[a continuation from yesterday's post...]

“If you build it…they will come”

That whispering voice in “Field of Dreams” convinced Kevin Costner’s character, Ray Kinsella, to build a baseball field in a rural Iowa cornfield – equally my “vision” of faith has followed a seemingly unconventional path as well.

What started out as a crazy idea from “left field” has uncovered several bases of interest – while having some unique similarities to the themes of this American classic.

This blog is cultivated on the WordPress platform, along with a few dozen plugins/widgets and techniques for search engine optimization. I also integrated a few other “farming” technologies including: Scribd (inline PDF viewing and document management), Google Analytics (tracking and data collection), AWStats (advanced web statistics), FusionCharts (dynamic flash charts…sorry for a shameless plug here – you guys rock!), NetworkedBlogs (social media network), and Twitter (micro-blogging).

“Go the Distance”

Despite a few challenges to the need for increasing public communication and engagement in education, I hope this project will continue to illustrate the need to plow under outdated methodologies.

In today’s fertile and technology-rich environment, effective communication needs to be nurtured with a proactive approach in a more timely and concise fashion – replacing any casual tendency (or perception) for another passive game of “catch.”

I included a few highlights of my “seedlings” and their current trends below. Click on any of the thumbnails to enlarge the image.

Google Analytics – Overview of Visitor Traffic
(March 20, 2010 to April 30, 2010)

Google Analytics – Map overlay showing global visitors
(March 20, 2010 to April 30, 2010)

Google Analytics – Map overlay showing USA visitors
(March 20, 2010 to April 30, 2010)

Google Analytics – Map overlay showing Pennsylvania visitors
(March 20, 2010 to April 30, 2010)

Google Analytics – Visitors from our district’s service provider
(December 2, 2009 to April 30, 2010)

Google Analytics – Top Search Keywords
(December 2, 2009 to April 30, 2010)

Scribd – Document Access Report
(January 1, 2010 to April 30, 2010)

To “blog” or not to “blog” – that is the question
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
And, by opposing, end them…

I was recently interviewed for an upcoming article in the PSBA Bulletin on school board member “bloggers” along with cyber-colleagues Dr. Fred Baldwin (Carlisle Area School District) and Mr. Jim Butt (Cheltenham Township School District). In preparation for the interview, I revisited my convictions for starting this blog – along with the vivid memory of a retired educator’s quote that I shall always remember… “If you are fearful you will never be successful.”

This statement is very true in so many different ways – especially since great rewards are never derived from valiant efforts void of potential risks. Hence that’s part of the confident attitude in accepting a few calculated risks through the use of this blog.

Although it has been nearly 5 months since my first post, I remain firmly committed to continue sharing information and insight from this role in public service. As education continues to face many collective challenges ahead, the impetus for better and improved communications has never been greater. School districts (mainly administrative teams and board members) must continue to work at tearing down the real (and perceived) walls of communication challenges with all stakeholders.

Successful partnerships that continue to meet the growing needs of educating students will only flourish and be sustainable in an environment of increased collaboration, engagement, transparency, and accountability.

Suggested reading: Lamar Johnson, “Take the Plunge”, American School Board Journal – April 2010

[Part II of this post will follow tomorrow...]

What’s the difference between a budget and a financial plan?

Think about maneuvering a rowboat. The energy you use to make the boat move is like the money you have to spend. You can row all day, but if you don’t spend any time steering, you’ll never arrive at your destination. Budgeting, like rowing, provides the resources needed to keep a school district moving forward on a daily basis. Financial planning, like steering, focuses our effort on our destination. Rowing without steering, or budgeting without a long-range strategic financial plan, will keep you moving — but not necessarily in the right direction.

Most school districts’ finance efforts are directed at budget development, financial compliance and reporting, and control of expenditures — important tasks but ineffective ways to chart a strategic course. Most districts spend far too little time evaluating how effectively their funds are being used, identifying future financial needs, and gauging the impact today’s decisions will have on future needs or goals.

Fiscal responsibility

School board members, superintendents, and business managers have two levels of fiscal responsibility. The first level is compliance with state and federal law. Compliance ensures that the budget meets state standards and that state funds are directed to legislated accounts and programs. Compliance does not ensure that funds are being used efficiently or effectively, however.

The second, higher order of responsibility is that of fiscal stewardship, which goes well beyond compliance and ensures that funds are spent on programs that make a difference and move the district toward its vision. Fiscal stewardship avoids deficit spending and the need for drastic cuts that undermine education. It requires that policy and process are in place to ensure that funds are used effectively and wisely and that deficits are avoided.

How does a School District achieve effective fiscal stewardship?

The answer is financial planning. You would never build a new house only to tear down part of it because you didn’t budget enough to finish the entire building. Unfortunately, that’s how some districts often handle funds. Some build a district vision for student success one year at a time and often end up spending so much on small projects that they don’t have enough for the programs that would really make a difference.

Building a successful district requires a strategic plan, improvement goals, and a financial plan to support the vision — plus the fiscal stewardship to make sure tax dollars are being directed to the most effective programs and departments.

Budgeting versus financial planning

Financial planning differs from budgeting in a number of key ways:

1. Purpose — compliance versus fiscal stewardship. Budgets are usually developed to match revenues against planned expenditures and comply with state budget development and reporting requirements (state law rarely requires financial plans). The purpose of strategic financial planning is to project the long-term sources and uses of funds, evaluate the effectiveness of programs and departments, and focus financial resources on programs that help attain the district’s vision for students. Enrollment histories, enrollment projections, patterns and strategic goals are all imperative to the planning and purpose.
2. Process — routine versus evaluative. The budgeting process usually involves routine review of annual expenditures. Budget center directors are given directions on spending limits and possible increases, and new programs are occasionally introduced. Each year, school officials spend a lot of time reviewing these budgets, when all they’re really doing is approving last year’s budget with a few changes. Financial planning, on the other hand, takes the district through an evaluation process that identifies areas in which district funds are being overspent or spent on ineffective programs. With financial planning, programs are renewed if they produce material results for students— not because they have become part of the way of doing things. Site-based or school-based improvement plans and their evaluations are the impetus to continuous improvement.
3. Focus — tactical versus strategic. The focus of a budget is on taking care of day-to-day operating needs, such as staff, supplies, utilities, and benefits. Financial planning focuses on allocating resources efficiently, making long-range plans for new funds, and ensuring that funds are directed toward goals and priorities of a strategic plan that is well thought out in advance, implemented and followed.
4. People involved — middle to lower-level employees versus top administrators. The superintendent, business manager, building principals and the people who report directly to them are involved in financial planning, which plays a more strategic role than traditional budgeting and places accountability on those managing budgets and departments. The school board should review and monitor the district’s finances throughout the year, including written reports at monthly board meetings.
5. Information — revenue projections and budget allocations versus spending trends, performance benchmarks, district goals, and performance. Most traditional budgets focus on the collection of minutiae, from head counts to supply use to salaries. Strategic financial planning uses this information as a foundation and build on it. Districts that use only the traditional budget document as a management tool force the board and superintendent to review information that is the proper domain of mid-level administrators. Strategic financial plans, on the other hand, provide information on issues of fiscal stewardship, effectiveness, vision, and change.
6. Time frame — next year versus next five years. Traditional budgets usually provide data for the budget year and the previous year. Financial plans, in contrast, generally provide two or more years of history and a three- to five-year projection of future expenditures based upon strategic documents. Such documents can include enrollment histories and projections, facility ages and capital needs for maintaining each building’s infrastructure, staffing patterns and it’s ability to adequately serve the number of students under its roof.
7. Accountability — spending questions versus goals questions. Traditional budgets ask, how is your department or program going to spend its funds next year? Strategic financial plans ask, what will you achieve with the level of funding requested for the next five years, and how does that compare to other alternatives for the same goal or service? In addition, financial plans have contractual negotiations as the impetus for accountability. The ability to restructure financially during collective bargaining is paramount for the vision of a school district and community.
8. Issues addressed — operational versus strategic. Budgets address the immediate operating needs of the district: how much money is spent on salary versus supplies, for example, and how much is spent on each department. Strategic financial plans address critical issues, such as when new funding will be needed, the cost of alternatives for improving academic performance, the long-range impact of reducing class size or adding a new school, and the total annual capital and operating costs to fully implement and support technology. Most importantly, financial planning addresses whether a district is investing funds in programs that support district goals and vision. Districts that don’t use financial planning seldom learn about their educational inefficiencies. And when the adults have chosen comfort and status quo over work and change, the children will suffer in the long run. Financial planning and analysis ensures the needs of students are always put first.
9. Ability to influence district vision — short term versus long term. Traditional budgets affect what happens during the coming year, while strategic planning affects results for up to five years. Without the benefit of financial planning, a simple budget cannot affect the long term results or sustainability.
10. Communication with taxpayers — dollars and cents versus results. Traditional budgets show categorical spending only. Strategic financial plans show whether the funds are being used effectively, what funds are used for, what they will accomplish and most importantly, what affect the money will have on students and education. It also tells taxpayers that we are open about our district’s financial condition and that we are responsible and care how taxpayers’ money is being used. In short, financial plans are the most effective tool school officials have for achieving results and establishing accountability.

The current tough economic times require strong fiscal leadership. You can’t have leadership without fiscal stewardship. Your elected school board, in conjunction with administrators and staff members, should be committed to making sure the students of your community receive a quality, first-rate education. High stakes education now requires high commitment from everyone involved.

Source: East Longmeadow (Massachusetts) Public Schools, Executive Summary Budget Summary FY 2009-2010

If you have a moment, I encourage you to share your input and comments with this committee by completing this brief survey – it takes less than 3 minutes!  Thank you for your help.

>> Complete the survey

More information about our district’s Wellness Policy may be viewed below:

The article in today’s Morning Call might bring some clarity to the title of my post.  It might even spark a deeper understanding and appreciation for it as well.

Over the next few days, I’m going begin a personal challenge.  ”No”…I haven’t been picked for the next Survivor series or even trying to run a 10k for that matter.  This challenge is rooted much deeper than a physical one.  Its based on a belief and a synergy of the “Power of One.”

One of my purposes of starting this blog was to see if I could help fuse technology and communication into a viable tool to promote a higher degree of public awareness and understanding of public education within our community. I’ll provide you with an objective look through my eyes, both as a parent and a school board member.

I will also provide some information to explore further on your own. And we will look at some of the tremendous challenges facing every school district and public education in general.

I hope you will join me on my quest.  So click back and our journey together will begin shortly…

I hope you and your family had an enjoyable Thanksgiving holiday. I know you realize by now collective bargaining is a highly sensitive, complex and emotional topic.

As a lifelong member of this community and a former student of both Weisenberg Elementary and Northwestern Lehigh High School, I am deeply saddened by the amount of misinformation being spread by a few individuals.

It is truly a honor, privilege and great responsibility to serve as an elected member of our school board.  Without any hesitation, I can honestly tell you the members of your board are some of the most caring, dedicated, and passionate individuals I know…and within each of them is a heart of Tiger gold!

Rather than speaking to rumors or email blasts, let me provide you with some information that is appropriate and accurate.

First, the negotiation teams for the school board and the teacher’s association have been working for many months to reach mutually agreeable terms of a new contract.  The teaching staff has been working without a new contract since the previous one ended on June 30, 2009.  Unable to bridge the impasse that exists, the board’s negotiation team initiated the request for the parties to submit to fact finding.  This is an standard procedural element of the collective bargaining process that is outlined in Act 88 of 1992 (Act 88) and the Public Employee Relations Act (PERA) .

The Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board (PLRB), the state assigned agency for this process, appointed the fact finder for this case. The school board had no control, nor input, in the selection of the PLRB’s appointed fact finder.  The board and association presented their positions and documentation at a hearing that was held on November 5, 2009 at the district.

The school board received a copy of the fact finder’s report late in the evening on November 18th during our regularly scheduled meeting.  Upon receipt of this report, both the school board and association had 10 calendar days to take official action on it (either accept or reject it in full only).  It was discussed that additional time would be needed to fully review and analyze the contents and impact of the report within this 10-day deadline of November 28th.

The Board scheduled an extra meeting for November 25th to take official action.  This decision was based on many factors including: allowing additional time for data and statistical analysis, the deadline for required action, public meeting advertising requirements, Board members’ schedules, and the impending holiday.  I assure you, the implication that this date was somehow chosen as “suspect” is totally inaccurate, unfounded and completely unwarranted.

The Board did meet in Executive session prior to the meeting on November 25th.  The vote to support or reject the findings was required to be decided in a “single, non-exclusionary” fashion, despite its vast array of information and compounding complexities.

As  you may know, the Board voted to reject the report on a vote of 6 to 3…and  I did vote to reject  it.  At this time, the PLRB has released the details of the fact finder’s report to the public.  You may view a copy of the report below.

Despite what may be perceived from a “no” vote — I am truly respectful and appreciative of the collaborative roles our entire staff invests in our children and our schools to promote a lifetime of excellence through learning.  And I remain committed and focused to seek a fair and equitable solution for all stakeholders.  Rest assured – every student will always remain close to my head and heart throughout this process.

Thank you for your continued trust and support.

Paul C. Fisher, Jr.