Transition Planning Commission Plan

7/31/2019 Transition Planning Commission Plan

1/308

Transition Plan for the Merger

of Memphis City Schools and

Shelby County Schools

Submitted by the Transition Planning Commission

August 3, 2012


2/308

1

The Transition Plan was developed by the members of the Transition Planning Commission:

Joyce Avery

Jim Boyd

Kenya Bradshaw

Staley Cates

Dr. Reginald Green

Tommy Hart

Richard Holden

Rickey Jeans

Dr. Fred Johnson

Martavius JonesDaniel Kiel

Mayor Mark H. Luttrell, Jr.

Mayor Keith McDonald

Louis Padgett, III

David Pickler

Dr. Barbara U. Prescott

Christine P. Richards

Barbara Roseborough

Dr. John Smarrelli, Jr.

Larry Spiller

Katie Stanton

The Transition Plan was finalized by the Transition Planning Commission on August 3, 2012, afterreviewing and incorporating feedback from the Shelby County Board of Education, Commissioner of

Education, and public during the review period in June and July, 2012. This document is the finalversion of the Transition Plan, submitted to the SCBE and Commissioner for approval.


3/308

2

TABLE OF CONTENTSEXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................................... 4

INTRODUCTION ...............................................................................................................................................................18

LEGAL CONTEXT FOR THE SCHOOLS MERGER AND TPC ................................................................................................................... 19

CHARGE OF THE TPC ............................................................................................................................................................... 19

GUIDING PRINCIPLES ............................................................................................................................................................... 20THE GOAL OF THE TRANSITION PLAN .......................................................................................................................................... 20

SUMMARY OF THE PROCESS ...........................................................................................................................................21

EDUCATION PLAN: EDUCATIONAL SERVICES ...................................................................................................................28

INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................................................................................... 29

CONTEXT............................................................................................................................................................................... 30

PRIORITY 1:EVERY CHILD READY FOR SCHOOL ............................................................................................................................... 33

PRIORITY 2:EVERY STUDENT READY FOR SUCCESS IN COLLEGE AND CAREER ........................................................................................ 36

PRIORITY 3:RIGOROUS IMPLEMENTATION OF STANDARDS .............................................................................................................. 39

PRIORITY 4:QUALITY AND ACCESSIBLE EDUCATIONAL CHOICES......................................................................................................... 41

PRIORITY 5:ENGAGED PARENTS AND FAMILIES ............................................................................................................................. 44

PRIORITY

6:S

UPPORTIVE COMMUNITY MEMBERS AND PARTNERS..................................................................................................... 46PRIORITY 7:TAILORED INTERVENTIONS AND SUPPORT .................................................................................................................... 48

PRIORITY 8:EFFECTIVE TEACHERS............................................................................................................................................... 53

PRIORITY 9:EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERS (PRINCIPALS AND ASSISTANT PRINCIPALS) .................................................................... 76

PRIORITY 10:CULTURE AND CLIMATE OF HIGH EXPECTATIONS ......................................................................................................... 82

EDUCATION PLAN: ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION ....................................................................................................84

CONTEXT............................................................................................................................................................................... 85

SUMMARY OF CURRENT STATE ................................................................................................................................................... 85

FINDINGS FROM BENCHMARKS AND RESEARCH.............................................................................................................................. 87

ASPIRATIONS.......................................................................................................................................................................... 89

RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................................................... 90

OPERATIONS PLAN ........................................................................................................................................................ 100

INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................................................... 101

CUSTODIAL .......................................................................................................................................................................... 102

UTILITIES............................................................................................................................................................................. 105

MAINTENANCE ..................................................................................................................................................................... 107

CAPACITY UTILIZATION ........................................................................................................................................................... 109

TRANSPORTATION ................................................................................................................................................................. 115

PURCHASING........................................................................................................................................................................ 119

IT ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 124

SAFETY &SECURITY............................................................................................................................................................... 131

NUTRITION .......................................................................................................................................................................... 134

SHARED SERVICES ................................................................................................................................................................. 137

PERSONNEL MODEL ...................................................................................................................................................... 140

SUMMARY........................................................................................................................................................................... 141

CENTRAL OFFICE STAFFING ...................................................................................................................................................... 142

SCHOOL STAFFING................................................................................................................................................................. 145

COMPENSATION ................................................................................................................................................................... 149

BENEFITS............................................................................................................................................................................. 150

FINANCIAL MODEL ........................................................................................................................................................ 157

INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................................................... 158


4/308

3

CONTEXT............................................................................................................................................................................. 158

SUMMARY OF CURRENT STATE ................................................................................................................................................ 159METHODOLOGY FOR PROJECTIONS ........................................................................................................................................... 162

COST MANAGEMENT OF ENROLLMENT SHIFTS............................................................................................................................ 169

RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................................................. 170

SUMMARY OF PROJECTED FUTURE STATE .................................................................................................................................. 172RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................................................................................................................. 177

CONTINGENCY PLAN.............................................................................................................................................................. 178OTHER RELEVANT CONSIDERATIONS ......................................................................................................................................... 179

LEGAL ASSURANCES ...................................................................................................................................................... 182

INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................................................................... 183

TCA49-2-1201(1): ADMINISTRATION ORGANIZATION OF THE PROPOSED CONSOLIDATED SYSTEM ................................................ 183

TCA49-2-1201(2): METHOD TO ENSURE NO DIMINUTION IN THE LEVEL OF THE EDUCATIONAL SERVICE IN THE SCHOOLS IN ANY OF THE

SYSTEMS INVOLVED .............................................................................................................................................................. 183

TCA49-2-1201(3): APPROPRIATE MEANS FOR THE TRANSFER OF ASSETS AND LIABILITIES OF MUNICIPAL AND SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT

SYSTEMS ............................................................................................................................................................................ 183

TCA49-2-1201(4): PLANS FOR DISPOSITION OF EXISTING BONDED INDEBTEDNESS THAT SHALL NOT IMPAIR THE RIGHTS OF ANY

BONDHOLDER ..................................................................................................................................................................... 184

TCA49-2-1201(5): PLANS FOR PRESERVING THE EXISTING PENSION RIGHTS OF ALL TEACHERS AND NONTEACHING PERSONNEL IN THE

RESPECTIVE SYSTEMS ............................................................................................................................................................ 185TCA49-2-1201(6): PLANS FOR PRESERVING THE EXISTING TENURE RIGHTS, SICK LEAVE RIGHTS, AND SALARY SCHEDULE RIGHTS OF ALL

TEACHERS AND NONTEACHING PERSONNEL IN THE RESPECTIVE SYSTEMS ......................................................................................... 186

TCA49-2-1201(7): APPROPRIATE PLANS FOR CONTRIBUTIONS BY MUNICIPALITIES OR SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS TO THE COUNTY FOR THE

OPERATION OF A UNIFIED SYSTEM OF SCHOOLS DURING THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION FOLLOWING UNIFICATION, WHICH PERIOD SHALL NOT EXCEED

3 YEARS ............................................................................................................................................................................. 186

TCA49-2-1201(8): APPROPRIATE PLANS FOR REAPPORTIONMENT AFTER EACH FEDERAL DECENNIAL CENSUS OF DISTRICTS FOR ELECTION OF

MEMBERS OF THE SCHOOL BOARD ........................................................................................................................................... 186

TCA49-2-1201(9): ANY OTHER MATTERS DEEMED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO BE PERTINENT........................................... 186

MIGRATION PLAN ......................................................................................................................................................... 188

OVERVIEW........................................................................................................................................................................... 189

DAY ONE MILESTONES........................................................................................................................................................... 189TRANSITION MANAGEMENT .................................................................................................................................................... 191

ACTIVITIES AND MILESTONES FOR KEY INITIATIVES........................................................................................................................ 193

APPENDIX ...................................................................................................................................................................... 203


5/308

4

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


6/308

5

Introduction

The merger of Memphis City Schools (MCS) and Shelby County Schools (SCS) presents a historicopportunity for our community to unite behind the children of Shelby County. For the first time in theregions history, a single public school district will allow the community to bring together all of itsresources to ensure every student in Shelby County receives an excellent education.

At times, this community has been divided by emotions, politics, and even by this merger. Thepurpose of this Transition Plan, and the hope for the merged district, is to build a world-class schooldistrict that will help us move forward together.

This merger will not be easy, and planning for it is only the first step. The Shelby County Board ofEducation (SCBE) and district staff must be focused, disciplined, and courageous in their decision-making and leadership. In order for the merger to be successful, the Transition Planning Commission(TPC) strongly recommends the SCBE identify and name a Superintendent for the 2013-14 school yearas soon as possible, but no later than the fall of 2012. Additionally, the government leaders of theState of Tennessee (hereinafter referred to as "the State") and local governments owe it to thechildren to do everything in their power to help this merger succeed. Most importantly, everyone inShelby County is responsible for thisparents, community members, and community organizations

must serve as guardians of and advocates for this Transition Plan.

The vision laid out in this plan is a district in which the academic success and well-being of thestudents come first. It is a district where students and educators are held to high expectations. It is adistrict where parents are engaged and the community is invested, realizing everyone is in thistogether. The district is focused on both strong community schools and on students and familieshaving good choices. The district thoughtfully balances stability with needed change. It is a districtwith strong leaderswho can make tough decisions when needed in order to make a world-classsystem fiscally sustainable. It is a district that embraces this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.

The Transition Planning Commission

The Transition Planning Commission was created by state law. The Norris-Todd Act and court ordersentered by U.S. District Judge Samuel H. Mays, Jr. state that a planning commission should developthe transition plan to consider and provide for each of the matters set forth in TCA 49-2-1201(i) andTCA 49-2-1204. Following these orders, the TPC was appointed in August and September 2011 and iscomprised of 18 appointed commissioners and three ex-officio members.

Early in its process, the TPC adopted ten guiding principles to guide its work and to aid in therecommendation process:

1. The academic success and well-being of our students come first2. Educators and staff are our most important resource3. We have high expectations4. We are all in this together5. We aim to enhance our district by balancing stability with needed change6. We desire excellent community schools and options for all7. We believe parent engagement is essential8. We must save where we can to fund what we need9. We value strong leadership10.This is our once-in-a-lifetime opportunity


7/308

6

These principles were supported by the SCBE, and strongly informed the work of the TPC in thedevelopment of its recommendations.

The Transition Plan is designed to serve as a guide for the SCBE and merged SCS leadership to use inleading the transition. The Plan provides guidance on all the core componentsacademics, studentsupport, district organization, finances, personnel, and operations---for the merged SCS. It is intendedto supportnot substitute forthe leadership of the SCBE and district staff during the transition

process.

Throughout its work, the TPC engaged the community in a two-way dialogueboth informing thecommunity about the facts of the merger, and asking the community to provide input, guidance, andcontext to inform the development of the Transition Plan. Events were held throughout Memphis andother Shelby County municipalities for parents, community members, students, teachers, andprincipals. The TPC also provided regular updates to the SCBE and the Tennessee Department ofEducation. Through events, speaking engagements, town halls, and media, the TPC was able to reachmore than 13,000 people.

This community input directly informed the transition planning process. The TPC carefully consideredcommunity feedback prior to the formation of its recommendations, and included community

members in many of its recommendation-development workshops.

The Education Plan: How students, teachers, and schools are set up to succeed

The Education Plan chapter of the Transition Plan provides recommendations for ensuring thatevery student experiences a world-class education. This includes recommendations related toeducational programs and services, a set of strategies for ensuring all students have high-qualityteachers and principals, and an administrative structure that enables schools to innovate and succeed.

To start its work, the TPC studied the current state of student demographics, needs, and academic

performance. Across both districts, there are about 150,000 students of which 70% qualify for free orreduced lunch and 12% receive special education services. Seven percent of students have limitedEnglish proficiency, and 2% of students are estimated to be homeless.

In 2010-11, 34% of 3rd graders scored proficient or better on the state Reading exam, and 27% of 7thgraders scored proficient or better in math. Using the state value-added growth measure, however, thedistricts score in line with state expectations, with students making more progress than expected inmath. Across both districts, the 2010-11 graduation rate was 78%. All 11th grade students in Tennesseetake the ACT, and in 2011 10% of students met the ACT's college readiness benchmark, and 25%scored a 21 or better.

The ultimate goal of the Education Plan for merged SCS is that every student graduates ready for

success in college and career. The following diagram illustrates 10 priorities and the vision for theeducational services of the merged district:


8/308

7

Educational Priorities

The Education Plan chapter provides detailed recommendations in all 10 areas, while this ExecutiveSummary describes a few highlights.

Educational programs and services

In order for every child to be successful in school, every child must be ready for school. Currently, lessthan 50% of students across MCS and SCS meet a "Kindergarten readiness" benchmark at the start ofKindergarten. Both MCS and SCS operate district-run Pre-Kindergarten programs for 4-year-olds (Pre-K 4), funded by mostly by the state. About 4,300 students participate in this program, and thesestudents consistently out-perform their peers on Kindergarten-readiness assessments.

The Transition Plan recommends that the merged district expand the Pre-K 4 program to add 2,500spots over 5 years. This will effectively ensure universal access for Pre-K 4, given that some parentsand families will continue to prefer to send their children to private centers or Head Start. Therecommendation is to add 500 spots25 classroomseach year of the 5-year expansion. The cost ofthis recommendation has been factored into the district's budget and is detailed in the FinancialModel chapter.

Kindergarten Readiness is only the first step toward success. The ultimate goal for all students is tograduate ready for success in college and career. In order to achieve this goal, the district andcommunity must unite behind an aligned set of milestones and track progress toward these targets.Both districts currently have strategic plans, however they could benefit from a more concise andimpactful set of goals that are clear and understandable to the community. Other districts andcommunities around the country have benefited greatly from developing an aligned set of milestones,and from including the entire community in the development and monitoring of the goals. Aftercareful review of the data, the TPC recommends the following milestones:


9/308

8

8 Key Milestones:

*Items marked TBD are areas in which the TPC did not have current state data, therefore the TPC was notable to identify an appropriate target. In the Education Plan chapter, the TPC recommends the districtgather the baseline data for these items, and set ambitious goals.

It is important to note that these goals should be owned by the community as a whole, not just theschool district. The school district is not the only entity with a role in supporting students; parents anda wide range of community organizations also have critical roles. This approach acknowledges that thepath to educational success is bigger than the strategy of any particular district administration. It is avision that needs to be owned and sustained by all of Shelby County.

In addition to ensuring a core of courses and programs is available at every school, the Transition Planalso embraces choice and recognizes that students and families may have unique needs and intereststhat cannot be met at every community school. To support and challenge these students, the Planrecommends a district-wide school transfer policy on a space-available basis. The district will continueto support the Optional Programs that exist in current MCS, as well as unique offerings such as theInternational Baccalaureate (IB) programs that exist in both school districts. Furthermore, to ensurethat students are challenged no matter which school they attend, the district will double the number

of students who participate in Advanced Placement courses and Dual Enrollment programs over thenext five years. National research has found that students who participate in advanced courses regardless of their performance in them are more likely to be successful in college and career. Everychild in Shelby County deserves the chance to be challenged in order to reach his or her potential.

The district will need to provide tailored interventions for students who need extra help meeting highacademic standards. In order to help students, teachers and schools must first identify where there is aneed. For this reason, the 8 key milestones mentioned above are critical check-points in students'school careers. The district will offer targeted support to help students at these milestones. Schools willalso carefully track and provide interventions to address attendance and student behavior, given theimpact that these factors can have on students' likelihood to graduate. In addition, the TPCrecommends an increase in the number of school counselors, given their important role in providing

targeted interventions. Finally, for students in struggling schools that have been placed in theInnovation Zone, the school day will be extended by an hour to provide more instructional support.

The TPC's recommendations address many of the most critical aspects of the districts' educational andsupport services. However, the TPC recognizes that important detailed work remains in order to alignon the merged district's approach in areas including alternative education, gifted programs, athleticsand other extra-curricular programs. The TPC recommends that staff work during the implementationyear (2012-13) to develop a shared approach to these programs. Appendix C contains a compendiumof input from district staff, which can serve as a starting point for understanding the similarities and

Outcome 2010-11 actual 2016-17 target1. Kindergarten readiness 47% TBD%*2. 3rd Grade reading proficiency 34% 60%3. 7th Grade math proficiency 27% 50%4. 9th Grade on track Unknown TBD%*

5. ACT college ready / ACTminimum score of 21 10% / 24% 25% / 60%

6. Graduation rate 78% 90%7. Post-secondary collegeenrollment

40%(MCS data only)

60%

8. Post-secondary collegecompletion

16%(MCS data only)

TBD%*


10/308

9

differences in the districts' current programs. The Migration Plan chapter includes more detail on aprocess for developing a shared approach.

Teachers and school leaders

Research shows that teacher effectiveness is the single most important school-controllable variable forstudent achievement. Establishing a clear and shared understanding of the characteristics of effective

teaching, measuring for these characteristics, and then using that information to make better decisionsis one of the most important things a school district can do. A well-designed and well-implementedteacher evaluation is central to a districts effort to improve student achievement. Only whenevaluation is a meaningful representation of teacher performance can it be used to identify teachersprofessional development needs, help teachers advance their craft, make better decisions about whoteaches, and compensate teachers more effectively.

For many years, school districts across the United States have rated almost all teachers above averageand have provided little feedback on how to improve. MCS and SCS share this history, but are alreadymaking significant strides in improving upon it. Each district has begun full-scale implementation of adevelopmentally-focused teacher evaluation system in the past year. In MCS, this work has beensupported by a $90 million, seven-year Teacher Effectiveness Initiative (TEI) grant from the Bill and

Melinda Gates Foundation. In part based on the early work of TEI in MCS, the state adopted a morerobust teacher evaluation model as part of its Race to the Top application. The state model currentlyis used in SCS.

Over the coming months, the districts will partner to adopt single teacher and principal evaluationmodels to use from the merger date forward. These evaluations will be research-based, includemultiple measures, and be implemented by evaluators who are trained and reliable.

In order to ensure the evaluation model enables teachers and principals to improve their practice, thedistrict will develop an integrated professional development plan based on the needs identified inevaluations, student achievement data, and best practice research. The professional development willbe job-embedded, focused on student learning, and linked to specific development opportunities

identified by the teachers' evaluation. Additionally, the district will regularly protect time to allowteachers to meet in Professional Learning Communities to review student data and developinstructional plans.

Decisions about who teaches are among the most important decisions a school district makes. Thesedecisions include who is selected to fill vacancies, how teachers are dismissed, what happens toteachers whose positions are eliminated, and which teachers are allowed to transfer between schools.Currently, many of these decisions are made based on the seniority and tenure of the teacher.However, MCS and SCS data show no relationship between years of experience and teachereffectiveness. National research shows teachers' improvement leveling off after the first four or fiveyears. Meanwhile, research shows that approximately a quarter of a teachers effectiveness isdetermined by his or her fit with his or her school. Mutual consentthe decision of the principal andteacher to work togetheris more important than a teacher's years of experience. Given this, theTPC recommends that decisions about who teaches be based on mutual consent and teachereffectiveness.

The current average salary of MCS and SCS teachers is the highest in Tennessee. Teachers arecurrently paid on the basis of a step (years of experience) and lane (degree attainment) system.Approximately 30% of total teacher compensation in the district is based on years of experience anddegree attainment. Yet national research shows gains to teacher experience leveling off after four tofive years. Local data shows no relationship between years of experience and student value-addeddata after the first two years in MCS and at all in SCS.


11/308

10

The TPC recommends the district redesign teacher compensation to better attract and retain effectiveteachers, including attracting teachers to and retaining teachers in hard-to-staff positions.Additionally, teachers with sustained, demonstrated effectiveness should be eligible for salaryincreases and career advancement opportunities. To enable this differential compensation, the TPCrecommends freezing the additional compensation paid for advanced degrees.

Together, these recommendations will ensure more students have effective teachers leading theirclassrooms and effective principals leading their schools.

Administrative organization

No particular organizational design can guarantee a school districts success. Districts of manydifferent sizes and structures have demonstrated strong academic outcomes, while low-performingdistricts also come in a range of shapes and sizes. The most important question about administrativestructure is not whether a structure is right, but rather whether it supports the district in achievingits strategic goals. Structure above all should be an enabler, not an inhibitor, of critical drivers ofstudent achievement including strong district leadership, strong school-level leadership, and effectiveteaching.

The recommended structure for the administrative organization of the merged SCS is the MultipleAchievement Paths (MAP) model. This model builds upon best and promising practices from thecurrent districts and elsewhere, and it is tailored to the unique needs and context of Shelby County.This context includes 26 charter schools currently operating in the districts, and the formation thisyear of the state's Achievement School District (ASD), which aims to turn around the state's lowestperforming schools. The goal of this structure is to give each school, regardless of its status or location,the support and autonomy that will enable it to deliver on the districts educational priorities. TheMAP model calls for the district to hold all school operators to common high performance standards.

Multiple Achievement Paths Model

This model enables the district to focus foremost on students having the opportunity for an excellenteducation, regardless of what type of school they attend. This means a system where the district


12/308

11

partners with charter and ASD schools, and holds all schools to common high performance standards.In this model, most community and optional schools are managed in regions. Innovation, charter, andASD schools are supported through the Office of Innovation. These officesthe regional offices andthe Office of Innovationcollaborate, share best practices, and encourage innovation throughout thedistrict. The structure is meant to enable the most highly effective educational practices to beimplemented in the most appropriate contexts. To support this, the district will support broaderschool-level autonomy, allowing school leaders to make more decisions.

The central office of the merged SCS will need to support this model. More than any specificorganizational chart, the central office must fulfill the following six roles:

1. Take all necessary action to ensure that an increasing number of students have access toeffective schools and teachers.

2. Support high-quality instruction in district-operated schools. The district must maintain acentral focus on quality instruction, both by ensuring that schools are staffed with effectiveteachers and leaders and by providing support to teachers, principals, and staff to help themdevelop their skills over time.

3. Work in close partnership with charter schools and the ASD. This partnership requires that thedistrict, the ASD, and charter schools exchange services, share best practices, develop fairfunding arrangements and policies, and coordinate communications with families and thecommunity.

4. Measure performance. Ensure that common metrics are used to measure the performance ofdistrict-operated, charter, and ASD schools. Metrics should include both status and growthmeasures to account for schools' different starting points.

5. Provide high-quality operational and support services to district-operated andfor a feenon-district-operated schools. For the sake of efficiency, scale, and preserving principal time tofocus on instructional leadership, the central office is in the best position to provide theseoperational services to schools.

6. Ensure compliance, fiscal responsibility, and equity. The central office has a responsibility toensure compliance with laws, regulations, and policies, to ensure that funds are spent wisely,and to ensure all students and families are treated fairly.

Three features of the central office bear further mention here: the regional offices, the Office ofInnovation, and the Office of Planning and Performance Management. The regional office design isfocused on two critical roles. The primary role of the regional office is to foster and develop greaterinstructional leadership among principals. The second critical role of the regional office is to supportparent, family, and community engagement.

The purpose of the Office of Innovation is to ensure that the district is able to provide more high-quality school options for more children, through traditional and non-traditional AchievementPathsincluding charter schools, Innovation Zone schools, and ASD schools. To that end, the Officeof Innovation should ensure that all types of schools, including community schools, have the access toinnovative approaches that are effective.

The purpose of the Office of Planning and Performance Management is to have a consolidated,district-wide view into performance, enrollment and student needs across the district and across avariety of school types. This office supports the district, Superintendent, and SCBE in strategicallymanaging the creation of new schools, school closings, and the transition of schools from one "path" toanother.

Together these three offices ensure that all schools are supported in a way that encourages innovationand equips schools to be successful.


13/308

12

The Plan also includes recommendations about student assignment policies and attendance zones.The TPC recommends, with a few exceptions, that the district preserve current student attendancezones for a minimum of two years post-merger, in order to preserve stability for students and families.The TPC also recommends that the district expand its student transfer policies to allow transfersdistrict-wide, on a space-available basis. The TPC does not recommend any forced busing fordesegregation purposes.

The Operations Plan: How to ensure students and schools have the resources they need

The Operations Plan chapter of the Transition Plan provides recommendations to ensure that everystudent experiences a school that has the resources it needs to provide a world-class education. Thischapter describes how the district can maximize efficiency while also improving the quality ofoperational services. The Plan focuses on operational support functions in six areas: transportation,facilities (including capacity utilization, custodial services, maintenance and utilities), purchasing,information technology (IT), safety and security, and nutrition.

Using facilities efficiently is one of the most important ways for the district to ensure students have

access to the resources they need. Under-utilized schools have to spread the fixed costs of running aschool (e.g., utilities, maintenance) over fewer students and thus have a smaller proportion of per-pupil funds to spend on additional teachers and support staff. A secondary equity impact occursbecause the remaining schools in under-utilized regions also contribute to this shortfall. To ensureunder-utilized schools have a minimal level of program and supports, other schools in the region oftenhave to staff at higher student-teacher ratios to help balance the overall budget. By closing under-utilized schools, all students benefit from greater access to resources and a richer learningenvironment.

A capacity utilization analysis shows that there is an under-utilization of capacity in Western Memphisand over-utilization of capacity in Eastern Memphis. This trend is driven by an overall decline inenrollment in the district, and more significantly, a population shift from Western Memphis to EasternMemphis. The analysis shows there are 89 schools with under 80% utilization, of which 70 are in

Memphis and 19 are in Shelby County. However, low utilization is not the only factor that should beconsidered in determining whether to close a school. The TPC also considered these schools' academicperformance, facilities condition, enrollment trends, and the regional capacity to transfer students toother nearby schools. This analysis indicated an opportunity to close at least 20 schools, for a savingsof about $19 million annually.

In both transportation and custodial services, one district currently outsources the service, and theother currently provides the service in-house. In both transportation and custodial services, the districtthat outsources the service is more cost-effective than the district that provides the service in-house(with the exception of special education transportation). The recommendation in both areas is tomigrate to an outsourced service provider with experience in K-12 school districts and a reputation forquality, through a competitive bid process. The TPC does not have an inherent preference for

outsourcing, but recommends outsourcing these services because there is no evidence the district canachieve the same level of cost savings in-house (with the exception of special educationtransportation). The TPC also recommends that the bid process for vendors encourages providers topreferentially hire current district employees for new roles. Combined, these recommendations willsave the district more than $35 million annually.

In utilities and purchasing, the TPC recommends more cost-effective and quality-enhancing serviceprovision. The recommendation to pursue a Board-approved demand management policy to reduceschool level energy usage is expected to save about $5 million annually. Strategic sourcing of high


14/308

13

spend purchasesthrough consolidation to fewer vendors and more centralized buying and enhancedvisibility into spend at the central office and school levelwill save the district about $8 million.

The TPC also considered critical operational investmentsthe most significant of which is a singleHuman Resources, Payroll and Finance system for Day 1 of merged district. This expected $12-15million investment is necessary for ensuring the district can accurately pay staff, assign staff toschools, and understand the financials in the merged district. Other IT recommendations will allow

the district to move towards a less resource-intensive central help desk and provide for greater supportfor school-based instructional technology.

The recommended nutrition service and safety and security models are largely cost neutral. Adoptingthe MCS central kitchen model for the merged district will allow for reinvesting of money savedthrough purchasing scale into healthier food for students and enable greater flexibility to serve thevariety of new school models expected in the merged district. For safety and security, the TPCrecommends maintaining a blended model with both law enforcement and security guards present inthe merged district.

The Personnel Model: The personnel requirements of the merged district

MCS and SCS employ almost 18,000 full-time staff, including school-based staff, operations staff andcentral office staff. The ultimate success of the district depends on its people and their effectiveness increating a world-class educational system. Personnel costs are also the districts' largest expensetotalcompensation exceeds $1 billion per year.

The Personnel Model chapter includes an estimate of the personnel who will be required in themerged district to support this plan's aspirations. The personnel model reflects several inputs:

The baseline from the number and roles of personnel in MCS and SCS today Recommendations from the TPC Education Plan and Operations Plan Changes required to ensure the districts staff school-based roles equitably

Efficiencies, such as elimination of duplication through combining the two central offices

The TPC recommends that the size of the new central office be smaller than the aggregate size of thetwo central offices today. This recommendation is based on duplication and scale. For example, bothdistricts currently have many of the same positions and in the merged district there will only be a needfor one. Further, there will be efficiency gains from having a larger district. Based on these two factors,the TPC recommends the district cut combined district spending on central office personnel by $14million, or 26% of current general fund total spend.

Still, central office effectiveness cannot be achieved solely through a one-time target in reduction incentral office spending. It is dependent on a clear understanding of what success looks like for eachfunction and a culture where it is expected that all staff improve every year. The TPC recommendsthat the district establish a personnel management system for its central office functions that utilizes

multiple measuresincluding achievement of key metrics and customer satisfactionin order toevaluate each central office employee.

While both MCS and SCS are subject to the same state laws governing student-teacher ratios, the twodistricts have different approaches. For example, MCS has 1.9 more students per general educationclass than SCS. While this difference might seem insignificant, moving to the SCS effective staffingratio would cost the district $23M annually. The TPC recommends that the district adopt a cost-neutral approach to student-teacher ratios, which means a slight reduction in former MCS class sizesand a slight increase in former SCS class sizes, on average.


15/308

14

The district also must determine compensation for each of the different classes of employees. Formany classes of employees, the two districts pay similarly (e.g. teachers), but in other cases thedistricts have significantly different compensation for the same position (e.g. principals). The Norris-Todd Act requires that within three years of the merger date the district establish new salaryschedules that are no lower than the highest component of the prior salary schedule. The cost ofimplementing this recommendation for all employees, including associated increases in FICA andretirement, is approximately $18 million per year. The TPC recommends this begin in the third year

after the merger.

Beyond compensation, the districts also must develop a consistent benefits plan. Although the districtsuse the same health insurance administrator and have broadly similar policies, there are differences inplan design and the effective share of health care costs. By adopting the SCS effective district shareand other cost management improvements, the district will save $17 million annually on healthinsurance benefits.

The Financial Model: The finances of the merged district

The Financial Model chapter details the forecasted revenues and expenditures of the merged districtover its first three years. The model incorporates all of the recommendations in other sections of thePlan with financial implications, in addition to other assumptions about revenues and costs. Thefinancial projections are very sensitive to enrollment, so the financial plan also details the projectedoverall enrollment in merged SCS, and the enrollment mix among district-operated schools, charterschools, and the ASD. The financial projections are top-down targets, not intended to replace thebottom-up process for developing the district's budget.

Overall Shelby County public school enrollment is projected to decline 3% from FY2012 to FY2016,resulting in approximately 147,400 students enrolled in Shelby County public schools by FY2016. Theenrollment mix is expected to shift to non-district operators (including charter schools and the ASD),from 4% of total public school enrollment in FY2012 to 19% in FY2016, resulting in approximately118,700 students enrolled in district-operated schools by FY2016.

The following exhibit details the major categories impacting the FY2014 budget, which has a $57Mremaining fiscal gap:


16/308

15

FY2014 Fiscal View

Independent of the merger, the district is projected to face a deficit of $71M in FY2014. This assumesthat that the district aggressively manages costs, proportional to enrollment decline and shifts.

The merger increased the deficit by $72M with the TPC recommending an additional $14M ininvestments in educational priorities, leaving the merged district with a starting gap of $157M inFY2014.

The TPC has identified $100M in net efficiencies to close a significant portion of the gap, leaving a$57M deficit that must be addressed in order to balance the budget in FY2014. This gap is projected to

widen by $15M in FY2015 and an additional $37M in FY2016. The steep jump in FY2016 is mostlydriven by the timing of the Norris-Todd salary preservation requirement (estimated at $18M incurredin FY2016).

In order to close the $57M fiscal gap in FY2014 remaining after all TPC recommended investmentsand efficiencies have been incorporated, the TPC recommends that the district pursue the followingfour actions in parallel:

1. The SCBE will vigorously pursue additional City and local sources of funds and in-kind supportnot in the district's control. The most significant of these funds is the City of Memphisrepayment of the FY2009 maintenance of effort net payment of $55M.

2.

The SCBE will seek additional funding from the State, such as implementation of already-passed reforms to the State BEP funding formula ("BEP 2.0") and transitional funding forconsolidation (similar to what is suggested in TCA 49-2-1262).

3. The SCBE will set a $15M target for additional district efficiencies that do not increase student-teacher ratios or otherwise impact the classroom. The specific plan for achieving theseefficiencies will be developed by a district-led cross-functional working committee supportedby the Transition Management Office.


17/308

16

4. The SCBE will request increased local funding from the County through a reallocation of fundsfrom within the County budget and/or through implementing a tax increase

As a mechanism to provide ongoing guidance on improving operations in the merged district, the TPCrecommends the creation of an Operational Effectiveness Council by December of 2013.

Migration Plan: What must happen next

As the planning phase of the merger comes to a close, the focus turns to implementation. TheMigration Plan chapter focuses on the implementation activities that need to occur in theimplementation year defined as the year between the Transition Plan approval and July 1, 2013.

The migration plan identifies what must happen in order for the Transition Plan to be implementedwith fidelity and the merger to be successful. This includes a timely approval of the Transition Plan bythe SCBE and the State of Tennessee, so the district can begin to take action on the recommendations.Additionally, the district needs a clear transition governance model, clear goals and milestones toguide the transition process, and a community that holds the district accountable for implementingthe Plan.

District leadership

The easiest path to a clear transition governance model would include having a Superintendent forschool year 2013-14 named by the early fall of 2012.

Transition management

The district should aim to meet the following aspirations for the transition:

Students, families and staff are ready for the first day of school in the fall of 2013 The 2012-13 school year is successful in the midst of planning for the merger Merger planning decisions are well-informed and decision-making processes are effective The district retains and attracts the best talent The new district develops its own distinct culture A management structure is in place during the pre-merger implementation year so that tough

decisions for the merged district can be made

The district hits its financial targets The selection of staff for the central office is fast, fair and disciplined

The district will need a Transition Office to lead and manage the merger process, as the districtscontinue to operate two separate school districts during the 2012-13 school year. One role of this officeis coordination ensuring accountability to the Transition Plan, tracking progress and managingtimelines, and raising issues that cut across multiple initiatives. In this role, the Transition Office will

advise the merged SCS Superintendent on key decisions. Importantly, the Transition Office will alsoplan events and other means of helping the district develop a shared culture, facilitate clear andeffective internal and external communications, and track adherence to the legal requirements of themerger.

The Transition Office will be a group of current staff from both districts, selected by the merged SCSSuperintendent. These individuals will serve dual roles during the implementation year, continuing toserve in their current management roles while spending part of their time in the Transition Office.


18/308

17

One of the most important functions of this office will be coordinating all of the initiatives that requiresignificant progress during the implementation year. Most importantly, the district must ensure schoolstaff is trained and ready to start the 2013-14 school year and finalize educational programs andstudent services offerings. The transition office will also need to manage the development of the 2013-14 budget, development of board and personnel policies, and IT system migration. Additionally, inorder to protect investments in the classroom, the district must implement the TPC's operationsrecommendations: securing contracts with custodial and transportation vendors, and closing under-

capacity and under-performing schools.

The following high-level timeline summarizes some of the key milestones for the implementationyear:

Implementation year timeline:

Legal Assurances

The Legal Assurances chapter describes in detail how the Transition Plan meets the nine legalrequirements of the planning commission as outlined in TCA 49-2-1201.

Conclusion

After more than eight months of research, discussions, and planning, the Transition Planning

Commission is confident that the talent and resources in this community will enable the merged SCSto achieve the vision in this Plan. The merger presents a unique opportunity to build from the existingstrengths and emerging successes of both systems, of which there are many. The merger also promptsthis community to step back and ask, "Why not here?", and adopt best practices in education fromaround the world. Both districts employ talented leaders, who are true experts in their fields. Thismerger enables these leaders to join forces to build a district that improves upon both districts today.Finally, this merger presents an opportunity for community, business, philanthropic, faith, andgovernment leaders to unite to guarantee the success of this system, for the benefit of all of ShelbyCounty's children.


19/308

18

INTRODUCTION


20/308

19

Legal Context for the Schools Merger and TPC

On December 20, 2010, the Memphis City Schools Board of Education voted to surrender the schoolsystems charter. The Board proposed that a referendum be held for residents of the city of Memphisto approve the Boards proposal. In March 2011, Memphis residents voted to transfer theadministration of MCS to the Shelby County Board of Education (SCBE).

The Transition Planning Commission (TPC) was created by state law. The legislation (TCA 49-2-1201and ultimately TCA 49-2-502) lays out the Transition Planning Commission's makeup and mission tocreate a plan to guide the merger of the two school systems. The solution was subsequently supportedby the Norris-Todd Act and court orders entered by U.S. District Judge Samuel H. Mays, Jr. 1

The Transition Planning Commission was appointed in August and September 2011 and is comprisedof 18 appointed commissioners and three ex-officio members:

Appointed by Chair of MCS Board of Education: Kenya Bradshaw, Reginald Green, FredJohnson, Daniel Kiel, Barbara Prescott

Appointed by Chair of SCS Board of Education: Tommy Hart, Richard Holden, Rickey Jeans,Mayor Keith McDonald, Katie Stanton

Appointed by County Mayor: Jim Boyd, Louis Padgett, Christine Richards, BarbaraRoseborough, John Smarrelli Appointed by the Governor: Staley Cates Appointed by the Lieutenant Governor: Larry Spiller Appointed by the House Speaker: Joyce Avery Ex officio: Mayor Mark Luttrell, Martavius Jones, David Pickler

Charge of the TPC

The TPC has been charged with creating a plan to guide the merger of the Memphis City Schools with

the Shelby County Schools that includes the following components based on TCA 49-2-1201 (i) and49-2-502(b):

1. Administrative organization of the proposed consolidated system2. Method to ensure no diminution in the level of the educational service in the schools in any of

the systems involved3. Appropriate means for the transfer of assets and liabilities of municipal and special school

district systems4. Plans for disposition of existing bonded indebtedness that shall not impair the rights of any

bondholder5. Plans for preserving the existing pension rights of all teachers and nonteaching personnel in

the respective systems6. Plans for preserving the existing tenure rights, sick leave rights and salary schedule rights of all

teachers and nonteaching personnel in the respective systems7. Appropriate plans for contributions by municipalities or special school districts to the county

for the operation of a unified system of schools during the period of transition followingunification, which period shall not exceed three years

8. Appropriate plans for reapportionment after each federal decennial census of districts forelection of members of the school board

9. Any other matters deemed by the planning commission to be pertinent

1See Board of Ed. of Shelby Co., Tenn. v. Memphis City Board of Ed., U.S.D.C. No. 11-2110.


21/308

20

The TPC formed eight subcommittees to facilitate the planning process and, ultimately, to write thetransition plan.

Guiding Principles

The TPC adopted ten principles to guide its work and aid in the recommendation process: The academic success and well-being of our students come first Educators and staff are our most important resource We have high expectations We are all in this together We aim to enhance our district by balancing stability with needed change We desire excellent community schools and options for all We believe parent engagement is essential We must save where we can to fund what we need We value strong leadership This is our once-in-a-lifetime opportunity

The Goal of the Transition Plan

In order to fulfill the legal requirements outlined by statute and court order, the TPC adopted a visionfor the goal of the transition plan. This is particularly important for TCA 49-2-1201(9), which requiresthe Plan to include: Any other matters deemed by the planning commission to be pertinent." TheTPCs goal is to create a plan for a world-class school system that:

Provides an excellent education for all students in Shelby County Is led by an administrative structure that will serve the breadth of students and schools in the

merged district

Has a human capital model that will attract and retain strong leadership, teaching and non-teaching talent to Shelby County

Identifies areas of efficiencies and opportunities to fuel greater academic investments andensure the fiscal viability of the merged district

Promotes collaboration within merged SCS and between the district and other stakeholders inour community

Actively invites input from the community and uses that input to shape policies and decisionsThe Transition plan is designed to provide strategic guidance for the Shelby County Board ofEducation and merged SCS leadership to use to guide the full transition. The Plan provides guidanceon all the core componentsacademics, organization, finances, and operations for merged SCS. It isnot meant to replace the work of SCBE or the leadership of the superintendent during the fulltransition process.


22/308

21

SUMMARY OF THE PROCESS


23/308

22

Overview of the Transition Planning Process

The 18 appointed and 3 ex-officio commissioners led the transition planning process. This group drewheavily on the expertise of the current staffs of Shelby County Schools and Memphis City Schools,input of community members, and best practices from other school districts across the country. TheTransition Planning Commission also hired The Boston Consulting Group (BCG), a leadingmanagement consulting firm, to support the TPC in creating the Transition Plan.

To organize its efforts, the TPC created eight subcommittees to manage the planning process and,ultimately, to write the transition plan. Each committee was chaired by one or two TPC members andincluded other TPC members, representatives from district staffs, and The Boston Consulting Group.Over the course of the transition planning process, the TPC engaged approximately 150 staff membersacross all departments and levels of seniority from both districts.

The committees and their primary charges are:

Executive: Responsible for steering the overall direction and timing of the planning process aswell as addressing issues that do not fall into the ambit of a specific committee. This committeedid not include district staff.

Administrative Structure and Governance: Responsible for providing recommendations withregard to the high-level administrative structure for the resulting district.

Assessment: Responsible for compiling a baseline across student demographics, needs,performance, and distribution to inform TPC recommendations.

Communications and Community Engagement: Responsible for creating and executing acomprehensive communication and engagement plan for key stakeholders.

Educational Services: Responsible for recommending the highest priorities in support ofstudent achievement; responsible for recommending specific programs, strategies, and actionsto support excellence in high-priority areas.

Finance: Responsible for validating the overall financial viability of the Transition Plan andproviding a consolidated view of current and FY 2014 financials.

HR/Personnel: Responsible for developing a high-level staffing plan that addresses the legalrequirements in the Norris-Todd Act and estimating staffing levels for merged SCS.

Logistics: Responsible for providing recommendations on the go-forward models andefficiencies/investment needs for operational functions.Committees met weekly or bi-weekly and made reports to the broader TPC regularly. Broadly, eachcommittee was responsible for analyzing the current state of operations, understanding best practices,making recommendations for the go-forward model for merged SCS, and estimating any financialimpact. Recommendations were first approved at the committee-level before they were presented andultimately voted upon by the full TPC.

The TPC began meeting in October 2011, culminating with the approval of a draft of the entire planby the TPC on June 14, 2012. The Plan was presented to the Tennessee State Board of EducationCommissioner for review and endorsement and the SCBE for approval. The district staff, led by aTransition Management Office, will be responsible for implementing the Plan in the year leading up tothe school merger in the fall of 2013. See more detail in the Migration Plan chapter (page 188).


24/308

23

Summary of Communications Committee Process and Outputs

The Communications and Community Engagement Committee's efforts were based on a collaborationof the TPC, staff members from both MCS and SCS, and external partners including BCG, Red Deluxe,and Yacoubian Research. The goal of the Communications Committee was to engage the ShelbyCounty community in gathering input into the planning process and presenting the finished plan.

The committee targeted its engagement at five key stakeholder groups: Education Community (e.g. SCBE, district leaders, principals, teachers) Key Leaders and Influencers (e.g. Elected officials, business and non-profit leaders) Community Groups (e.g. Non-profit, business, faith-based) Broader Community (e.g. parents, students) Press

To engage the above groups, the Communications Committee organized efforts into three phases: Phase 1: Listen and Learn: Focused on in-bound communication and engaging the community

through 14 community-wide listening sessions and over 35 speaking engagements. This was thefocus of the TPC in January and February 2012.

Phase 2: Engage and Gain Buy-in: Focused on two-way dialogue between the TPC and thecommunity. The primary method of engaging the community in this phase was throughtargeted town halls for key stakeholder groups including instructional staff, non-instructionalstaff, and parent leadership in schools. This was the focus of the TPC in March and April 2012.

Phase 3: Inform (Completed by August 2012): Focuses on outbound communications tobroadcast key components of the final plan as they are recommended by the TPC. Primarymethods of engagement in this phase include the internet (through the TPC website and socialmedia), district email distribution lists, print (e.g. Op-Ed articles in newspapers), meetings witheditorial boards at local newspapers, and television/radio. This has been the focus of the TPCfrom May 2012 onward.

Through the committee efforts, the TPC has reached 13,650 voices through TPC events (e.g.listening tours), speaking engagements and town halls. In addition, the TPC has cooperated

extensively with the print and television media, thereby greatly increasing the total number ofresidents reached.

Community Voices Reached by the TPC

Form of engagement Voices reached

14 listening sessions 2,900

7 town halls 1,170

43 speaking engagements 1,910

Opinion poll: email surveys 2,200

Opinion poll: phone surveys 1,200

Unique visits to Our Voices website 4,235

Comments on OpEd articles 25

Total 13,650


25/308

24

The input gathered directly informed the transition planning process. The committee providedtargeted input to other committees prior to the formation of recommendations and providedsummary feedback to the broader TPC that reflected the information gathered during each phase ofthe Communications Committee's work. The TPC also shared its findings with the Shelby CountyBoard of Education.

Phase 1: Listen and LearnListening sessions were held county-wide and reached nearly 2,900 voices. TPC members alsocompleted more than 37 speaking engagements, reaching over 1,700 voices. More important than thenumber of attendees, the speaking engagements reached a very broad set of stakeholder groups whichincluded school and parent organizations, students, teachers, the business community, the faith-basedcommunity, and universities.

Map of Listening SessionsCompleted 14 sessions, reaching nearly 2,900 voices


26/308

25

List of Speaking Engagements

Each listening session was led by two or three TPC members (though additional members and districtstaff were often in attendance). The purpose of the sessions was to briefly introduce the charge of theTPC and then to solicit questions and comments from attendees regarding their aspirations, hopes,and concerns for merged SCS. All comments were recorded and presented to the broader TPC in bothsummary and detailed form as an input into the overall planning process. Examples of summarizedcomments from the listening sessions and speaking engagements include the following:

Aspirations and HopesMany comments, such as the following, focused on enhancing Educational Services for merged SCS:

Make every school in every community a great school Offer services that meet needs of all students, including special education and ESL Invest in early childhood Strengthen core subjects including math and science Keep and expand optional schools and programs for gifted students Offer enrichment programs outside of traditional focus areas Keep music, art, and vocational programs

Other comments focused on expanding community involvement: Promote parent involvement Increase teacher morale and seek advice from staff as new programs and policies are

implemented

Involve the business community and community groups as part of the planning process

Finally, comments focused on enhancing the personnel, operational and fiscal capabilities for mergedSCS:

Recruit and retain proficient teachers, caring staff, and top leaders Manage the costs of the merger Ensure students are safe from violence and bullying in their schools Provide world class nutritional services for our students Adequately maintain the upkeep of district facilities


27/308

26

ConcernsConcerns focused on Educational Services:

Academic quality and rigor will decrease as a result of the merger Special needs programs may be reduced in merged SCS Academic resources will not be equitably distributed across schools in merged SCS

Additional concerns focused on the Administration Structure of the district:

Local control to serve local needs will be lost Concern over lack of stability for students Concern over the efficacy of large districts

Finally, the community expressed concerns focused on HR, Operations, and Finance:

Concern over lack of stability for teachers and staff Financial resources will not be used responsibly

The TPC also held a special listening session to engage the students of both MCS and SCS. The sessionwas held at Colonial Middle School on February 20, 2012. The feedback from this session reflectedmany of the same themes as the broader comments summarized above, but additional themesincluded:

Establishing high academic standards for all students Increasing the individual attention that students receive from teachers Integrating technology into the classroom more frequently Offering broader diversity of programmatic options Prioritizing school safety and nutrition from an operational perspective Engaging students throughout the planning process

Phase 2: Engage and Gain Buy-InEach town hall session in Phase 2 was led by at least two TPC members (though other members anddistrict staff were often in attendance). The purpose of the sessions was to present specific TPC

recommendations from the Educational Services and Administrative Structure and Governancecommittees and get targeted feedback from the identified group. Comments from the meeting oftenextended past these topic areas and all comments were recorded and presented to the broader TPC inboth summary and detailed form as an input into the overall planning process. Examples ofsummarized comments from the town halls include:

Instructional Staff Town Halls

Support for specific priorities identified by the Education Services Committee (e.g. Pre-K, highexpectations, parental involvement, increased technology, targeted interventions)

Questions about the different school types identified in the Administrative StructureCommittee (e.g. Charter Schools, Achievement School District)

Questions about staffing policy and human resources recommendation (e.g. teacher staffingpolicies, comments about specific positions)

Concerns and questions about the teacher evaluation program Desire for strong professional development for all staff positions

Non-Instructional Staff Town Halls

Questions and comments about many of the recommendations addressed in the LogisticCommittee recommendations (e.g. transportation, nutrition services, custodial)

Support for the continuation of employee unions Questions about the preservation of salaries and benefits


28/308

27

Questions about staffing policy and employee transfers in merged SCSParent Leadership Town Halls

Strong support for increased parental engagement as part of transition planning process andduring the normal operation of the merged district

Support for specific priorities identified by the Education Services Committee (e.g. tailoredinterventions, importance of effective teachers and leaders Pre-K)

Desire for high expectations for students and increased transparency around academicstandards

Questions about student transfers in the merged district Desire for tailored interventions to support student needs

Special-education Town Hall

Strong support for interdisciplinary nature of gifted program and pull-out services that allowfor more tailored instruction

Concern over gifted class sizes being too large; suggestion for more cross-training of gifted andspecial education teachers to expand reach and effectiveness

Desire for teachers to receive more help with paperwork so they can focus on teaching Desire to see earlier identification and support with interventions Desire to see more parent engagement with IEPs

Phase 3: InformThis phase focuses on outbound communications to broadcast key components of the final plan asthey are recommended by the TPC. The TPC created a website (http://www.ourvoiceourschools.org )as a means to provide background information on the TPC and the transition planning process, tobroadcast a calendar of upcoming events, and to report out recommendations and other news. Thewebsite also provided community members with the opportunity to ask the TPC questions and makeadditional comments on the planning process. Comments and questions submitted through thewebsite were communicated to TPC members in long-form to inform the on-going recommendation

process.

The TPC reached more than 650 additional community voices during this phase. The TPC held eightevents in June and July of 2012, including four regional town halls, a community-wide presentation, afaith-based leaders meeting, a breakfast for community leaders, and a presentation to PeopleFirst.

Over the course of the planning process, the members of the TPC generated a number of FrequentlyAsked Questions (FAQs) received from community members. These questions were answered andcompiled in a document that was distributed at TPC events and displayed on the TPC website. The listwas updated as new questions were compiled and answered. Questions addressed in the FAQdocument include but are not limited to:

Within the merged system, will my child be able to remain in his/her current school? As a teacher, will I get to stay in my school? Will my salary and benefits change? Will the new teacher evaluation initiatives carry over in the Transition Plan? Will busing (for desegregation purposes) be part of the Transition Plan? What is the TPC's position on the potential for separate municipal districts? Does research support large districts?
http://www.ourvoiceourschools.org/http://www.ourvoiceourschools.org/http://www.ourvoiceourschools.org/http://www.ourvoiceourschools.org/


29/308

28

EDUCATION PLAN: Educational Services

The Education Plan for the district includes two sections: first, the educational services that the district willprovide, and second, the administrative structure that will deliver these services. This chapter starts with theeducational services recommendations.


30/308

29

Introduction

This chapter provides recommendations for educational services in merged SCS across 10 priorityareas. These recommendations and priorities were identified as critical to making Shelby CountySchools a world-class school system. Across the 10 priority areas, there are a total of 78recommendations, most with sub-recommendations. Within this list, the most transformativerecommendations representing the greatest departure from the current state include:

Expanding Pre-Kindergarten to provide an additional 2,500 slots across the county to ensureuniversal voluntary access for all four-year-olds (recommendations 1a1c) Introducing measures of success along eight key benchmarks for college readiness, and setting

goals and tracking progress in these areas:

8 Key Milestones:

*Items marked TBD are areas in which the TPC did not have current state data, and so the TPC was not ableto identify an appropriate target. In theEducation Plan chapter, the TPC recommends the district gather thebaseline data for these items, and set ambitious goals.

Doubling the number of students participating in Advanced Placement courses and dualenrollment programs

Expanding access and ensuring equity through a consistent, district-wide school transfer policyon a space-available basis

Supporting the creation of a community collaborative that includes community organizations,government leaders, the faith community, and the business community. The goal of thiscollaborative will be to focus the community on the eight benchmarks listed above and to alignresources to support the well-being and academic success of all Shelby County's children

Reducing the number of suspensions and expulsions district-wide by focusing student behaviorinvestments on preventative, positive behavior education and programming

Using evaluations for teachers and principals that clearly define effective teaching andeffective instructional leadership and that utilize multiple measures, both qualitative andquantitative, to assess performance

Creating integrated plans for professional development for teachers and instructional leadersthat are linked to needs identified by individual evaluations

Making all hiring by mutual consent whereby principals can offer a teaching position to thebest-fit applicant from any pool of teachers at any point during the year

Dismissing teachers and instructional leaders who cannot or will not improve Redesigning teacher and instructional leader compensation to attract and retain teachers for

high priority schools and hard to staff subjects, as well as to reward sustained effectiveness

Creating reciprocal accountability at all levels of the district by making sure that each level ofthe organization holds the others accountable for high performance

Outcome 2010-11 actual 2016-17 target1. Kindergarten readiness 47% TBD%*2. 3rd Grade reading proficiency 34% 60%3. 7th Grade math proficiency 27% 50%4. 9th Grade on track Unknown TBD%*

5. ACT college ready / ACTminimum score of 21 10% / 24% 25% / 60%

6. Graduation rate 78% 90%7. Post-secondary collegeenrollment

40%(MCS data only)

60%

8. Post-secondary collegecompletion

16%(MCS data only)

TBD%*


31/308

30

Forming a Student Congress to identify and elevate student priorities with district staffWhat follows is a more detailed description of the current state, best practice research, measures ofsuccess, and specific recommendations within each of the 10 priority areas.

Context

The Education Plan for merged SCS includes the priorities and recommendations necessary for SCS tobe a world-class educational system, where every student graduates ready for success in college andcareer.

To develop the priority areas, the TPC relied on an assessment of the current state including studentdemographics, student needs, and student academic performance. Data from this report is included in"Summary of current state" section of each priority area. Additionally, the complete AssessmentReport is included in Appendix A.

In developing recommendations, the TPC considered its guiding principles. In each priority area, thePlan describes the guiding principles that are most relevant to the recommendations in that area.

The TPC also considered additional aspirations that establish the overarching framework andphilosophy for the educational services of merged SCS. These aspirations include:

Quality Equity Efficiency Accessibility County-wide collaboration Data-driven decision-making Decision-making as close to the student as possible

To focus its work, the TPC identified 10 educational priorities, depicted on the next exhibit:

1. Every child ready for school2. Every student ready for success in college and career3. Rigorous implementation of standards4. Quality and accessible educational choices5. Engaged parents and families6. Supportive community members and partners7. Tailored interventions and support8. Effective teachers9. Effective instructional leaders10. Culture and climate of high expectations


32/308

31

Educational Priorities

In each priority area, the TPC recommends measures of success for merged SCS to use in evaluatingits success across these 10 areas. In some cases, the TPC had enough information to suggest specificnumerical targets for the measure of success. In other areas the TPC did not have current state data,and so left the target as TBDwith the proposal that the district leadership should set specificnumerical targets in partnership with the community. All measures of success will be tracked andreported regularly to the community.

The majority of the recommendations are cost-neutral. In the places where there is a financial cost,that cost has been detailed in this chapter, as well as in the Financial Model chapter of the Plan.

The Committee developed these priorities and recommendations with the understanding that ShelbyCounty Schools will not be structured like a traditional school district in 201314. With the growth ofthe Achievement School District (ASD), the Innovation Zone, and charter schools, the district will be amix of school operators and types. The TPC recognizes that the district does not, and should not, havethe authority to mandate some of the recommendations below in charter schools and the ASD.However, to ensure equity and to enhance the quality of education offered by all schools, the TPCrecommends that the ASD and charter schools consider these recommended strategies and measuresof success, and that the district uses these in the charter school application process. The TPC stronglyrecommends collaboration among all school operators to ensure that all students are successful. Thisincludes district-operated schools (both in regions and in the Office of Innovation), charter schools,and the ASD.

The TPC also recognizes that the district is only one contributor to student success. Parents,community members, and community partners are critical as well. Several times in these

recommendations the TPC charges a community collaborative with owning the tracking andimplementation of several recommendations. A community collaborative is in the process offormation, and will include leaders of community organizations, government, public institutions, thefaith community, and business leaders.

The TPC recognizes that the items specifically identified in these recommendations do not representthe full scope of work for a school district and that, for many of these items, greater specificity will berequired during implementation to accomplish the Plans goals. As part of the work of the EducationalServices Committee, the staffs of the existing districts have developed detailed documentation of the


33/308

32

current state and initial recommendations for merged SCS. This work has contributed significantly tothe TPCs recommendations below. In addition, the TPC recommends:

1. Utilizing the recommendations presented by the staffs on specific educational topics(reproduced in Appendix C) as a starting point for making more detailed decisions throughthe implementation process in a way that is consistent with the educational priorities andrecommendations outlined within this Plan.


34/308

33

Priority 1: Every child ready for school

The following guiding principles are most relevant to the recommendations in this section:

The academic success and well being of our students come first We have high expectations We desire excellent community schools and options for all This is our once-in-a-lifetime opportunity

Summary of current stateMCS and SCS operated a combined 219 Pre-Kindergarten classrooms for 4-year-olds in the 201112school year, serving about 4,380 students (out of 4,975 who applied). District-sponsored pre-Kprograms are full-day instructional models (7.5 hours) delivered by certified, college-educatedpreschool teachers who are supported by a full-time assistant.

In addition to the district-run program, Shelby County Head Start and private care centers providePre-K 4 programs to approximately 4,000 students.

MCS reports the Kindergarten readiness scores for students disaggregated by where students attendedPre-K 4, as reported by parents. This research has consistently shown that students who participate in

district-run programs are better prepared for Kindergarten than other programs. However, studentswho participate in any formal Pre-K 4 program (including Head Start and private centers) are betterprepared for Kindergarten than those who do not participate in any program at all.

MCS Academic Achievement, by Pre-School Experience, 2010

Findings from benchmarks and other districtsMany national studies have shown the long-term benefits of Pre-K education. The following threestudies are commonly cited:2

2 Galinsky, Ellen. The Economic Benefits of High-Quality Early Childhood Programs: What Makes theDifference? Committee for Economic Development, February 2006.


35/308

34

Summary of Academic Research on Pre-Kindergarten

High/Scope Preschoolproject Abecedarian Project

Chicago Child-ParentCenters

Long-term OutcomesPart-day center-basedpreschool for 2 years +weekly home visits

Full-day program from 6weeks age 5

Part-day school-basedpreschool for 2 years +parent outreach

Tested as specialeducation

15% v. 34% 12% v. 48% 23% v. 38%

Arrested by age 19 31% v. 50% n/a 17% v. 25%

High schoolcompletion

71% v. 54% 70% v. 67% 66% v. 54%

College enrollment 33% v. 28% 36% v. 12% 24% v. 18%

Public benefit for each$1 invested

$7.16 $2.69 $6.87

Measures of success

100% of four-year-olds have access to a high-quality preschool experience (including but notlimited to district-run Pre-K)

TBD% of Kindergarteners meet the Kindergarten readiness indicatorsRecommendations

2.

Shelby County as a community ensures universal access to Pre-Kindergarten for all four-year-olds in Shelby County, provided by a mix of district-run classrooms, Head Start, and privatecare centersa. The district leads the way in ensuring universal access, by adding 2,500 spaces (125

classrooms) to its Pre-K program over the next five years. This represents enough slots sothat all children (including

Documents

Transition Planning Commission Plan