Boxborough School Committee presentation to theBoxborough Board of Selectmen

March 19, 2012

Analysis of Impact of Job Sharing and In-House Reductions

Presentation Includes:• Background on Exploring New

Administrative Models• Job Sharing

Overview Estimated savings Advantages Disadvantages/Changes

• In-House Reductions Overview Estimated savings Advantages Disadvantages /Changes

Background on Exploring New Admin Models• Enrollment at Blanchard has been

declining over the last 3-4 years• Correspondingly, per pupil

expenditures are increasing• BSC concerned that continued

declining enrollment will: Negatively impact educational program

(eliminating too many sections) Result in ever-increasing per-pupil

expenditures and an unsustainable financial model

BSC Took a Proactive Approach to Issues• Short-term Creating a 5-year rolling enrollment projection Eliminating several grade sections Taking in limited choice students to bolster

budget

• Long-term Working with ABRSC to establish Regional

Study Committee to assess Pre-K to 12 regionalization

Examining job sharing with Harvard Assessing in-house reduction options

Job Sharing Overview

• Shares selected jobs across 2 or more school districts

• Typically central office positions shared • Principal is not a shared position• Maintains local school committees but

also establishes a “union” school committee to oversee union positions only

• Requires a vote of the School Committee• Interested towns need to work out a

mutual agreement

Job Sharing Estimated Savings• Share with Harvard with 30% to 33% of

shared positions plus related office space• Includes Superintendent, SPED Director,

Food Service Director, Admin Assistant to SPED Director, Data Support

• Saves $45,900 to $78,500 compared to current structure, depending on positions and allocations

• Saves $137,600 to $170,300 compared to full administrative model

• Differential is $92,000 between models

Job Sharing Advantages

• Opportunity to share costs of system-wide staff positions

• Town maintains full control of school district

Separate school committees for each town Local school committee oversees school

district No cross over of policies, curriculum, etc.• Blanchard would have its own full-time

Principal• Principal oversees hiring of teachers/staff

Job Sharing Disadvantages/Changes• Less face-to-face time with

Superintendent; time with SPED Director is comparable

• Principal becomes the curriculum leader• Requires state approval to dissolve• Does not address declining enrollment

and small class sizes• BSC will likely need to continue to open

Blanchard to choice students to bolster the budget

In-House Reductions Overview

• SC realizes the full administrative model is not financially viable

• If no regionalization or job sharing, in-house reductions would be necessary

• Followed logic if we could decrease central office through job sharing, we could cut in-house

• Models cut Superintendent to 30%, 40% and 50% and SPED Director to 30%

In-House Reductions Estimated Savings• Saves $43,300 to $69,900 compared to

current structure, depending on allocations

• Saves $135,300 to $161,900 compared to full administrative model

• Differential is $92,000 between models

In-House Reductions Advantages

• Town maintains full control of school district, for finances and policies

• No state approvals needed to change• Blanchard would have a full-time Principal• Principal oversees hiring of teachers/staff

In-House Reductions Disadvantages/Changes• Would need to find Superintendent and SPED

Director who are interested in part-time positions; could limit or change pool of applicants

• Less face-to-face time with Superintendent and SPED Director

• Would need staff to be flexible to handle crises• Principal becomes the curriculum leader• Does not address declining enrollment and

small class sizes• BSC will likely need to continue to open

Blanchard to choice students to bolster the budget

Questions?

Regionalization Update

• MGL Chapter 71, Section 14E allows for 5 ways to structure a regional school committee:

(1) electing committee members by voters in member communities with each community’s representation apportioned according to population;

(2) electing members in district-wide elections to be held at the biennial state elections;

(3) electing members with residency requirements in district-wide elections to be held at the biennial state elections;

Regionalization Update

• MGL Chapter 71, Section 14E allows for 5 ways to structure a regional school committee:

(4) weighing the votes of committee members according to the population they represent; and

(5) appointing committee members by locally elected officials such as school board members