Bill H.1079

HOUSE DOCKET, NO. 1119 FILED ON: 1/19/2011

HOUSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . No. 1079

By Ms. Walz of Boston, a petition (accompanied by bill, House, No. 1079) of Martha M. Walz and others relative to school district collaboration and regionalization. Education.

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts

_______________

In the Year Two Thousand Eleven

_______________

An Act relative to school district collaboration and regionalization.

Whereas, The deferred operation of this act would tend to defeat its purpose, which is to improve school district capacity , therefore it is hereby declared to be an emergency law, necessary for the immediate preservation of the public convenience.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives in General Court assembled, and by the authority of the same, as follows:

SECTION 1. The commissioner of elementary and secondary education shall, not more than 60 days after the effective date of this act, commence an expedited review of school districts for which collaboration or regionalization plans have been developed as of the date of enactment of this act. The collaboration or regionalization plan for each district or group of districts shall be reviewed to examine the extent to which proposed strategies for increased collaboration or regionalization result in: (1) increased academic and programmatic quality of the school district(s); (2) increased effectiveness of the central office of the school district(s) in supporting student achievement and the improvement of its schools; (3) increased fiscal viability and efficiency of the school district(s); and (4) stronger sustainability of the school district(s) in future years. The purpose of the review shall be to determine whether the collaboration or regionalization plan for the district(s) is sufficient in such areas.

The commissioner shall concurrently commence a review of school districts with less than 1,000 students to examine: (1) the academic and programmatic quality of the school district; (2) the capacity of the district, including the effectiveness of the central office of the school district, to support high levels of student achievement; (3) the fiscal viability and efficiency of the school district; and (4) the overall sustainability of the school district in future years. The purpose of the review shall be to identify areas of need, if any, in these four areas and determine whether those identified areas of need could be adequately addressed through greater collaboration with another district, an educational collaborative, a city, town, or other entity, or through the regionalization of such school district.

The commissioner shall prioritize for review partial school districts, superintendency unions as defined in section 61 of chapter 71 of the General Laws, and any school district that, in the commissioner’s judgment, warrants immediate review on the basis of exigent concerns related to one or more factors that comprise the review, including academic performance and fiscal viability. The commissioner may also select 2 or more districts for concurrent review if, in the commissioner’s judgment, such concurrent review would promote the purposes of this act.

In reviewing the academic and programmatic quality of the school district, the commissioner shall examine multiple indicators, which shall include the following factors: (1) student performance on the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System; (2) accountability status under state performance measures; (3) accountability status under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, including for the district, individual schools, and subgroups of students; (4) the percentage of teachers licensed in their teaching assignment; (5) attendance and dismissal rates, including increased academic time as evidenced by decreasing the student dismissal rates; (6) student promotion and graduation rates; (7) student discipline, suspension and expulsion rates; (8) the availability and variety of academic classes, including enrichment classes and electives, as applicable; (9) the availability and variety of honors, Advanced Placement, and International Baccalaureate classes, as applicable, and the participation of diverse groups of students in such classes; (10) scheduling flexibility in order to access the available and diverse array of electives and educational options; (11) the availability of extracurricular, arts, and athletic activities for students and the participation of diverse groups of students in such activities; (12) school building capacity and facilities; (13) the quality of school leaders and staff; and (14) possible in-district collaborations between school buildings, including consolidating buildings, programs, school building and central office administration, special education and food service.

In reviewing the effectiveness of the central office of the school district to support high levels of student achievement, the commissioner shall examine multiple indicators, which shall include the following factors: (1) the number of staff members in the central office; (2) the number of such staff members whose primary responsibility involves academic and instructional support for schools, faculty, and students; (3) the extent to which the central office uses data and analysis of such data to tailor effective educational improvement strategies for district schools; (4) the overall provision of services by the district to special populations of students, including, but not limited to, low-income students, English Language Learners, students with special health care needs, and students with disabilities; (5) the provision of targeted programs by the district to address identified areas of academic need in one or more schools; (6) the provision of professional development programs and activities to improve teacher quality; and (7) the extent of inter-district collaborations and partnerships with outside organizations focused on school performance and student academic achievement.

In reviewing the fiscal viability and efficiency of the school district, the commissioner shall examine multiple indicators, which shall include the following factors: (1) the overall budget of the school district; (2) the percentage of such budget expended on instructional purposes; (3) the percentage of such budget expended on non-instructional or operational purposes; (4) the extent of inter-district collaborations, arrangements with educational collaboratives, or partnerships with cities or towns for the purpose of generating economic efficiencies; and (5) in-district collaboration between school buildings, programs, services and administration.

In reviewing the overall sustainability of the school district in future years, the commissioner shall examine multiple indicators, which shall include the following factors: (1) school enrollment data for the district and individual schools, including enrollment projections; (2) population data for the city or town served by the district, including population projections; (3) demographic data for the district and the city or town served by the district, including data related to the number of school-aged children; (4) income data for the city or town served by the district; (5) school building capacity and facilities; and (6) the experience of the district and the city or town served by the district in efficiently and effectively securing budget agreements from year to year.

In conducting any review or concurrent review, the commissioner shall provide ample opportunity for a district or districts to present data or evidence that, in the judgment of the district, is relevant to the review. At the request of the district, the commissioner shall make any and all data or evidence being used in the review available to the district or districts under review. At the request of the commissioner, the district or districts under review shall make all existing data or evidence reasonably needed to conduct the review available to the commissioner.

SECTION 2. Not later than 60 days after commencing a review, a concurrent review, or an expedited review, the commissioner shall publicly release a report containing detailed findings of the review. The commissioner shall, on the basis of one or more such findings and the model approaches recommended by the commission established by section 72 of chapter 188 of the Acts of 2010, recommend options for the district, including but not limited to: (1) collaborate with one or more districts, an educational collaborative, a city, town, or other entity to address one or more areas of need identified in the review, (2) form a regional school district to address one or more areas of need identified in the review, or (3) continue to operate with no changes in its level of collaboration or governance structure.

A district or districts shall, within 60 days of receiving recommendations from the commissioner, submit a report to the commissioner that shall identify which, if any, option will be pursued by the district or districts. If a district declines to pursue the commissioner’s recommendations, it shall submit a detailed report to the commissioner explaining why his recommendations have been rejected. If a district agrees to pursue one or more of the commissioner’s recommendations, said report shall also include specific strategies that will be implemented by the district or districts. If a district pursues regionalization, the commissioner shall grant reasonable requests by the district to submit said report more than 60 days after receiving the recommendations from the commissioner.

In the case of a recommendation for increased collaboration, the report shall include, but not be limited to: (1) identification of partners and strategies for engaging those partners in increased collaboration, (2) programs and services that will be affected by increased collaboration, (3) a description of how the aforementioned programs and services will be administered more effectively or efficiently due to increased collaboration, and (4) how increased collaboration will improve the overall capacity, academic performance, and fiscal viability and sustainability of the district or districts.

In the case of a recommendation for regionalization, the report shall identify the district or districts plan that includes, but is not limited to: (1) the geographical characteristics of the new district; (2) an inventory of all academic and programmatic offerings in the new district; (3) an inventory of all educational facilities, and the anticipated plan for such facilities; (4) the

administrative structure of the new district; (5) a plan for merging the school district central office buildings, staff, and operational systems of the applicable districts into the new district; (6) a plan for commencing collective bargaining negotiations for the new district; (7) a plan for merging debt obligations of the applicable districts into the new district; (8) a proposed budget for the new district; (9) a student transportation plan and budget for the new district; (10) an expenditure plan related to transition costs in establishing the new district; and (11) an assurance that the new district will comply with all applicable federal and state laws.

The commissioner shall assess district reports based on the likelihood of their success in addressing the areas of need included in the commissioner’s review of the applicable districts, and shall provide written agreement with the report or propose amendments to such report within 30 days.

The school committee or committees may modify its plan for increased collaboration or regionalization prior to approving it. In such cases, the committee or committees shall provide the commissioner with a detailed statement explaining why the modifications are necessary for success in addressing the areas of need identified in the commissioner’s review and subsequent report. In such cases, the district or districts shall amend its plan according to the school committee or committees’ statement.

The final plan shall be submitted to the local school committee or committees for approval. If the plan proposes the creation of a regional school district, the towns that would become members of such district shall conduct a vote pursuant to section 15 of chapter 71 of the General Laws.

SECTON 3. Within 60 days of approval of the collaboration or regionalization plan as described in section 2, districts shall submit to the commissioner a detailed implementation plan.

Name:	District/Address:	Date Added:
Martha M. Walz	8th Suffolk	1/19/2011
Geraldo Alicea	6th Worcester	2/4/2011
Denise Andrews	2nd Franklin	2/4/2011
Jennifer E. Benson	37th Middlesex	1/25/2011
Jennifer L. Flanagan		2/1/2011