Presentation at Superintendent Academy in January 2019 by Karen Hawley Miles and Rob Daigneau

1. © Education Resource Strategies, Inc. 2018
Resource Allocation and the Superintendency
National Superintendents Academy
January 2019

2. • What does strategic resource use look like in schools and
systems?
• What, therefore, must I ask, know & do as Superintendent to
maximize the impact of limited resources in my system?
2
Today’s Essential Questions:

3. 3
A quick warm up…
TURN TO YOUR NEIGHBOR
When you think of the biggest challenges
with resources what comes to mind?
What do you wish you knew?
What do you wish you could do?

4. Agenda
1. Setting the stage (30 min)
Introduction and Current state of education funding
2. The Strategic System(45 min)
A lens for thinking about resource use and school system transformation
3. Break (10 min)
4. Budget Hold’em for Districts(85 min)
A game to illustrate tradeoffs needed to drive success at the system level
5. Wrap-up (10 min )
Tools and resources to drive change moving forward
4

5. Every School. Every Child.
Ready for Tomorrow.
ERS is a national nonprofit that partners with district, school
and state leaders to transform how they use resources (people,
time, and money) so that every school prepares every child for
tomorrow, no matter their race or income.

6. WEST COAST
California
Sacramento, Oakland,
Los Angeles
Colorado
Denver
SOUTHWEST 15
Arizona
Arizona Community Foundation
New Mexico
Santa Fe, Albuquerque
Oklahoma
Tulsa
Texas
El Paso, Austin, Aldine, Spring Branch
MIDWEST
Minnesota
St. Paul
Illinois
Chicago
Indiana
Indianapolis
Ohio
Cleveland, Cincinnati
Michigan
Michigan State University
SOUTH
Tennessee
Memphis, Nashville, Knox County,
TN Dept. of Education
Georgia
Atlanta, GA Dept. of Education
Florida
Duval County, Lake County,
Palm Beach County
North Carolina
Charlotte-Mecklenburg
Louisiana
Avoyelles Parish, LA Dept. of Education
NORTHEAST
Massachusetts
Boston, Cambridge, Holyoke
Rhode Island
Providence
Connecticut
Hartford, Waterbury, New Haven,
Connecticut Council for Education
Reform
New York
Buffalo, Rochester, Syracuse, New
York City, NY State Dept. of
Education
Pennsylvania
Philadelphia
New Jersey
Newark
Maryland
Baltimore,
Prince George’s County
Washington, D.C.
D.C. Public Schools
Current State Work
Past State Work
Current District Work
Past District Work
We partner with districts across the country to transform resource
use so that every school succeeds for every student.

7. Setting the stage:
What is the current state of
education funding?

8. 8
Until the great recession hit, real spending on
education had increased nearly every year since 1920
$0
$2,000
$4,000
$6,000
$8,000
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
National Public K-12 Expenditures Per Pupil (1920-2018) ($M)
Current expenditures Per Pupil (Real) Current expenditures Per Pupil (Nominal)*
Source: National Center for Education Statistics: Digest of Education Statistics.
*Nominal expenditures expressed in constant 2018 dollars.

9. Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Survey F-33, 2012-13
9
All levels of government fund education – Title I is the
federal government’s largest contribution
10% 16%
45%
49%
45%
36%
National Average Typical Urban District
Sources of Education Funding
Local
State
Federal

10. Even adjusted for cost of living, the highest
spending state spends 3X the lowest
$7.5K
$22.4K
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
$25,000
Utah
Indiana
Arizona
Nevada
Idaho
NorthDakota
Texas
California
Oklahoma
Mississippi
NorthCarolina
Florida
Virginia
Alabama
Georgia
Tennessee
Maine
Michigan
SouthDakota
Ohio
Colorado
Arkansas
NewMexico
Washington
Kentucky
Louisiana
Missouri
Wisconsin
Kansas
Hawaii
Oregon
Iowa
SouthCarolina
Minnesota
Maryland
Illinois
Montana
Nebraska
RhodeIsland
Pennsylvania
WestVirginia
Massachusetts
Delaware
NewHampshire
NewJersey
Wyoming
Connecticut
NewYork
Vermont
Alaska
Total K12 Per Pupil Expenditure, 2017-18 (adjusted for geography)
Source: Rankings of the States 2017 and Estimates of School Statistics 2018, NEA Research April 2018; NCES Comparable Wage Index; ERS analysis
National median = $12.3K

11. Spending varies widely across districts...
11Source: ERS database
$7,800 $8,300
$9,200
$10,200 $10,800
$13,000
$14,100 $14,400
$16,800
$21,100
Aldine, TX Charlotte Knox
County, TN
Fulton
County, GA
Denver Prince
George's
County, MD
Baltimore Cleveland D.C. Newark
Per-Pupil Spending on Education
~3x

12. Systemic Budget Gaps
cost structure rises regardless of revenue
12
• Longevity based teaching salaries grow at ~2-
4% annually
• Benefits growing at ~10+% annually
• SPED spending continues to grow
• Pre-set COLA increases
• Tax revenue falling
• Enrollment declining
• Drop in Federal Funds

13. What do districts spend their money on?

14. School Spending Quiz:
Central administration consumes a
significant portion of district funding
True or False?

15. False: Most urban districts spend less on central
overhead than commonly perceived
15
District Governance, Management of the support services provide to Schools
Example: Superintendent, Board, Strategy, Dir. of Math, Dir. of Transportation
Leadership &
Management
“Central
Overhead”
All FTEs, services, and materials allocated directly to schools in the district
expenditures
Example: SBB Allocations, Non-SBB Resources
All FTEs, services, and materials not reported on the school budget, but
support schools on a regular and predictable basis
Example: Athletics, Prep Kitchens, PSNs
School-
attributed
All FTEs, services, and materials that provide support to schools in ways that
leverage scale across schools
Example: Transportation, Maintenance
Shared
Services
“School-
Attributed”
This is what ERS uses to
compare spending across
schools.
District X
7%
12.3%
8.4%
72.3%

16. School Spending Quiz:
Instruction is the primary business
and consumes what % of the budget?
1) 50-60%
2) 60-70%
3) 75%+

17. Typically 50-60% of most districts’ budgets is
spent on instruction in schools
17
56% 56% 58% 53% 55% 58% 59%
52% 57%
6% 5%
6%
6% 6%
6% 5%
6%
6%
20% 19%
20%
23% 21%
20% 18%
22% 16%
7% 9% 5% 6% 6% 6% 8% 8% 8%
8% 7% 8% 8% 8% 7% 7% 8% 8%
4% 5% 3% 4% 4% 3% 3% 4% 5%
District
Average
Palm Beach Duval Couty Lake County Aldine Charlotte Fulton PGC Denver
Breakdown of Total Operating Spending: % by Use
Business Services
Leadership
Pupil Services &
Enrichment
O&M
ISPD
Instruction
Source: SDPBC FY15 Expenditures, ERS analysis, ERS Benchmark Database
Adj. $pp $9.4 $9.8 $8.5 $7.4 $7.9 $9.7 $10.4 $11.6
Year 2014-2015 2009-2010 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2010-2011 2012-2013 2009-2010
PreK-12
Enrollment
166 (K) 121 (K) 36 (K) 66 (K) 137 (K) 88 (K) 126 (K) 77 (K)

18. School Spending Quiz:
School level spending goes mostly to people
and consumes what % of the budget?
1) 60-70%
2) 70-80%
3) 80-90%

19. 80-90% of a schools budget is typically spent on staff; therefore, strategic
budget reform must look first and foremost at people or “Who does What?”
19
65%
5%
2%
5%
8%
1%
2%
9%
School X
Teachers
Instructional Aides
Student support
Administration
Clerks & Other Staff
Substitutes
Supplies & Contracted Services
Utilities & Maintenance

20. Spending and Performance

21. Does spending level matter?
21
A generation of research says “no”
• Hanushek summarizes the existing literature to say “no.”
• Dollars per pupil are NOT systematically related to student outcomes
• Very consistent finding over time
• Consistently cited as reason to oppose spending increases

22. Inputs always matter. Logically, there exists a production function (or
multiple functions) to describe the relationship between inputs and
student learning. So, what’s up here?
How could education researchers possibly find (and so consistently)
such a negligible relationship between spending levels (dollars per
pupil) and student learning outcomes?
22
Question for discussion:
?
?

23. How much versus how well: Dollars go to things that don’t improve student performance (misalignments). Spending
more wrongly doesn’t make a difference…Need a theory of what matters most…
• Class size reductions
• Teacher compensation is 50% of budgets and 30% of that goes to experience and education pay that are unrelated to
student performance
• More students served in special education (eg: 20%+ in Syracuse)
Data: Spending data used in the research doesn’t get to the student level
• Equity within schools. But what if within a school some general education students get 20% more than others?
• What if some schools do a better job of targeted specific additional interventions to need?
Time horizon: Most existing research is premised on “same-year” relationship between spending and outcomes
• What if some investments take longer to demonstrate benefits than the year they’re implemented?
23
Possible reasons that scholars cannot find a
relationship between spending and performance…

24. • Sustained increases in per pupil spending in the 1970s-80s led to increased educational
attainment (years of completed education) and higher wages for low-income students.
(Jackson, Johnson, Persico. “The Effects of School Spending on Educational and Economic Outcomes: Evidence From School Finance
Reforms” October 2015)
• Sustained increases in per pupil spending in low-income school districts ordered by courts in
the 1990’s also enabled increases in student achievement for students in those districts
(Lafortune, Rothstein, Schanzenbach. “School Finance Reform and the Distribution of Student Achievement” February 2016)
24
But wait… More recent findings say that:
Notes: “Educational attainment” was measured by years of completed education; “Student achievement” was measured by NAEP scores

25. How Much and How Well
How Much Student OutcomesHow Well
Inequities persist, even when funding increases. How well those funds are used is
critical to equitably improving student outcomes
Skepticism and lack of clarity for what the money will buy has hindered the case for
more funds. Greater clarity for how resources would be used and proof points for
using them well would bolster the case for greater investment in education

26. Reflection (2 minutes)
26
TURN TO YOUR NEIGHBOR
Where have you seen the biggest opportunities
to use resources more effectively?
What gets in the way of optimizing resources?

27. The status quo persists because re-aligning
resources is hard
• Pure operating efficiencies are small and miss the
point
• Quick timelines inhibit significant changes
• Complex reallocations are multi-year, some with up-
front investment
• Hard to mobilize around the “from” without a clear vision for the “to”
• Can require eliminating policy barriers and/or changing peoples’ jobs
• Realigning resources may not be what the public or board wants

28. Agenda
1. Setting the stage
Introduction and Current state of education funding
2. The Strategic System
A lens for thinking about resource use and school system transformation
3. Break
4. Budget Hold’em for Districts
A game to illustrate tradeoffs needed to drive success at the system level
5. Wrap-up
Tools and resources to drive change moving forward
28

29. Schools that accelerate learning for ALL students
“do school” differently …
Teacher Collaboration
Organize sufficient time for
teaching teams to improve
instruction with content experts
Time
and Attention
Match student grouping,
learning time, technology
and program to individual
student needs
Instruction
Uphold rigorous, college-and-
career-ready standards and use
effective curricula, instructional
strategies, and assessments
to achieve them
Talent Management
Attract and retain the best teachers,
ensure all teachers have ongoing access
to growth-oriented feedback, and design
and assign roles and responsibilities to
match skills to school and student need
Whole Child
Ensure students are deeply known and
more intensive social and emotional
supports are integrated when necessary
Growth-oriented
Adult Culture
Grow a collaborative culture where
teachers and leaders share ownership
of a common instructional vision and
student learning

30. Transforming outcomes for all students requires
redesigning the system & tackling outmoded structures
30
Strategic System Domain From To
Standards & Instruction
Inconsistent or inadequate standards with little
support for teachers.
Rigorous, information-age standards supported by
effective curricula and assessments.
Teaching
Isolated teachers with limited support, flexibility,
opportunities for growth.
A new way we hire, assign, support, team, pay, and
promote teachers.
School Design
A one-size-fits-all learning environment that holds
everyone back.
A re-imagined school day with new schedules,
dynamic groupings and targeted instruction
Leadership
Limited autonomy, flexibility & support to develop
and reward strong leaders
Clear standards, support, and account- ability for
principals and district leaders.
School Support
Central office staff responsibilities that focus on
compliance and oversight.
A central office that is a service and strategy partner
that leverages data.
Funding Wide funding variances across schools.
Systems that allocate resources equitably and
flexibly across schools.
Partners
Schools providing a wide range of services in
addition to their core educational mission.
Partnering to create innovative and cost-effective
ways to serve students better.

31. Four high priority levers for transformation:
1.Implement strategic school designs that personalize learning for
students based on need
2.Restructure investments in PD and teacher time to create
“connected professional learning” for teachers and leaders
3.Restructure one-size fits all teacher compensation and job
structures
4.Revise funding formulas to achieve greater equity, transparency
and flexibility
31

32. Most schools organize people, time, and money the
same way they did 50+ years ago
32
One teacher
per class
20-30 students
per class Studying a
particular subject
For a set period of time
(e.g., 50 min/day)
For a set duration
(e.g., full year)

33. Most districts have opportunities to strategically
raise class size…
33Source: Elementary Grades Homeroom file Oct 2009; Includes elementary schools and K-8 schools (grades K0-5); excludes classes that are special education 60%+, ELL 60%+; includes
Advanced Work classes; excludes schools with Two-Way bilingual program; excludes classes with “mixed” grade (mainly due to teacher data NA); ERS analysis
21
22 22 2222
25
28
31
Grades K-2 Grades 3-5 Grades 6-8 Grades 9-12
In this District Class Sizes are Far from Maximum
and Do Not Vary by Grade
Average class size Contract max

34. …and to target class sizes to priority subjects and
students
34
*Core class defined as ELA, Math, Science, Social Studies; Non-core defined as Arts, Computer Literacy, Vocational, Foreign Language
Source: District A and B 9th and 12th grade course data (internal – Resource Mapping presentation); ERS analysis
In these districts class sizes for core subjects are higher than non-core
27
21
18 18
District T District L
Average Class Size by Course Type
9th Grade Core Class Size* 12th Grade Non-Core Class Size

35. Many schools also have more adults than they
actively manage to provide targeted attention
Source: ERS analysis
35
18
26
22 22 22
25
29
20
29
14 14
16
13
15 14
16
12
17
District A District B District C District D District E District F District G District H District I
General Education Class Size versus Student-Teacher Ratio
ERS Estimated Average General Ed Class Size Average Total Student-to-Teacher Ratio

36. Cycle of isolation and specialization
36
Large, diverse classes
Teachers without needed
expertise and support
Remove “problem”
student
Administration to coordinate
Resources and responsibility
fragmented
Add on support

37. More spending on separate classrooms means less on
early intervention
37
Note: Excluded are all district Alternative/Adult schools.
Sources SY10 October enrollment, district budget as of 10/09. Excludes students who did not report; ELL includes those currently in programs, excludes
students who opted-out
$11.7
$15.2
$19.9
$42.6
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
$35
$40
$45
FullyAllocated$PerPupil
(Thousands)
Sample District Spending by Student Type
2009-2010
General Ed LEP Sped Resource Sped Separate
Enrollment: 37.8K 6.6K 5.4K 5.5K
Weight: 1.0 1.2 1.7 3.5
Poverty
Increment

38. To target individual attention to students, in the
short term, you can ...
38
To Support Sustainable Transformation
Invest transition
resources to
 Provide expert PD to increase teacher capacity to use individual attention strategies
 Create and use formative assessments and tools to enable targeted instruction and grouping
Lay the groundwork for
long-term change by…  Build understanding of impact of targeted group sizes & teaching effectiveness in strategic designs
To Reverse Misalignments
Reduce spending by…  Increasing general class size targets
 Increasing class size for specific low need students, grade levels, and subjects
 Leveraging technology for high cost courses and selected lessons
Increase spending to …  Reduce group size for high need students, skills, grade levels and subjects

39. Most schools have the opportunity to
optimize time by subject…
Source: ERS analysis 39
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
ES 7-9 10-12
PE
Electives
Foreign Language
Science
Social Studies
Math
ELA
Typical District Percent of Student Time
By Grade and Subject

40. 40
….and by student need
Note: % Time is based on the instructional time throughout the school day. It only includes periods entered in PowerSchool and does not include passing time, lunch, recess or maintenance/homeroom classes.
Source: ERS Analysis, CMS SY2013-2014 Course Schedule PowerSchool Data, CMS SY2012-2013 EOG Performance Data
22% 22%
22% 22%
16% 14%
16% 14%
2% 5%
Below Basic Proficient
%ofInstructionalTime
Prior Year ELA EOG
Avg. % of Time by Core Subject for Below Basic and Proficient Middle School Students
Foreign Lang.
Social Studies
Science
ELA
Math

41. Many districts have an opportunity to increase
instructional time by increasing the school day
Sources: District figures are from Time and Attention in Urban High Schools: Lessons for School Systems (Frank, 2010) and from ERS analyses for the Aspen CFO network. Leading Edge school figures are from Shields, R. A.,
and K. H. Miles. 2008. Strategic Designs: Lessons from Leading Edge Small Urban High Schools. Watertown, MA: Education Resource Strategies. Charter school figures are from The Boston Foundation report (May 2010) “Out
of the Debate and Into the Schools.” ERS analysis.
41
963
1080
1110
1120
1125
1138
1160
1170
1180
1200
1210
1250
1250
1260
1276
1476
Chicago
PG County
LA
Boston
Seattle
St Paul
Milwaukee
Washington DC
Rochester
Denver
Baltimore
Pittsburgh
Philadelphia
Atlanta
Leading Edge schools
Boston Charters
Student Hours Per Year National Avg. = 1170

42. How does Revere High provide personalized
learning to students?
Introduction: Revere High School has prioritized the 9th grade student experience though a 9th grade
academy. The academy is designed to provide additional support and time to students as they face more
rigorous content through flipped learning and flexible groupings.
As you watch, consider:
What strategies are they using to provide personalized learning?
What are the resource implications of these strategies?
What system-level implications of these strategies?
Video: Link
42Source: ERS

43. Four high priority levers for transformation:
1.Implement strategic school designs that personalize learning for
students based on need
2.Restructure investments in PD and teacher time to create
“connected professional learning” for teachers and leaders
3.Restructure one-size fits all teacher compensation and job
structures
4.Revise funding formulas to achieve greater equity, transparency
and flexibility
43

44. Designed to “develop teachers”…
Traditional professional development
One-off workshops
University
classes
Conferences Online learning
modules
…through disconnected learning events…
…where knowledge is delivered to individual teachers…
…who in turn try to extract and apply
relevant information in their own
classrooms.

45. 45
From traditional, one-way PD to dynamic,
“Connected Professional Learning”
Rigorous,
comprehensive
curricula and
assessments
Content-focused,
expert-led
collaboration
Frequent,
growth-oriented
feedback

46. Making the shift from traditional PD to Connected
Professional Learning
46
Element Traditional PD Connected Professional Learning
Rigorous, comprehensive,
curricula and
assessments
Curricula selected by district leaders,
lacks rigor to meet College- and
Career-Ready Standards
Curricula, vetted by experts, adapted by
teachers, linked to sample lesson plans and
assessments
Content-focused, expert-led
collaboration
Most planning done individually, with
teams focused on administrative
issues
90 minutes/week of expert-led collaborative
time with teachers who teach the same
content
Frequent, growth-oriented
feedback
Annual observations for formal
evaluations, with occasional visits
from a district coach
Weekly observations and feedback from a
school-based instructional leader with
content expertise
Source: Igniting the Learning Engine, Education Resource Strategies, 2017

47. Research shows that the choice of instructional materials can have an
impact as large as or larger than the impact of teacher quality
47Sources: Chingos and Whitehurst. (2012). Choosing Blindly: Instructional Materials, Teacher Effectiveness and the Common Core.
“...improving teacher quality is challenging, expensive, and
time consuming, making better choices among available
instructional materials should be relatively easy,
inexpensive, and quick.” – Chingos and Whitehurst
Empowering
curriculum

48. Case study systems provide more time for high-
quality collaboration
48
75%
69%
45%
10%
10%
11%
11%
12%
17%
10%
11%
4%
14%
Typical Systems Case study districts Case study CMO
How teachers spend their time (pct of annual hours)
Collaborative planning
Professional learning days
Individual planning
Duties/lunch
Instructional delivery
Source: ERS analysis of district financial, HR and performance data, interviews with district and school leaders
Annual hours 1,399 1,464 1,878
Expert-led
collaboration

49. Potential Opportunities Works well when.. Considerations
Early release/late start • Transportation & student day is flexible
• Uninterrupted planning time is a priority
• Difficult to schedule teachers together in the school
day
• Transportation costs
Pay select teams to come in
before/after school, or during
school using subs to cover
• Uninterrupted planning time is a priority
• Additional money exists in budget
• Stipends/overtime pay (or sub pay if
releasing teachers during the day)
Decrease teacher teaching time • Teacher planning during school day is a priority • Requires additional staff or raising
class size
Stack planning periods back-to-
back (1x/week or more)
• Resources are limited
• Flexibility exists to change schedule
• May require rotating schedule
and/or additional staff
Stack planning around other non-
teacher moments (lunch,
before/after school)
• School can flexibly hire several part-time elective
teachers (in exchange for full-time teachers)
• Large teacher teams need to meet together at the
same time
• Part-time vs. full-time staff
• Facility space for all electives at
once
Options for creating >90 minute blocks of
collaborative planning time
49
Expert-led
collaboration

50. Case study systems devote radically increased time for
cycles of informal, growth-oriented feedback
50
80 30-150
540-
1,080
60 30-150
540-
720
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
Time for observations and feedback
(minutes/year per teacher)
Feedback
Observation
Source: ERS analysis of district financial, HR and performance data, interviews with district and school leaders
Informal
observations
& feedback
Informal
observations
& feedback
Typical system Case study systems
Formal evaluation
Typical
teacher
Struggling
teacher
Formal evaluation
Typical
teacher
Struggling
teacher
• Equal to 30-50 mins per week
• Enables continuous improvement
• Fosters trust among professionals
Ad hoc
Growth-oriented
feedback

51. Strategic systems direct more resources toward expert-
led collaboration and more frequent observations
51
System-wide investment Typical Strategic Δ
Education Pay (i.e. “Lanes”) 3.3% 1.1% -2.2%
Direct PD Workshops & Coaching 3.8% 2.4% -1.4%
Curriculum & Assessments 1.5% 2.1% +0.6%
Support for School & Teacher Leaders 0.1% 0.6% +0.5%
Strategic PL Days for Teachers 0.9% 2.1% +1.2%
Expert Led CPT 0.9% 2.3% +1.4%
Observations & Debriefs 0.2% 1.7% +1.5%
Total investment 10.7% 12.2% +1.5%
Less investment
in traditional “PD”
More investment
in supported,
school-based
collaboration
Source: ERS analysis of district financial, HR and performance data, interviews with district and school leaders
Pct system operating expense

52. Four high priority levers for transformation:
1.Implement strategic school designs that personalize learning for
students based on need
2.Restructure investments in PD and teacher time to create
“connected professional learning” for teachers and leaders
3.Restructure one-size fits all teacher compensation and job
structures
4.Revise funding formulas to achieve greater equity, transparency
and flexibility
52

53. Within total teacher compensation, benefits and experience
pay make up the largest additions to base salary
53
Starting base
36%
Experience
22%
Education
10%
Other
3%
Benefits
29%
District Total Teacher Compensation
By reducing benefits 10% for
teachers, this district would free
up 1.5% of its total budget for
strategic re-investment.
Category $ Amount
Starting Base $93M
Experience $58M
Education $25M
Other $7M
Benefits $75M

54. Strategy Misalignment
Attract Early career teacher salaries not competitive with
comparable professional opportunities.
Retain Pay disconnected from contribution or role. Pension
structure and slow rise in salary and encourage low
performers to stay.
Leverage
Expertise
Limited opportunity or incentive to take on greater
challenges or leadership roles.
Industrial age compensation structures don’t
match needs of information age workforce
54

55. To transform the teaching job, in the short term,
you can...
To Support Sustainable Transformation
Invest transition
resources to…
 Invest in effective evaluation and data systems
 Create new school designs that make teaching job more doable
 Design new compensation structures
To Reverse Misalignments
Reduce spending
by…
 Reduce benefits spending
 Shrink or stop automatic step increases
 Tighten approval process for moving lanes
Increase spending
to…
 Pay teachers more for high-needs and leadership assignments
 Support expert-led teacher teaming
 Restructure time for teaming and planning
Source: Do More, Add More, Earn More; Center for American Progress and Education Resource Strategies; 2015; https://www.erstrategies.org/library/do_more_add_more_earn_more

56. Four high priority levers for transformation:
1.Implement strategic school designs that personalize learning for
students based on need
2.Restructure investments in PD and teacher time to create
“connected professional learning” for teachers and leaders
3.Restructure one-size fits all teacher compensation and job
structures
4.Revise funding formulas to achieve greater equity, transparency
and flexibility
56

57. Elements of a healthy school funding system
Flexibility
School leaders
define the
resources they
need to drive
student
achievement
Equity
Resources are
distributed
equitably based on
student need
Transparency
Clear and easily
understood rules
for where, how, and
why dollars flow
Source: ERS

58. We typically see significant variation in funding
between schools in the same district
Source: ERS Analysis; District Financial File 2016
$0
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
$7,000
$8,000
$9,000
$10,000
Elementary Schools Middle
Median $5.8K
Hi-Lo Spread 1.6X
District Example- ERS analysis
School Level Gen Ed. Dollar per Gen Ed. Student by School
Excludes Federal Funds
High
Median $7.0K
Hi-Lo Spread 1.9X
Median
$6.5K
Hi-Lo
Spread
1.6X

59. Districts do not intentionally allocate resources
inequitably
…but district policies often
unintentionally create
inequity.
Funding inequity is
never intentional…

60. For example, most districts use average (as opposed to
actual) teacher salary for budgeting which disguises inequity
Using average salary School A School B
District average salary $60,000 $60,000
Number of teachers 10 10
Budgeted for salary $600,000 $600,000
Though the district
would appear to be
making an equal
investment in these
schools on an average
salary basis…
…School B actually
invests $300k more
than School A
Using actual salary School A School B
Novice teachers earning $30,000 each 5 0
Mid-level teachers earning $60,000 each 5 5
Experienced teachers earning $90,000 each 0 5
Actual salary $450,000 $750,000

61. Districts should determine if variation is intentional and strategic and then
adjust accordingly to improve equity
61
District Strategy
School opening/ closure
$
School Level
$
School Type
$
Student Need
Special
Education
$$$
English Language
Learners
$$
Economic Disadvantage
$$
Other Student Needs
$
Unplanned
Enrollment/ School
Size
$$$
Teacher Compensation
$
Building Utilization
$
Enrollment Projections
$
Ad-hoc exceptions
$

62. 10 Minute Break

63. Agenda
1. Setting the stage (30 min)
Introduction and Current state of education funding
2. The Strategic System(45 min)
A lens for thinking about resource use and school system transformation
3. Break (10 min)
4. Budget Hold’em for Districts(85 min)
A game to illustrate tradeoffs needed to drive success at the system level
5. Wrap-up (10 min )
Tools and resources to drive change moving forward
63

64. A Card Game that’s More Than a Game…
• Explore trade-offs through interaction
• Vision what is possible
• Break down silos—for everyone, not just the finance team
64
What is Budget Hold’em for Districts?
Played by over 10,000
people in person and online!

65. Defining “trade-offs” begins by examining typical responses to budget
gaps: An attempt to preserve current structures
65
Frozen salaries Incremental staffing ratio
adjustments
Across-the-board cutsFurlough days

66. Expanding on the idea of “trade-offs,” we see that for the same cost, a
typical district can:
66
Reduce K-6 class
size by 2
Add 90 minutes of
collaborative planning time
for all teachers
OR
Give all teachers a
5% raise OR
Offer 25% higher principal
salaries
OR
Double the raise for the top
5% of teachers
Add school leader staff to
increase time for teacher
support
Teaching
School
Leadership

67. Goal of this exercise
Help District X use its limited resources strategically to improve student achievement
and meet our goals.
1. Identify the core needs
2. Consider broad range of investment and savings options
3. Weigh investment and savings options
4. Make investment and savings decisions
67

68. The object of the game
• Create a “hand” of investment and savings cards that represents a new budget for
District X
• Your hand must meet the district’s priorities (see handout)
• Your hand must achieve a cost neutral status and improve student achievement
68

69. Hold’em cards are organized into seven categories
69
Teaching
TimeGroup Size Special
Education
Career Path &
Compensation
Leadership
Efficiency

70. Add 60 min of learning time
to the school day in the 25%
lowest performing schools
Extended learning time can raise
student achievement if it is
targeted on core instruction with
high quality teachers who are
expert in critical subject and
instructional areas.
1.7%
Student
impact
indicators
Investment (+) or
Savings (-) as % of
budget
Card
Description
Note: Extending learning time
can be costly. Ensure that the
schools in which you invest have
leaders and teaching staff who
can deliver high quality
instruction to struggling
students.
Considerations
(Notes or Warnings)
Turnaround schools
Some cards are more
effective when played
together
Time+
The Anatomy of a Hold’em Card (printed version)
There are also
wild cards that let you
add more savings or
investment options.
Category
Card Title

71. Things to consider
• Select cards thoughtfully – consider your priorities
• Consider inter-relationships between cards and try to get those bonus points
• Acknowledge approximation
• Be bold
• Consider different staffing allocations
• Use Wild Cards
• Have fun!
71

72. Let’s Play

73. Directions
73
Step 1
5 min
Read the District X fact sheet individually. Note priorities and challenges.
Step 2
1 min
Choose someone to record decisions online and someone to read the cards.
Step 3
45 min
The card reader will read the cards aloud (just the title and description), and
your group will collectively sort them into Yes, No, and Maybe piles.
TIP: It is often easiest to decide between No and Maybe, so start there.
Step 4
15 min
After your first pass, go back through your Yes and Maybe piles to decide
what to add or remove in order to reach your targets. Calculate your budget
and student impact.
Step 5
2 min
Take stock: Consider the expected performance outcomes of your choices –
are you maximizing impact given resource limitations and district priorities?
Online Scoring Instructions
1. Go to:
erstrategies.org/scoresheet
2. Enter your team’s “Access
Token” (on your table)
3. Enter decisions as you go

74. Debrief on Hold ‘Em

75. Discussion Questions—from up on the balcony
1.What were the biggest insights and/or surprises in your choices?
2.Which options are off the table or challenging, but promising, interesting, or
important? What must change to make them a real option?
3.How did this exercise influence your thinking on:
a. How to improve outcomes with limited resources?
b. The use of impact data for leadership decision-making?
75

76. 1. Setting the stage
Introduction and Current state of education funding
2. The Strategic System
A lens for thinking about resource use and school system transformation
3. Break
4. Budget Hold’em for Districts
A game to illustrate tradeoffs needed to drive success at the system level
5. Wrap-up
Tools and resources to drive change moving forward
Agenda
76

77. Today’s Essential Questions:
1. What does strategic resource use look like in schools
and systems?
2. What, therefore, must I know, do, and ask as superintendent
to maximize the impact of limited resources in my system?
77

78. Help ERS achieve our mission: to support you!
• ERS has a variety of free tools to support meaningful change in your districts :
• Online Budget Hold ‘Em
• The Strategic Snapshot | Mini (Formerly Resource Check)
• DREAM
• School Funding Resource Guide
• Talent Decision Planner
• School Designer
• And lots more…
78
ERS
Tools
www.erstrategies.org