DOCUMENT RESUME ED 061 595

ED 061 595

TITLE

INSTITUTION

PUB DATENOTE

EDRS PRICEDESCRIPTORS

DOCUMENT RESUME

EA 004 179

[Tne Educational 11,esources management S.srem:Application of PPBES Concepts to Education.]Association of School Business Officials, Chicago,Ill7163p.; A report of the ASBO Convention ResearchCommittee (Montreal, Canada, October 23-28, 1971)

MF-$0.65 HC-$3.29Administrative Personnel; Budgeting; EducationalAccountability; *Educational Resources; Evaluation;Management; *Management Development; *ManagementSystems; National Surveys; Planning; Programing;Resource Allocations; Systems Approach; *SystemsConcepts; *Systems Development

ABSTRACTThis document reports the results of a survey of

school business officials to determine the status of EducationalResource Management Systems (ERMS) orPlanning-Programing-Budgeting-Evaluating Systems (PPBES) in schooldistricts and colleges in the United States and Canada. Though theactua1 number of school districts developing management systems hasircreased considerably since 1967, only a small percentage ofdistricts in the two countries is engaged in developing a systemsapproach. Charts showing how participation was initiated, whichgroups have been active, and w!lat stages of development have beenimplemented are also included. (RA)

A:;;;Ti. oC etioo1 iWsincss Officials2421i W. L;irence Avenue

Illinois 60625

ghe Educational Resources Management System: Applicationof PPBES Concepts to Education2

Introduction

1971

AR r.NT 'H&

OF IDUT 'IC,TI- AENT HAS LEN liLDUCEL AACTLY AS RECEIVED Fh,.THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIG-INATING IT. POINTS OF VIEW OR OPIN-IONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILYREPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EDU-CATION POSITION OR POLICY.

The writers of the Educational Resources Management System

hope that the system developed by the ASBO Research Corporation

may serve as a guide to apply the best of the PPBES Concepts to

Education. Administrators should be cautioned that much research

is required before PPBES or ERMS can be fully implemented.

School districts or colleges attempting to design, develop and

implement an educational resources management system, to any

reasonable degree of sophistication, should plan on a minimum

developmental period of three to five years. Some experts advise

that the full implementation of an effective stem for ERMS will

require more than five years.

Many obstacles stand in the way of a fu. implementation of

ERMS. The obstacles represent an adherence to traditions--a

reluctance to change from the familiar. The report of this Con-

vention Committee is charged with the responsibility f bringing

ASBO members an up-to-date report on the status of EMRS as of

Spring 1971.

The survey form, shown on pages 2 EiV wE It o 4,146

members of ASBO early in 1971. The inventory instrument was de-

signed and distributed to help the ASBO Research Committee deter-

mine the status of PPBES within its school district and college

membership.

th'your collEagues.Return only one reply for --2ach di tr: t

School District

Address

ERM Research Committee

of the

Association of School Business Officials

Dr. LaMar L. Hill, Chairman

Pupil Membership

Information furnished by

Telephone No.

Position

city, state, province

Please read the enclosed "Summary of System Features" before completing the ques-tionnaire. Answer by checking the appropriate space.

1. Has a system for supporting decision-making, to include thefeatures of the ERMS or PPBES, been authorized by:

a. Your State or Province Educational Agency?

b. Your local governing board?

Has your school district made plans for developing anERM or PPBE?

Is your school district engaged in developing a system forERM or PPBE?

4. Has your school district used the services of a paidconsultant for developing an ERMS or a PRBES?

5. Has your state or Province Educational Agency providedassistance for developing a system?

If you are now operating an ERMS or a PPBES

or

If plans are underway for the development of an ERMS or a PPBES,

Please auwer the ques.tions_o_n the_next page.

2

YES NO

VII

,NOMI

FOR SuriOOL DISTRICTS OPERATING OR INITIATINGAN ERMS OR A PPBES

6. Who took the initiative in starting the system? (Mark an "S" in the responsespace.)Who is currelvaly the most active leader? (Mark an "A" in the response space.)

a. Superintendent d. The Board or a board member

b. Business Official e. Other (Name the position)

c. Instructional Staff member

7. Which of the following participated in the development-implementation processof the system?

a. Teachers c. Community leaders

5. Classified Personnel d. Others (Name the group)

8. Mark in number order each of the following items which has been accomplishedor is a part of your system for the ERMS or the PPBES. (Mark the first tobe accomplished as I, etc.)

a. Steering Committee

b. Planning team named

c. Goals and objective team named

d. Programming team named

e. Budgeting team named

f. Evaluating team named

g. Time schedule prepared

h. Cost analysis model in use

i. Program structure accepted

j. Cost/effectiveness model in use

9. Do you have samples of the instructions, forms or other materials developedthus far w'oich you are willing to share?

Send to: .,Research LibraryAssociation of School Business Officials2424 West Lawrence AvenueChicago, Illinois 60625

RETURN BOTH PAGES IN THE ENCLOSED ENVELOPE -- NO POSTAGE IS REQUIRED.

The State of the Art

For purposes of giving a means of evaluation of Canada and

the United Sta..es the charts on the following pages were developed.

Many of the items included in the survey can be grouped for

purposes of analysis. The charts will be developed for determining

what the status may be in terms of the size of the schools partic-

ipating in the survey, their status and their outside source of

guidance, the individuals responsible for initiation, groups par-

ticipating in the development of the plans and a final chart that

indicates the status of the various stages of ERMS or PPBES devel-

opment.

The first chart (page 7) deals with the number of schools in

Canada and the United States participating in the inventory and the

size of the districts. It should be rdted thai V- Inver

submitted to 4,146 members representing 2,832 member districts and

colleges. There were 1,327 respondents which represents approx-

imately 32% rspclding, however, members were requested not to

send more t an one reply for each district.

Chart -vo (page 7) indicates the stages of development for

those schools reporting. The relationship of those schoo-s in-

volved and tilose rot imolvec in plans for development varies

greatly be-ty-2 n states--namely 1 to 15 for South Dakota tc 64 to

43 in Califonlia. In development New York showed 6 to 65 ratio

compared to 1L to 7 ratic in Florida. Consultants have not been

44

utilized very extensively and the state offices have not offered

much assistance. It should be noted, however, that 318 reported

that the decision has been authorized; 387 have plans for developing

a system; 362 are developing the system; 101 are using consultants

and 169 reported that the state or province is assisting in

providing a system. An example is California whose State Department

of Education and the Advisory Commission on School Budgeting and

Accounting are currently using 14 pilot school districts, and one

county to develop, implement and test a Educational Resources

Management System.

These figures indicate that only a small percentage of the

school districts of Canada and the United States are engaged in

developing a ERMS or PPBE System. Nevertheless; there is a

marked increase in the number of school districts in Canada and the

United States that are either developing or planning and ERMS or

DPfl- System since a survey was made in 1967.

Chart III (page 8) indicates how participation was initiated.

Interestingly enough the school business official seems to be

spearheading most of the situations.

Chart IV (page 8) indicates which groups have been active. It

is good to see that more schools have been inviting teachers,

classified personnel and others to aid in the development of the

system. It may be suprising to note that only 38 schools indicate

the use of ccmmunity leaders in the developmental stages of the

ERM System.

Chart V (page 9) compares the status to which systems have

been developed. If the importance of the item is judged by its

status at th0 timP nf .111P invontnry it would_indicate,that the

design of an ERM System is done in the following order:

1. Planning team named 126

2. Steering Committee named 98

3. Budgeting team named 97

4. Goals and objectives team 95

5. Time schedule prepared 92

6. Program structure accepted 68

7. Programing team named 63

8. Cost analysis model in use 49

9. Evaluating team named 41

10. Cost effectiveness model in use 11

Further analysis shows, however, that 69 respondents stated

that (A.) Steering Committee ranked first in their program and 57

reported that (B.) Planning team named ranked second in importance-

indicating that the value of each item is not at all the same in the

362 districts and colleges developing a system.

CHART I

SCHOOL MEMBERSHIP

AREAS TYPE OF SCHOOL SCHOOL2Oo1

5000

NEMBERSHIPsoal-10000Unified College

I-

10001001-2000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50001-over

Canada 57 1 4 16 11 14 7

United States 1248 79 59 126 405 319 203 '115 13

TOTAL 1305 79 60 126 409 335 214 129 20

Approx. Percent Dist. 4 6 9.7 31.3 25.7 16 4 9 9 1 5

AREAS

DECISIONMAKINGAUTHORIZED

CHART II

STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT

PLANS FORDEVELOPMENT

IN

DEVELOPMENT

PAIDCONSULTANTUTILIZED

STATEASSISTANCE

Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes N Yes No

Canada 12 40 14 42 12 45 3 54 12 45

United States 318 1014 387 875 362 936 101 1120 169 998

TOTAL 330 1054 401 917 374 981 104 1174 181 1043

!

CHART III

INITIATIVE IN STARTING THE SYSTEM CAME FROM:

INITIATIVESTARTING

ACTIVELEADER

BOTHROLES

A.

B.

C.

D.

E.

Superintendent2 ICanada

United States 90 I 24 35

Business Official5 4

.

3CanadaUnited States 57 1 63 108

Instructional StaffI

.

CanadaUnited States 3 16

Board/Board Flember3Canada

United States 25

Other1 3Canada

United States 13 36 12

1

CHART IV

GROUPS PARTICIPATING IN DEVELOPMENT

ONLY PERSON WITH ONE OTHER MORE THAN TWO

A. TeachersCanadaUnited States

B. Classified PersonnelCanadaUnited States

C. Community LeadersCanadaUnited States

2

41

24

26

D. OthersCanadaUnited States

2 2

49 35 32

The following Steps were

accom lished or are oart

of

or

CHART V

STATUS IN SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT

.

the System for the ERMS

the PPBES:

12

/8

US JJS

9US

10

US

US

US

US

___

US

CUS

CUS

___L

A.

Steering Committee

669

15

1.

B.

Planning Team Named

242

557

12

C.

',..;oals and Objective

Team Named

18

230

25

92

D.

Programming Team Named

915

10

21

18

14

E.

Budgeting Team Named

119

17

1..,,,

111

12

75

1

I;_

214

e_ ,)

1

8

127

447

243.

214

,

1

i

1

F.

Evaluating Team Named

4

137

1

5

122

2

5

218

2G.

Time Schedule Prepared

H.

Cost Analysis Model in

USE

I.

Program Structure

Accepted

6ii

111

11

16

J.

Cost Effectiveness

Model in Use

3

Summary

In summary it must be stated that there is much interest

in ERNS or PPBES in education. There has been a marked increase

in development and implementation of systems in the past 4 years.

Superintendents now seem to lead the field in initiating

or starting the system, however, business administrators still

are the most active leaders currently.

It appears that teachers and classified employees are showing

more interest in participating in ERMS development. Not too

suprising is the fact that we are still a little skeptical in

using community leaders in system development.

Again we should be reminded that it is the goal of the creators

of the ASBO conceptual ERN System to provide a vehicle for local

school districts and colleges which, when applied will encourage:

1. Involvement of citizens, staff and students inplanning and decision making.

2. Responsiveness to change and the needs of the learners.

3. Long range planning.

4. Determination of priorities.

5. Thorough analysis of the alternatives.

6. Effective identification and allocation of resources,especially personnel.

7. Adequate display to the public of resource allocationin relation to programs.

8. Accountability to the public in relating resourceutilization to outcomes.

()PI:17.-564

/V

(tee)

/41 efae/I-

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGERICAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS

MCNTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

;

ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 20850

STATE-ARKANSAS

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

21

1-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZO.

YES

NO.

3

:Jf.,I.

ERM RESEARCH COMMITTEE REPORT

SUMMARY OF SYSTEM FEATURES QUEST.

DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

500.1-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE.

1

2-PLANS FOR DEVELOPING

3- ENGAGED IN

4-PAID CONSULTANT

ERNS OR PPBES-

DEVELOPMENT

-.0.. 6- INITIATIVE 4i4LSTARTING

THE SYSTEM CAME FROM

A. SUPERINTENDENT

B. BUSINESS OFFICIAL

C. INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF

D. BOARO/BOARD MEMBER

E. OTHER

YES

NO

3

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

8-THE FOLLOWING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED

OR ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM FOR

THE ERMS OR THE PPBES

A. STEERING COMMITTEE

B. PLANNING TEAM NAMED

C. GUALS AND 08J TEAM NAMED

O. PROGRAMMING TEAM NAMED

E. BUDGETING TEAM NAMED

F. EVALUATING TEAM NAMED

G. TIME SCHEDULE PREPARED

-H. COST ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE

I. PROGRAM STRUCTURE ACCEPTED

-1-

YES

NO

BOTH

ROLES

UTILIZED

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

YES

NO

33.

7-PARTICIPATION IN

DEVELOPMENT CAME .FROM

A. TEACHERS

B. CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL

C. COMMUNITY LEADERS

O. OTHERS

-2-

-3-

-4-

-5-

3

ONLY

'WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

-6-

-7-

-8-

-9-

-10-

.1.- ),

ehedzi-

L1

(d

6

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGERILAL INt-ORMA(ION AND ANALYSIS

MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS


STATE-ALABAMA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COA.EGE

3.

1-DECISION MAKING

.SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

ND

,



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

2-PLANS FOR DEVELOMG

3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

YES

NC

12

6- INITIATIVE 44LSTARTING


INITIATIVE

iVE

STARTING

LEADER

A. SUPERINTENDENT



D. BOARD/BOARD MEMBER

E. OTHER


OR ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM fOR

THE ERNS OR THE PPPES



C. GOALS AND OBJ TEAM NAMED

D. PROGRAMMING TEAM NAMED

.



G..TIME SCHr.DULE PREPARED

H. COST ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE


YES

NO

12

1

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

2

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

YES

NO

3

7-PARTICIPATION IN

DEVELOPMENT CAME FROM

BOTH

.

ROLES

A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-1-

-2-

-3-

-4-

-5-

3

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

-6-

-7-

-8-

79-

-10-





ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 2DB50

DATE RUN

6121/71

STATEARI.ZONA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

IDECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZDe

YES

NO

.

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

500.1-140000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR

MORE:

2

FOR DL,

f.PING 3 ENGAGED IN

ES

PP1;;

DEvELOPMENT

4.

63

4

4PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

5STITE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

320

'

10

10

614

1.

19

123

Q!.1

--- 6 INITIATIVE 'Oil-STARTING

7PARTICIPATION IN


DEVELOPMENT CAME FRom

.INITIATIVE

ACTrVP

BOTH

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

.

STARTING

LEADER

RnLES

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

A. SUPERINTENDENT

11


.1

1

C. INSTRUCTIONAL STA,


U. 8GARU/BUAVO MEMBER

D. OTHERS

.

'E. OTHER

8THE FOLLOWING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED

Ok ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM FUR

THE ERMS Ok THE PPBES

1 2

34

5.-6

78

910


2I


11

1-


11

.


*

2


2


1


I


S

I


1

J. COST/EFFECTNESS MODEL IN USE

1




STATE-ALASKA

YPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIEU

COLLEGE

31



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000. 50-01-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE. I

I-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO

21

..1

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

6- INITIATIVE VilSTARTING


A. SUPERINTENDENT



U. 8OARD/BOARD MEMBER

E. OTHER

YES

NO

3

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

1I.

1


OR ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM.FOR






H. COST ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE'


'

1.

YES

NO

2

BOTH

ROLES

2

-1-

-2-

1

1

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

UTILIZED

.PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

YES

NO

22

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

1

11

13

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

-

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

2.

22

-6-1

-7-

-8-

1

-9-

-10-

1

0EPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGERICAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS



STATECALIFORNIA

1TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

104

10



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000OR .MORE:

3

1DECISION MAKING

2PLANS FOR DEVELOPING 3 ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO.

87

67

ERNS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

YES

NO

'

64

43

YES

NO

75

36

519

.

4PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

17

90

18

29

12

7

5STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

6 INITIATIVE 41:42-STARTING


7PARTICIPATION IN


INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

A. SUPERINTENDENT

16

47

A. TEACHERS

98

11


10

10

28

B. CLASSIFIED'PERSONNEL

9.

39

C.

INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF

24

3C. COMMUNITY LEADERS

33

'

aD. BOARD/BOARD MEMBER

21

D. OTHERS

5a

E. OTHER

4I.

---




12

34

56

78

910


20

51


213

4

C. GOALS AND LBJ TEAM NAMED

32

33

1


1.

26

21

1

E. BuGGETING TEAM NAMED

32

23

22

1


23

11

12


53

42

11

1


11

12


12

15

21

J. COSI/EFFECTNESS MODEL IN USE

21

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGERILAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS


;

RucKvT

mApylANn

STATECANADA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

57

A1DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHILD.

YES

NO

.

12

40



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-40000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000OR MORE,

1


ERNS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

YES

NO

'

.14

42

6 INITIATIVE 41.51STARTING


SUPERINTENDENT

b. BUSINESS OFFICIAL

C. INSTRUCTIONAL SIAFF

De BOARD/BOARD. MEMBER

E. OTHER

YES

NO

12

45

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STAkTING

LEADER

ROLES

254

3

313

4.

16

11

14

4PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

354

7PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS


C. COMMUNITY LEADER

D. OTHERS

8THE

OR

FOLLOWING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED

ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM FOR

THE

ERMS OR THE PPBES

12

34

5STE

'ING COMMITTEE

6

PLAi,,,iNG TEAM NAMED

25

C. GoALS AND OBJ TEAM NAMED

21


31


11

1


2

1.



22

1


12

1

5STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

12

45

ONLY

PERSON42

4.J

WITH ONE

OTHER

MORE

---

THAN TWO

32

51

..2

1

7

I;

67

89

10

..

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL ANO MANAGERICAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS



STATE-CONNECTICUTTYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

29

3



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-.OR MORE,

1

11-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHI1D.

YES

NO

121

ERMS OR PPBES

YES

.NO

46

16.

6- INITIATIVE 1NLSTARTING


wft4

A. SUPERINTENDENT


C. INSIRUCTIONAL STAFF


E. OTHER

11

.

4-PAID CONSULTANT

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

12

19

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

8-THE FOLLOWING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLiSHED










H. IOST ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE


-1-21

YES

NO

428

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS

8, CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL


D. UTHERS

810

1

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

427

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE'.

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

-2-

-3-

-4-

-5-

-6-

-7-

1

1

1

1

1

11

11

1

-10-

f11ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE



RUCKVILLE, MARYLAND 20850

STATE-COLORADO

TYPE

'11.-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO

19

13

4



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

2

1


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

6- INITIATIVE 'IN).STARTING


A. SUPERINTENDENT


C.

INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF


E, OTHER

YES

.NO

413

INITIATIVE

STARTING

221


O. ARE PART C.3,

THE SYSTEM FUR

THE ERMS OR THE PPRES




U. PROGRAMMING TEAM NAMED







YES

NO

314

12

.

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

116

7-PARTICIPATION IN


54

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

3.

14

12

ACTIVE

BOTH

LEADER

ROLES

A. TEACHERS

ONLY

WITH ONE

PERSON

.0THER

MORE-

THAN TWO

1B. CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL

1


1

D. OTHERS

11

.2

-2 -

211

-3-

-4-

-5-

-6-1

-7-1

-8-1

-10-

1V



1


STATE-DELAWARE

7TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

10

1-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHI2D.

YES

NO.

19

1

ERM RESEARCH COMMITTEE REPOR',


DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

500.1-...10000

10001-20000

20001-.

1


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

yESI

14

.

4-PA1D CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

9

6- INITIATIVE 4i4LSTARTING


INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

A. SUPERINTENDENT

1



1.


E. OTHER


OR ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM.FOK







F. EVALUA1ING TEAM NAMED



I. PROGRAM STRUCTURE ACCEP1ED

-1-

BOTH

ROLES

910

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-2-

-3-

-4-

-5-

31

1

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

.PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

10

'1

50000-OR .MORE,

,41.;

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

-

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

-6-

-7-

-8-

-9-

-10-

DEPARTMENT OF EUUCATIONAL AND MANAGERICAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS


ROMILLE, MARYLAND 20850

STATE-FLORIDA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

12

5

7



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

1-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHILD.

YES

NO.

.

10

7

WJ.

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

6- INITIATIVE ftiLSTARTING


Y.ES

NO

10

7

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

A. SUPERINTENDENT

41


3

C. INSIRUCTIONAL SIAFF

D. BOARU/COARC MEMBER

3.

E. OTHER

1.

4

3.

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

YES

NO

14

7

BOTH

ROLES

211

512

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

2

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

10

7

ONLY

PERSON1

'

4.

35

...1....

WITH ONE

MORE

-

OTHER

THAN TWO

21I.

13

8-THE

ORTHE

FOLLOWING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED

ARE PAkT OF THE SYSTEM FOR

ERMS OR THE PPBES








H. COST ANALYSIS MOUEL IN USE


J COST/EFFECTNESS MODEL IN USE

-1-7212211221

-2 -

61

-3-

44

-4-1132

-5-1221

-6-12

-7-

-8-

-9-

a



a

ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 2085C

STATE-GEORGIA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

3.

1



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5004-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR HORE,

1-DECISION MAKINC


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZO,

YES

NO3

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

6- INITIATIVE 4i4I"STARTING


A. SUPERINTENDENT



D. bCARD/BOARO MEMBER

E. UTHER

YES

NO

1.3

YES

NO

13

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES





B. PLANNING TEAM NAMEO

C. GOALS ANO UBJ TEAM NAMED

D. PROGKAWNG TEAM NAMED



G. TIME SCHEDULE PREPAV

H. CCST ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE


-1-

-2-

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

UTILIZED

YES

NO

13

7-PARTIC!PATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

13

2

,r

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO.

-6-

-7-

-8-

-9-

2

10--


MONTGOMERY COuNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

1


STATE-HAWAII

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

1.

1-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZO.

YES

NO.

1

1



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5C0110000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE.


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

'

YES

NO

YES

NO

-

1.1

11

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

6- INITIATIVE 4MLSTARTING


INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

A. SUPERINTENDENT




E. OTHER








E. BUuGETING TEAM NAMED



H. COST ANALYSIS MuDEL IN USE

I. PROCRAm STRUCTURE ACCEPTED

7-PARTICIPATION IN


BOTH

ROLES

A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

1

-2-

-3-

-4-

-5-

1

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

Lao

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

-6-1

1

-8-

-

1

-10-




STATE-IOWA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

CULLEGE

34

7



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

'001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR .MORE,

2

1-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZD,

YES

NO .

.2

39

'

ERNS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

-' 6- INITIATIVE itii4STARTING

THE SYSTEM GAME FROM

A. SUPERINTENDENT

B. BUSINESS Of-FICIAL


D. BOARD/BOARD. MEMBER

E. OTHER

YES

' NO

533

YES

NG

436

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

0LEADER

ROLES








'


.F. EVALUATING TEAM NAMED




-1-

-2-

812

.10

4-PAID CONSULYANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

140

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS


C. CUMMUNITY LEADERS

D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

5

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

139

ONLY

'WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

-6-

-7-

-8-

;

-9-

-10-

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGER1CAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS



STATEINDIANA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

45

'A1DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZO,



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000OR MORE,

514

.12

93

1


ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

NO

YES

NO'

YES

NO

740

45

4PAID CONSULTANT

5STATE OR PROVINCE

YES

NO..

yES

45

--- 6 INITIATIVE biNJ.STARTING


A. SUPERINTENDENT



D. BOARD/BOARD. MEMBER

542

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

21




A. STEERING COMMITEE



D. PROGRAMMING TEAm NAMED

E. BUDGETING TEAM NAMEC



H. CoST ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE

I. PROCRAM STRUCTURE ACCEPTED

BOTH

ROLES

11

211

1

211

1I.

7PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

34

5

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

11

11

1

67

8

1

910

eV



ROCKVILLE? MARYLAND 20850

STATE-IDAHO

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SEr:UNDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

a



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5004-40000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR .MORE,

1-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZO.

YES

NU..

17

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

6- INITIATIVE gq.11"STARTING

THE SYSTEM CAME Fyom

A. SUPERINTENDENT


C. INS1RUCTIONAL STAFF

D. BOARD/BOARD, MEMBER

E. OTHER

YES

NO

.12

6

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

'STARTING

LEADER












1. PROGRAM STRUCTURE ACCEPTED

YES

NO

17

BOTH

ROLES

1

-1-

-2-

4.

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

8

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

21

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO8

ONLY

'WITH ONE

MORE "

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO -

-6-

-9-

-10-

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND !IliNACERILAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS



STATE...ILL!NOIS

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

132

1



DATE RUN

6/21/71

11

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

20015000

5001-10000- 10001-20000

2000150000, 50000OR SORE.

12

48

19

52

27

38.

;

1..4)ECISION MAKING

2PLANS FOR DEVELOPING

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

ERMS OR PPBES

YES

NO .

YES

NO

*

26

128

39

111

3"- ENGAGED IN

4...PAID CONSULTANT

CEVELDPMENT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

YES

NO

36

115

7.

137

5STATE OR PROVINCE

-PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

5*

142

4;

tt

;.

6 INITIATIVE II.11START1NG

7...PARTICIPATION IN



INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE"

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

A. SUPERINTENDENT

62

A. TEACHERS

6'


49

Bo CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL

4.


.4


De HOARD/BOARD MEMBER

De OTHERS

.1E. OTHER

2

8THE FOLLCWING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED

OR AkE PART OF ThE SYSTEM fOR


..2

8A. S1EERING COMMITTEE

5


38

1


36


21


I.

25



12



1.

32

litiARMENT Of IDLIONAL AND MANA(,LRI!

MONTGOMERY LOUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS


STATE-KANSAS

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECUNUARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

17

4

.11-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO

.

1010RWIti;iN AND 1,w1LYSIS



RATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR M0RE.1,


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS. OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

yES

NU

14

89

g(J,

I--" 6- INITIATIVE /MI.STARTING


t-t

A. SUPERINTENDENT


C. INSIROCIIONAL STAFF

D. BGARD/BOARD MEMBER

E. OTHER

Yrr,

NO

313

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BO1H

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

211

8-THE FOLLuWING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED



A. S1EERING COMMITTEE

8. PLANNING TEAM NAMED

.





G. TIRE SCHEDULE PkEPARED


I. PROGRAm STRuClUkL ACCEPTED

1

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

UTILIZED

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

YES

NO

115

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

1

1

1

214

ONLY

'WITH ONE

MORE

'

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

11

-6-1

-7-

-8-

-9-

-10-

DUARTMENT OF EDuCATtorlAI Arm

tI

IICAL INFORMAIINO AHD ANALYSIS

MON I GOJl[R'

LIJItI I

isCHOULS


STATE-KENTUCKY

ERM RESEARCH

COMMITTEE REPORT


DATE RUN

6/21171

TYPE

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNiFiE0

LuLLEGE

81

32

2

1-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AuTLIZD,

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-:10000

10001-20000

20001-50000 -50000-CR .MORE


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR EWES

DEVELOPMENT

YES

NO.

Y.ES

NO

16

2

'..°- 6- INITIATIVE I.N.LSTARTING

THE SySTEM CAME FROM

DEVELOPmENT CAmE

OM

.

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BGTH

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE' .

.STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO'

A. SUPERINTENDENT

2A. TEACHERS

I'

'



5

YES

NO

25

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

UTILIZED

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

YES

NO

7-PARTICIPATION IN

FR

81

7

D. BOARD/BOAtID HEMBLR

E. OTHER


I.

D. OTHERS

1

8-THE FOLLOwING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED



-1-

-2-

-3-

-4-

-5-

-6-

-7-

-8-

. -9-

-10-

.

A. SlEERING COMMITTEE


.

C. GOALS ANO OBJ TEAM NAMED

D, PR0GRAMMING TEAM NAMED


P. EVALUATING TEAM NAMED

.

G. TIME SCHEDULE PRFPARED

H. CILST ANALYSi

MODEL IN IFF

1. PROGRAM STRUCTURE ACLLviLu

Mt




STATE-LOUISIANA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

61

1

ERM RESEARCH COMMIiTEE REPORT

SUMMARY OF SYSTEM FEATURES QUESTA-

DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

500.1-l00oo

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

1

1-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZD,

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

1

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

YES

NO7

6- INITIATIVE IN STARTING


A. SUPERINTENDENT


r,

INSTRUCTION,A

STAFF

D. rArtVO/BOAR6 MIJfikU

kIII[1(

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

77

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

B-IHE FOLLOWING SIEP

1AERE ACCOMPLISHED





C. GOALS AND UBJ TEAM NAMED'


PIIDGET(Cf; TFAM HAMEL)

V, Pi/1111/11r,

.H

NANED

G. TIME SCHLDULI PkEPARED

H. GUST ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE


-1-

-2-

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO7

1

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

PERSOW

OTHER

'

THAN TWO

-3-

-4-

-5-

1 -6-

-7-

-9-

3

-10-




STATE-MAINE

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

7

*11-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZO.

YES

NO.

:

14



QATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR .MORE.


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

6- INITIATIVE 1041.STARTING


YES

NO

43

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

A. SUPLRINTENDENT

2


D. BOARD/BOARD.MEMBER

1

E. OTHER

rfllIOWINC sTrve; !!Fpr

!

h. PI,NOINi,

NAmtD

GOALS ANL) OHJ TEAM NAMED







I.

1

YES

NO

BOTH

ROLES

12

3

3.

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

2.

5

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-2-

-3-

-4-

-

21

2

11

2

3

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO6

2

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE'

'

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

2.

121

-7°1

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGERICAL INFORMATION

AND ANALYSIS



STATE-MARYLAND

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONOARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

12

2

1 DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES7

5



OATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

500.1°10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

1

1


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

3

4-PA1D CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

.yES

NO

-""- 6- INITIATIVE ltillSTARTING


86

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

YES

NO

YES

MO

86

510

BOTH

ROLES

7-PARTICIPATION.IN


PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NCI

10

3

ONLY

WITH ONE. MORE:

PERSON

OTHER

.THAN TWO

A. SUPERINTENOENT

51

A. TEACHERS

1.

1


2B. CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL

2


1


D. OTHERS

21

2

E. OTHER

.1

2



THE ERNS OR THE PPBES

A. STEERINC, COMMITTEE


C. GUALS AND OBJ TEAM NAMED

D. PRDURAMMING TEAM NAMED






-1-

-2 -

3

3

1

2

-3-

-4-

-5-

12

2

- A -

-7-

-8-

6

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND mANAGERICAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS



STATE-MONTANA

1



DATE RUN

6/21/71

TYPE

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE:

32

.1

1-DECIS1ON MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

YES

NO

12

2I.

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES.

NO

12

12

3

6- INITIATIVE 'IN STARTING

.7-PARTICIPATION IN



INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

RCLES

A. SUPERINTENDENT

1


C. INSTRUCTIONALSTAFF.

E. OTHERS

1


C. COmmUNITY LEADERS

Do OTHERS

,

ONLY

WITH ONE' MORE

PERSON.

OTHER

THAN Tiff)

/

1

8-THE FOLLOWING STEPS wERE ACCOmPLISHED

OR ARE PART oF THE SYSTEM FOR


-1-

-2-

-3-

-4-

-5-

-6-

-7-

-8-

-97

-10-


B. PLANNING TEAm NAMED

C. GOALS AND oBJ TEAM NAMED





H. COSI ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE

I. PROGkAm STRUCTURE ACCEPTED

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGERICAL INFURmAiluN ANU ANALT1J



STATE-MASSACHUSETTS

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

32

1

4-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUfHIZD.

YES

NO .

523

GINM

a.vrtvistat.t.


DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

500.1-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

1


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

yES

NO

13

20

YES

NO

13

20

412

.11

3

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

UTILIZED

YES

NO

3.

30

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES6 '

NO

27

11

6- INITIATIVE 11STARTING


INITIATIVE

STARTING

A. SUPERINTENOENT

3

B. BUSINESS CFFICIAL

1


D. BOARD/BOARD,MEMBER

E. OTHER

.11


OR APE PART OF THE SYSTEM.FOR


A. STEERING COMMITEE





F. EVALUATING A1,Am NAMED

G. 'PmE SCHEDULE PREPARED


I. PRuGRAM STRUCTURE ACCEPTED


ACTIVE

LEADER

212

-1-132

BOTH

ROLES

231

-2-1221

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

75-

1131.

2

1

ONLY

PERSON14

-6-

!

1

WITH ONE

OTHER

-7-1

4.

..

MORE',

THAN TWO

433

-8-

-

11

-10-




STATE-MISSISSIPPITYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

I1-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO .

6

1



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

;

.1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-:10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

5J400-OR MORE,

!


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

7

6- INITIATIVE IMSTARTING


A. SUPERINTENDENT


C. INSTkUCTICNAL STAFF

D. BOARD/BOARD, MEMBER

.

E. OTHER

Y.ES

NO

YES

NO

16

.INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES


OR ARE PAkT OF THE SYSTEM FOR






'






-1-

-2-

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

7

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

3

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YE

SN

O

1

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE.

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

-7--8-

1-10-

1




STATE-MIi

.iSOTA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

36

'A

1-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YE

SN

O.

1422

;:r1



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEABERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE,

18

53

2


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

YES

NO

14

22

/--- 6- ,NITTATIVE *iM4STARTING

TKE SYSTEM CAME FROM

A. SUPERINTENDENT


C. INSTRUCTIGNAL SIAFF


E. OTHER

'

YE

SN

O

828

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

START/NG

LEADER

ROLES





B.' PLANNING TEAM NAMED


D. PROGPAmmING TEAM NAmED

E. BUIJCETING TEAM NAMED





15

-1-

-2-1

2

21

312.

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

531

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

I.

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

235

ONLY

'WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THA74 TWO

34.

3

-6-

--8-

-9-

-10-

t

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL ANO MANAGERICAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS



STATEMICHIGAN

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

87

.5

t

ERM RESEARCH CC:-lMITTEE REPORT


DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000OR MORE.!

3

1DECISION MAKING


SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO

10

82

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

6 INITIATIVE 41llaSTARTING


A. SUPERINTENDENT


C.

INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF


E. OTHER

yES

NO

22

69

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

41

43

1I.

11





4B. PLANNING TEAM NAMED

2


D. PROGPAMMING TEAM NAMED

1


4

EVALUATING TEAM NAMED




1


1

YES

NO

23

64

434.

4PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

25

10

10

3

5STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

YES

NO

686

7PARTICIPATION IN


582

BOTH

ROLES

ONLY

PERSON

WITH ONE

OTHER

MORE

THAN TWO

1A. TEACHERS

21

6B. CLASSIFIED

PERSONNEL

61

C. CU:'i.;N1TY

LEADERS

D. OTf::PS

51

1

34

56

78

911

1

6

31

12

I.

11

11

11

101



ROCKVILLE. MARYLAND 20850

STATEMISSOURI

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

23

1



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

11000

10012000 20015000

500110000

100I.20000 2000150000

50000...OR MORE,

1:-DECISION MAKING


3. ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHILD.

YES

NO

21

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

6.- INITIATIVE TSTARTING


YES

NO

317

YES

NO

220

.INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

A, SUPERINTENDENT

11

3. BUSINESS OFFICIAL


1

D.

bOARD/LiOAK), MEMBER

E. OTHER








'







1

1

27

.

ir.-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

I.

20

.frPARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

3

1

64

4

5..-.STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISANCE

YES

NO

21

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

11

E/'

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGERICAL INFORMATION .4113 ANALYSIS



STATE-NEBRASKA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

14



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

17

.2

12

1

1-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

ERNS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO.

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

f

210

'. 4

94

92

11

1

W.4.

f

--- 6- INITIATIVE 14.04START.ING

7-PARTICIPATION IN



INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

A. SUPERINTENDENT

2


11

B. CLASSIFIED PERSO

C. INSTRUCTICNAL STAFF


r


O. OTHERS

.

E. OTHER




-1-

-2-

-3-

-4-

-5-

-6-

-7-

-8-

-9-

-10-


II

B. PLANNING TEAm NAMED

11


11


1


1


1

G. TImE SCHEDULE PREPARED

11

Ji. COST ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE

1'


MONTGOMERY CUUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

ROCKVILLE, MARYLANO 20850

STATE-NEVADA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

5

t



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

500.1-1000010001-20000

20001-5000050000-O

R M

OR

E.1i

11

.

1-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

SYSTEM AUTHILD.

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

.2

2

6- INITIATIVE 4/41STARTING


A. SUPERINTENDENT


C. INSTRUCIIONAL STAFF

D. 13CARD/BOAkD MEMBER

E. OTHER

32

32

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES




A. STEERING CUNMITTLE


C. COALS AND OBJ TEAM NAMED


L. BUDGETING TEAM NAMED





2

-2-

13

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

1'

4

ONLY

*WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

:

-3-

-4-

-5-

-6-

/

3

cr)

-7-

-8-

-9-

-10-

t


MUNTGOMEk/ COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS


STATE-NEW. JERSEYTYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

79

5

iAI-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO

469



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

500V-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MOREI

5


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

6- INITIATIVE tf44STARTING

THE SYSTEM CAME FLOM

A. SUPERINTENDENT



D. BOARD/BOARO MEMBER

E. OTHER

,

yES

NO

.17

65

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

22

42

1

B-THE FOLLOWING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED







L. BUDGETING TEAM NAMED





2

YES

NO

1568

BOTH

ROLES

4312

-1-

-2-

221

/4

36

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

380

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

17

7

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

577

ONLY

PERSON13

.

21

.1.

WITH ONE

MORE

'

OTHER

THAN TWO

3

52

-3-

121

-4-111

-5-

-6-

1

-7-1

-a-

JEPAR1-

Ji OF EDUCATIONAL ANO MANAGERICAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS

ALNTGOMFRY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

ROCKVILLE/ MARYLAND 20850

STATE-NEW,MEXICOTYPE

ELEMEt'TARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

61



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

100172000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR .MORE

1

1-DECISION MAKING


3* ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO,

16

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

--- 6- INITIATIVE lill'STARTING


YES

NO

15

.INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

A. SUPERINVNDENT

1


C. INSTRUCTPTNAL STAFF

D. BFARD/BLW). MEMBER

E. C7HER

8-THE FOLLOWIKO STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED


THE ERMS OR

HE PPBES

A. STEEKING COMMITTEE



D. PROGPAMMING TEAM NAMED


F. [VAL !ATING TEAM NAMED



I. PROG A STRUCTURE ACCEPTED

-1-

YES

NO

15

BOTH

ROLES

1

I.3

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

UTILIZED

YES

NO

1.

5

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES1

ONLY

PERF-v!

-3-

-4-

-5-

-6-

NO5

*WITH ONE

MORE'

'

OTHER

THAN TWO

-7--

-8--

-9-,

-10-

DEPAR'!ENT OF EDUCATIONAL ANU MANAGERICAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS



STATENEW YORK

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

71

1DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO

10

59



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

11000

10012000

2001-..5000

5001.10000

10001.20000

2000150000

50000.OR MORE'

4


ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

YES

NO

10

58

YES

NO

665

.10

33

.17

4PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

764

8

5STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

19.

61

31

Ql;

--os. 6 INITIATIVE ft44STARTING


INITIATIVE

STARTING

ACTIVE

LEADER

BOTH

ROLES

7PARTICIPATION IN


ONLY

PERSON

WITH ONE

OTHER

MORE

.

THAN TWO

A. SUPERINTENDENT

31

2A.

TEACHElS

12

'

1.


34

6B.

CLASSIFIED

PERSONNEL

3.

21


C.

COMMUNITY

LEADERS

11


1,

.

D.OTHERS

22

E. OTHER

2


OR AkE PART Of THE SYSTEM. FOR


-1-

23

45

67

89

10

A, STEERING UMMITTEE

41

1

!MC, TLAM NAMED

23

L.

UBJ TEAM NAMED

21

22


21

E. 8ULGETING TEAM NAMED

12

11


21

1


11

1


1


1'

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGER/CAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS

MuNTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS

RoCKVILLE, MARYLAND 20850

STATE-NORTH DAKOTA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

7

1



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

500.110000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

3.

1-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

4-PAID CONSULTANT

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

ERMS Ok PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

YES

NO.

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

1.

62

5

-.0-- 6- INITIATIVE fN1-STARTING


INITIATIVE

STAR/ING

ACTIVE

LEADER

2

BOTH

ROLES

52

5

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. SUPERINTENUENT

A.

TEACHERS


1B.CLASSIFIED

PERSONNEL

C.

INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF

1C.

COMMUNITY

LEADERS

D. ECARD/u0ARD MLMBER

U.

OTHERS

E. OTHER

8-THE FOLLowiNG STEPS wERE ACCOMPLISHED



-1-

-2-

-3-

-4-

-5-


1


1






1


I. PROGRAM STRuCTURE ACCEPTED

4

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO6

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE'

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

f

-7-

-8-

-9-

-10-

1

i"




STATE-NORTH CAROLINA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

51

1



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

1

1-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZO.

YES1

5

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

6- INITIATIVE fNI.STARTING


A. SUPERINTENDENT


C.

INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF

D. BOARO/BOARD MEMBER

E. OTHER

Y.ES

NO

15

YES

NO

15

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES


OR AkE PART OF THE SYSTEM FOR

THE ERMS 2P THE PPBES





E. alOCETING TEAM NAMED

F. EVALUATING TEAR NAMED




-1-

-2-

4-PA1D CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

15

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

21

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

2

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

-6-

-7-

-e--9-

-10-

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL ANU MANAbLKILAL limrunnAinunf new .4,11^up.,s.a



STATE-NEW HAMPSHIRE

TYPE

SUMMARY OF SYSTEM FEATUkES QUEST.

DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000- 50000-OR MORE,

1-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHILD.

2


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

YES

NO

y.:S

*

NO

12

2

YES

NO

4-PA10 CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

UTILIZED

PROVIDED ASSIFJANCE

YES

NO

YES

NO

-."- 6- INITIATIVE /k"STARTING

7-PARTICIPATION IN



INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

ONLY

*WITH ONE

MORE

.STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

A. SUPERINTENDENT

1


I1


1

:C.

INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF


D. BCARD/BOAF.D MEMBER

D. OTHERS

1

.E. OTHER




-1-

-2-

-3-

-4-

-5-

-6-

-7-

-8-

-9-

-10-




1


E. EULCETING TEAM NAMED

1


1


H. cnsT ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE



1

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGER/CAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS



STATE-OREGON

'E

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

20

4

1


SUMMARY OF SYSTEM FUJURES QUEST.

DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001.-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR °MORE

1

11-DECISIGN MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NU10

ERNS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

--- 6- INiTIATIVE T/41-ST4RTING

r


YES

.NO

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

A. SUPERINTENDENT

2



D. BEARD/BOARD MEMBER

E. OTHER

8-THE FULLOING STEPS WERE ACC:iMPLISHED








H. COST ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE'


YES

NO

716

BOTH

ROLES

241

-1-

-2=

1

I.

42

4-PAID.CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR-PROVINCE

UTILIZED

YES

NO

320

7-PARTICIPAT/ON IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

11

1.

1

1

3

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

517

2

;.4..:-

.

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

'

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

2

-6-

-7-

11

1

-8-

2211

-9-

2

-10-

.

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGERICAL INFORMAVION AND ANALYSIS



STATE-OHIO

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY OIN-FIED

COLLEGE

45

1

1-DECIIN MAKING

SYS)

AUTHIZD.

YES4

NO

35

1



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5004-10000

10001-20000

20u01-50000

50000-OR MORE


3- ENGAGED IN

116

.12

10

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

10


35

YES

NO

10

33

YES

NO

441

7-PARTICIPATION IN

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES3

NO

2


INITIATIVE

STARTING

ACTIVE

LEADER

BOTH

ROLES


ONLY

PERSON.

WITH ONE

OTHER

MORE

THAN TWO

A. SUPERINTENDENT

1.

A. TEACHERS

11

1

B. BUSINESS EFFICIAL

22

B. CLASSIFIED

PERSONNEL

1


1C. COMMUNITY

LEADERS

I.


1D. OTHERS

21

E. OTHER

21

8-THE FuLEO,AING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED

OR ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM FOK


A. STEEPING COMMITTEE


1



E. BUDGETING TEAM NAME0




1


-1-

-2-11

-3-

-4-

-5-

1

1

-6-

-7-

-8-

-9--

5


MONTGOMERY COUNTY PU8LIC SCHOOLS


STATE-OKL.AHOMA



DATE RUN

6/21/71

TYPE

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

a1

13

.2

21

.11-DECISION MAK!NG

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.


3- ENGAGED IN

ERRS OR-PPEIES

DEVELOPMENT

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

UTILIZED

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

Y.ES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

17

. 3

63

69

27

TAL

....- 6- INITIATIVE thiLSTARTING

7-PARTICIPATION IN



INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

.*.

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

A. SUPERINTENDENT

I.

I

B. BUSINESS CFFICIAL

8. CLASSIFIED PERSONt:EL

2.


1C. COMMUNITY LEADER

I

D. ECARD/BOARD MEMBER

D. OTHERS

I

E. OTHER


OR AKE PART OF THE SYSTEM FOR


-2-

-3-

-4-

-5-

-6-


B. PLANNING TEM NAMED


D. PRoGRAMMING TEAM NAMED

1






-8-

-9-

-10-




STATF-PENNSYLVANIA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

89

2



DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-L10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

'.0000-OR MORE

3

1-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO

35

78

:if.J.

4L1.

ERMS QR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

YES

NO

10

65



A. SUPERINTENDENT




E. OTHER

YES

NO

647

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

51



THE ERNS OP THE PPBES

A. STtERING COMMITTEE






G. TINE SCHEDULE PREPARED



J. COST/EFFECTNESS MoDEL IN uSE

31

311

-1-

-2-

11

2

1

639

.

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

27

18

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

YES

NO

180

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS

8. CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL


D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

1

1

1

17

67

ONLY

'

WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON.

OTHER

THAN TWO

11

21

-6-

-7-

-8-

-g-

-10-


MuNTGOMEkY COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS


STATE-RHODE ISLAND

TYPE

E:LEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

41



DATE RUN

6/21171

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

I-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO.

32

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

--- 6- INITIATIVE PiLSTARTING


YES

NO

32

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

A. SUPERINTENDENT

1



D. BOARL/BOARD MEMBER

E. OTHER

8-THE EOLLOWING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED


THE ERPS Ck THE PPBES









I. l'OGRAM STRUCTURE ACCEPTED


1

2.

11

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

UTILIZED

YES

NO

YES

NO

23

BOTH

ROLES

1

-1-

-2-

111

1

23

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

111

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

1

ONLY

VIITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

11

-6-

1

-7-1

-8-

1

-9-

4

-10-

ri




STATE-SOUTH CAROLINA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

9

1-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.


ERMS OR PP8ES

YES

NO

1a

YES

NO

18

-

-Y

6- INITIATIVE fill'STARTING


INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

A. SUPERINTENDENT

1


1


D. BCARDJBOARD MEMBER

E. OTHER




A.

B.

C.

D.E.

F.G.H.I.

STEERING COMMITTEE

PLANNING TEAM NAMED

GOALS t,ND OBJ TEAM NAMED

PROGRAMMING TEAM NAMED

BUDGETINC TEAM NAMED

EVALUATING TEAM NAMED

TIME SCHEDULE PREPARED

COST ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE

PROGRAM STRUCTURE ACCEPTED

-1-

ERM RESEARCH rOMMITTEE REPORT

SUMMARY OF SY.iTEM FEATURES QUEST.

DAT: RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

100)-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

3-.ENGAGED IN

23

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

18

YES

NO

18

7-PARTICIPATION IN


BOTH

ROLES

A. TEACHERSB. CLASSIF!ED PERSONNEL

C. COMMUNI7Y LEADERS

D. OTHERS

-2-

-3-

-4-

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES1.

NO8

I.

ONLY

WITH ONE

SORE

.

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

-5-

-6-

1

-7-

-8-

-9-

2

-10-

DEPARTMENT OF EDULATIONAL AND MANAGER:CAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS

MONTGOMERY COuNTY PUBLIC SCHuOLS

ROCKVILL:, MARYLAND 20850

STATE-SOUTH DAKOTA

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

16

ERM RESEARCH COMMITTEE PEFL1RT

SHMMARY OF SYSTEM FEATURES QUEST..

.E RUN

6121/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

10012000 20015000

500110000

10001-20000

2000/-50000

50000..4)R MORE

1

1-DECISION MAKING


:- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZO.

YES

NO

115

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

6- /NITIATIVE P41-STARTING


t)

A. SUPERINTENDENT

B. BUSINLSS OFFICIAL


D. FOARD/BOARU MEMBER

E. OTHER

YES

NO

115

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

F-THL FOLLOWING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED


THE ERMS Ok THE PPRES










1

YES

NO

/15

BOTH

ROLES

-1-

-2-

1

85

.

ir''PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

16

7..-PARTICIPATION TN


A. TEACHERS

B. CLASSIFIED PERSONN4


D. OTHERS

-3-

-5-

1

5STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVID7D ASSISTANCE

YES

NO15

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE"

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

1

-6-

-8-




STATE-TENNESSEE

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

6

1-DECISION MAKING

SYSTEM AuTHIZD.

YES

NO.

6

1

ERM RESEARCH r,OMMITTEE REPORT

SUMMARY C.:: SYSTEM FEATURES QUEST.

DATE RUN

6/21i71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

500.1-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE,


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT



YES

NO

A. SUPERINTENDENT

H. BUSINESS OFFICIAL



34

YES

NO

1.

5

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

I.

1.

1

8-THE FuELOwING STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHED


THE ERMS uR THE PPBES




D. PROGRAmmING TEAM NAMEL






1

-1-

-2-1

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

I6

7-PARTICIPATION IN

-DEVELOPMENT CAME FROM

A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

1

1

4

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

16

ONLY

WITH ONE

MORE

PERSOW

OTHER

'

THAN TWO

I.

11

-6-

-7-

-8-

-9-

-10-

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATL '4AL AND MANAGERICAL IN'ORMATION AND ANALYS'


ROCKVILLEg MARYLAND 20850

STATE-TEXAS

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

44

1



CATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-.40000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

1

1-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

'LES

NO

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

YES

NO

34

10

24

16

15

.13

6

4-PAID CONSULTANT

5-.STATE OR PROVINCE

UTILIZED

YES

NO

YES

NO

19

21

139

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

27

15

3

INITIATIVE IN STARTING

THE SYSTEM GAME FROM

INITIATIVE

STARTING

ACTIVE

LEADER

BOTH

ROLES

7-PARTICIPATION IN


ONLY

PERSON

WITH ONE

OTHER

MORE

THAN TWO

A. SUPERINIENDENT

3.

11

A.

TEACHERS

33

1


75

B.

CLASSIFIED

PERSONNEL

31

C.

INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF

1C.

COMMUNITY

LEADERS

1

D. BLARD/BOARD MEMBER

D.

OTHERS

43

E.,

OTHER

3



INT ERNS CR THE PPBES

-1-

-2 -

-3-

4 -

-5-

-6-

-7---8-

-9-A. STEERING CUMMITTEE

31


53

1


3

D. PRUGRAMMING TEAM NAMED

1

tiE. BUDGETING TEAM NAMED

24

13


1


11

13

1

H. CCS1 ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE

11

I. PRUGFAM STRUCTURE ACCEPTED

11

1.

J. CUST/EFFECTNESS MODEL IN USE

1

5

-10-

DEPARTMENT OE EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGEVE.iL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS



STATE UTAh

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

14


SUMMARY OF SYSTEM FEATURES QUESTo

DATE RUN

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5004-.-10000

10001-20000

2C001-50000

50000OR MC'E

1

1DECISICN MAKING


SYSTEM AOTHI1D,

YES

NO.

611

)

ERNS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

--- 6 INITIATIVE 1NI'STARTING


yES

NO

511

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER

A. SUPERINTENDENT

2

B. BUSINESS OEFICIAL

O. INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF

D. HCAku/BOARD MEMBER

E. OTHER

8THE FOLLOWING STEPS 1JRE ACCOMPLISHED

OR ARE PART OF THE S\

"iM FOR

THE ERNS OR THE PPBES

A. STEERING COMMI

-E

B. PLANNING TEAM

D

C. GOALS AND OBJ TL

A NAMED

O. PROGRAMMING TEAM NAMED







YES

NO

312

BOTH

ROLES

1

21

1 2

1

1

35

.

4PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

15

7PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

34

51

1

1

32

5ST1TE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES5

NO10

ONLY

'WITH ONE

MOE'

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

6

1

7

1

8

1

9

1

10--

DEPARTMENT OE EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGERICAL INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS



STATE-VERMONT

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

-OLLEGE

2



DATE RUN

6/21/71

r

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

1-DECISION MAKING


3- ENGAGED IN

SYSTEM AUTHIZD.

YES1

1

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

-- 6- INITIATIVE PNLSTARTING


A. SUPERINTENDENT



U. POARD/UOARO. MEMBER

E. OTHER

yES

NU

1

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

STARTING

LEADER



THE LRMS CR THE PPBES



C. GUALS AND OBJ TEAM NAMED





H. COST ANALYAS rinDEL

IN USE


YES

NO

BOTH

ROLES

-1-

-2-

2

2,

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

YES

NO2

7-PARTICIPATION IN


,A. TEACHERS

B. CLAsfAFIED PERSONNEL


D. OTHERS

-3-

-4-

-5-

.*

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

ONLY

WITH

-

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

-6-

-7-

-8-

1

ULPAK;MtNI ur LUULAIIUNAL ANU 1ANAUCM1UAL 114FUMMAIILM AVIU MIlmi-gos4


ROCKVILLEv MARYLAND 2r850

STATE-VIPGINIA

TYPE

ELCMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

12

1

1-DECISION MAKING

S'!STEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO.

111


DATE RUN

6121/71

PUPIL MEMBSHIP

.

.1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

50000-OR MORE

1


3- ENGAGED IN

ERMS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

yES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

--- 6- INITIATIVE IMLSTARTING


A. SUPERINTENDENT

B. BUSINESS CEFICIAL

C.,

INSTRUCTIONAL STAFF

U. BLARO/BOARD MEMBER

E. OTHER

4-PAID CONSULTANT

UTILIZED

310

58

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

8-THE FOLLOwING STEPS WERE ACCOMPEIS!IED

uR ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM FOR




C. GOALS AND ni3J TEAM NAMED

D. PROGRAmmING TEAM NAMED



G. TIME SCHEuULE PREPARED

H. CUST ANALYSIS MODEL IN USE

1. PROGRAM STRUCTURE ACCEPTED

-1-

-2-

112

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

1.

6

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

ONLY

PERSON

-3-

-4-

-5-

-6-

!

I.

NO13

'WITH ONE

MORE

OTHER

THAN TWO

111

-7--

-8-

-9-

3

-10-

DEPARTMENT OF LDOCATIONAL AND MANAGERICAL INfORMATION ANDANALYSIS


ROZKVILLE, MARYLAND 20850

STATE-WASHINGTON

1

ERM RESEARCH COMM TTEE REP RT

SUMMARY' OF SYSTEM, FEATURES QUEST.

DATE, RUN

6/21/71

TYPE

PUPIL. MEMBERSHIP

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

1000

-2000

2001 5000

51

0000

10001-2000

20001-50000

00-0R, 110,,HE

1 OfCISI IN MAKING

313

79

52


ENGAGED' IN'

SYSTEM, AUTHIZD,

ERMS OR PPBES

YES

NO

1015

4-P Al ID, CONSULTANT

5-STATE OR PROVINCE'

DEVELOPMEICT

UTILIZED.

-PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

yES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

NO

13

18

11

20

229

9,

22

4, AM

6INITIATIVE IN STARTI, G

THE SYSTEm CAME FROH,

INITIATIVE

STARTING

A. SUPERINTENDENT

4.

3. EUSINESS CfFICIAL

LL

BOARD/BOARD MEMBER

E. OTHtR

ACTIVE

LEADER

24

BOTH

ROLES

23

7-PARTICIPATION, IN

DEVELOPMENT CAME. FROM

A. TEACHERS


D. OTHERS

8-THE 'CILL,

NG STEPS WERE ACCOMPLISHE

Ok AkE PART OF THE SYSTEM FOR


-1-

-2-

--5-


2B. PLANNING TEAM NAMED

11

C. GOALS AND OBJ TEAM NAMED,

11

2D. PROGRAMMING TEAM NAMED

2I.

1E. BUCGETINC TEAM NAMED

31

2.


2'

1


11

1


11

1I. PROGRAM STRUCTURE ACCEPTED

21

ONLY'

WITH ONE

MORE

PERSON

OTHER

THAN TWO

1''

- 21

5t

1

-6-1

.

1

DEPA TmENT OF EDUCATIONAL ANo MANAGERICAL

INFORMATION AND ANALYSIS

mUNTGOMERYCOUNTY PUBLIC. SCHOOLS,

ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND, 20850

STATE-WISCONSIN

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED,

52

COLLEGE

5

1-DECISION MAKING

2-PLANS FOR ,"EVE

PING,

SYSTEM AUTHILDo

YES.

NO -

38

ERMS OR PPBES

INITIATIVE IN STARTING,

THE SYSTEM pall FROM

YES

NO

22

33

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

5004

310

21

ENGAGED IN

4-PAID CONSULTANT'

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

YES

NO,

18

37

YES

NO

156

1-PARTICIPATION, IN

DEVELOPMENT CAME FROM.

1

ERM RESEARCH, COMMITTEE. REPORT

SUMMARY OF. SYSTEM FEATURES QUEST'.

DATE RUN

6/21171

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP'

10000

10001-20000

20001- 0000

50000-OR MORE

95

3

5-STATE OR. PROVINCE

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

0'

651

A. SuPERINTENDENT



D. BOARD/BOARD MEMBER.

E. OTHER

,NITIATIVE

STARTING

5

ACTIVE'

LEADER

42

BOTH

ROLES

2512

A. TEACHERS



D. OTHERS

OhtY

'

;JERSON.

141

WITH ONE' MORE

OTHER

'THAN TWO

24

343

12

2


DR ARE PART C.F. THE SYSTEM FOR


-2-4-

-7--10-

A. STEERING COMmITTEE

31

B. PLANNiNG TEAm, NAMED

32

1

COALS AND OBJ TEAM NAM1D

3,D. PROGRAmmiNG, TEAM NAmED

2E. BUDGETING TEAM NAMED

3F. EVALUATING TEAM, NAMED

1.

G. TIME SCHEDUtE PREPARED


2I

PROGRAM STRuCTURE ACCEPTED.

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGERICAL INfORMATION AND ANALYSIS

MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUtiLIC SCHOOLS

ROCKVILLE' MARYLAND 20350

S ATE

'EST VIR IN A

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIE,

COLLEGE

I-DECISION MAKING

2-PLANS FOR DEVELOPING.

SYSTEM AUTHIZO4

YES

ND.

ERNS 01i, PPBES

INIT. ATIVE IMLSTARTING

THE SYSTEM CAME FRO

A. SUPERINTENDENT

B. eusINEss OFFICIAL


D. IJOARD/60AR3 MENDER

E. CTHER

rES

NO

7

1-1000

100.

2000

21001-5000

ERM RESEARCH COR ITTEE REP RT

SUMMARY Of SYSTEM' FEATURES QUEST.

pATE RUN,

6/21/71

PUPIL MEMBERSHIP.

5001-10000

10001-20000

0001 503noo

50000-OR M Rt,

42,

ENGAGED IN

4-PAID. CONSULTANT

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED.

YES

NO

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING.

LEADEW

ROLES


OR ARE PART. Of THE SYSTEM FOR



B. PLANNING TEtM AAMED

C.GUALS ANL) OBJ TEAM NAMED

D. PRuCRAmmiNG TEAM NAMED

E. PUDGETING TEAM NAMED

F. EvALUATING TEAM NAMED

G. TIME SCHEDUtE PRLPARED


t. PROGRAm STRUCTURE ACCEPTED.

YES

NO

7

7-PARTICIPATION IN


A. TEACHERS


C. COMMUNITY LEADERS,

D. OTHERS

5....STATE OR PROVINCE

PROVIDED' ASSISTANCE

YES

NO.

ONtY

WITH ONE

MORE'

-

PERSON!

OTHER

THAN TWO

-6-

-1-

-9-

-10-



kOCKVILLE, MARYLAND 20850

ST),TE- WY U M I NG

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SECONDARY UNIFIED

COLLEGE

1-DECISION MAKING

2..PtANS FOR DEVELOPING

SI STEM AUTHIZD.

YES

NO.

16

INITIATIVE

THE SYSTEM

ERAS OR PPBES,

NO

2

tiNkSTARVING,

CAME FROM

A. SUPERINTENUENI


C. INSTRUtTIONAL STAFF

O. BOARO/BOAROMBER

E. OIHER

1-1000

1001-2000

3

1



OATE RUN

6121/71

PUPIL MEMBERS6IP

2001-5000

5001-3000

10001-20000

20001-50000 n000-OR tinRE

2

ENGAGf0 IN

4-PAID CONSULTANT

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

YES

ND

26

...INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROL1S


OR ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM FOR.



D. PLANNING TEAM NAMED


U. PROGRAMMING TEAM NAMED


F. EVAtUATING TEAM NAMED

O. TIME SCHEOUtE PREPARED

H. COST ANALYSIS MODEL IN. USE


YE

SN

O

1-PARTICIPATION IN

DEVELOPMENT' CAME FROM.

.

A. TEACHERS

B. CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL.


D, OTHERS

-3-

5-STATE OR PROVINCE

'

PROVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

NO

2"

6,

ONtY

WITH ONE

MORE'

'

PERSON

OTHER.

THAN TWO

IMP

-10-

11,

DE ARTMENI Of EDUCATIONAL AND, MANAGERICAL INfOR

MONTGOMERY COUNTY PUBLIC. scHnoLs


STA- -.UNKNOWN

TYPE

ELEMENTARY

SEC NPARY UNIFIE2

1-DECISION MAK

SYSTEM AUTHA

YES

NO2

COtLEGE

NG,

2-PLANS FOR. DEVE OPING

ERNS OK PPBES

6-

I1 IIATIVE INLS, ART NG


A. SUPERINTENDENT

L5,,

BUSINESS OFFICIAL

C. INSTRUCTIONAL STAff

U. 8LA1OMARD ME18E1

E. OTHER

yES

NO,

2

ATION AND ANALY

I'

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

2.

ERN RESEARCH COM

SUMMARY OF SYSTE

DATE. RUN

6/21/7

.PUP1L MEMBERSHIP

TTFE REPORT

FEATURES QUEST.

543au-t0000

10001-20000

2000L-50000

500a0- R IILV

RE:

ENGAGED IN

4-PAID CONSULTANT

DEVELOPMENT

UTILIZED

YES

NO

INITIATIVE

ACTIVE

BOTH

STARTING

LEADER

ROLES

8-THE FULUNING STEPS WEE. ACCOMPL SHED

OR. ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM FOR.

THE ERMS ON. THE PPBES

A. STEERING. COMMITTEE

8. PLANNING TEAM. NAMED



E.

121.0DC.E.TiNG TEAM NAMED

F. EVALUATING fE,A.1, NAMED

G. TIME SCHEOUtE PREPARED.

H. COST ANALYSIS MOUEL IN USE

I. PROGRAM STRUCTURE ACCLPTED

-2-

YES

NO

3

7-PART CIPATT N IN

OEVELOPMENT CAME FROM

A. TEACHERS

B. CLASSIFIED PERSONNEL.

C. COMMUNITY LEADERS,

0. OTHERS

-5-

5-S

ATE. OR PROVINCE

OVIDED ASSISTANCE

YES

ND,3,

ONLY

WITH ONE MORE'

PERS N

OTHER.

THAN TWD

-6-

-8-

0-

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONAL AND MANAGERICAL INfORMATION AND, ANALYSIS,



S TIA T

F I NAL TO T At

T YPE

ELEMJENTARY

SECJONOARY UN IF IE

COLtEGE

1-1000

1001-2000

2001-5000

ERA RESEARCH COMA. HEE REPORT

SUMMARY Of SYSTEM FEATURES WEST.

DATE RUN

6121/71

PUP IL NEMHERSH1P

5001-10000

10001-20000

20001-50000

.1

R, moRE

1248.

79

59

126

405

.319

1-DECISION MAKING,

2-PLANS FOR OEVELOPING

ENGAGED IN

4- PA 0 CONSULT'

SYSTEM AUTH120.

ERRS OR PPBES

DEVELOPMENT

UTIL I Z ED

YES

NO

YES

NO

YES

ND

YES

NO

. 318,

1014

tlt,

387

875

362

936

101

1120

6- INIT ATIVE IN STARTING

7-PARTICIPATION IN

THE

YSTEM CAME FROM


INITIATIVE

ACT EVE,

S TART ING

LEADER

BOTH

ROtES

203

115

13

5- ST AT f OR. PROM I NC E,

PROV MED A SS IS TA NC E

YES

NO

169

998

ONt

PERSON

14 I TH ON E '" MORE '

OTHER

THAN T.'

4124

26,

,32.

A. SUPER IN1ENDENT

90

.24

35

A .

T EACHE RS

33

3,1

8, BUSINESS Of OCTAL

57

63

108

8 t

C LAS S If! ED.

PERSONNEL.

55

36.

C. flSTRUCF1ONAL ST AF5

316

5C.

COMMUNITY

L EA DfR S

8,

4D. BOARUIBOARD MEMBER

25

26

0.

0 THER S

49

.35

E. OTHER

13

36

12

8-THE FOLLOWING STEPS WER E ACCOMPLISHED

OR AR E PART OF THE SYSTEM FOR.

THE ER. S OR Tt PF8ES

-1-

-2-

- 3 -

-4-

-7 -

A. ST E Ek ING COMM1 TT EE

69

15

13

2

.pLANNtND rEAK NAKED

42

57

12

32

C. GOALS AND U!J TEAM NAMED

18

30

25

96

22

U. PROGRAMMING TEtM NAMED

915

10

21

8

E. RUOCET ING TE AM NAMED

19

17

I I

12

75

F. FVALUAT I N; TEAM, NAMED

45

55

42

G. T IME SCHEUULE PkEPARED

13

12

21

21

12

44

H. COST ANALYSIS YODEL IN USE

72

a4

77

3

IPROGR.;.,M ST RUCTURE ACCEPTED,

611

11

610

3

J COS 1 iCUELCTNAESS MOUEL IN, USE

23

1

21

124

1432

1

Documents

DOCUMENT RESUME ED 061 595