recalibrated prototypes will provide districts the financial ability to continue and expand accountability such as professional development, student assessments and similar types of programs.

 

Following discussion of accountability, student performance and existing state-imposed accountability mechanisms through assessment, accreditation and school audits, attention was directed to the comparison of resources within the current model prototypes to resources contained within the proposed recalibrated prototypes, a copy of which is contained within attached Appendix G.  Dr. Picus noted recalibration will attempt to infuse additional formula weight through model prototypes with less weight derived from prototype adjustments.  This is in accordance with legislative directive.  Additionally, recalibration will explicitly identify resources provided within model prototypes for at-risk students and high school vocational education programs and will, to the extent possible, include recommendations for integrating special education costs within base prototypes.

 

Dr. Odden provided explanation of the rationale for and derivation of the personnel resource items enumerated under the recalibrated prototypes.  Teacher resources are disaggregated into core teachers, specialist teachers and instructional facilitators and coaches.  A second category of teacher resources is designated for at-risk students based upon integrated educational strategies for servicing this population.  Strategies include additional staff necessary for tutors, Limited English Speaking programs, extended day programs and summer school programs.

 

In response to Select Committee inquiry, it was noted teacher resource costs or salaries would be based upon labor market analysis.  Further, benefits would be included within the teacher salary/resource cost analysis.  A review of different approaches to addressing teacher seniority, experience and education would also be a part of this analysis.  Any teacher resource recommendations would also require analysis of cost differences between regions within the state.  Continuing, Dr. Odden indicated although it is difficult to include regional compensation comparators in resource analysis primarily due to the issue of cost versus choice, labor market analysis will include a broad regional review of salary and benefits.

 

CoChair Wasserburger responded by stating teacher recruiting and retention concerns require the Legislature conduct a fair comparison between Wyoming salaries and salaries provided by other states.  Dr. Odden suggested the Selected Committee will be provided this information in the labor market review, which will include a review of any teacher shortage areas as presented by the data.  Dr. Picus added this analysis may include teacher supply and demand data available through the University of Wyoming for University graduates.  Senator Nicholas suggested the Select Committee be provided information identifying any problems impacting Wyoming teacher supply and recommendations for addressing identified problems.  On the matter of teacher quality, Dr. Odden indicated currently, much is yet to be determined in linking student performance and teacher quality.  However, data tying teachers to student test performance would provide a start for this analysis.  Senator Job added Wyoming should be capable of attracting quality teachers if compensation is competitive with surrounding states.

 

Recess.

 

At 5:10 p.m., CoChair Coe recessed the Select Committee.

 

Tuesday, April 19, 2005

 

Representative Jeff Wasserburger, Select Committee CoChair, reconvened the Select Committee at 8:30 a.m.

Dr. Picus and Dr. Odden, Continued.

 

Dr. Picus initiated discussion by stating three matters remain on the Select Committee meeting agenda: prototype components, meeting dates and professional judgment panels.  CoChair Wasserburger directed consultants commence by addressing item one, prototype components.

 

Dr. Odden focused attention on recommended recalibrated prototype components referred to as the prototype matrix, a copy of which is attached as part of Appendix G.  Select Committee guidance was requested for several issues involved with prototype design, including:

 

With respect to ADM count, Dr. Odden suggested recalibration maintain the three-year rolling average of ADM to absorb the impact of declining enrollment .  One exception was made, which is to allow use of prior year ADM for any district facing rising enrollment.  General agreement was provided by Select Committee members to pursue this approach for use of ADM within model recalibration.

 

With respect to prototypical school size, Dr. Odden suggested recalibrated prototypes be built upon current sizes until results of research are available which present evidence on ultimate school sizes for small schools.  Discussion focused on school grade configurations and school definitions.  Guidance was requested by consultants on these matters.

 

Senator Job suggested prototypes be based upon existing grade configurations.  Representative Hammons added emphasis be placed upon the unique needs of schools to enable provision of more effective programs for students.  CoChair Coe requested small school needs be reviewed.  Select Committee consensus was for consultants to work with the Department of Education in compiling a list of existing schools and consultants then provide recommendations to the Select Committee for appropriately defining schools. Dr. Picus indicated work will proceed in a rational approach, lending to a cost-based strategy.  In response to Senator Jennings, Dr. Picus clarified the model essentially defines parameters and components of schools, which ultimately serves as a definition.

 

In response to the number of prototypes, CoChair Wasserburger suggested prototypes be developed for each school.  Dr. Odden indicated the proposed recalibrated prototypes will be school based, thereby enabling the identification of resources generated under the model for each school within a district.  The model spreadsheet will begin at the school level and build forward from that point, adding adjustments as necessary.  Suggested model prototype size expansion was grouped into three levels:

In response to Senator Job, Dr. Odden suggested current class sizes be maintained in recalibration of model prototypes.  A definition of school will provide a basis for development of rules on application of prototypes.  Size issues can be separately addressed through school and district-level adjustments.

 

Discussion focused on inclusion of full-day kindergarten programs within the recalibrated prototypes.  General Select Committee consensus was to allow modeling of full-day kindergarten programs, but not to mandate district provision of full-day kindergarten programs.  CoChair Coe reminded Select Committee members of the significant funding implications of this addition, to which CoChair Wasserburger added the ramifications for school facilities.

 

Dr. Odden cautioned that early Select Committee guidance is not binding, it serves to initiate work only.  Subsequent revision is likely.

 

Following a break, CoChair Wasserburger requested scheduling of future Select Committee meetings.  The following dates and locations were determined:

 

Professional Judgment Panel Organization.

 

Dr. Picus indicated professional judgment panels are used in determining the resources necessary to provide the statewide educational program.  Panel composition involves school leaders (superintendents, principals, curriculum directors, business managers) and teachers, all from a broad spectrum, representative of small and large, rich and poor districts, and also representative of successful schools or exemplary practices involved with moving schools forward in some manner.  Two panels of approximately thirty-five participants will be held in each of three locations throughout the state.  Each panel will meet from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. on one of three designated dates:  June 7, 8 and 9, 2005.  Dr. Picus requested Select Committee members do not attend these discussions, and that attorneys involved with school finance litigation also not attend, as the absence of these parties generally allows for more open discussion.

 

Select Committee guidance on establishing professional judgment panels included contacting each district and state education organizations for participant nominations, conditioned on a requirement that at least 50% of district nominees include teachers, and that organization nominees include practitioners only and not organization staff.  Each district is to be requested to commit at least two full time participants, to be scaled upward based upon district enrollment.  In accordance with consultants' recommendations, total numbers of panel participants is to be capped at 200-215.  Select Committee members are to be provided an opportunity to review the list of selected panel participants and may add additional participants as appropriate.  Panel locations are to include Douglas, Thermopolis and Rock Springs.

 

LSO is to serve as the nominee clearinghouse, with consultants allowed to review and select participants.  Nominations are to include contact information, position and reasons for nomination.  Professional judgment panel discussion on prototypical resources will be presented to Select Committee members, together with consultant recommendations.

 

Directing discussion back to recalibration components, Dr. Odden indicated initial analysis extends teacher contract days by five.  This primarily allows for increased professional development opportunities.  Overall, Dr. Odden indicated proposed teacher numbers will approximate existing prototypical levels, perhaps slightly more. Discussion continued on recalibration, personnel components and measures of recalibration.

 

In response to Select Committee inquiry, Dr. Odden indicated much data exists in Wyoming on at-risk students.  The consensus is to continue use of the unduplicated count of limited English speaking and free and reduced lunch students, augmented by the high school mobility count.  This mechanism is supported by research.  Resource components within the recalibrated prototypes for at-risk programs will be clearly identified however.

 

Dr. Picus, responding to concerns of Senator Jennings with district understanding of redesigned prototypes and subsequent expenditures of block grant dollars, suggested districts generally determine their path for delivery of educational programs.  However, the recalibrated prototypes place incentives on identified resources necessary to provide the educational program successfully.  Representative Hammons added schools eventually tend to assimilate prototypes over time.

 

Dr. Picus concluded discussion by stating the proposed prototype design report will be submitted to Select Committee members prior to the May meeting.

 

Adjournment.

 

There being no further business, CoChair Wasserburger adjourned the Select Committee at 12:00 noon.

 

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

 

 

 

__________________________________    _________________________________

Senator Hank Coe,                                            Representative Jeff Wasserburger,

Select Committee CoChair                                 Select Committee CoChair

[Top] [Back] [Home]