044636-3 Human Resources - parmacityschools.org City School District Performance Audit Human Resources 3-1 Human Resources Background Organizational Chart The following section summarizes

Parma City School District Performance Audit

Human Resources 3-1

Human Resources

Background

Organizational Chart

The following section summarizes the performance review of Parma City School District’s (PCSD)human resources and the operations of the human resources department (HRD). For purposes of theperformance audit, the personnel responsible for benefits administration are considered a part of theHRD although they are under the supervision of the treasurer’s office.

• The chart below provides an overview of the HRD’s organizational structure and staffinglevels.

Human Resources Department

Organization Function


Human Resources 3-2

The human resources department (HRD) and the business manager are responsible for coordinatingthe activities and programs for the recruitment and selection of employees, administering benefits,monitoring compliance with employment standards (criminal record background check and teachercertification requirements), facilitating employee performance evaluations, administering andmonitoring the district’s grievance policies and procedures, conducting disciplinary hearings,negotiating and administering labor contracts, maintaining job descriptions, maintaining employees’personnel files and placing substitute teachers and selected substitute classified employees.

Summary of Operations

All Parma City School District (PCSD) employees are categorized as either certificated or classifiedstaff. Certificated staff includes principals, teachers, counselors, therapists, librarians andpsychologists. Classified staff includes educational assistants, secretaries, maintenance andcustodial employees, bus drivers, food service employees and other miscellaneous employees.

The assistant superintendent of human resources reports to the superintendent and manages all ofthe department’s primary functions for certificated personnel. These functions include but are notlimited to negotiating and administering the Parma Education Association’s (PEA) union contract,recruiting and hiring certificated employees, administering personnel policies, preparing andmaintaining certificated job descriptions, ensuring timely completion of certificated evaluations andmanaging the teacher transfer process.

The business manager reports to the superintendent and spends approximately 30 percent of his timeperforming human resources functions for classified employees. These functions include negotiatingand administering the Ohio Association of Public School Employees (OAPSE) union agreement,preparing and maintaining job descriptions, hiring classified employees, ensuring timely completionof evaluations, and managing the classified employee transfer process.

Currently benefits administration is a responsibility of an account clerk reporting directly to thetreasurer. However, the related responsibilities are included in the human resources section forconsistency and comparative purposes among the peer districts.

Staffing


Human Resources 3-3

Table 3-1 represents current HRD staffing for PCSD.

Table 3-1: Human Resources StaffingPosition # Staff # of FTEs

Assistant Superintendent, Human ResourcesBusiness ManagerAccount Clerk (Benefits)Certificated SupervisorClassified SupervisorExecutive SecretaryClerk

1111113

0.90.31.01.01.01.03.0

Total 9 8.2 Source: HRD

Financial Data

Table 3-2 presents the HRD’s actual expenditures for FY 1996-97 and FY 1997-98 and the budget


Human Resources 3-4

for FY 1998-99.

Table 3-2: Budget - Human Resources Department

Appropriation AccountActual1996-97

Actual1997-98

Budgeted1998-99

Salaries1 $296,961 $284,488 $306,233

Fringe Benefits1 83,216 76,286 82,549

Purchased Services N/A 3,408 0

Materials and Supplies N/A 497 3,560

Equipment N/A 2,684 1,000

Substitute Teachers N/A 1,256,264 1,304,675

Total $380,177 $1,623,627 $1,698,017 Source: Treasurer’s office 1 Includes salary and benefits for the classified supervisor and the general clerk reporting to the business manager N/A - District was unable to identify actual costs

Customer Satisfaction Survey

A Customer Satisfaction Survey was distributed to a random sample of 290 PCSD employees. The


Human Resources 3-5

purpose of the survey was to obtain employees’ feedback and perceptions of employee relations andhuman resources/personnel issues. Responses were received from 134 employees, for a responserate of about 46 percent.

The survey solicited responses to 20 statements concerning human resources functions, proceduresand policies. The respondents’ overall rating of the 20 statements was 3.55 which is a slightly aboveaverage response in that 5.00 represents the highest level of satisfaction, 3.00 represents a neutralresponse and 1.00 represents the lowest level of satisfaction.

Respondents demonstrated an above average level of satisfaction regarding awareness of dutiesrequired by job descriptions and the accuracy of the job descriptions reflecting actual daily routinewith overall average responses of 4.49 and 3.91 respectively.

The clerical staff indicated dissatisfaction with the effectiveness of job training with an averageresponse of 2.80.

Respondents’ level of satisfaction regarding evaluations as a valuable means of staff developmentand a means of timely and relevant feedback appeared to be positive as indicated by responses of3.47 and 3.52 respectively. Administrators and clerical employees expressed some level ofdissatisfaction with the evaluation form as indicated by an average response of 2.92 and 2.80respectively.

Teachers demonstrated a positive level of satisfaction toward the qualifications and effectivenessof substitutes and toward the effectiveness of the current substitute system with an average responseof 3.74 and 3.18.

District employees in each of the various categories demonstrated satisfaction with the proceduresregarding insurance benefits with an overall average response of 3.83. Respondents demonstrateda positive level of satisfaction in response to the question regarding district employee satisfactionand morale with an overall average of 3.52.

The respondents’ overall evaluation of the timeliness and types of services provided by the humanresources department was an average of 3.61. The chart on the following page details the resultsof all statements included in the customer satisfaction survey.

Human Resources Attribute Teachers Other FoodService Admin Clerical

Cust. /Maint.

Educat.Assts.

WeightedAvg.

1) I am aware of the dutiesrequired by my job

4.48 4.38 4.67 4.73 4.40 4.14 4.75 4.49


Human Resources 3-6

description. 2) My job description

accurately reflects myactual daily routine.

3) Our department couldeffectively maintainproductivity in event of short term absence; crosstraining has beenimplemented.

4) Staff training is effective. 5) Evaluation process is a

valuable means of staffdevelopment.

6) Evaluation processprovides timely andrelevant feedback.

7) The instrument by whichstaff members areevaluated is effective.

8) Management respondsand acts onrecommendations madein evaluation sessions.

9) District’s employeesubstitutes are qualifiedand effective.

10) Currentsubstitute system is quiteeffective in placingsubstitutes.

11) I am aware offew lapses incertificate/licenses due toan oversight of thehuman resource department.

12) I am satisfiedthat I am informed of changes in policies &procedures.

4.08

3.59

3.36

3.45

3.53

3.42

3.28

3.74

3.18

3.28

3.84

3.42

3.60

3.87

3.80

3.49

3.35

3.66

3.60

3.56

3.53

3.33

3.80

3.67

3.40

3.20

3.21

2.71

3.88

3.38

3.54

3.69

3.29

3.33

3.31

3.36

3.56

3.56

4.00

4.67

5.00

3.67

3.67

4.00

3.33

3.33

3.00

3.00

4.00

4.00

2.50

2.50

3.50

3.33

3.33

4.00

3.67

3.40

3.29

3.50

3.07

3.29

2.92

3.08

3.54

3.14

2.55

3.60

3.36

3.80

4.29

3.75

3.62

3.50

3.64

3.00

3.80

3.50

2.80

3.40

3.00

2.80

3.00

3.40

3.80

3.25

2.80

3.00

3.20

4.00

3.25

3.25

3.25

3.25

3.60

4.00

4.14

3.86

3.86

3.86

3.86

3.43

3.60

2.75

3.00

3.86

3.50

3.50

3.71

3.20

2.60

2.60

3.60

3.57

4.00

2.75

3.25

3.33

3.33

3.25

2.67

2.75

2.25

3.00

3.00

1.75

2.50

4.00

3.33

3.67

2.33

2.33

3.50

3.91

3.57

3.40

3.47

3.52

3.37

3.23

3.60

3.10

3.23

3.70

3.37

3.56

3.83

3.68

3.44

3.31

3.61

3.52


Human Resources 3-7

13) The district’soverall recruitment process is effective.

14) The district’sprocedures regarding job posting and hiringare effective.

15) I am satisfiedwith the procedures regarding insurancebenefits.

16) Currentgrievance procedures are fair and effective.

17) Currentdiscipline procedures are fair and adequate.

18) Currentfollow-up procedures for dismissal anddiscipline are adequate.

19) I am satisfiedwith overalleffectiveness of thedistrict’s current HRmanagement policies andprocedures.

20) I feel thatoverall districtemployees satisfactionand morale is positive.

Overall Average 3.60 3.48 3.66 3.45 3.34 3.53 3.09 3.55

Number of responses received 84 16 3 15 5 7 4 134

Scale - 5-Strongly Agree, 4-Agree, 3-Neutral, 2-Disagree, 1-Strongly Disagree

Performance Measures

The following is a list of performance measures that were used to review PCSD’s human resourcescoupled with the functionality typically performed by a human resources department (HRD):


Human Resources 3-8

• Clearly defined roles, responsibilities, accountabilities and authorities of key participants in theaffairs of personnel administration

• Appropriate allocation of resources in relation to workloads• Appropriateness of human resources system for retention and utilization of critical personnel data• Adequacy of systems and procedures for compiling candidate information• Assessment of staffing classifications and respective ratio to total full time equivalents • Assessment of the allocation of the ratio of direct instructional personnel to district educational

support personnel• Appropriateness of staff levels and mix• Analysis of teachers’ work day as defined by the union contract versus actual work day worked• Assessment of number of instructional minutes taught per teacher, class sizes and staffing ratios• Assessment of implementation of new legislation• Assessment of total FTE employees in comparison of the ratio of total salaries per classification

to total district salaries• Assessment of utilization and compensation for supplemental pay and stipends• Assessment of salary schedule and maximum step structure• Assessment of W-2 wages in correlation to salary schedules• Utilization of paid leaves• Appropriate use of substitute personnel• Assessment of employee benefit costs and administration including workers’ compensation• Assessment of contract administration (collective bargaining) and contractual issues• Accuracy/completeness of job descriptions• Assessment of procedures to document proper qualifications and certification of candidates• Assessment of teacher certification process• Appropriateness of training programs for staff involved in the interview and selection process• Assessment of a comprehensive staff development program available for all employees• Effectiveness of employer/employee relations program regarding grievances and disciplinary

actions• Assessment of performance appraisal system• Efficiency/effectiveness of recruitment efforts including turnover rates

Findings/Commendations/Recommendations

Organizational Issues

F3.1 Table 3-3 illustrates that PCSD’s human resources FTE staffing levels are the second


Human Resources 3-9

lowest when compared to the peer districts.

Table 3-3: Comparison of HRD Staff by Position - FTEsParma Canton Dayton South-Western

Administrators 1.2 1.0 4.01 1.0

HRD Staff Member 7.0 6.31 15.0 10.01

Total 8.2 7.3 19.0 11.0

FTE Regular Employees 1,759.0 1,516.1 3,316.9 1,988.6 Source: Preliminary FY 1997-98 EMIS Profile 1 Includes vacancies

F3.2 Table 3-4 presents the ratio of full-time equivalent (FTE) employees per HRD staff. Theratio of PCSD employees assigned to the HRD staff is 214.5:1. PCSD has the highestamount of employees per personnel staff member when compared to peer districts.

Table 3-4: FTE Employees Per HRD StaffParma Canton Dayton South-Western

Total HRD FTE Employees 8.2 7.31 19.01 11.01

FTE Regular Employees 1,759.0 1,516.1 3,316.9 1,988.6

Ratio 214.5:1 207.7:1 174.6:1 180.8:1 Source: Preliminary FY 1997-98 EMIS Profile 1 Includes vacancies

F3.3 The business manager has indicated that the 30 percent of his time currently spentperforming human resources functions for classified employees may be better utilized ifspent performing other operational functions. Additionally, the assistant superintendentof human resources currently responsible for human resources functions for certificatedpersonnel has indicated consolidating human resources functions for both certificated andclassified employees would allow for a higher and more consistent level of benefits for alldistrict personnel.

R3.1 In order to increase consistency in procedures performed across employee groups and tomore appropriately align human resources functions, PCSD should consolidate and realignall human resources functions. This will allow the assistant superintendent of humanresources to have full human resources responsibilities and allow the business manager tomore effectively manage the operational side of the district.


Human Resources 3-10

Financial Implication: Because no additional staff would be required to realign the HRD, no financial implication would be recognized for this recommendation.

F3.4 In 1986, PCSD contracted with Block Development, a computer programming company,to create a Human Resources Information System (HRIS) and to upgrade the system inJune 1998. The system is used to track applicant information, certification data, employeeevaluations, base salaries, certificated employee leave usage and substitute information. However, the system is not integrated with the payroll system nor is it used to trackgrievances, disciplinary actions or exit interviews. The HRIS does not have a positioncontrol feature that would enable the district to define the budgeted organizationalstructure in terms of specific positions and would prevent the district from hiring moreemployees than budgeted. The district is currently tracking supplemental pay manually.

The district is currently using the Uniform Staff Payroll System (USPS) which is statesoftware. The policy of the Ohio Department of Education (ODE) relative to statesoftware such as USPS is that no one may alter data structures used by state software withsoftware not supported by the ODE. This policy is to maintain data integrity within thestate software systems. Therefore, the district’s HRIS, that is not software supported bythe ODE, cannot directly interface with USPS.

R3.2 PCSD should consider creating a program which would compare certain data from theUSPS to the same data in the HRIS. The program should be able to create a “mismatch”report which would identify any discrepancies between the two systems. Additionally, thedistrict should work together with other school districts using state software and approachthe ODE, as a group, about the feasibility of creating a HRIS as part of the USPS. Anintegrated HRIS and payroll system provides the district with the tools to effectively andefficiently manage workload drivers; eliminates the need for duplicate databases and thetime spent maintaining and reconciling them; reduces the amount of staff needed tomaintain the information; and provides immediate access to all employee information.

R3.3 In order for the HRIS to further meet the HRD’s critical business needs, the system shouldbe upgraded to measure the following key areas:

• Position control• Grievances• Disciplinary actions• Supplemental pay• Exit interviews



Staffing/Compensation Analysis

F3.5 The district’s total FTEs were divided into six classifications of personnel as defined inTable 3-5. These classification are used for further assessments in F3.6 and F3.7.

Table 3-5: Personnel Classifications and Positions Descriptions

Classification Position Descriptions

Administrative Employees Superintendent, Asst Supt, Admin Asst, Prin, Asst Prin,Sup/Mgr/Dir, Treas, Asst Treas, Coordinators, Planning, AdminInterns, Curriculum Specialist

Teachers Remedial Specialists, Teachers, Secondary Tutors, Adult EdTeachers, Visiting Teacher

Pupil Services Employees Counselors, Librarian/Media, Psychologist, Speech HearingTherapists, Head Start/Spec Ed, Nurses, Interpreters, SocialWorkers, Parent Mentors, COTA

Support Services Operative, Laborer, Custodians, Food Service, GeneralMaintenance, Mechanics

Other Classified Employees Attendance Office, Monitors, Clerical, Teaching Aides,Library/Media Aides, Public Relations, Bookkeepers,Purchasing Agents, Library/Media Technicians

Technical Computer Operator, Computer Programmer



F3.6 Table 3-6 illustrates the ratio of six classifications of personnel to the district’s totalnumber of FTE employees and the percentage of total employees in each classification foreach of the peer districts.

Table 3-6: Breakdown of Total FTE Employees and Percentage of Total Employees Classification

Classification Parma Canton Dayton South-Western

# ofEmp.

% of TotalEmployees

# ofEmp.

% of TotalEmployees

# of Emp.

% of TotalEmployees

# ofEmp.

% of TotalEmployees

Administrative 73.0 4.2% 74.7 4.9% 195.0 5.9% 93.5 4.7%

Teachers 838.4 47.7% 876.0 57.8% 1,761.9 53.1% 1,109.7 55.8%

Pupil Services 72.1 4.1% 66.8 4.4% 264.0 8.0% 66.8 3.3%

Support Services 290.1 16.4% 199.5 13.2% 498.0 15.0% 338.1 17.0%

Other Classified 483.4 27.5% 290.3 19.1% 598.0 18.0% 375.5 18.9%

Technical 2.0 0.1% 8.8 0.6% 0.0 1 0.0% 5.0 0.3%

Total 1,759.0 100.0% 1,516.1 100.0% 3,316.9 100.0% 1,988.6 100.0%1 Employees providing technical support are currently provided by an outside contractor

Table 3-6 illustrates an analysis of the total FTEs categorized as instructional personnelversus support services personnel. PCSD has the highest percentage of other classifiedFTEs as indicated by the bolded number above when compared to the peer districts. Otherclassified employees include monitors as defined in Table 3-5. As indicated in F3.15,PCSD has significantly more monitors than the peer districts. As defined in the ParmaEducational Association (PEA) contract, PCSD teachers are not required to performadditional supervising duties thus requiring the district to employ numerous monitors tofulfill such duties.



F3.7 Table 3-7 presents employees categorized by instructional personnel as compared toeducational support personnel. Included in the instructional personnel classification areteachers and pupil services employees while educational support personnel includeadministrative, support services, other classified and technical employees.

Table 3-7: Ratio of Direct Instructional Personnel to District Educational Support Personnel

Classification Parma Canton Dayton South-Western

# ofEmp.

% of TotalEmployees

# of Emp. % of TotalEmployees

# of Emp.

% of TotalEmployees

# ofEmp.

% of TotalEmployees

DirectInstructionalPersonnel 910.5 51.8% 942.8 62.2% 2,025.9 61.1% 1,176.5 59.2%

DistrictEducationalSupportPersonnel 848.5 48.2% 573.3 37.8% 1,291.0 38.9% 812.1 40.8%

Total 1,759.0 100.0% 1,516.1 100.0% 3,316.9 100.0% 1,988.6 100.0%

As illustrated in Table 3-7, 910.5 or 51.8 percent of PCSD’s total FTEs make up the directinstructional personnel. When compared to the peer districts, PCSD has the lowestpercentage of direct instructional personnel. Although Table 3-7 indicates that more than50 percent of total employees are categorized as direct instructional personnel, Table 3-6illustrates only 47.7 percent of total employees are actually teachers. Additionally, Table3-7 illustrates that 48.2 percent of total employees are categorized in the districteducational support personnel category which is the highest among the peer districts by7.4 percent to 10.4 percent.



F3.8 Table 3-8 presents the staffing levels of FTEs per 1,000 students enrolled for PCSDand the peer districts.

Table 3-8: FTE Staff per 1,000 Students Enrolled

Category Parma Canton DaytonSouth-

WesternPeer District

Average

ADM 13,116 12,560 25,972 17,347 17,249

Administrators: Central Site Based Supervisor/Manager/Dir. Other

0.32.51.61.3

0.32.82.70.3

0.01

2.93.00.5

0.22.42.20.8

0.22.72.40.7

Professional Education: Curriculum Specialists Counselors Librarian - Media Teachers - Elem and Sec Others

0.01.71.1

62.02.1

0.01.90.4

67.42.3

0.91.10.5

66.01.9

0.01.40.3

61.22.7

0.21.50.6

64.62.3

Professional - Other 2.4 2.9 8.8 2.1 4.1

Technical: Computer Operator Computer Programmer/Analyst Others

0.20.00.6

0.70.01.4

0.00.00.7

0.10.20.0

0.20.10.7

Office/Clerical: Clerical Teaching Aides Library/Media Aides Others

8.75.31.91.5

6.35.10.00.9

9.011.4

0.00.4

5.513.7

0.00.5

7.48.90.50.8

Crafts/Trades 1.9 0.9 2.3 2.1 1.8

Transportation 6.1 3.0 3.0 6.1 4.6

Laborer - Groundskeeping 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0

Custodial 8.7 6.5 8.0 5.1 7.1

Food Service 5.4 5.4 5.6 6.2 5.7

Service Work - Other 19.1 9.5 1.5 2.0 8.0

Total 134.4 120.7 127.6 114.8 125.1 Source: Preliminary FY 1997-98 EMIS Profile

Notes: 1) Figure appears to be incorrect.



PCSD has the highest FTEs in six categories as indicated by the bolded numbers abovewhen compared to the peer districts and has the highest FTEs overall. In addition, theaverage FTE staff per 1,000 students enrolled for all districts which have had aperformance audit performed to date is 116.0 FTEs. PCSD exceeds this average byapproximately 16.7 percent. Because of the district’s current financial situation, thedistrict will be forced to make difficult decisions regarding the district’s operating costs. Table 3-8 indicates several areas where the district could potentially reduce staff.

F3.9 PCSD has approximately 1.3 FTEs per 1,000 students in the other administratorclassification. PCSD ranks highest when compared to the peer district average of 0.7 FTEsper 1,000 students. Included in this category are seven teachers enrolled in theadministrative internship program (see F3.97 for more detail on the internship program). Without the seven administrative interns, PCSD would be in-line with the peer districtsin the other administrative classification. Therefore, no reduction in other administratorsis recommended.

F3.10 PCSD has approximately 1.1 FTEs per 1,000 students in the librarian classification. PCSDranks highest when compared to the peer district average of 0.6 FTEs per 1,000 students. In addition, a comparison of the ratio of total librarians to total number of school buildingsindicated PCSD is the highest with a ratio of 0.76 librarians per building when comparedto the peer district average of 0.37 librarians per building. For example, South-WesternCity School District maintains 28 buildings and currently only has five librarians. Additionally, PCSD employs 29 library aide/technicians as further detailed in F3.11. Furthermore, Ohio Administrative Code (OAC) section 3301-35-03 sets minimumstandards for educational service personnel. It provides for a district wide average of aminimum of five full time equivalent (FTE) educational service personnel for each 1,000pupils in the district’s average daily membership (ADM). Included in the educationalservice personnel category are visiting teachers, counselors, librarians, nurses, art, physicaleducation and music teachers. PCSD currently averages approximately 6.1 FTEeducational service personnel employees per 1,000 pupils when compared to the minimumFTE requirement of 5.0 FTEs.

R3.4 In order to achieve the peer district FTE average of 0.6 FTEs librarians and 0.37 librariansper building and to be more in line with the OAC minimum requirement of 5.0 FTEeducational service personnel per 1,000 students, PCSD could possibly reduce sevenlibrarian positions.

Financial Implications: Assuming an average salary of $52,715 for a librarian and benefitsconstitute 30 percent, reducing seven librarian positions would create an annual savingsof approximately $479,709.

F3.11 PCSD has approximately 1.9 FTEs per 1,000 in the library aides classification. The peer



districts coded library aides in various other EMIS categories for a peer district averageof 1.6 FTEs in the library aides classification. The HRD indicated the district strives tostaff at least one library aide at each school building and realizes that additional costs areincurred by staffing library technicians at this level. However, PCSD currently employs29 library aides/technicians but only maintains 21 buildings.

R3.5 PCSD has 0.3 library aides per 1,000 more than the peer districts. Continuing to maintainthis level of library aides costs the district $56,963 annually in salary and benefits. Because of PCSD’s pending financial situation, the district might consider reducing libraryaides. In order to achieve the peer district FTE average of 1.6 library aide FTEs, PCSDcould possibly reduce three library aide positions.

Financial Implications: Assuming an average salary of a library aide is $14,606 andbenefits constitute 30 percent, reducing three library aide positions would create an annualsavings of approximately $56,963.

F3.12 PCSD has approximately 1.5 FTEs per 1,000 students in the other office/clericalclassification. Included in this classification is 1.1 FTE account clerks and payroll clerksper 1,000 students. However, the peer districts code the account clerks and payroll clerksin the office clerical classification as opposed to the other office/clerical classification. Additionally, PCSD has 12 FTE clerical positions which are paid with federal funds.Combining the account and payroll clerks and removing the 12 federally funded positions,leaves PCSD with approximately 9.0 FTEs per 1,000 students in the clerical classificationwhich is the highest when compared to peer district average of 7.8 FTEs. Further analysisindicates that the peer districts averaged approximately six office/clerical positions in eachhigh school. However, PCSD averaged 12 office/clerical positions in each high school.

R3.6 In order to achieve the peer district FTE average of 7.8 FTEs, PCSD could possibly reduce15 clerical positions. The district should consider reducing these positions at the highschool level.

Financial Implications: Assuming an average salary of $19,936 for a clerical position andbenefits constitute 30 percent, reducing 15 clerical positions would create an annualsavings of approximately $388,752.

F3.13 PCSD has approximately 1.9 FTEs per 1,000 students enrolled in the crafts/tradesclassification which is not the highest when compared to the peer districts. However,



multiple subclassifications are included in the crafts and trades category includingtransportation mechanics. Further analysis in the transportation section of theperformance audit report indicates PCSD may be overstaffed in bus mechanics. See thetransportation section of the report for recommendations and financial implications.

F3.14 PCSD has approximately 8.7 FTEs per 1,000 students enrolled in the custodialclassification which includes custodians and cleaners and is the highest when comparedto the peer district average of 7.1 FTEs. The facilities section of the performance auditreport conducts a more detail assessment of PCSD’s custodial staff and responsibilities. See the facilities section of the report for further analysis and recommendations.

F3.15 PCSD has approximately 19.1 FTEs per 1,000 students in the other service work classification. Included in this classification is monitors. Because monitors andeducational assistants perform the same functions in most school districts and are codedaccordingly, an additional analysis comparing total monitors plus total educationalassistants was performed. This analysis indicated that PCSD has the highest FTEs withapproximately 19.4 FTEs per 1,000 students when compared to the peer district averageof 15.0 FTEs. Because the PEA contract does not require teachers to perform additionalsupervisory duties such as lunch and bus duty, the district must hire numerous monitorsto perform these functions.

R3.7 In order to achieve the peer district FTE average of 15.0 FTEs in the monitor andeducational assistant classifications, PCSD could possibly reduce 57 monitor positions.

Financial Implications: Assuming an average salary of $4,434 for a monitor and benefitsconstitute 30 percent, reducing 57 monitor positions would create an annual savings ofapproximately $328,559.

F3.16 Table 3-9 compares the number of FTEs as classified in Table 3-6 to the number ofadministrators responsible for supervising and coordinating the staff for PCSD to the peerdistricts.



Table 3-9: Comparison of FTEs to Administrators

Parma Canton DaytonSouth-

WesternPeer

Average

Average Daily Membership 13,116 12,560 25,972 17,347 17,249

Administrators 73.0 74.7 173.0 93.5 103.6

TOTAL FTEs(Excluding Administrators)

1,686.0 1,441.4 3,143.9 1,895.1 2,041.6

FTE per Administrator 23.1 19.3 18.2 20.3 20.2 Source: Preliminary FY 1997-98 EMIS Profile

Table 3-9 indicates PCSD has the lowest number of administrators when compared to thepeer districts. The table also indicates PCSD has approximately 23.1 FTEs peradministrator which is the highest when compared to the peer district average of 20.2.

F3.17 Table 3-10 summarizes the average workday of an elementary teacher as defined in thePEA contract. The table indicates that approximately 15 minutes per day are undefinedin the contract. The district indicated that elementary teachers are actually in theclassroom for 265 minutes even though the contract indicates 250 minutes of student



contact time. The district has attempted to renegotiate the contract language to reflectactual student contact time of 265 minutes. However, the issue has not been resolved todate.

Table 3-10: Analysis of Elementary Teacher WorkdayDescription of Activity Per PEA Contract

Length of Regular Teaching Day asDefined by Contract

7 hours and 15 minutes or 435 minutes

Duty free lunch 50 minutes

Planning Time (before and after school) 60 minutes

Additional planning time during art,music and gym

Approximately 35 minutes per day

Student supervision before and afterlunch

5 minutes before lunch and 5 minutes after lunch

Student contact time1 300 minutes less approximately 35 minutes per daywith scheduled specialists and 15 minutes per dayfor student arrival time for a total of 250 minutesstudent contact time

Student arrival time 15 minutes

Total minutes defined in contract 420 minutes

Balance of minutes not defined 15 minutes

Length of Student Day 6 hours or 360 minutes, including lunch and recess Source: PEA contract 1 Although the contract indicates 250 minutes of student contact time, the district has indicated that actual student contact time for elementary teachers is 265 minutes. The balance of minutes not defined assuming 265 minutes student contact time would be 0 minutes.

F3.18 The PEA contract contains language stating the work day for secondary teachers will notexceed 465 minutes, including a duty-free lunch period. The contract stipulates the dailyworkload for middle school teachers is five regular class periods, one academicassistance/individual instruction period, two conference/planning periods and one lunch



period. The contract stipulates the daily workload for high school teachers is fiveinstructional or supervisory periods, two conference/planning periods and one lunchperiod. The middle schools have nine 42-minute periods scheduled per day and the highschools have eight 48-minute periods per day.

Table 3-11: Analysis of Teachers’ Work Day

Description of ActivityMiddle Schoolper Contract

High Schoolper Contract

AverageMiddle School

Average High School

Length of RegularTeaching Day as Definedby Contract

465 minutes or 7hours/45 minutes




Pre-defined Periods Specified in Contract or Based on District Practice

Regular classperiods

Maximum 5 teaching orsupervisory periods or

210 minutes

Maximum 5 teaching orsupervisory periods or

240 minutes210 minutes 240 minutes

Duty-free lunch 1 period or 42 minutes 1 period or 48 minutes 42 minutes 48 minutes

Conference/Planning 2 periods or 84 minutes 2 periods or 96 minutes 84 minutes 96 minutes

Academic Assistance 1 period or 42 minutes 25 minutes 42 minutes 25 minutes

Hall passing time 27 minutes 32 minutes 27 minutes 32 minutes

Homeroom 5 minutes N/A 5 minutes N/A

Before &after school55 minutes split before

and after school 24 minutes55 minutes split before

and after school 24 minutes

Total Pre-definedMinutes Specified orActual Average Minutes

465 minutes 465 minutes 465 minutes 465 minutes

Balance of Minutes NotDefined 0 minutes 0 minutes 0 minutes 0 minutes

Length of Student Day 410 minutes 416 minutes 410 minutes 416 minutes

Source: PEA contract

Table 3-11 details the teachers’ workday and indicates that PCSD teachers are fulfillingtheir contractual obligations in terms of the teacher workday. However, when comparedto the peer districts, it appears PCSD’s total secondary teachers teach the lowest numberof instructional minutes. Additionally, PCSD’s middle school teachers teachapproximately 20 percent less than the average number of instructional minutes taught bythe school districts which have had performance audits conducted to date. Furthermore,



PCSD teachers are the highest paid when compared to the peer districts and are notrequired to perform additional supervisory duties without additional compensation unlessit is part of their regular schedule of five periods. The low number of instructional minutestaught by secondary teachers indicates an inefficient utilization of the district’s largestexpense which directly correlates to the current financial condition of the district as furtherdetailed in the financial section of the performance audit report.

F3.19 Table 3-12 illustrates the number of traditional high school and middle school teachers andthe number of instructional minutes taught and periods per day spent teaching for FY1998-99. The following high level analysis does not take into consideration the curriculumprovided by the district.

Table 3-12: Teachers per Instructional Period - FY 1998-99

Middle School Teachers High School Teachers

TeachingMinutes per Day

# of Periods per Day

# of TeachersTeachingMinutes per Day

# of Periods per Day

# of Teachers

84 2 0 96 2 2

126 3 4 144 3 3

168 4 10 192 4 28

210 5 84 240 5 123

252 6 11 288 6 5

Total 109 Total 161

Source: 1998-99 Master teaching schedules

F3.20 Table 3-12 above shows that 20 percent or 33 of the traditional high school teaching staffteach less than 240 minutes per day or the equivalent of four or less periods per day whichis less than defined in the PEA contract. Approximately 125 periods are actually beingtaught by the 33 traditional high school teachers. If each of the 33 teachers were requiredto teach five periods per day, the district could possibly reduce eight high school teachingpositions. If each of the 161 high school teachers were required to teach an additionalperiod, in place of one of their two conference/planning periods, the district could possiblyreduce 32 teaching positions.

F3.21 Table 3-12 above also shows that 13 percent or 14 of the middle school teaching staffteach less than 210 minutes per day or the equivalent of four or less periods per day whichis less than defined in the PEA contract. Approximately 52 periods are actually beingtaught by the 14 middle school teachers. If each of the 14 teachers were required to teachfive periods per day, the district could possibly reduce two middle school teachingpositions. If each of the 109 middle school teachers were required to teach one additional



period, in place of one of their two conference/planning periods, the district could possiblyreduce 19 middle school teachers.

R3.8 The PEA contract stipulates that the daily workload for secondary teachers includes fiveregular teaching or supervisory periods and two conference/planning periods. Additionally, teachers are currently not required to cover non-teaching supervisory dutiesin excess of the five periods previously mentioned. Thirty-three high school and 14 middleschool teachers teach less than five periods per day. If all teachers were required to teacha minimum of five periods per day, PCSD could possibly reduce 10 secondary teachingpositions. If all secondary teachers received one conference/planning period instead oftwo and teachers were required to teach six periods per day, the district could possiblyreduce 51 secondary teaching positions.

Financial Implications: Based upon PCSD’s adjusted five year forecast, the district is facing financial difficulties. Because of PCSD’s expected financial deficit, the district willneed to reduce operating costs. See the financial systems section of the performance auditreport for more detail on the projected deficit. One possible area PCSD could considerwould be to reduce teaching positions at the secondary school level. However, reductionsshould not be in excess of those needed to balance the budget. Maximizing the numberof periods taught per teacher to concur with the PEA contract, the district could possiblyreduce 10 secondary teaching positions. Assuming the average salary of a secondaryteacher is $46,614 and benefits constitutes 30 percent of the salary, this reduction wouldcreate an annual savings of $605,982. If all secondary teachers were required to teach sixperiods per day, the district could possibly save $3,090,508 by allowing staffing levels todecrease through attrition or a reduction in force or by redirecting secondary teachingresources to the elementary level.

Another option PCSD could consider in lieu of staff reductions might be redirecting teaching resources to enhance educational programming. Additional course offeringscould be added with no additional personnel costs to the district by utilizing existingteachers and increasing instructional minutes taught per teacher. As indicated in F3.24,PCSD has a high student/teacher ratio at the elementary level. Fully utilizing secondaryteachers would enable the district to reduce operating costs which would allow the districtto hire additional elementary teachers thereby reducing the student/teacher ratio at the



elementary level. However, areas of teacher certification should be assessed prior to anyreductions in positions or addition of course offerings.

F3.22 Ohio Admin. Code Section 3301-35-02 provides guidelines for educational programs. TheOAC provides general guidance for topics of study including career education, citizenshipand human relations. However, AM. Sub. S.B. 55 revises the minimum courserequirements necessary for graduation after September 15, 2001. The total number of unitsthat must be taken in grades nine through twelve increases from 18 to 21 units. Thedistrict has revised its graduation requirements accordingly. AM. Sub. S.B. 55 reduces thenumber of elective units that count toward the required number for graduation andincreases the required units of English language arts, mathematics, science and socialstudies. For the 1999 graduating class, the district requires 18 units of study forgraduation. The district has phased in an increase in the required units of study forgraduation over the next two years with 21 units being required for students graduating in2002.

F3.23 Table 3-13 presents a review of the middle school FY 1998-99 master teaching scheduleswhich revealed 16 traditional periods with 15 or less pupils. These classes do not includeany special education or vocational classes. Examples of classes with 15 or less pupilsinclude art, computer science, math, choir, science and metals.

Table 3-13: Middle School Teaching Periods with 15 or less PupilsNumber of Students 5 or

less6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Number of Periods 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 11 2Source: FY 1998-99 Master teaching schedule - HRD

Table 3-14 presents a review of the high schools’ FY 1998-99 master teaching scheduleswhich revealed 25 traditional periods with 15 or less pupils. These classes do not includeany special education or vocational classes. Examples of classes with 15 or less pupilsinclude US history, world history, art, advanced art, computers, honors biology, chemistry,honors chemistry, Latin, French, English, honors English, honors algebra, earth science,social studies and accounting. The district has indicated that several of these classes areEnglish as a second language. Classes offered at one PCSD high school are not requiredto be offered at the other high schools in the district.



Table 3-14: High School Teaching Periods with 15 or less PupilsNumber of Students 5 or

less6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

Number of Periods 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 7 11Source: FY 1998-99 Master teaching schedule - HRD

F3.24 Minimum standards for elementary and secondary education provide for a ratio of teachersto pupils on a district wide basis of at least one full time equivalent classroom teacher per25 pupils in average daily membership. A building ratio less than 25 to one potentiallyincreases the number of teaching positions. Table 3-15 illustrates the student/teacher ratioof traditional students to traditional teachers in the elementary schools is 23.2:1. Additionally, the district’s student/teacher ratio in the elementary schools exceeds theaverage for all schools having a performance audit conducted to date by approximately10.5 percent. Am. Sub. H.B. 650, effective FY 1999, requires that each district with aDisadvantaged Pupil Impact Aid (DPIA) index of greater than 1.00 must use a portion oftheir DPIA money to implement all day kindergarten. A portion of the remaining DPIAmoney must be used to implement the “third grade guarantee.” The third grade guaranteeconsists of increasing the instructional attention given to each pupil in kindergartenthrough third grade by reducing the ratio of students to instructional personnel, extendingthe length of the school day, or extending the length of the school year. H.B. 650 alsospecifies that districts must first ensure a ratio of instructional personnel to students of nomore than 15:1 (in kindergarten and first grade) in all buildings, before they can spendDPIA money for activities to increase instructional attention in any other building.

Although PCSD’s DPIA is less than 1.0, maintaining a 23.2:1 ratio at the elementary levelindicates PCSD may have a shortage of elementary teachers. Requiring secondaryteachers to teach more instructional minutes would reduce operating costs and allow thedistrict to focus on maintaining a lower elementary student/teacher ratio by hiringadditional elementary teachers.

Table 3-15: Elementary Staffing Levels

Building

Average DailyMembership

(ADM)

Non-SpecialEducationStudents

Non-SpecialEducation Teachers

Student/Teacher Ratio

Elementary Totals 6,356 6,252 270 23.2

Source: EMIS class database

F3.25 Table 3-16 illustrates the staffing levels at the middle and high school buildings for FY1998-99. The student/teacher ratios are representative of the number of traditional



students which excludes special education students to the number of traditional teacherswhich exclude special education, vocational education and traveling/itinerant teachers.

Table 3-16: Middle School and High School Staffing Levels

Building

Average DailyMembership

(ADM)

Non-SpecialEducationStudents

Non-SpecialEducationTeachers

Student/ Teacher

Ratio

Middle Schools: Greenbriar Hillside Shiloh

761530681

746513681

462941

16.217.716.6

Middle School Totals 1,972 1,940 116 16.7

High Schools: Normandy Parma Senior Valley Forge

1,1191,4681,642

1,1011,4481,621

527373

21.219.822.2

High School Totals 4,229 4,170 198 21.1

Source: EMIS class database

F3.26 Traditional student to traditional teacher class size ratios in the middle and high schoolsaverage16.7:1and21.1:1respectively asillustrated inTable3-16. Average classsizeslessthanminimumstandards willrequiremoreteachin



gpositions forthesamenumberofstudents. Currently,PCSDmaintains a16.7:1student/teacher ratiowhichresultsin 38additionalmiddleschoolteachingpositions. Also,maintaining a21.1:1ratio atthehighschoollevelresultsin 23additio



nalhighschoolteachingpositions. Continuing tomaintain levelswhichexceedminimumstandards willcostPCSDapproximately$3,696,490annually inteachers’salariesandfringebenefits. Thisfinancialimplicationwascalculatedprior toany



staffreduction as aresultofrecommendationR3.8.

F3.27 Table 3-17 compares the average salary of each classification to the peer districts for FY1997-98. Table 3-17 indicates that PCSD has the highest average salaries among the peerdistricts in the administrative, professional education and other professional categories, asindicated by the bolded numbers. The salaries average between 7 and 15 percent higherthan the peer district averages.

Table 3-17: Average Salary by Classification

Parma Canton Dayton South-Western Peer Average

#FTEs

AvgSalary

#FTEs

AvgSalary

#FTEs

AvgSalary 1

#FTEs

AvgSalary

#FTEs

AvgSalary

Official/Admin. 73.0 $62,576 74.7 $56,807 170.0 $51,793 93.5 $62,086 102.8 $58,316

Prof/ Education 878.4 45,203 905.0 40,447 1,825.9 35,258 1,139.7 41,982 1,187.3 40,723

Prof/Other 32.1 47,426 37.8 43,661 229.0 28,738 36.8 40,751 83.9 40,144

Technical 10.0 31,552 25.8 23,512 17.0 25,345 5.0 40,601 14.5 30,253

Office/Clerical 228.5 18,292 154.4 16,464 540.0 19,161 340.3 18,224 315.8 18,035

Crafts/Trades 24.0 33,219 12.0 28,561 61.0 34,880 36.0 31,318 33.3 31,995

Transportation 78.6 15,755 37.7 17,893 79.0 25,884 106.0 18,086 75.3 19,405

Laborer 0.0 0 0.0 0 3.0 38,858 0.0 0 0.8 9,715

Custodian 113.8 17,085 81.9 20,021 207.0 25,779 89.0 26,012 122.9 22,224

Food Service 70.7 8,898 67.9 5,683 146.0 13,579 107.1 13,488 97.9 10,412

Other Service 249.9 8,213 118.9 15,218 39.0 12,546 35.2 7,713 110.8 10,923

Source: Preliminary 1997-98 EMIS Profile1 Per 1997 W2 report





F3.28 Table 3-18 illustrates total FTEs and salaries presented in Table 3-17 but have been re-categorized into the ratio of six classifications of personnel as defined in Table 3-5 andfurther compares the ratio of total salaries per classification to total district salaries.

Table 3-18: Breakdown of Total FTE Employees and Percentage of Total EMIS Salaries by Classification

Classification# of

Employees% of TotalEmployees

TotalSalaries

% of Total Salaries

Administrative 73.0 4.2% $4,568,052 8.0%

Teachers 838.4 47.7% 37,610,670 66.0%

Pupil Services 72.1 4.1% 3,622,702 6.3%

Support Services 290.1 16.5% 4,709,360 8.3%

Other Classified 483.4 27.4% 6,455,514 11.3%

Technical 2.0 0.1% 59,354 0.1%

Total 1,759.0 100.0% $57,025,652 100.0%

Source: Preliminary FY 1997-98 EMIS Profile

When PCSD’s ratio of administrators to total FTEs are compared to their respective salaryratio, administrators make up 4.2 percent of total staffing. However, administrators’salaries account for eight percent of total salaries. PCSD’s average salary for professionaleducation is approximately 10 percent higher when compared to the peer district average. As reflected in Table 3-18, teachers, who are included in the professional/educationalcategory in Table 3-17, make up 47.7 percent of total FTEs. However, teachers’ salariesaccount for 66 percent of total salaries.

R3.9 PCSD’s secondary teachers are provided with two planning periods and an extended lunchhour which provides for additional planning time as further explained in F3.18. Additionally, PCSD teachers are not required to perform additional supervisory duties. In total, there are approximately two and one-half periods per day where secondaryteachers are not teaching or performing supervisory duties. The peer districts averagebetween one and one and one-half periods of planning time per day. Furthermore, PCSDteachers are the highest paid among the peer districts and 9.7 percent higher than the peerdistrict average for FY 1997-98. PCSD teachers also have the second highest averagesalary at $45,429 just behind Cincinnati City School District at $46,695 when comparedto the total school districts having a performance audit conducted to date. Such schoolsinclude Columbus City Schools, Akron City Schools, Toledo City Schools, Cincinnati CitySchools, Lorain City Schools, Elyria City Schools, Springfield City Schools and HamiltonCity Schools. However, within Cuyahoga County, PCSD’s starting salary for teacherswith a bachelor’s degree ranks 29th lowest of the 33 school districts. Also, PCSD’smaximum salary for a master’s degree ranks 21st lowest of the 33 school districts. Because



of PCSD’s current financial situation, the district should negotiate changes that wouldallow the district to redistribute teachers’ workload and reduce unnecessary operatingcosts. PCSD should pursue the following options:

• The district should require teachers to teach, at a minimum, an additional periodrather than receiving two planning periods.

• PCSD should require teachers to perform supervisory duties in place of one of thetwo planning periods which would reduce the number of monitors needed.

• Additionally, the district should reduce the cost of living adjustment (COLA) forteacher salaries at the end of the current contract period (August 1, 1999). Thenegotiation of a reduction in the COLA would be a first step in equalizing thedifference between the wages for PCSD teachers and the peer districts and also thecurrent compensation inequities between teachers and PCSD’s classified personnel.

Financial Implication: Based upon PCSD’s adjusted five year forecast, the district isforecasting significant deficits in future years. Because of PCSD’s pending financialdeficit, the district will need to reduce operating costs. As indicated in R3.7, requiringteachers to perform supervisory duties would save PCSD approximately $328,559 inmonitor salaries.

Because teacher salaries and benefits are the greatest expense to the district, implementinga reduced COLA for PCSD’s teachers for FY 1999-00, FY 2000-01 and FY 2001-02 andassuming employee staffing remains consistent, a cost avoidance of $739,039, $768,601and $1,191,146 respectively in wages and salaries would be achieved. In addition, a costavoidance of approximately $221,712, $230,580 and $357,344 respectively in benefits(calculated at 30 percent of salaries) would be achieved. The total accumulated costavoidance achieved by the district over the three year contract period would beapproximately $3,508,421.

F3.29 As indicated in Table 3-18, pupil services personnel, who are categorized asprofessional/other in Table 3-17, make up 4.1 percent of total FTEs. However, pupilservices personnel salaries account for 6.3 percent of total salaries.

As illustrated in Table 3-17, PCSD’s transportation, custodian and food serviceemployees’ salaries are less than the peer district average. These salaries range between15 and 25 percent less than the peer district average. Additionally, Table 3-18 reflects thesupport services classifications, which includes transportation, custodian and food serviceemployees, makeup 16.5 percent of total FTEs. However, support services salaries onlyaccount for 8.3 percent of total salaries. The results of the respective staffing to salaryratios indicate PCSD may have a compensation inequity among the individual employee



classifications.

R3.10 PCSD should perform a comprehensive compensation analysis for all employees todetermine the true costs and value of all components of compensation. The analysisshould include external market comparisons to derive at appropriate wage structures. Additionally, an analysis to determine the reasonableness of the district’s average salariesincluding supplementals and overtime should be performed.

F3.30 The Ohio Public Expenditure Council, October 1997, issued a report that stated that theaverage salary paid to Ohio’s classroom teachers was $38,945 for FY 1996-97. Table 3-19 indicates that PCSD’s average teaching salary of $45,429 is the highest among the peerdistricts and greater than the state average teaching salary per the Ohio Public ExpenditureCouncil report by approximately 14 percent. Average teachers’ salary among peer districtswill be affected by cost of living adjustments (COLA), experience and educationalattainment. Table 3-19 adjusts the teachers’ salary for COLA and also providesinformation concerning educational attainment and total years of experience. PCSDteachers have the highest average years of experience and the highest number of teacherswith a masters degree which correlates with the district having the highest averageteaching salary. However, Table 3-20 indicates that PCSD has the highest averageteaching salary for teachers with a masters degree and above when compared to the peerdistricts.

Table 3-19: Average Teachers’ Salary

Parma Canton DaytonSouth-Western

Average Teaching Salary $45,429 $41,188 $39,478 2 $42,237

COLA Salary 1 $44,087 $43,505 $39,048 $41,430

Average Years of Experience 15.3 14.4 15.3 12.6

% Non-Degree 0.0 4.0 1.1 0.1

% Bachelors Degree 18.5 25.3 37.0 31.3

% Bachelors Degree +150 26.7 35.9 12.4 3 23.5

% Masters and Above 54.8 34.8 49.5 45.1 Source: Preliminary FY 1997-98 EMIS Profile 1 Per 1995 composite index 2 Per district records



F3.31 Table 3-20 indicates PCSD has the second highest beginning bachelors salary, the highestbachelors and masters salaries at step five on the salary schedule, the second highestmaximum masters salary and the highest Ph.D. maximum salary when compared to thepeer districts. Table 3-20 also indicates that PCSD teachers reach the maximum step onthe salary schedule after 14 years. In addition, teachers receive longevity increases in threeyear increments starting at 17 years of experience.

Table 3-20: Teachers’ Salary Schedule

District

BachelorsBeginningSalaries

BachelorsSalary5th Step

BachelorsMaximum

Salary 1

MastersSalary5th Step

MastersMaximum

Salary 1

Ph.D. orDoctorateMaximum

Salary 1

# of Steps in

Salary Step Schedule

Parma $26,467 $33,190 $50,683 $37,160 $59,457 $68,971 14 steps pluslongevity at17,20,23,26,

29,32,&35 years

Canton 25,596 29,179 43,289 32,763 48,920 57,111 13 steps pluslongevity at

18,21,26

Dayton 27,535 30,032 44,515 32,896 49,231 52,467 20 steps pluslongevity at 20th

step

South-Western 26,083 33,125 48,619 36,516 56,861 N/A 24 steps

Average $26,420 $31,381 $46,777 $34,834 $53,617 $59,516

Source: FY 1998-99 salary schedules 1 Maximum salaries are calculated after longevity increments have been applied N/A - South-Western does not have a salary step above the masters maximum salary

F3.32 Although PCSD’s average teaching salary per EMIS for FY 1997-98 was $45,429, a



review of the 1997 calendar year W-2 report for full-time teachers reflected actual salariespaid to teachers ranged from $25,192 to $71,745 with approximately 42 percent of teachersreceiving more than $50,000 for the year. Table 3-21 represents the range of actualteacher salaries based on the W-2 report for 1997.

Table 3-21: Comparison of Teacher Salaries per 1997 W-2 Report to FY 1997-98 Base Salaries per EMIS

Salary Range# of Teachers per1997 W-2 Report

$70,000-72,999 2

60,000-69,999 46

50,000-59,999 263

40,000-49,999 215

30,000-39,999 155

25,192-29,999 51

Total 732

Source: Payroll department - 1997 W-2 report

F3.33 Part of the difference between the average salary per EMIS and actual salaries per the W-2report is due to supplemental pay. The PEA contract, which identifies the varioussupplemental pay activities, states that PCSD teachers are only required to teach orsupervise five periods per day and states that any teacher who teaches more than fiveperiods per day receives supplemental pay for the additional teaching load. In addition,a teacher who performs additional student supervision, such as study halls or bus duty,shall receive additional supplemental pay. In addition to PCSD teachers having the highestaverage teacher salary and PCSD teachers teaching the lowest number of instructionalminutes when compared to the peer districts, Table 3-22 indicates the district paid$436,450 to teachers for an additional teaching load and $97,694 for student supervision. The total amount of supplemental pay paid to employees for FY 1997-98 was $1,229,518. However, the district currently has no performance measures in place to trackeffectiveness in determining if continuation of the supplemental activity is warranted.

Table 3-22: Supplemental Pay for FY 1997-98

Supplemental Type Amount Paid



Additional teaching load $436,450

Student supervision 97,694

Department heads 66,657

Cluster heads 88,013

Athletic coaches 325,108

Music directors 82,684

Other 132,912

Total $1,229,518

Source: Payroll department

R3.11 As reflected in Table 3-22, additional compensation is provided through supplemental paypaid to teachers for duties performed. PCSD should consider implementing performancemeasures to track the level of effectiveness of the programs which initiate the additionalcompensation. Another option the district could consider would be to reduce the numberof planning periods and utilize the time to perform supervisory duties. See R3.9 for furtherexplanation.

F3.34 Table 3-23 is presented to demonstrate the salaries applicable to local districts who couldpossibly compete with PCSD in the recruitment of teaching positions due to their localproximity. PCSD’s average teachers’ salary is higher than North Olmsted’s averageteachers’ salary even though North Olmsted teachers have more years of experience andmore teachers with a masters degree or above.

Table 3-23: Surrounding District’s Average Teachers’ Salary

Parma Berea North Olmsted

Average Teaching Salary $45,429 $42,049 $45,121

Average Years of Experience 15.3 14.6 16.2

% Non-degree 0.0 11.9 0.0

% Bachelors Degree 18.5 25.8 15.5

% Bachelors Degree +150 26.7 26.6 24.3

% Masters and Above 54.8 35.7 60.2


Substitutes



F3.35 Table 3-24 indicates that PCSD spent $1,009,100 on substitute teachers for FY 1997-98. Because the district does notseparately budget or accountfor classified substitutes costs,the district was unable todetermine the total cost spenton classified substitutes. Thetreasurer indicated allclassified substitutes werecharged to the same objectcode as supplemental pay eventhough the Uniform SchoolAccounting System (USAS)requires two separate objectcodes for these expenditures. The transportation departmentwas able to provide substitutebus driver costs for FY 1997-98.

Table 3-24: Substitute Payments for FY 1997-98

Classification Amount Paid

Teachers $1,009,100

Secretaries/Clerical N/A

Educational Aides N/A

Custodial/Maintenance N/A

Transportation 45,574

Food Service N/A

Total $1,054,674 Source: Treasurer’s department N/A - not available - district was unable to provide data

R3.12 Without identifiable, accurate substitute cost information, management cannot makeinformed decisions pertaining to the district’s employee resources. PCSD should budgetand account for various classified substitutes in accordance with USAS which wouldprovide administrators with essential information needed to manage and control employeeleave usage and substitute costs.



F3.36 Table 3-25 compares PCSD and the peer districts’ substitute costs and procedures. Thisinformation will be used in numerous findings when assessing substitute costs.

Table 3-25: Comparison of Substitute CostsParma Canton Dayton South-Western

Auto/ManualSubstitutePlacement

Manual Manual Automated Manual

Daily Cost ofTeacherSubstitutes

1-30 days - $76/day31-60 days-$101/day61+ days - $144/dayplus eligible for full

benefits

$56/day$62/day for a core sub

At 61st day, paid accordingto training & experienceon salary schedule plus

benefits

Substitutes hired beforeJuly 1, 1995

without 4 year certificate:$86.78/day

with 4 year certificate$90.27/day

Substitutes hired after July 1, 1995

without 4 year certificate$72/day

with 4 year certificate$75/day

At 61st day, paid accordingto salary schedule plus

benefits

Substitute Pool - $70/dayRegular Sub - $63.00/day

Half-day Sub - $3516 - 30 days - $75/day31-60 days - $80/day

At 61st day, paidaccording to training &

experience on salaryschedule plus benefits

Hourly Rate forBus Drivers $10.61/hour $9.85/hour

$8.14/hour$7.00/hour (trainee) $11.72/hour

Hourly Rate forClerical & Aides $6.50/hour

$6.00/hour - clerical$5.50/hour - monitor $8.26/hour

Clerical - $6.50/hourAides - $6.00/hour

Hourly Rate forMaintenance

$6.00/hour - cleanersonly $7.00/hour

$6.85/hour (custodial)At 61st day receive benefits1

No substitutes formaintenance

$9.25/hour

Hourly Rate forFood Service $5.50/hour $5.50/hour

$6.00/hourAt 61st day receive benefits $6.00/hour

Source: HRD



Certificated Substitutes

F3.37 PCSD uses daily and long-term substitute teachers to cover for teacher absences. Dailysubstitutes are paid $76.00/day. After 30 days in the same position, the daily rate increasesto $101.00/day. A long-term substitute is defined as a substitute who works in the sameposition for 61 or more days. On the 61st day, the substitute receives $144.00/day and iseligible for full benefits.

F3.38 In FY 1997-98, PCSD utilized 813.4 FTE teachers who were contracted to teach 178 days(school year) for a total of 144,785 school days requiring a teacher. Table 3-26 showsapproximately 7.2 percent of total teaching days for FY 1997-98 were taught by asubstitute teacher. The table also illustrates that of the ten periods defined, five periodshad eight percent or more of available teaching days taught by a substitute teacher whichis indicated by the bolded numbers.

Table 3-26: Substitute Teachers Report for FY 1997-98

Month

TeachingDaysPer

Month

TotalTeaching

Days 1ElementarySubstitutes

SecondarySubstitutes

TotalSubstitute

Days

% of TotalTeaching

DaysRequiringSubstitutes

Aug/Sept’97 23 18,708 382.0 420.4 802.4 4.3%

Oct’97 22 17,895 642.5 624.9 1,267.4 7.1%

Nov’97 16 13,014 550.0 485.5 1,035.5 8.0%

Dec’97 15 12,201 452.5 467.5 920.0 7.5%

Jan’98 18 14,641 581.0 488.0 1,069.0 7.3%

Feb’98 19 15,455 664.0 586.9 1,250.9 8.1%

Mar’98 22 17,895 791.5 644.5 1,436.0 8.0%

Apr’98 16 13,014 561.5 507.9 1,069.4 8.2%



May’98 20 16,268 683.5 643.3 1,326.8 8.2%

June’98 7 5,694 120.0 123.1 243.1 4.3%

Total 178 144,785 5,428.5 4,992.0 10,420.5 7.2% Source: Human Resources Department 1 Number of teachers multiplied by number of teaching days per period

F3.39 Table 3-27 illustrates the number of leave days used by teachers for FY 1997-98 thusrequiring either a substitute or another staff member to cover for the absence.

Table 3-27: Total Leave Days Taken per Teacher - FY 1997-98#

SickDays

Taken

#Personal

Days Taken

# Prof.Days

Taken

#OtherDays

Taken

TotalLeave DaysTaken

Numberof

Teachers

Average#of Days

per Teacher

Teachers 7,693 1,123 402 1,811 11,029 881 12.5 Source: HRD F3.40 Table 3-28 illustrates the average number of sick, personal, professional and other leave

days taken, per teacher, for FY 1997-98.

Table 3-28: Average Number of Leave Days Taken per Teacher

Parma Canton Dayton South-Western

# ofDays

Taken

AveragePer

Teacher

# ofDays Taken

AveragePer

Teacher

# ofDays

Taken

AveragePer

Teacher

# of DaysTaken

AveragePer

Teacher

PeerDistrict

Average 2

Sick Leave 7,693 8.7 6,568 6.9 14,704 7.9 7,252 5.7 6.8

Personal Leave 1,123 1.3 1,508 1.6 441 0.2 2,160 1.7 1.2

Prof. Leave 402 0.5 1,440 1.5 3,748 2.0 1,769 1.4 1.6

Other Days 1 1,811 2.1 81 0.1 1,050 0.6 194 0.1 0.3

Total 11,029 12.6 9,597 10.1 19,943 10.7 11,375 8.9 9.9

# of EligibleTeachers 880.6 946.0 1,868.0 1,276.0

1 Other days include jury duty, school business leave and days off without pay 2 Peer district average excludes PCSD

F3.41 PCSD’s teachers averaged 8.7 sick days per teacher in FY 1997-98. Table 3-28 illustratesPCSD’s teachers averaged 1.4 days or approximately 19 percent more sick leave than thepeer group average. Table 3-28 also indicates that PCSD teachers averaged 12.6 leave



days taken per teacher which equates to teachers being out of the classroom approximatelyseven percent of the time. The average percent of leave taken by the peer districts is 5.5percent. In addition to the increased cost of substitute teachers, excessive leave createsinterruptions in the flow of teachers’ curriculum and may have an impact on the qualityof education provided to students. Data provided by the Bureau of Labor Statisticsindicates that 12 month government workers average 4.7 sick days per person in 1997which is lower than the peer group average and significantly lower than PCSD’s teacheraverage.

F3.42 The assumptions used for the following statistics are based on the average daily substituterate of $76.00 per day. PCSD teachers, who are provided 15 days of sick leave per year,averaged 8.7 days of sick leave per teacher or approximately $582,253 for total substitutesalaries in FY 1997-98. In FY 1997-98 teachers averaged 1.3 days of personal leave perteacher or approximately $87,003 for total substitute salaries. PCSD’s union agreementallows three days of professional leave days per teacher up to a maximum of 800 days peryear. In FY 1997-98, PCSD’s teachers averaged 0.5 days of professional leave or $33,463for total substitute salaries. PCSD teachers averaged 2.1 days of other leave orapproximately $140,544 for substitute salaries. Using the leave as defined above,$843,263 could have been spent on substitute teachers. This estimate is conservativebecause it does not consider the increased rate for long-term substitute teachers. PCSDactually spent $1,009,100 on substitute teachers in FY 1997-98.

R3.13 PCSD spent $1,009,100 on substitute teacher payments for FY 1997-98. Contributing tothis expense was sick days used by all employees. If PCSD would reduce the amount ofsick leave taken, it would reduce additional administrative time, enhance the quality ofeducation by eliminating interruptions in the flow of teachers’ curriculum and wouldreduce the overall substitute costs incurred as shown in Table 3-29 below. Reducing sickleave taken by four days would bring PCSD in line with the average taken by 12 monthgovernment workers of 4.7 days as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Table 3-29: Annual Savings Calculated for Reduction in Usage of Teacher’s Sick Leave

Annual Savings Calculated at

Sick leave reduced by 1 day

Sick leave reduced by 2 days

Sick leavereduced by 4 days

Teachers $66,926 $133,852 $267,704

Financial Implication: Reducing the number of sick days taken by each teacher by one day would save PCSD approximately $66,926 annually in substitute costs. Reducing thenumber of sick days taken by each teacher by two days would save PCSD approximately$133,852 annually in substitute costs. Reducing the number of sick days taken by eachteacher by four days would save PCSD approximately $267,704 annually in substitutecosts. The financial implications may be greater depending on use of long-term substitutes



whose salaries are considerably higher and who receive benefits.

F3.43 The district has indicated substitute teachers are difficult to find. PCSD uses the followingapproaches to find substitutes:

• Placing advertisements in local newspapers• Advertising at local colleges and universities• Posting available positions on all schools’ bulletin boards• Sending notices with employee paychecks• Questioning applicants for full-time teaching positions if they are

willing to substitute

F3.44 When a qualified substitute is not available to cover for an absent teacher, the principal willask another teacher to cover the class and the teacher is compensated at a rate of $21.17per class which is significantly higher than the peer districts as reflected in Table 3-30. The district could not identify the total cost paid to teachers in FY 1997-98 to cover aclass when a substitute could not be placed.

Table 3-30: Rates Paid for Teachers to Fill in for Substitutes


$21.17/hour $18.67 per period(Maximum of threeperiods - $56.01)

$13.00/hour $15.22/periodSplit Session Rate -

$20/period

The customer satisfaction survey included two questions regarding the district’s substituteteacher process. Results indicated teachers are satisfied with the quality, effectiveness andavailability of substitutes.

R3.14 PCSD’s hourly rate to cover for teacher absences is significantly higher than the peerdistricts. PCSD should include the rates paid to fill in for substitutes as part of thecomprehensive compensation study as recommended in R3.10.

Classified Substitutes

F3.45 Classified positions that require substitutes are typically filled by casual/short-termsubstitutes. Casual/short-term substitutes are paid an hourly wage based upon the



classification of employees as shown in Table 3-25. On the 21st day in the same position,the rate increases to the base rate on the salary schedule. On the 81st day in the sameposition, the rate increases to step one of the salary schedule. The substitute rate does notincrease higher than the step one salary. Benefits are not provided to casual/short-termsubstitutes at any time.

F3.46 Table 3-31 illustrates the number of days of leave used by PCSD’s classified staff for FY1997-98 which could have required either a substitute or another staff member to cover forthe vacancy.

Table 3-31: Classified Personnel Days Taken FY 1996-97

Classification

# of SickDays

Taken

# of VacDays

Taken

# ofPersonal

DaysTaken

# of Prof.Days

Taken

# of OtherDays

Taken1

TotalLeaveTaken

# ofEmp.per

Class.

Average# Total DaysTaken perEmployee

Clerical/Office 888 328 199 13 52 1,480 129 11.5

EducationalAssistants 620 0 141 36 23 820 67 12.2

Custodial/Maintenance 1,467 563 252 14 75 2,371 120 19.8

Food Service 527 0 87 6 122 742 68 10.9

Transportation 946 123 155 10 370 1,604 84 19.1

OtherClassified 1,509 82 293 23 283 2,190 196 11.2

Total 5,957 1,096 1,127 102 925 9,207 664 13.9

Source: Staff Attendance Reports 1 Other days include jury duty and days off without pay

F3.47 Table 3-32 illustrates the average number of leave days taken per employee category forFY 1997-98.

Table 3-32: Average Days Leave Taken FY 1997-98 - Classified Personnel

Classification

Average# Sick Days

Taken

Average # Vacation Days

Taken 1

Average #Personal Days

Taken

Average #ProfessionalDays Taken

Average #Other Days

Taken 2

Clerical/Office 6.9 11.3 1.5 0.1 0.4

EducationalAssistants 9.3 0.0 2.1 0.5 0.3

Custodial/Maintenance 12.2 12.2 2.1 0.1 0.6



Food Service 7.8 0.0 1.3 0.1 1.8

Transportation 11.3 12.3 1.8 0.1 4.4

Other 7.7 9.1 1.5 0.1 1.4

Source: Staff Attendance Reports 1 Calculated based upon eligible employees 2 Other days taken includes jury duty and days off without pay

F3.48 Table 3-33 presents FY 1997-98 substitute costs for classified employees assuming anaverage daily substitute rate as defined in Table 3-25 and an average number of total leavedays taken per employee as established in Table 3-31 for each employee classification. As noted in F3.35, the district was unable to identify total classified substitute costs,therefore, an analysis comparing estimated substitute costs to actual substitute costs couldnot be performed.

Table 3-33: Classified Personnel Substitute Costs FY 1996-97

Classification

Avg # TotalDays Taken

per Employee

Hoursper

Day

SubstituteRate

per Hour

# of EmployeesIncluded in Group

EstimatedSubstitute

Cost

Clerical/Office 1 11.5 7.5 $6.50 129 N/A

Educational Assistants 12.2 6.5 $6.50 67 $34,535

Cleaners 2 25.9 8.0 $8.50 105 184,926

Food Service 10.9 3.5 $5.50 68 14,268

Transportation 19.1 6.0 $10.61 84 102,136

Total $335,865

Source: Staff Attendance Reports 1 PCSD only uses clerical substitutes for long term positions 2 Substitutes are only used for cleaners



F3.49 Table 3-34 compares the average number of sick days taken by PCSD’s classified staff tothe peer districts for FY 1997-98.

Table 3-34: Average Number of Sick Days Taken FY 1997-98


# SickDays

Taken

AveragePer

Employee

# SickDays

Taken

AveragePer

Employee

# SickDays

Taken

AveragePer

Employee

# SickDays

Taken

AveragePer

EmployeePeer

Average

Clerical 888 6.9 876 7.5 2,928 12.3 720 4.9 7.9

EducationalAssistants 620 9.3 1,926 8.4 3,745 11.7 2,260 6.4 9.0

Cust/Maint 1,467 12.2 874 8.2 2,838 11.9 1,372 8.4 10.2

Food Service 527 7.8 1,019 6.1 1,337 8.0 971 6.0 7.0

Transportation 946 11.3 734 12.9 2,315 10.6 1,089 8.0 10.7

OtherClassified 1,509 7.7 81 3.8 428 13.4 0 0.0 8.3

Total 5,957 9.0 5,510 7.9 13,591 11.3 6,412 6.7 8.7

Table 3-34 indicates that PCSD classified employees averaged 9.0 sick days during FY1997-98. Educational assistants, custodian/maintenance and transportation employeesutilized nine or more days of sick leave in FY 1998-97. PCSD’s classified staff used thesecond highest average number of sick days when compared to the peer districts. Inaddition, South-Western City Schools and Hamilton City Schools’ classified employeesaveraged only 6.7 and 6.6 days per employee which is approximately 34 to 36 percent lessthan PCSD’s classified employees. The classified staff provides critical resources to theeducational process by providing the following services:

• Functioning as a support resource to staff and students• Providing a clean and secure environment• Ensuring nutritious lunches• Transporting students in a safe and timely fashion• Fulfilling additional functions as required by curriculum and/or other district needs



Because excessive sick leave limits the district’s resources, daily routines are disrupted andcan weaken the quality of education. In addition, the district incurs significant financialexpenditures through the use of substitutes or overtime.

R3.15 The classified employee population averaged 9.0 sick days per person in FY 1997-98which is higher than the peer district average and substantially higher than the averagetaken by 12 month government workers for 4.7 days as reported by the Bureau of LaborStatistics. Assuming full utilization of substitutes by the district, if PCSD would reducethe amount of sick leave taken, it would reduce additional administrative time, enhance thequality of education by eliminating interruptions in the flow of work and reduce the overallsubstitute costs incurred as shown in Table 3-35.

Table 3-35: Annual Savings Calculated From Reductions in Classified Sick Leave Usage

Annual Savings Calculated atEmployee

Classification Sick leave reduced by 1 day



Clerical 1 N/A N/A N/A

Educational Assistants $2,831 $5,662 $14,155

Custodial/Maintenance 2 2,592 5,184 12,960

Food Service 1,309 2,618 6,545

Transportation 5,347 10,695 26,735

Total Savings $12,079 $24,159 $60,395

1 PCSD only uses clerical substitutes for long term positions 2 PCSD only uses substitutes for cleaning positions

Financial Implication: Reducing the number of sick days taken by each employee by oneday would save PCSD approximately $12,079 annually in substitute costs. Reducing thenumber of sick days taken by employees by two days would save PCSD approximately$24,159 annually in substitute costs. If PCSD could further reduce sick leave taken by fivedays, the district would save approximately $60,395 annually in substitute costs.

R3.16 Although PCSD currently has a HRIS which can provide management with detailedinformation, the district does not have an automated substitute calling system. PCSDshould define requirements to select and implement an automated substitute calling systemthat will meet the district’s needs. The implementation of an automated substituteplacement system should be integrated with the payroll system and the HRIS. An



automated substitute placement system will improve operations in the following areas:

• Extent of Automation: There is functionality that a substitute placement systemoffers that is not available with a manual substitute placement operation. Forexample, such a system can record instructions from the absent teacher that areautomatically played for the substitute who accepts the position.

• Availability of Data: An automated substitute placement system will providemanagement with reports concerning substitute placement rates, absenteeism andother useful information. Furthermore, the system can generate reports to respondto unemployment compensation claims by substitute personnel.

• Future Improvements: For an additional investment, such a system can be interfacedwith payroll to reduce manual payroll processing and can be expanded toaccommodate non-teaching substitute placement such as substitute school clerks.

• Site-based Management: An automated substitute placement system will callsubstitutes based on a prioritized roster established by each school.

Financial Implication: Several additional benefits of a computerized substitute systemmay include an efficient method of contacting qualified substitutes that will reduce thetime spent by district personnel in obtaining substitutes; an overall reduction in employeesick time; and a convenient reporting system that will improve management’s access tosubstitute data. The estimated costs associated with implementing a teacher substitutesystem include approximately $60,000 in software and hardware and ongoing technicalsupport and technology upgrades would be approximately $3,000 in annually.

Benefits Administration

F3.50 The administration of benefits is shared between the HRD and the payroll departmentwhich reports to the treasurer’s office. The HRD is currently responsible for new employeeorientation and distributing benefit information packets to employees. The treasurer’soffice is responsible for processing enrollment additions and changes, reconciling carriercoverage records and working with the payroll department to ensure corresponding payrolldeductions are processed properly. In addition, the administration of health, dental, visionclaims and tax-sheltered annuities are handled by an account clerk in the treasurer’s office. The account clerk reports to the treasurer.

F3.51 The district has an insurance committee that is composed of four members appointed bythe president of the Parma Education Association (PEA), four members appointed by thesuperintendent and one representative from each of the OAPSE local chapters. The



committee meets monthly and monitors all benefit plan costs including claims, reviewsbenefit expenditures for efficiency and effectiveness and reviews utilization studies. Thecommittee does not have decision making authority and can only make advisoryrecommendations to the board of education regarding benefits. The board is ultimatelyresponsible for approving changes in benefits.

F3.52 The insurance committee has contracted for consulting services on an as needed basis with Willis Cooroon, Incorporated, an independent consulting firm. Willis Cooroon providesthe following services: assisting the district in determining the most effective healthinsurance strategies, preparing reports regarding insurance issues, attending insurancecommittee meetings, assisting the district in dealing with insurance carriers and advisingthe district as to the appropriateness of the existing premium. The last report was issuedin May 1998, and indicated that no alternative medical plan could match the price or thelevel of service the district is currently receiving.

F3.53 All full-time certificated employees are eligible to receive health care benefits. Most

certificated employees are considered full-time if they work 37.5 hours or more per week. Certificated employees hired before FY 1994-95 and who work 50 percent or less of afull-time position are required to contribute 50 percent of the monthly premium in orderto receive full benefits. Part-time employees hired in or after FY 1994-95 are required tocontribute towards their health insurance costs based on a percentage of their assignmentlevel. Table 3-36 is an example illustrating the percentage of the premium that the boardwill pay is in direct proportion with the workload of part-time employees hired in or afterFY 1994-95. The district currently has 11 part-time employees who were hired after FY1994-95 and are required to contribute based on their workload.

Table 3-36: Example of the Contribution Scale for Part-time Certificated Employees Hired After FY 1994-95

Hours WorkedDuring Day

% of Full-TimeWorkload 1

% of Premium Paidby Employee

% of Premium Paid by Board

6 hours per day 86% 14% 86%

5 hours per day 71% 29% 71%

4.5 hours per day 64% 36% 64%

3 hours per day 43% 57% 43% 1 Assumes a full-time teacher works 180 days a year.

C3.1 PCSD has successfully implemented a graduated benefit scale designed to prorate thecontributions required by part-time certificated employees. Part-time employees who wishto have medical coverage are required to contribute towards the premium costs based onthe percent of a full-time schedule that each employee works which helps reduce insurancecosts to the district.



F3.54 Classified employees receive benefits based on the hours worked per week. Thoseemployees working more than 30 hours a week are eligible to receive single or familycoverage paid by the board. Those employees working more than 20 hours but less than30 hours a week are eligible for single coverage benefits at the board’s expense and mayelect family coverage and contribute the difference between the family and single plans. Employees who work less than 20 hours a week may voluntarily participate in the board’sinsurance plans at their own expense.

F3.55 The district currently utilizes three healthcare plans: Medical Mutual which is a traditionalplan and only offered to certificated staff, Super Med Plus which is a PPO plan, andKaiser Permanente which is a HMO plan. Full-time employees enrolled in the Super MedPlus plan (PPO) are not required to contribute towards the cost of the premium. Thoseindividuals who elect family coverage through Medical Mutual (Traditional Plan) arerequired to pay $50 towards the monthly hospitalization premium. However, effectiveJanuary 1, 1999, those employees who elect family coverage under Medical Mutual willbe required to pay the full difference in the premiums between the traditional familycoverage and the comparable Super Med Plus family coverage. The board will continueto pay the total cost of single health coverage under the Medical Mutual plan. Anyemployee may elect the Kaiser Permanente health plan (HMO) in lieu of the above healthplans and be charged the difference between the premium rates for the Super Med Plusmedical and dental plans and the cost of the HMO plan. According to a report completedby SERB (see F3.56), 28 percent of employers offer insurance coverage through an HMO. The SERB study also identified the average monthly medical premium for single andfamily coverage as $177.84 and $447.34 respectively. The single and family premiumsfor the Super Med Plus plan is substantially lower than the averages identified in the SERBstudy. The district indicated the PPO premiums are established based on prior claims anddue to favorable claim experience, the district was able to negotiate the favorable premiumrate. Table 3-37 identifies the amount paid by employees and the amount paid by theboard for each medical plan during FY 1997-98.



Table 3-37: Health Plan Cost Obligations

MedicalMutual-

Certificated

Super Med Plus (PPO) -Certificated

Super MedPlus (PPO) -

Classified

KaiserPermanente

(HMO) -Certificated

KaiserPermanente

(HMO) -Classified

Full-time Employees

Monthly Single Plan Rate $155.59 $108.92 $108.92 $172.87 $172.87

% paid by employee 0% 0% 0% 18% 20%

$ paid by employee $0 $0 $0 $31.24 $34.11

$ paid by employer $155.59 $108.92 $108.92 $141.63 $138.76

Full-time Employees

Monthly Family Plan Rate $416.07 $291.25 $291.25 $469.87 $469.87

% paid by employee 12% 0% 0% 23% 24%

$ paid by employee $50.00 $0.00 $0.00 $107.76 $113.97

$ paid by employer $366.07 $291.25 $291.25 $362.11 $355.90

F3.56 A report on the Cost of Health Insurance in Ohio’s Public Sector was completed by SERB.

Based on the 1997 study, almost 64 percent of the responding employers required theiremployees to pay a portion of the cost of a family premium. Fifty-one percent requiredtheir employees to share the cost for the single plan. The average monthly employeecontribution is $19.81 for single and $57.23 for family. These rates amount to 11 percentof the cost of a single plan and 13 percent of the monthly family premium. Other findingsfrom the study include the following:

• Estimated cost of medical and other health care benefits will average $5,170 per

covered employee in 1997. • Monthly medical insurance premiums currently average $177.84 for single coverage

and $446.26 for a family plan. • Average total monthly cost of employee health care benefits stands at $216.08 and

$512.35 for single and family coverage, respectively.• Approximately 88 percent of public employers offer some level of dental coverage,

46 percent provide a vision plan and 93 percent offer life insurance.• Dental coverage costs an average of $26.21 a month for single and $45.56 a month

for family. The cost of optical insurance averages $7.61 for single and $14.65 forfamily coverage.



• Twenty-eight percent of employers offer insurance coverage through an HMO. Forty-three percent contract at least some health services through a providernetwork.

F3.57 Table 3-38 provides certain details about health care information. Each of the peerdistricts requires contributions from employees depending on the type of coverage and theplan chosen by the employee with the exception of Canton City School District which doesnot require an employee contribution for single or family coverage.

Table 3-38: Health Care Costs

School Provider(s)

MonthlyPremium

For SinglePlan

FullTimeEmp.Share

MonthlyPremium

ForEmp.+ one

FullTimeEmp.Share

MonthlyPremium

ForFamily

Full-TimeEmp.Share

# ofEmployees

In EachPlan

Self-Insured

Parma Medical Mutual/(Traditional)certificated

Super MedPlus/(PPO)certificatedclassified

KaiserPermanente 1/(HMO)certificatedclassified

$155.59

$108.92$108.92

$172.87$172.87

$0

$0$0

$31.24$34.11

N/A

N/AN/A

N/AN/A

N/A

N/AN/A

N/AN/A

$416.07

$291.25$291.25

$469.87$469.87

$50.00

$0$0

$107.76$113.97

147/151

109/549112/445

2/78/11

No

NoNo

NoNo

Canton Traditional -North AmericanBenefits1

PPO - OhioHealth Choice1

HMO - Aultcare1

$170.82

$162.91

$143.55

$0

$0

$0

N/A

N/A

$272.65

N/A

N/A

$0

$471.24

$449.41

$437.55

$0

$0

$0

18/0/22

381/0/894

33/25/53

Yes

Yes

No

Dayton United HealthCare 1

Anthem - BlueCross & BlueShield 1

$170.91

$174.88

$25.63$34.18

$26.23$34.98

N/A

N/A

N/A

N/A

$432.62

$441.72

$64.89$86.52

$66.26$88.34

479/1,006278/263

278/48299/140

No

No

South-Western

United HealthCare1

$169.45 $0 N/A N/A $447.34 $146.33 1,135/697 No

1 Prescription plan is included in medical benefits premium costs

The customer satisfaction survey included a question asking if employees were satisfiedwith procedures regarding insurance benefits. The survey results concluded the majorityof the recipients are satisfied in this area.



F3.58 Table 3-39 provides certain details about health care information for two surroundingdistricts. The two surrounding districts are self-insured and only Berea requirescontributions towards health care coverage.

Table 3-39: Surrounding District’s Health Care Costs

School Provider(s)

MonthlyPremium

ForSinglePlan

FullTimeEmp.Share

MonthlyPremium

ForFamily

Full-TimeEmployee

Share

# ofEmployees

In EachPlan

Self-Insured

Parma Medical Mutual/(Traditional)certificated

Super MedPlus/(PPO)certificatedclassified

Kaiser Permanente 1/(HMO)certificatedclassified

$155.59

$108.92$108.92

$172.87$172.87

$0

$0$0

$31.24$34.11

$416.07

$291.25$291.25

$469.87$469.87

$50.00

$0$0

$107.76$113.97

147/151

109/549112/445

2/78/11

No

NoNo

NoNo

Berea Medical Mutual 1 $150.06 $0 $404.02 $12.12 348/565 Yes

North Olmsted Medical Mutual

Kaiser Permanente

$105.66

$153.99

$0

$0

$271.33

$406.51

$0

$0

172/423

10/13

Yes

No

1 Prescription plan is included in medical benefits premium costs



F3.59 Certain benefits affect the overall cost of medical plans. Table 3-40 compares some keybenefits that are considered when comparing benefits to cost when choosing a medicalplan.

Table 3-40: Key Medical Plan BenefitsParma

Medical Mutual(Traditional)

Super Med Plus (PPO) Kaiser Permanente

(HMO)

CantonNorth American

Benefits (Traditional)Ohio Health Choice

(PPO)AultCare (HMO)

DaytonUnited Health Care

Anthem - Blue Cross& Blue Shield

South-WesternUnited Health Care

(HMO)

OfficeVisits

80/20$10 co-pay

100% covered

Traditional - 70/30PPO - 90/10

HMO - 100%

$5.00 co-pay$5.00 co-pay

$5.00 co-pay

EmployeeAnnual

Deductible

$100 S/$200 FNetwork - $0

Non-network - $250None

Traditional - $75/$150PPO - $75/$150

HMO - $0

No deductibleNo deductible

No deductible

Prescription PlanIncluded?

NoNoYes

Yes YesYes

Yes

Need to Choose PrimaryPhysician

NoNoYes

Traditional - NoPPO - No

HMO - Yes

YesYes

No

Maternity 100%100% network / 70% non-

network100%

Traditional - 70%PPO - 90%

HMO - 100 %

First visit - $5.00,100%100%

100%

Well Child Care $500 max per year$10 co-pay network/70% or

$500 max non-network100%

Traditional - NoPPO - No

HMO - Yes

$5.00 co-pay$5.00 co-pay

$5.00 co-pay

Inpatient Hospital Care 100% - 730 days max100% network/ 70% non-

network100% - No daily maximum

Traditional - 70%PPO - 90%

HMO - 100%

100%100%

100%



F3.60 Table 3-41 shows the average premiums paid for both single and family dental plans. While the three peer districts are all self-insured, Dayton City School District is the onlypeer that requires employee contributions. PCSD offers two dental plans neither of whichrequires a contribution.

Table 3-41: Dental Insurance

School Provider(s)

MonthCostFor

SinglePlan

FullTimeEmp.Share

MonthCostFor

Family

Full-TimeEmp.Share

NumberEnrolled:Single/Family

Self-Insured

Parma Canada LifeAssurance/certificated

Super MedPlus/classified

$26.00

$20.05

$0

$0

$66.37

$60.14

$0

$0

258/707

126/478

No

No

Canton Professional ClaimsManagement

$19.56 $0 $53.83 $0 336/1,095 Yes

Dayton Mutual HealthMedical Mutualof Ohio

$20.36

$11.15

$1.44

$1.12

$47.90

$31.83

$3.38

$3.18

842/1,760

48/96

No

Yes

South-Western

Coresource $47.52 $0 $47.52 $0 1,834 Yes

F3.61 Table 3-42 shows the dental coverage comparisons for two surrounding districts. Both

peer districts are self-insured and only Berea Schools requires full-time employees tocontribute towards the monthly family plan premium

Table 3-42: Surrounding District’s Dental Insurance Coverage

School Provider(s)

MonthlyCost forSinglePlan

Full-timeEmployee

Share

MonthlyCost forFamily

Plan

Full-TimeEmployee

Share

NumberEnrolled:

Single/Family

Self -Insured

Parma Canada LifeAssurance/certificated

Super Med Plus/classified

$26.00

$20.05

$0

$0

$66.37

$60.14

$0

$0

258/707

126/478

No

No

Berea Medical Mutual $25.77 $0 $104.97 $35.75 622/293 Yes

NorthOlmsted

Medical Mutual $15.43 $0 $41.12 $0 182/436 Yes



F3.62 Table 3-43 indicates that the district is currently offering two vision plans. The certificatedstaff were insured through Medical Mutual while the classified staff were insured throughSuper Med Plus. The certificated plan was $3.84 less per person and provided employeeswith the option of family coverage. However, during spring negotiations the districtrectified this situation by only offering vision benefits through Medical Mutual effectiveJune 1, 1998.

Table 3-43: Vision Insurance

School Provider(s)

MonthlyCost forSingle

Full-TimeEmployee

Share


Full-TimeEmployee

Share

# ofEmp In.

EachPlan

SelfInsured

Parma MedicalMutualcertificated 1

Super Med Plusclassified

$6.79

$10.63

$0

$0

$15.63

N/A 2

$0

N/A 2

264/711

588

No

No

Canton North AmericanBenefits

$2.99 $0 $9.03 $0 318/1,058 Yes

Dayton N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

South-Western

Vision ServicePlan

$4.48 $0 $12.97 $0 400/1,434 Yes

1 Classified employees enrolled in the Kaiser Permanente health plan are provided vision benefits through Medical Mutual. 2 The Super Med Plus plan does not offer dependent coverage.

C3.2 Consolidating the district’s two vision plans to one plan decreases the amount of timeutilized to administer the plans, therefore reducing administrative costs. Additionally,larger enrollment numbers may enable the district to qualify for quantity discounts.



F3.63 Table 3-44 shows the average premiums paid for both single and family vision plans forthe two surrounding districts. As indicated below, North Olmsted City School Districtdoes not provide vision insurance to its employees.

Table 3-44: Surrounding District’s Vision Insurance

School Provider(s)

MonthlyPremiumfor Single

Plan

Full-TimeEmployee

Share

MonthlyPremium

for FamilyPlan

Full-TimeEmployee

Share

# ofEmployees

In eachPlan

SelfInsured

Parma MedicalMutual/certificated 1

Super MedPlus/classified

$6.79

$10.63

$0

$0

$15.63

N/A 2

$0

N/A 2

264/711

588

No

No

Berea Medical Mutual $4.96 $0 $17.37 $6.77 542/339 Yes

NorthOlmsted

Vision insurance is notoffered.

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

1 Classified employees enrolled in the Kaiser Permanente plan are provided vision benefits through Medical Mutual.2 The Super Med Plus plan does not offer dependent coverage.

F3.64 Table 3-45 shows the average premiums paid for both single and family prescriptioninsurance plans. Only the Kaiser Permanente plan includes prescription coverage withinthe hospitalization/medical coverage at PCSD. Prescription coverage is included withhospitalization/medical coverage for each of the peer districts and none require employeecontributions.

Table 3-45: Prescription Insurance

School Provider(s)

Cost/Mthper Emp.

Single

Full-TimeEmployee

Share


Full-TimeEmployee

Share

# ofEmp In

Each PlanSelf

Insured

Parma Medical Mutualcertificated

Super Med Plusclassified

Kaiser Permanentecertificatedclassified

$32.71

$29.84

Included inhealth plan

$0

$0

N/AN/A

$70.86

$64.65

N/AN/A

$0

$0

N/AN/A

251/704

110/437

N/AN/A

No

No

NoNo

Canton Included in healthplan


Dayton Included in healthplan


South-Western

Included in healthplan




F3.65 Table 3-46 shows the average premiums paid for both single and family prescription plansfor the two surrounding districts.

Table 3-46: Surrounding District’s Prescription Insurance

School Provider(s)

Monthly Premium for Single

Plan

MonthlyPremium forFamily Plan

NumberEnrolled:

Single/Family

Full-TimeEmployee

ShareSelf

Insured

Parma Medical Mutual/certificated

Super Med Plus/classified

Kaiser Permanentecertificated

classified

$32.71

$29.84

Included in health plan

Included in health plan

$70.86

$64.65

N/A

N/A

251/704

110/437

N/A

N/A

$0

$0

N/A

N/A

No

No

No

No

Berea Medical Mutual Included in health plan N/A N/A N/A N/A

NorthOlmsted

Medical Mutual $30.47 $75.99 182/436 $0 No

F3.66 Table 3-47 compares PCSD’s FY 1997-98 average yearly total insurance costs to the peerdistricts. The table indicates that PCSD’s average insurance cost per employee of $4,675is the highest when compared to the peer districts. Additionally, PCSD’s annual insurancecost per employee is the third highest when compared to all the school districts who havereceived a performance audit to date. PCSD’s annual insurance cost per employee issubstantially higher than the peer districts’ because employees enrolled in the traditionalplan and HMO plans are only required to contribute a minimal amount of the monthlypremium and employees enrolled in the PPO plan are not required to contribute towardsthe monthly premiums. In addition, the district’s premium rates for dental family plans aresubstantially higher than the peer districts’.

Table 3-47: Yearly Total of All Insurance Costs - FY 1997-98

SchoolHealth Care

CostsDentalCosts

PrescriptionCosts

VisionCosts

LifeInsurance

Costs Totals

Annual Costper

Employee 1

Parma $6,368,621 $756,263 included inhospitalization

$94,392 $121,237 $7,340,513 $4,675

Canton $4,954,537 $609,036 $441,827 2 $70,320 $78,178 $6,153,898 $4,288

Dayton $10,250,165 $1,157,668 3 N/A $245,116 $11,652,949 $3,805

South-Western

$4,443,342 $988,710 3 $244,232 $116,845 $5,793,129 $3,098

1 Does not include life insurance costs2 Prescription costs 1/98 through 6/98; coverage 7/97 through 12/97 included in health care costs



3 Included in health care premiums

F3.67 Table 3-48 indicates PCSD’s fringe benefit expenditures for certificated personnel areslightly higher than the peer district average and approximately equal to the statewideaverage for benefits in proportion to total operating expenditures. Fringe benefitexpenditures for classified personnel are greater than both the peer district and statewideaverages for benefits in proportion to total operating expenditures.

Table 3-48: Fringe Benefit Expenditures as a Percentage of Total Operating Expenses

ExpenditureBreakdown Parma Canton Dayton South-Western

PeerAverage

StateAverage

CertificatedBenefits

12.9% 14.3% 10.0% 11.6% 12.2% 13.0%

ClassifiedBenefits

5.3% 4.5% 4.6% 4.1% 4.6% 4.2%


F3.68 Table 3-49 indicates PCSD’s fringe benefit expenditures for certificated employees appearto be consistent with the statewide average and less than the surrounding peer districtaverage for benefits in proportion to total operating expenditures. Fringe benefitexpenditures for classified personnel are higher than both the peer district and statewideaverages.

Table 3-49: Fringe Benefit Expenditures as aPercentage of Total Operating Expenses - Surrounding Districts

ExpenditureBreakdown Parma Berea

North Olmsted

PeerAverage

StateAverage

CertificatedBenefits

12.9% 18.0% 13.9% 14.9% 13.0%

ClassifiedBenefits

5.3% 4.9% 1.7% 4.0% 4.2%


F3.69 PCSD provides term life insurance to all certificated employees who work 12.5 or morehours per week. All eligible employees are provided with $50,000 of life insurance. Classified employees who work 30 or more hours are provided with $30,000 of lifeinsurance. Classified employees who work between 20 hours but less than 30 hours perweek are provided with $20,000 of life insurance coverage.

F3.70 According to Table 3-38, PCSD’s HMO plan through Kaiser Permanente appears to be



more costly than the traditional plan through Medical Mutual. However, the premiumunder Kaiser Permanente includes the cost of the prescription plan while the traditionalplan does not. By adding the cost of the prescription plan under Medical Mutual to thehealth care premium, the traditional plan becomes the most expensive costing $188.30 and$486.93 a month for medical and prescription coverage under the single and family plansrespectively. Furthermore, these rates are approximately 33 percent and 34 percent greaterthan the comparable coverage offered through the PPO plan. The traditional plan, whichis only offered to certificated employees, currently has 147 individuals enrolled in thesingle plan, and 151 in the family plan.

R3.17 PCSD’s average benefit cost per employee is $4,675 compared to the peer district averageof $3,967 and the district has the second highest certificated fringe benefit expendituresas a percentage of total operating expenses and the highest classified fringe benefitexpenditures as a percentage of total operating expenses when compared to the peerdistricts. Effective January 1999, certificated employees electing the family traditionalplan must contribute the difference between the traditional plan monthly premium and themonthly premium for the Super Med Plus family plan. During the past open enrollmentperiod, 117 employees currently enrolled in the traditional family plan elected a differentplan due to the new requirement effective January 1999. Since PCSD currently offers twoother more efficient health care plans, the district should discontinue providing the costlytraditional plan. Employees enrolled in the traditional plan should be enrolled in the PPOplan that is currently offered. Willis Cooroon, the district’s insurance consultant, indicateda 20 percent savings is a reasonable assumption when determining the anticipated savingsof discontinuing the traditional plan. Implementing this recommendation would requirefuture negotiations.

Financial Implications: Assuming employees enrolled in the traditional plan as of January1999 switched to the PPO plan and assuming a 20 percent savings in premium rates, PCSDwould save approximately $55,173 annually by eliminating the traditional health care plan. Assuming employees enrolled in the traditional plan as of January 1999 switched to thePPO plan and assuming the current PPO premiums stay the same, PCSD would saveapproximately $136,468 annually.

F3.71 The district currently offers separate dental plans for certificated and classified employeesalthough the coverage for both plans is fairly consistent. However, the Canada Lifemonthly premiums (offered only to certificated employees) are approximately 10 percentto 30 percent higher than the Super Med Plus premiums. Canada Life issued a refund inthe amount of $41,517 for the policy year ending May 31, 1998.

R3.18 PCSD should consider consolidating the two dental plans offered into one dental plan for

all employees. Consolidating the dental plans into one plan would reduce administrative



costs and potentially provide the district with a quantity discount. Implementing thisrecommendation would require future negotiations.

Financial Implications: Assuming employees currently enrolled in the Canada LifeAssurance plan were to enroll in the Super Med Plus dental plan, the district would saveapproximately $79,000 annually.

R3.19 PCSD currently requires employees enrolled in the HMO plan to contribute the differencebetween the HMO monthly premium and the PPO monthly medical and dental premiums. Certificated employees enrolled in the traditional plan must contribute $50 a monthtowards the family plan monthly premium. In addition, certificated employees hired in orafter FY 1994-95 and work less than full-time are required to contribute based on theirworkload. PCSD does not require full-time employees to contribute towards the monthlypremium for the dental and vision plans. Classified employees working between 20 and30 hours per week are eligible for single coverage benefits at the board’s expense and mustpay the difference between the single and family plans if the family plan is elected.

In addition to R3.17 and R3.18, if PCSD would change employee contributions to beconsistent for all employees enrolled in all medical and dental plans, the overall insuranceexpenses would be reduced as shown in Table 3-50. Requiring employee contributionsfor all employees would assist the district in controlling benefit costs.

Table 3-50: Annual Savings Resulting fromIncreased Employee Contributions for Insurance

Annual Savings Calculated at

10% 15% 20%

Single Plan - Medical $35,900 $60,984 $86,070

Family Plan - Medical $373,410 $578,575 $783,784

Single Plan - Dental $9,239 $13,859 $18,478

Family Plan - Dental $85,519 $128,279 $171,038

Total Annual Savings $504,068 $781,697 $1,059,326

Financial Implication: Requiring a 10 percent contribution from all employees for medicaland dental benefits would save PCSD approximately $504,068 annually. Increasing thecontributions to 15 percent would save PCSD approximately $781,697 annually. Increasing the contributions to 20 percent would save PCSD approximately $1,059,326annually.

R3.20 In addition to requiring employees to contribute a larger percentage towards the monthlypremium, PCSD should consider establishing an employee plus one enrollment option in



addition to the single and family plan options. This enrollment type facilitates lowerpremiums for employees with only one dependent thus reducing family plan enrollmentsand may reduce the overall insurance expense to the district and to the employee.

F3.72 PCSD offers employees who separate employment continuous medical benefits incompliance with the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985 (COBRA)put into law by the federal government in 1986.

F3.73 PCSD pays 4.5 percent of each administrators’ portion of STRS or SERS. Theadministrators’ portion of STRS paid by the board for FY 1997-98 was approximately$145,501 and the administrators’ portion of SERS paid by the board for FY 1997-98 wasapproximately $12,493. Table 3-17 indicates that PCSD administrators are the highestpaid when compared to the peer districts. Included in the average administrator salary perEMIS is the salary for administrative interns. As indicated in F3.97, administrative internsreceive their regular teaching salary. When the average administrator salary is recalculatedexcluding the administrative interns, PCSD has the highest average administrator salaryout of the eight schools which have had a performance audit conducted to date, averaging$66,092 in salaries.

R3.21 Based upon PCSD’s adjusted five year forecast, the district is forecasting significantdeficits in future years. Because of PCSD’s expected financial deficit and the fact thatPCSD administrators have the highest average salary when compared to the peer districts,the district should consider eliminating payment for the administrators’ portion of SERSand STRS when the administrators contract is subject to renewal. See the financialsystems section of the performance audit report for more detail on the adjusted five yearforecast.

Financial Implication: The district would save approximately $157,944 annually as aresult of eliminating the employee portion of administrators’ retirement contributionswhich equates to 4.5 percent per administrator.

Workers’ Compensation

F3.74 During 1995 and 1996, PCSD was enrolled in the premium discount plan administered by



the Bureau of Workers Compensation. In 1997, the district achieved a credit rating andresigned from the premium discount plan, choosing to join the Ohio Schools Councilgroup rating plan which provided lower premiums.

The Division of Safety and Hygiene which has been in existence since 1923 strives toprevent accidents in order to keep workers’ compensation claims from increasing. Thedivision offers the following services: safety consultations, ergonomic analysis andindustrial hygiene and engineering. In addition, the division also offers many resourcesfor employers and employees, which include safety training, publications, a videotapelibrary and a reference library. These services are offered at no additional cost toemployers.

R3.22 Accident prevention is an effective way to keep workers’ compensation costs from rising. The district should continue to work with the Division of Safety and Hygiene in order tomaintain their current experience rating with BWC. Additionally, working with theDivision of Safety and Hygiene enables the district to continue to participate in the grouprating plan.

F3.75 Table 3-51 illustrates workers’ compensation benefits for the four peer districts in 1997. PCSD has the second highest number of medical claims filed and the second lowestnumber of total lost time claims filed per employee. Lost time claims are defined as thenumber of workers’ compensation claims exceeding eight days of leave. Generally, thesetypes of claims are the most taxing on the system and consequently drive premium costsup. The experience modifier is based upon factors such as the number of total claims inany previous time period, the severity of those claims and the extent to which lost timeclaims went into effect.



Table 3-51: Peer District Comparison of Workers’ Compensation Benefits for 1997

TotalEmployees

#MedicalClaims

Allowed

LostTime

ClaimsAllowed

Claims/Employee Premium

PremiumCost/

EmployeeExperience

ModifierRetroRating

Parma 1,759 65 6 0.040 $501,356 $285 0.70 No

Canton 1,516.1 64 16 0.053 $654,500 $431 1.26 Yes

Dayton 3,316.9 133 50 0.055 $3,418,233 $1,031 2.38 No

South-Western

1,988.6 43 8 0.026 $682,641 $343 0.65 No

Group Avg 2,145.2 76 20 0.044 $1,314,183 $523

Source: Bureau of Workers’ Compensation

F3.76 Table 3-52 indicates that PCSD’s medical and lost time claims, as well as the district’sexperience modifier, have fluctuated over the last three years. The district has attemptedto control workers’ compensation costs by participating in the Ohio Schools Council, agroup rating plan which was administered through Anthem Comp Services. Anthemprovided the following services to the district: claims administration, benefit chargecontrol, experience rating analysis and consultation services. The group rating planprovided the district an estimated savings of $64,743 in 1997 and $59,428 in 1998.

Table 3-52: Workers’ Compensation Statistics

Medical ClaimsAllowed

Lost TimeClaims Allowed

Experience Premium Costs

ActualPremiums Paid

ExperienceModifier

1995 1 49 19 $558,459 $552,941 0.66

1996 2 54 9 $751,667 $589,698 1.28

1997 3 65 6 $501,356 $124,060 0.70

Source: Bureau of Workers’ Compensation1 In 1995, PCSD received a rate adjustment of $5,5182 In 1996, PCSD received a dividend credit of $146,455 and a rate adjustment of $15,5143 In 1997, PCSD received a dividend credit of $378,017 and an early payment discount of $1,279. In addition, PCSD received a 75

percent BWC rebate in the amount of approximately $938,000

F3.77 The district does not have a formal board approved job transition program which wouldidentify less physically demanding jobs for injured workers to perform while they recoverfrom work related injuries. However, the supervisor of the classified staff has been usingan informal job transition policy. On an individual basis, the classified staff supervisorattempts to identify and assign duties that injured employees may be able to perform.



C3.3 PCSD is commended for creating transitional work for injured employees. Implementingintermediate work not only improves the quality of life for the injured worker but also aidsin containing costs for the district.

R3.23 PCSD should create and provide a formal job transition program. Furthermore, this

program should be board approved and be implemented district-wide. The program should identify less physically demanding jobs for injured employees to perform while theyrecover from injuries. In addition, PCSD should actively promote early return to workpractices which is an effort to keep employees from being absent from the workplace forextended time periods. By reducing the number of workers’ compensation claims and thecorresponding length of claims, the district could effectively decrease its premiumamounts.

Contractual Issues

Certain major contractual issues which have been assessed and compared to the peer districts inaddition to neighboring districts are illustrated in the following pages. Because contractual issuesdirectly affect the district’s operating budget, many of the major contractual issues have also beenassessed to show the financial implication to the district. The implementation of any of thefollowing contractual recommendations would require union negotiations.

F3.78 Table 3-53 compares the number of bargaining groups for each of the peer districts.

Table 3-53: Comparison of Organized Labor EnvironmentParma Canton Dayton South-

Western

# of Bargaining Groups 6 5 8 2



F3.79 Table 3-54 shows that PCSD has six primary collective bargaining units.

Table 3-54: Union Membership

ClassificationUnion

Affiliation

# of Members and% EnrolledFY 1997-98

Teachers Parma Education Association (PEA) 874/100%

Food ServiceTransportationSecretarial/ClericalCleanersCustodial/Maintenance

Ohio Association of Public SchoolEmployees (OAPSE)

Local 404Local 695Local 160Local 756Local 122

73/100%92/100%

294/100%84/100%73/100%

Total Union Employees 1,490

Source: Payroll Department

F3.80 Teachers and classified employees hired by the district are required to join the union or paya fair share fee. Currently, 86 or six percent of eligible employees pay fair share fees.

F3.81 The PEA union agreement expires August 31, 1999 and the OAPSE agreement expires onJanuary 31, 2001. Due to a difference of opinion as to when the OAPSE agreement wasratified, the district spent the period between March 1998 and September 1998 re-negotiating the OAPSE contract. A brief summary of the events that took place follows. On March 7, 1998, OAPSE ratified the original contract, but later determined there wereproblems with the vote. On March 24, OAPSE notified the board of the need for a secondratification vote. Although the board was aware that OAPSE had objections to the originalagreement, they still adopted the contract on March 26. On March 29, OAPSErepresentatives voted against ratifying the contract because representatives felt theagreement did not fairly represent their position, and requested the district make variousmodifications. The district originally did not allow these modifications, to which OAPSEresponded by filing three unfair labor practices with the State Employees Relations Board(SERB). On September 16, 1998, before SERB could make a ruling, the district allowedamendments to the agreement which appears to have settled the issue. See the financialsystems section of the performance audit report for details on the financial/legalimplications of these negotiations.

PEA - Contractual Issues



F3.82 Table 3-55 compares some key PEA contractual issues between PCSD and the peerdistricts.

Table 3-55: PEA Contractual Issues

PEASection Description Parma Canton Dayton South-Western

Section 7.03 Student contact time inminutes?

Middle School - 210 minutes per

dayHigh School -

5 periods or 240minutes per day

Middle School -Five teachingperiods (200

minutes) with twoplanning periods

High School -Six teachingperiods (300

minutes) with 1.5conference periods

Middle School -235 minutes per day

High School -290 minutes per day

Middle School -5 teaching periods

with twosupervisoryperiods (240

minutes)High School -

5 teachingperiods with asupervisory

period or six classperiods maximum

(282 minutes)

Section 7.03 Length of Work Day Elementary 7 hours 15

minutesMiddle and High

schools 7 hours 45

minutes

Elementary7 hours 20 minutesMiddle and High

schools7 hours 30 minutes

Grades K-12 = 7hours and 25

minutes

Grades K-4 = 7hours 5 minutesGrade 5-6 = 7

hoursGrades 7-8-9 = 7hours 10 minutesGrades 10-11-12

= 7 hours 10minutes

Section 32.01 Maximum Class Size Grades 7-12District will strivefor a 30:1ratio for

Grades 9-12 - Nomore than 156

students per day

K-1 - 25:12-3 - 27:14-6 - 29:17-8 - 32:19-12 - 35:1

K-5 - 26:16 - 8 - 25:19-12 - 27:1

Section 6.02 # Contract days # of Instructional Days# of In-service Days# of Paid Holidays

184178

60

185178

70

200178

715

185178

70

Section 24.03 Maximum # of Sick DaysAccrued

Unlimited Maximum of 265 days

Maximum of 250 days max

Unlimited

Sick leave incentives?N* N* N* N*

Section 21.02 Maximum # of sick dayspaid out at retirement and %of payout.

Less than 14 yearsof service with

district - 120 dayspaid out at 25%for a maximum

payout of 30 days

Hired prior to5/1/96 and 14+

Accumulated sickleave:

0-120 days - 25% +

>121 - 215 -20%if 215 days areaccumulated at

retirement then twoadditional days are

Maximum 180 sickdays paid out at

25% for a maximumpayout of 45 days

Maximum of 285days accumulatedbut unused sickleave paid out at

33% which equalsa maximum

severance payoutof 95 days at thedaily rate of pay



PEASection Description Parma Canton Dayton South-Western

years of servicewith district -

Maximum of 60days plus 10% ofsick days above

240 days

Hired after 5/1/96and 14+ years of

service withdistrict - 360 dayspaid out at 25%for a maximum

payout of 90 days

given for severancewhich equals amaximum of 51

days

Section 21.01 # of Years of Service Required for Severance Pay

Eligibilityrequirements under STRS

Eligibilityrequirements under

STRS

Eligibilityrequirements underSTRS + 5 years ofservice with district

Eligibilityrequirementsunder STRS

Section 27.01 # of Personal days &explanation required?

3 days/year; anexplanation is

required in someinstances

3 days/year,written report must

be filed 3 daysprior to leave

except foremergencies

1 day/year; at least2 days notice; paidout at end of year if

unused+ 4 emergency

leave days/year notpaid out

3 days/yearunrestricted paidleave, one day

advance request

Section 26.01 Sabbatical/Professionalleave; Requirement toreturn?Compensated?

YesOne school year

upon return.No compensationbut receive full

insurance benefits

YesOne school year

upon return.Difference of

teacher’s /substitute salary

Yes Two school years

upon return. Difference of

teacher’s /substitute salary

N*N*N*

Section 2.08 # of Association LeaveDays

75 days with pay 50 days with pay 100 days with pay 60 days -Equal to 5% timesthe total number

of members in thebargaining unit

Section 4.05 # of Days to File Grievance 15 days 15 days 30 days 15 days

Notice of separationrequired?

N* N* N* N*

Section 33.04 Cost of Living Increase pereach year of contract

1% - 8/962% - 1/973% - 1/982% - 8/982% - 1/99

4% - 7/983% - 7/994% - 7/00

3% - 7/98 3% - 7/99 3% - 7/00

3% - 1/973% - 1/983% - 1/99

Section 4.01 Past Practice Clause Yes N* N* N*

N* - nothing stated in contract

F3.83 All PCSD employees are granted 15 days of sick leave annually and can accrue an



unlimited number of sick days. PCSD employees may use accrued sick time for illnessesof family members instead of using the provisions as established by the Family andMedical Leave Act of 1993. Teachers absent more than 15 consecutive days are requiredto submit a physician’s statement and classified employees who are absent more than 10consecutive days are required to submit a physician’s statement. In FY 1997-98, PCSDteachers averaged 8.7 sick leave days per teacher and classified employees averaged 9.0sick leave days per employee.

R3.24 The PEA contract implies that assigned physician statements may be required if a teacheris absent for more than 15 consecutive days. As indicated by the high use of sick leave byteachers and classified employees, administrators need to be able to better manage the useof sick leave. To better monitor and manage the use of sick leave the contract shouldrequire an employee out sick for three or more consecutive days to provide a physicianstatement prior to the employee returning from the leave.

F3.84 PCSD teachers may be granted up to four full years of long-term parental leave andclassified employees may be granted up to two years of long-term parental leave. Thispolicy allows for more leave time than the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 whichprovides for leave up to twelve weeks per year.

R3.25 Excessive long-term leave provided by the district precludes the district from effectivelyrecruiting and planning future staffing needs. Because the Family and Medical Leave Actof 1993 provides for a reasonable amount of time off, PCSD should consider limiting theamount of parental leave granted to be in accordance with the Family and Medical LeaveAct of 1993. Furthermore, if additional leave time is required, district employees shouldbe required to utilize accumulated sick leave in lieu of extending leave without pay.

F3.85 Severance pay is granted to PEA members eligible to retire under the State TeachersRetirement System. The contract does not specify a certain date when employees mustnotify the district of their intention to retire. This prevents the district from accuratelyidentifying staffing needs for the following school year. Members retiring with less than14 years of service receive 25 percent of accumulated unused sick days up to a maximumof 120 days. Members hired before May 1, 1996 and retiring or resigning with 14 or moreyears of service receive a maximum of 60 days and members receive an additional 10percent of accrued and unused sick days above 240 days. This severance policy does notencourage members to accumulate sick leave above 60 days. Table 3-28 indicates thatPCSD teachers had the highest average sick leave usage per teacher when compared to thepeer districts. The district recently negotiated a change in the severance policy whichstates that members hired after May 1, 1996 and retiring with 14 or more years of servicewill receive 25 percent of accumulated unused sick days up to a maximum of 360 days fora maximum payout of 90 days.



There are currently 211 teachers and 25 administrators with 25 or more years of service. Under the existing severance pay policy, the payout for the 211 teachers would beapproximately $3,708,653 and the payout for the 25 administrators would be $485,002.

R3.26 In order to more accurately identify staffing needs for the following school year, PCSD

should establish a policy that requires employees to notify the district by March 1st of theirintentions to retire the following school year. One option the district could consider wouldbe to reduce the amount of severance pay if the employee does not notify the district bythe specified date.

R3.27 An analysis of the peer districts illustrated that PCSD’s severance policy is generous and

the district should re-negotiate the severance payout policy to lessen the financial impactto the district. The areas of the severance policy the district needs to address are thepercentage of payout and the maximum number of days to be accumulated.

One option PCSD could consider is the Ohio Revised Code 124.39 which provides apayout of 25 percent of accrued but unused sick leave credit, upon retirement, up to 120sick days (30 day payout), for persons with 10 or more years of service. A second optionthe district may consider would be to establish a maximum sick leave accrual of 240 daysand cap the payout at 42 days (25 percent of the first 120 days and 10 percent of theremaining days) which is comparable to Springfield City Schools. Table 3-56 illustratesthe cost savings resulting from implementation of either of these two options.

Table 3-56: Cost Avoidance Resulting from Severance Payout Restructure

Payout Structures

CurrentPolicy

Option 1Payout at 25Percent of 30

Days

Option 2Maximum

Payout of 42Days Cost Avoidance

Sick Leave Payout TotalCost Avoidance $4,193,655 $1,776,769 $2,352,860

$1,840,795 to$2,416,886

Financial Implication: By renegotiating the provisions of the contract to limit severancepayout for sick leave to 25 percent (maximum of 120 days) or maximum payout of 42



days, PCSD would achieve a cost avoidance between approximately $1,840,795 to$2,416,886 providing employees elected to retire upon eligibility.

F3.86 The PEA contract states that any sick leave earned and unused in prior employment in anygovernmental agency in Ohio may be transferred to the employee’s account at PCSD. Itis the district’s practice to pay for these days at severance. Therefore, when an employeeretires from PCSD, the district is not only paying for sick leave accumulated at PCSD, theyare paying for sick leave accumulated at other agencies.

R3.28 Because PCSD has such a large number of sick days paid out at severance as indicated inF3.85, allowing teachers to transfer an unlimited number of sick days into the districtenables the teacher to reach the 90 day maximum quickly and can be costly to the district. In order to control severance costs, the district could consider establishing a policy whichlimits the amount of sick days that can be transferred into the district or limits the amountof days eligible for severance. Another option could allow unlimited sick days to betransferred but restricts their use only as sick days.

F3.87 The PEA contract indicates that peer assistance can be used when a teacher has beenidentified with a specific deficiency. In addition, the contract also states that peerassistance can only be used with the consent of the teacher involved. The assistantsuperintendent of human resources indicated that peer assistance is often suggested whena teacher receives a poor assessment during the evaluation process. In some cases,teachers request peer assistance as additional support to improve teaching practices.

F3.88 The PEA agreement requires each school building to establish a building advisorycommittee (BAC) with the purpose of serving in an advisory capacity to the principal inmatters relating to the administration of the building. The BAC consists of a maximumof eight faculty members and can include parents and students. However, none of thecurrent BACs include parents or students. Administrators have indicated that BACs areusually effective although some BACs struggle with the concept of BACs and moretraining is needed.

R3.29 Because decision making responsibility affecting educational excellence should residewhere it will have the most impact, with the principals and teachers interacting mostdirectly with the pupils enrolled in PCSD, the district should consider continuing districtwide development of the BACs. This could include providing training to all BACs andrequiring a minimum term of two years to ensure consistency and continued growth of theproject.

F3.89 The PEA contract stipulates a maximum of 75 days with pay for teachers on associationbusiness. The board will provide substitute teachers for the first 15 days and the



association will reimburse the board for substitute teachers used during the next 60 days. In addition, the PEA president is required to teach 60 percent of the day and to performPEA duties for 40 percent of the day. The contract stipulates that the association willreimburse the board for 40 percent of the president’s annual salary plus retirement costs.

C3.4 Requiring the association to pay for substitute teachers needed to cover for teachers onassociation business compels the union to take ownership for approved association leave. In addition, requiring the union to pay for the time the PEA president spends performingunion duties is a fair and equitable practice.

F3.90 A past practice clause is specified in Article 4.01(A) which states that a grievance is an

alleged misinterpretation, misapplication or violation of a previously adopted policy orpractice affecting wages, hours or conditions of employment. A past practice clause limitsthe ability of management to maintain a fluid and efficient administration by stripping itsability to manage district operations.

R3.30 Past practice clauses should be eliminated from the PEA contract. Past practicesdiscourage changes for the duration of the contract and during subsequent negotiations. If a past practice was inefficient, it will continue unless it is negotiated within the newcontract.

OAPSE - Contractual Issues

F3.91 Table 3-57 compares some key OAPSE contractual issues between PCSD and the peerdistricts.

Table 3-57: OAPSE Contractual Issues

OAPSESection Description Parma Canton Dayton South-Western

Section 6.3 Evaluations required? Yearly Yearly Yearly Every 2 years butmay occur moreoften as needed

Section 8.1.4 Minimum call in hours paid 3 hours 3 hours 3 hours 2 hours




to employees for unscheduledemergencies? (Custodians)

Section 11.2 Vacation time to accumulate 46 week employee:1-5 years - 4.5 days6-7 years - 6 days8-10 years - 9 days

11-12 years - 11 days13-15 years - 13.5

days

52 week employee:1-4 years - 10 days5-6 years - 15 days7-8 years - 17 days

9-10 years - 20 days11-12 years - 22 days13-15 years - 25 days

260-dayemployees:

< 5 months - 0days

>5 months -5 days10 months to 5 yrs

- 10 days6-10 years -15

days11-15 years-20

days16 years-21 days17 years -22 days18 years + - 23

days + oneadditional day for

each yearthereafter,

maximum 30 days

12 monthemployees:

0 - 9 mths = 1 dayper month ofemployment

1 year = 12 days2 years = 13 days3 years = 14 days4 years = 15 days12 + years = 20

days

Less than 12month employeesreceive vacationbased on above

schedule proratedaccording to

months worked

12 monthemployees:

1-8 years - .84 perfull month - (10

days)9-17 years - 1.25

per month (15 days)18+years - 1.67 per

month (20 days)11 month

employees:1-8 years - .91 permonth (10 days)9-17 years - 1.36

per month (15 days)18+ years - 1.82 per

month (20 days)10 month

employees:.80 per full month

(8 days)9 month

employees:.89 per full month

(8 days)

Sick leave incentive? N* N* Yes - Employeeswho have less

than 12 years ofservice and 120days of unusedsick leave willreceive 5 extra

days of vacation

N*

Section 9.4 # of sick days to accumulate Unlimited 260 days max 250 days max Unlimited

Section 13.1 Max # of Sick days paid outat retirement/ % of payout.

20% - 0-50 days25% - 51-100 days30% - 101-150 days35% - 151-200 days 40% - 201-250 days

For a maximumpayout of 75 days

25% - 0-120 days20% - 121-215

days or anadditional

payment of 19days, for an

aggregate of 49days

25% ofaccumulated sick

leaveLess than 5 yrs =

0 days5-15 yrs. = max

30 days15-25 yrs = max

35 daysGreater than 25

yrs = maximum of40 days

33% ofaccumulated sickleave up to 285

daysFor a maximum

payout of 95 days

Section 9.7 # of personal days 3 days/year 3 days/year 3 days/year 3 days/year

Section 10.1 Holiday Leave 11 holidays for 12month employee

9 holidays for 9-11

12 holidays foremployees

working more

12 holidays 9 holidays for 11and 12 month

employees




month employee than elevenmonths

8 holidays for9 month employees

Section 5.4 # of days to file a grievance 10 days 20 days 5 days 20 days

Section 27 Labor-ManagementCommittee

Yes Yes Yes Yes; conferencecommittee

Section 33 Cost of Living Increase pereach year of contract

2.2% - 2/982.5% - 2/993.0% - 2/00

4.0% - 7/983.0% - 7/993.5% - 7/00

4.0% - 7/981.5% - 1/993.5% - 1/00

4.0% - 7/973.0% - 7/983.0% - 7/99

N* - Nothing stated in contract

F3.92 In the current OAPSE agreement, the district negotiated a clause stating an employee’squalifications for a promotion or job transfer consists of passage of the appropriate civilservice test, the employee’s past performance based on written evaluations and theemployee’s attendance record.



C3.5 Considering attendance data and past performance when deciding whether to transfer orpromote an employee provides administrators and supervisors with a valuable managementtool. Managers can deny a request for a promotion based on an employee’s attendancehistory which reinforces the importance of attendance to employees. In addition, thisclause allows a manager to promote the most qualified candidate for the position ratherthan promoting the most senior candidate.

F3.93 The OAPSE contract states that all new classified employees, except bus drivers, will servea probationary period for the first 75 paid work days. The 75 day probationary period forbus drivers will begin after completion of the pre-employment training and licensing bythe State Highway Patrol.

R3.31 A probationary period allows the management of PCSD to determine whether a newlyhired employee conforms to the requirements of the position filled and permits the releaseof the employee. PCSD should consider extending the probationary period to provide thedistrict with additional time to assess the potential employee and enhances the ability ofthe board to employ qualified, dedicated and hard-working personnel.

F3.94 The OAPSE agreement provides for a labor management committee to meet on a monthlybasis with the intent of responding to both the board and employees’ concerns. Althoughadministrators have indicated the committee is effective, classified employees haveindicated the committee does not meet regularly and is not effective.

R3.32 An effective labor-management committee creates an avenue of open communicationbetween employees and management, which has a positive effect on the general moraleof the district, informs management of potential contractual problems and involvesbargaining unit members in managerial discussion giving them a sense of contributing todistrict policy. In order for PCSD’s labor management committee to be effective, thecommittee should meet on a regular basis and create an environment where issues can bediscussed and resolved.

F3.95 Both the PEA and OAPSE contracts contain detailed descriptions of the grievance processwhich include an informal step to be taken before the formal grievance process is started. The informal grievance procedure entails a discussion with the building principal orimmediate supervisor in an effort to arrive at an informal solution to the problem. In theevent the matter goes unresolved in the informal process, a formal grievance shall be filedas stipulated in the union contracts. The OAPSE agreement requires an informal grievanceto be filed within 10 days and the PEA agreement requires an informal grievance to befiled within 15 days.

R3.33 In order to resolve grievance issues in a timely manner, the district should require all



grievances to be filed within 10 days of the act or condition which is the basis of thegrievance. Establishing a maximum of 10 days to file grievances, precludes duplicategrievances from being filed as a result of an unresolved issue. Filing written grievancessooner should initiate prompt responses from all parties which can lead to more timelyresolutions.

F3.96 Each spring, the district begins the staffing process for the following school year. Basedon projected enrollment and known retirements and resignations the district usuallyimplements an annual reduction in force (RIF) for instructional aides. Because the OAPSEcontract requires the district to notify instructional aides by the last day of school if theywill be needed for the following year, the district cannot wait until the beginning of thenext school year to implement a reduction in force. ORC 3319.083 states a school districtmust notify a classified employee by June 1st of the district's intent to re-employ theemployee for the following school year.

Implementing a RIF each year, for minimal employees who are subsequently called backto work, is potentially costly to the district and may be unnecessary. The district has toremove the employee from the payroll system, discontinue the employee’s benefits,maintain a RIF list, pay unemployment benefits for the employees and process allnecessary paperwork when the employee is called back to work.

R3.34 History has shown that educational assistants are usually recalled back during the courseof the year. Because there are administrative and unemployment costs associated with theRIF procedure, PCSD should review the RIF policy to determine if it is cost effective tocontinue with this practice.



Employment Issues

F3.97 PCSD has implemented a two-year administrative intern training program for teachersinterested in becoming principals. Administrative interns agree to the followingstipulations:

· Administrative interns will be paid according to the current certificated teachingsalary schedule.

· The position includes a supplemental contract for 10 additional days of servicebeyond the school year.

· All supplemental contracts held will be relinquished.· There will be no guarantee that interns will be returned to their prior teaching

positions.· The intern will function as an administrator and will not be governed by the PEA

contract.· There will be no guarantee that the intern will be selected as an administrator after

completion of the two year program.

Administrative interns experience the following activities: administering pupil discipline, preparing reports, participating in the budget process, assisting with staff development,participating in curriculum studies, evaluating teachers, reviewing testing procedures,reviewing compliance with state standards, evaluating and reviewing building emergencyplan, participating in activities related to the opening and closing of school and otheractivities as assigned by principals.

C3.6 A comprehensive training program for administrators ensures better coordination of effortsand facilitates effective decision making within the district. Additionally, ongoing trainingfosters team building as well as providing a communication link for the execution ofdistrict wide goals.

R3.35 Over the next three years, PCSD could potentially lose 25 central office and buildingadministrators due to retirements. In order to prepare for the loss of experienced administrators, the district should assess the quality of the leadership training program,identify strengths and weaknesses and implement necessary changes for improvement. Providing on the job training and developing future administrators will assist in providinga seamless transition and assure continuity in the daily operation of the district whencurrent administrators retire.

F3.98 Job descriptions for all district personnel are kept on file in the HRD. The HRD has



indicated job descriptions are updated on an as needed basis and that all job descriptionshave not been updated. The current contract with OAPSE establishes a job descriptionreview committee for the purpose of reviewing all job descriptions and recommendingchanges to the superintendent. The committee consists of three OAPSE members and twoemployees appointed by the superintendent. The committee will begin reviewing jobdescriptions in early 1999. Current job descriptions are important for the followingreasons:

• Articulating job content to employees and supervisors• Establishing individual performance expectations• Providing criteria for recruitment and selection• Avoiding legal liability - job descriptions should be appropriate and legally

defensible

The customer satisfaction survey included a question asking if employees had a jobdescription and if their daily routines were consistent with their job descriptions. Thesurvey results concluded the majority of the recipients knew their job description and theirdaily work routines were consistent with it.

R3.36 PCSD should continue to update all job descriptions. An update of current jobclassifications will provide PCSD with the foundation for establishing internal equity andexternal competitiveness with respect to the wide array of job positions. In addition toupdating the job descriptions to adapt to changing times and environment, the HRD mustbe cognizant of the required compliance with ADA requirements.

F3.99 The assistant superintendent of human resources is responsible for ensuring that teachersare properly certified for the subjects being taught. The customer satisfaction surveyincluded a question regarding any knowledge of lapses in certificate/licenses due to anoversight of the HRD. The survey results indicated recipients were not aware of lapses incertificates/licenses.

C3.7 A review of three percent of all teachers’ certificates revealed no lapsed certificates.

F3.100 In an attempt to professionalize the certificate/license renewal process, SB 230 was passed,effective September 1, 1998, which established a new system of teacher licensor which strengthens teaching programs at colleges and universities, requires successfulperformance of beginning teachers and intensifies professional development. With arenewable, five-year license system, the state will no longer award permanent certificates. To renew a license, a teacher must develop a professional development plan that isapproved by a local professional development committee (LPDC). The LPDC will overseeand review professional development plans for course work, continuing education units,



or other equivalent activities. The LPDC can include teachers and administrators, but amajority of the members must be practicing classroom teachers. Any teacher holding apermanent certificate by September 1, 2003 is exempt from the new licensor rules.

C3.8 PCSD has created the Parma Local Professional Development Committee (the committee)and established the bylaws of the committee. The committee consists of nine votingmembers including five teachers and four administrators. During FY 1998-99, thecommittee will begin to work with teachers on developing individual professionaldevelopment plans.

F3.101 The HRD maintains a log of all grievances but does not track the level the grievance wasresolved. In 1997, the supervisor for classified personnel created a spreadsheet thatidentified each OAPSE grievance filed in FY 1996-97 and the level it was resolved. Thisspreadsheet has not been updated since 1997. Table 3-58 represents the number ofgrievances filed based upon information provided by the HRD.

Table 3-58: Estimated Grievances FiledEstimated Grievances FY97

Grievances filed 30

Resolved at informal level 0

Resolved at level 2 7

Resolved at level 3 10

Intent to arbitrate filed 6 Source: HRD

The customer satisfaction survey included a question asking if employees felt currentgrievance procedures are fair and adequate. The survey results indicated the majority ofrecipients felt grievance procedures were fair and adequate.

R3.37 Although the HRD does track grievances, the HRD should create a procedure to track andmonitor all grievances filed and the final resolution of the grievance. The monitoring canbe used to identify problems with the responsiveness of the administrator/departments ateach step of the grievance process as well as identify other problems which may arise.

F3.102 Disciplinary actions are entered into employee personnel files, but are not tracked ormonitored on a formal basis.



R3.38 The HRD should create a procedure to track and monitor all disciplinary actions. Themonitoring can be used to identify problems with the responsiveness of theadministrator/departments at each step of the disciplinary process as well as identify otherproblems that may arise.

F3.103 The responsibility for completing employee evaluations on a timely basis belongs with therespective employee’s immediate supervisor. The HRD is responsible for tracking andenforcing the completion in accordance with the time requirements outlined in the variousunion contracts.

The PEA contract stipulates limited contract teachers are appraised two times a year andcontinuing contract teachers are evaluated no less than once every three years. Classifiedemployees are evaluated annually.

If a teacher is determined to be having difficulties, the teacher is evaluated at least twotimes during the year and an individual plan of assistance is developed. The plan ofassistance consists of a specific list of deficiencies which, if not corrected, might result in non-renewal.

C3.9 All classified employees and limited contract teachers are evaluated annually. Frequentevaluations improve an employee’s efficiency and effectiveness by providing an employeeand supervisor the opportunity to discuss strengths and weaknesses and any other pertinentissues.

R3.39 Evaluations for all employees must be done a minimum of once a year. Frequentevaluations are important for the following reasons:

• Ensure employees receive clear feedback on areas for improvement and to surfaceand document disciplinary problems.

• Improve the quality of instruction provided to the students and bring about professi• Provide evidence about the quality of employees’ professional performance.• Improve efficiency and effectiveness of the employees in carrying out the duties o• Improve employee morale.• Monitor an employee’s success and progress.

F3.104 PCSD has no exit interview process which would assist in identifying issues related to highturnover in specific positions, management styles of specific supervisors and employeeconcerns regarding specific district facilities/locations. The district experienced a sixpercent teacher turnover rate during FY 1996-97 and FY 1997-98.

High turnover may offer some advantages to the district including the following:



• New teachers may bring newer technology skills.• New teachers may mean lower salaries and benefits.• New teachers may bring additional learning techniques.• New teachers may be interested in participating in supplemental activities.

Disadvantages to high turnover may include the following:

• New teachers with specific fields of certification may be hard to find.• If recruiting isn’t strong, finding a large number of teachers may be difficult.• New teachers have a learning curve which may increase costs.• New teachers’ productivity may be much less than that of an experienced teacher.

R3.40 PCSD should implement an exit interview process. Exit interviews are critical for thefollowing reasons:

• Defining the reason for the turnover• Establishing potential trends for future assessments• Measuring employee morale• Providing criteria for changes in future contractual issues

R3.41 PCSD should track turnover and monitor the reasons why employees leave the district. Monitoring reasons for separation of employment may identify specific issues whichwould allow the district to potentially change policies, procedures or future recruitingstrategies.

F3.105 ORC 3319.01 and 3319.02 allow superintendents and administrators to be paid, uponseparation, for vacation leave accrued and unused, not to exceed the amount that could beaccrued within three years before the date of separation. PCSD is allowing thesuperintendent, deputy superintendent, assistant superintendent and certain classifiedadministrators to accrue unlimited vacation time. Their employment contracts are silentas to whether vacation leave payment upon separation is limited to three years. Inaddition, the contracts are also silent concerning the number of work days to be used forcalculating the per diem rates for the assistant superintendent and associate superintendent. The district’s legal counsel has indicated that the per diem rate should be calculated using234 days versus 260 days which increases the daily rate used to process the separationpayment.

R3.42 Contracts for all district administrators should include provisions which limit the amountof vacation time that could be paid at separation and establishes the number of work daysas referenced by the ORC . In addition, the current contracts should be reviewed to ensure



full compliance with the ORC before any separation payments are processed under thesecontracts. The board should establish a policy associated with the per diem rate issuewhich complies with the ORC and with the overall intent of employment contracts.

Financial Implications Summary

The following table summarizes the total estimated savings, cost avoidances and implementationcosts from the above recommendations. PCSD should consider the potential educational effectcertain recommendations may cause.



RecommendationEstimated Annual

Cost SavingsImplementation

CostCost Avoidance

R3.4 - Establishing librarian staffing levelscomparable to peer districts $479,709

R3.5 - Establishing library aide staffing levelscomparable to peer districts $56,963

R3.6 - Establishing clerical staffing levelscomparable to peer districts $388,752

R3.7 - Establishing monitor staffing levelscomparable to peer districts $328,559

R3.8 - Maximizing instructional time persecondary teacher to concur with PEA contract $605,982

R3.8 - Maximizing instructional time persecondary teacher by reducing one planning periodper day $3,090,508

R3.9 - Implementing a reduced cost of livingadjustment for teachers for three years $3,508,421

R3.13 - Reduction of sick leave usage - teachers $66,926 - $267,704

R3.15 - Reduction of sick leave usage - classified $12,079 - $60,395

R3.16 - Implement Automated Substitute System $63,000

R3.17 - Eliminate traditional health care plan $55,173 - $136,468

R3.18 - Consolidate two separate dental plans intoone plan $79,000

R3.19 - Increasing percentage of employeecontribution towards health care premiums $504,068 - $1,059,326

R3.21 - Reduce 4.5% administrators retirementpickup $157,944

R3.27 - Cost avoidance achieved byimplementation of reduced payout of sick leave forseverance payments

$1,840,795 - $2,416,886

Total $5,825,663 -$6,711,310 $63,000 $5,349,216 -$5,925,307

Conclusion StatementPCSD’s human resources department appears to effectively provide human resources services. TheHRD utilizes a HRIS which provides the department with many of the tools needed to manageworkload drivers although the system is not integrated with the district’s payroll system. Anintegrated HRIS would eliminate the need for duplicate databases and the time spent maintaining



and reconciling them; reduce the amount of staff needed to maintain the data; provide immediateaccess to all employee information; and decrease the time and cost associated with processingduplicate information.

Because of the district’s pending financial situation, PCSD will be faced with making difficultdecisions to reduce operating costs. An analysis of district staffing levels indicated possible areasfor reduction. PCSD may be overstaffed in the librarian, library aide, clerical, bus mechanic,custodian and monitor positions and the district should consider staff reductions specifically in theseareas. By eliminating one of the two planning periods provided to teachers and maximizing thenumber of periods taught per teacher to six periods per day, the district could possibly reduceteachers at the middle and high school levels through attrition or a reduction in force or reallocateteacher resources to enhance the quality of education.

The terms and conditions of the PEA contract contain several costly provisions which affectmanagement’s ability to manage. One clause, which has a significant financial impact to the district,is the provision providing all secondary teachers with two planning periods per day in addition toan extended lunch period. Because the PEA contract states that teachers are not required to performsupervisory duties, the district has had to hire numerous school monitors to perform supervisoryduties. In addition to receiving two planning periods per day and not performing supervisory duties,PCSD has the highest average teaching salary of the peer districts. Additionally, PCSD teachershave the second highest average salary at $45,429, slightly behind Cincinnati City School Districtat $46,695, when compared to the total school districts having a performance audit conducted to datealthough PCSD’s teachers teach low instructional minutes and do not performsupervisory/monitoring duties except through supplemental contracts. However, within CuyahogaCounty, PCSD’s starting salary for teachers with a bachelor’s degree ranks 29th lowest of the 33school districts. Also, PCSD’s maximum salary for a master’s degree ranks 21st lowest of the 33school districts. An analysis of W2's indicated that 42 percent of teachers receive a salary in excessof $50,000. Additional salary analysis illustrates a potential compensation inequity amongemployee classifications. Because PCSD needs to reduce operating costs, the district should requireteachers to perform supervisory duties and consider negotiating a reduced COLA for teachers forthe next contractual period.

PCSD’s average of 8.7 sick days per teacher was the highest when compared to the peer districtsduring FY 1997-98. In addition, classified employees averaged 9.0 sick days per employee whichwas the second highest when compared to the peer districts during FY 1997-98. Although thedistrict separately tracks substitute costs for teachers, the district does not separately track substitutecosts for classified employees. PCSD should aggressively manage and monitor the amount of leavetaken by all employees and track substitute costs by employee classification. In addition toincreased substitute costs, excessive time off creates interruptions in work flow and may have animpact on the quality of education provided to students.



For FY 1997-98, PCSD had the highest annual benefit cost per employee among the peer districts. Additionally, the district had the second highest certificated fringe benefit expenditures as apercentage of total operating expenses and the highest classified fringe benefit expenditures as apercentage of total operating expenses when compared to the peer districts. PCSD’s high benefitexpenditures can be attributed to the minimal employee contributions required for the traditional andHMO plans, and no employee contribution for employees enrolled in the Super Med Plus plan. Thedistrict has attempted to lower benefit costs by requiring employees enrolled in the traditional familyplan to contribute the difference between the traditional plan monthly premium and the Super MedPlus family plan monthly premium effective January 1999. However, because the traditional planis significantly higher than the HMO and the PPO plans, PCSD could save approximately $55,000to $136,000 annually if the district eliminated the traditional plan. Additional benefit savings couldbe recognized if PCSD required consistent employee contributions towards all medical and dentalpremiums.



This page intentionally left blank.

Documents

044636-3 Human Resources - parmacityschools.org City School District Performance Audit Human Resources 3-1 Human Resources Background Organizational Chart The following section summarizes