Fulton County GA Autonomy Framework

School Autonomy Guidebook 2013-2014

FINAL VERSION September 2013

BOARD OF EDUCATION Linda Schultz, President

Linda McCain, Vice President Julia C. Bernath • Linda P. Bryant • Gail Dean

Catherine Maddox • Katie Reeves

Robert M. Avossa, Ed.D., Superintendent

September 2013 Dear Fulton Parents, Staff, and Community, As Georgia’s largest Charter System, Fulton County Schools is on an exciting journey to create learning environments where student achievement increases and innovation thrives. This is our opportunity to re-imagine education in new and forward-thinking ways. The path to developing truly innovative and effective schools relies on one thing – increasing local school autonomy. We fully believe in a system where schools take more ownership of decision-making and assume appropriate levels of accountability for results. School communities will play an instrumental role as we align our work with individual school needs. You have an incredible opportunity to become the architect of your school’s success. However, we first need to think differently about everything – how we operate, how we engage with our communities, and how we make decisions. The Charter System model is a new framework for school support. It’s one where local school leaders, School Governance Councils, and central office departments will work together to positively impact student achievement. It is a change from “business as usual.” That’s why it’s important to begin by clarifying expectations and establishing strong guidance with clear direction. This School Autonomy Guidebook is a tool we’ll use to meet the ambitious goals and commitments of the district’s Strategic Plan 2017: Building Our Future. The guidebook will be updated annually to provide clarity, reflect new ideas, and address continuing opportunities that arise throughout the Charter System’s evolving implementation. Thank you for joining us on this journey and for your continued support. Robert M. Avossa, Ed.D. Superintendent

Table of Contents

Introduction – The Path to Innovative Schools ................................................. 4

1. Why Is Local School Autonomy Important? ................................................. 5

2. How Will the Parameters of Autonomy Be Determined? ............................ 6

Part I. Fulton Guiding Principles – Holding “Tight” ............................................... 7

Part II. Fulton Guiding Principles – Letting “Loose”.............................................. 8

Part III. Illustrative Examples of Guiding Principles in Practice........................... 9

3. How Will Schools Determine Which Flexibilities they Should Pursue? ...... 17

Part I. School Strategic Plans (SSPs) ..................................................................... 17

Part II. Earned Requests for Flexibility (RFFs) ....................................................... 18

Part III. Requests for Flexibility Timeline ................................................................ 18

Part IV. Initiating Change within the Charter System ....................................... 19

Conclusion ........................................................................................................ 20

School Autonomy Guidebook 2013-2014 | of 20

Introduction – The Path to Innovative Schools

Fulton County Schools’ mission is to educate every student to be a responsible, productive

citizen. As Georgia’s largest Charter System1 the district now has an unprecedented level of

freedom and flexibility to meet the diverse needs of students across the district, educate

children to meet their full potential, and direct continued operational improvements and

efficiency system-wide.

This flexibility also includes a deliberate shift in the district’s approach to decision-making

authority, encouraging more autonomy at the local school level where student needs are

best met. Each of these elements, working in concert, will ensure every Fulton student

graduates from high school on time and is supremely prepared for college and career.

The aim of this document is to present a purposeful path to innovative schools across the

district. We must think differently about how the district operates in order to achieve the

bold vision outlined in Fulton’s Charter System contract and five-year Strategic Plan 2017:

Building Our Future. In order to successfully achieve these goals, principals, School

Governance Councils, district department leaders and staff require clear, specific guidance

that:

1. Clarifies the parameters of local school autonomy for school principals and School

Governance Councils, as well as central office departments and leaders that support

schools;

2. Demonstrates how the district will be consistent in the treatment of new ideas and

proposed innovations; and

3. Publicizes and standardizes currently available areas of flexibility.

The following pages describe Fulton’s path to innovative schools in three steps as highlighted

in Figure 1.

Figure 1 – Path to Innovative Schools

1 As of August 12, 2013.


1. Why Is Local School Autonomy Important? The district’s five-year strategic plan prescribes a Fulton County Schools system that is more

agile and responsive to the needs of each student and school. Significant challenges exist

today that make the road to achieve this vision difficult, including:

The graduation rate across Fulton is too low;

Budget cuts have become the new normal; and

Our schools are being asked to do more (Common Core/Georgia Performance

Standards) with limited budgets.

We believe that increased local school decision-making promotes and supports the creation

of new ideas and energies that can offset these challenges. There is untapped innovation

and excellence in our schools and communities that can be released with shared

governance and flexible systems. Increasing the level of autonomy at the local school level

is important for three specific reasons.

REASON #1: Recognizes Fulton’s Diversity. Increasing local school decision-making autonomy

is a key lever in district reforms to improve student achievement because it:

Recognizes Fulton’s Diversity: The district is made up of 95,000 students and 100

schools with vast socioeconomic, preparation, language, and interest diversity;

Shifts Decisions Closer to Kids: Decentralizing authority empowers community

engagement; and

Supports the FCS Learning Community Model: School communities are best

positioned to develop unique solutions for their students.

REASON #2: Integral to our Charter System Contract. Fulton County Schools’ five-year

Charter System contract with the Georgia Department of Education (GaDOE) reflects the

expressed desires of our community to strengthen local community involvement and

encourage more local decision-making.

REASON #3: Provides Increased Flexibility for Principals. Shifting the locus of decision-making

greatly empowers district principals and School Governance Councils to make decisions that

align with their level of responsibility and accountability for meeting the diverse needs of all

of their students.


2. How Will the Parameters of Autonomy Be Determined? While many decisions are best made at the local level, there are other decisions that best

remain with the Board of Education and Superintendent as foundations of the district’s

governance and management structure. This belief is consistent with the idea that, as a

Charter System, Fulton is not a collection of individual charter schools but a system of schools

working together, where the Board of Education and Superintendent have ultimate

accountability and responsibility for student achievement outcomes.

Fulton County Schools’ local school autonomy philosophy is grounded by seven guiding

principles that reflect the district’s Charter System governance framework. The district has

developed these guiding principles to address ideas and proposed innovations by local

schools and central office departments through a consistent lens as they are generated.

There are already numerous areas in which schools enjoy the autonomy and flexibility to

make local decisions, including determining local staffing; using dedicated funds to staff

additional positions, equipment, or resources; the inclusion of more discretionary allocated

funds as a percentage of the overall school budget; flexibility in how to manage custodial

services; and others. This framework also seeks to highlight these areas so they are

consistently applied across all district schools.

Before we discuss the guiding principles in more detail, let’s consider some basic definitions.

Holding a service “tight” means that the district would determine how a service

is provided and the intention is for it to be provided in the same way across

schools.

Letting something “loose“ means that the school can determine how a service is

provided and hence substantial variation is expected across Fulton County

Schools.

It is the guiding principles that will determine the appropriate place and level for decisions.

We have used the following theoretical examples to help illustrate how these guiding

principles will be applied.


Part I. Fulton Guiding Principles – Holding “Tight” Table 1 explains four (4) guiding principles for the relatively few areas where the district has

determined decisions would be best made at the central office or system level.

Table 1 – “Tight” Guiding Principles

It is important that some aspects of district operations be as consistent as possible for some

key reasons, including:

1. Minimizing district and personal legal and financial risk, 2. Protecting student safety, 3. Preserving equity and federal compliance standards.

Additionally, maintaining tighter oversight of the specific areas listed in Table 1 at the district

level should minimize non-value add work and additional management responsibilities for

principals and reduce potential distractions.

Central office departments and staff are committed to continuously improving district

processes to ensure system-wide supports meet and exceed local school needs. This should


free up our principals and School Governance Councils to consider a spectrum of ideas that

can lead to sustained improvements within their school classrooms and communities.

Part II. Fulton Guiding Principles – Letting “Loose” Table 2 presents three (3) guiding principles the district will use to determine whether

proposed ideas and innovations in these areas would be open to consideration for local

schools to pursue. Ideas would then be judged by their merit and cohesiveness of the

approach to solving a particular opportunity area for improvement within the school.

Table 2 – “Loose” Guiding Principles

Shifting many aspects of decision-making authority away from central management to local

schools represents a dramatic change in philosophy as Fulton County Schools embarks upon

a fundamentally new framework of school support. The district envisions that, over time,

boundless opportunities for innovations will organically develop through the increased

community engagement that School Governance Councils will generate. Evaluating these

ideas through these seven (7) guiding principles in Table 1 and Table 2 will ensure a

consistent approach and drive increased flexibility and creativity from local schools and their

supporting central office departments.


Part III. Illustrative Examples of Guiding Principles in Practice

District staff has spent considerable time this year with principals and system leaders to

gauge specific ideas for thinking differently about how Fulton County Schools operates.

The following should not be considered an exhaustive list of what is possible through

increased local school autonomy and the potential of the district’s Charter System

designation. These real concepts, arranged by strategic plan focus areas, were selected to

illustrate and clarify how the district will approach similar ideas as we advance local school

autonomy across the district. In some cases, a ‘tight’ example was included to underscore

the difference between what we describe as ‘tight’ or ‘loose.’ It may be noteworthy to

consider the level of flexibility already currently available to local schools. Proposals beyond

areas of existing flexibilities may require a specific Request for Flexibility (RFF), which is defined

in more detail in Section 3 of this document beginning on page 17.

Each fall, the district plans to release additional guidance to clarify questions and issues that

surfaced throughout the prior school year, so the outcomes and approach are standardized

and transparent.

Instruction Technology Seat time and Class size Selecting Technology Tools to Aid Instruction Developing New Courses Selecting Instructional Resources Effective Schools Adjustments to School Day, Times, or Schedules

Transportation Scheduling and Supplemental Services

Additional Graduation Requirements

Selection of Custodial and other Support Services

People Developing Staffing and Hiring Priorities Resources Setting Budget Priorities School-Based Fundraising and Use of Funds


Focus Area: Instruction

General Idea

Desired Flexibilities or Innovations

Tight or Loose

Currently Available or Requires RFF

Guiding Principle

Seat Time/Class Size

Creating ‘seminar-style’ courses at HS level

Increasing PE class size

Loose Requires an RFF Key Innovation

Description Schools could consider quarter-long or other varying length courses, especially for electives. To prepare students for college rigor, courses could be designed as seminar courses and add additional flexibility to school master schedules.

Potential Implications

What affect would additional courses have on the school’s master schedule? Schools would need to work with Learning & Teaching to ensure that new courses are aligned to existing FCS standards, and partner with Assessment & Evaluation to develop student learning objectives (SLO’s) for the course. There may also be staffing considerations for PE that need to be addressed with Talent.

Developing New Courses

Creating additional electives or variations to core subjects

Loose Currently Available Central to School Strategy

Key Innovation

Description Schools could propose additions to their local school catalog of courses based on student demand.


Schools would need to work with Learning & Teaching and Assessment & Evaluation to develop SLO’s for any new courses. Professional Learning & Development would need a strong preparation program in place for non-traditional teachers and an ability to plan ahead with Talent to source talent with subject matter content mastery.

Selecting Instructional Resources

Deciding what resources to use for subjects without textbooks

Selecting adopted textbooks

Determining use of traditional or digital resources

Loose Currently Available Key Innovation

Description Schools may consider the most effective instructional resources for particular courses, select from an approved list of adopted textbooks, or determine whether digital media or traditional textbooks best present instructional material for students.


Schools would have to work with Learning & Teaching to ensure chosen resources support Board-approved curriculum and meet applicable standards. The type of resource selected could affect the local school’s ability to take advantage of other district-wide initiatives, given the system’s established strategic direction toward digital tools and resources.


Focus Area: Instruction (continued)

General Idea


Tight or Loose


Guiding Principle

Adjustments to School Day, Times, or Schedules

Extended school day for specific, targeted programs or students

Extended school year

Saturday school


Key Innovation

Description Schools could choose to extend their school day to provide targeted programs for students, hold Saturday classes to increase instructional time, or develop master schedule variations to create more time for supplemental student supports or counseling services.


Transportation Services operates a multi-tier system to ensure efficiency in base morning and afternoon services. Schools may consider repurposing existing extended day services. Schools will need to consider costs associated with expanding the base transportation system as well as how the school would deliver all other building support services necessary to operate the building. District Transportation and Facilities Services teams would provide cost estimates for requested services to schools to support well-informed budgeting decisions that balance operational feasibility and costs and instructional outcomes.

Additional Graduation Requirements

Students better prepared for college, career, and to be world citizens through additional required experiences in high school


Description Based on community and student demand, schools could set additional graduation requirements beyond current requirements. This could include community service requirements, a prescribed number of completed online courses, or other potential academic or enrichment-type activities for students.


Schools would have to consider and mitigate impacts to higher mobility students and how the additional requirements could affect these students. How would the school provide equitable access for all students to meet these requirements?


Focus Area: Instruction (continued)

General Idea


Tight or Loose


Guiding Principle

Continuous Achievement

“Opt-out” of continuous achievement philosophy

Tight N/A Key District Strategy

Description Continuous Achievement is the district’s instructional philosophy to ensure students are challenged according to their ability and learning level. Individual schools cannot deviate substantially from this key district strategy.


Implementing additional programs (e.g. International Baccalaureate, Cambridge, College Board) would require a thorough review by the Board of Education and Superintendent to ensure aspects of the program do not fall outside the district’s broad Continuous Achievement philosophy.

Individual School Balanced Assessments

Determine own standards for student mastery

Tight N/A Expertise

Description While schools may want to develop their own assessments or determine how students can demonstrate standards mastery, this would lead to significant inconsistencies across the district.


The district’s balanced assessment program must be followed so a consistent measure of student performance is possible. Local school staff may not have expertise in writing or evaluating assessments for their effectiveness.

Examples for illustration purposes only


Focus Area: People

General Idea


Tight or Loose


Guiding Principle

Developing Staffing and Hiring Priorities

Staff positions are utilized to meet local school and student needs


Description Schools may prioritize specific experiences, credentials, or certifications in the hiring of staff in accordance with consistent district policies. For example, a school may consider Talented and Gifted (TAG) credentials as a key criterion during teacher and staff interviews, with the goal of increasing the overall level of instruction in all classrooms, to meet an identified local school need.


Schools would have to consider with Talent the impact of such preferences on existing employees. How would local school funds be determined and directed to train staff currently without the prioritized ‘credential’? Is Academics in agreement with the local school that the preference is likely to improve student achievement?

Compensation Reforms

Schools use new budget flexibilities to build differentiated compensation plans for teachers or staff

Tight N/A Key District Strategy

Description Inconsistent compensation levels at the local school level destabilize the district’s management of its talent and human capital. The district’s compensation reform initiative will design new structures that effectively compensate employees fairly and incent high performance across all districts.


Bidding for talent between schools can create significant legal risk for the district, has severe implications for employee morale, and impacts the sustainability of the local school staffing budget.



Focus Area: Technology

General Idea


Tight or Loose


Guiding Principle

Selecting Technology Tools to Aid Instruction

Variations of BYOD programs or Student Tablets


Key Innovation

Description Effective use of technology tools can aid schools in personalizing their instructional programs to meet individual student needs. This is a key district strategy, however, flexibility parameters or approved device lists may be developed that support sound district technology infrastructure management and drive cost efficiencies.


Schools would need to consider the funding sustainability of the selected tools with Finance & Budget, gain agreement with Learning & Teaching and Instructional Technology that the tool supports the district’s instructional philosophy, and partner with Information Technology to work through network capacity and maintenance requirements.



Focus Area: Effective Schools

General Idea


Tight or Loose


Guiding Principle

Selection of Custodial and other Building Support Services

An array of options to meet custodial and other building services needs

Loose Currently Available

Close to Students

Description Schools could determine levels of spending and approaches to custodial services, school resource deployments, and other building-specific services as these items are local options. The district would provide guidance and processes to limit management time for instructional leaders where appropriate.


Legal issues would be mitigated through a close relationship with Contracting. A consistent quality of service is more likely by closely following guidance from Facilities Services.

Transportation Scheduling and Selection of Supplemental Services

Varying school start or end bell schedules or extended hours for the entire school

Tight N/A Economies of Scale

Description A multi-tier transportation system maximizes district-wide efficiency and ensures school resources remain in the classroom. Per current Board policy bell time is determined by Transportation Services as school start and end times are critical variables to ensuring the efficient use of a multi-tier system. Bell times can be a key lever to increase instructional time or extracurricular learning opportunities for students. At this time, changing bell times is not possible without additional cost implications. If schools wish to consider changes to the base morning and afternoon service, critical trade-offs in local school budget decisions would be necessary to fund the additional service levels. Cost estimates and operational implications would be evaluated by Transportation Services. Once complete clusters, feeder patterns, and Learning Communities are transitioned into the Charter System framework, schools may potentially be able to work collectively to add time to the day among all schools within their transportation system with less impact to overall school system budgets. Additional services such as extended days or Saturday school for targeted students remain currently available. Schools may use existing transportation services for extended day or may reallocate the funding for these services as noted in an earlier example in this document.


Poorly aligned transportation services would likely impact state funding formulas significantly as well as the services provided to partner feeder schools within each Learning Community. Schools would need to work closely with Finance & Budget and Transportation Services to determine available local school funds, understand the additional costs of selected supplemental transportation services, and the district’s capability to provide the service.



Focus Area: Resources

General Idea


Tight or Loose


Guiding Principle

Setting School Budget Priorities

Allocating school budget funds to priority areas


Description Schools are receiving more of their budgets in real dollars, which increases the discretion schools have in determining how to spend their funds. Funds related to positions or programs that may not be central to the school’s mission or strategy could potentially be better utilized in other areas.


Alignment with Finance & Budget keeps an appropriate level of focus on sustainability and more obscure compliance issues that the district manages centrally.

School-Based Fundraising and Use of Funds

Fund new or incremental staff positions, programs, or activities


Key Innovation

Description Many schools have robust fundraising operations to support school activities. There are broad implications for how these funds are used and how these decisions impact related district operations. This is more of a policy and procedure concern than a true innovation. Schools cannot use funds derived from fundraising sources to purchase positions (i.e., people); these funds may only be allocated for resources (i.e., things).


A school would need to work closely with Finance & Budget to structure such positions or programs on a consistent expectation of funding, likely develop a longer-range model for the position with Talent to ensure consistency, or “end-date” the position or resource during each annual budget cycle.

Use of Federal and Grant Program Funds

Designating more of school budget funds to specific initiatives or priorities

Tight N/A Compliance

Expertise

Description and Potential Implications

Material variances in the use of Federal and Grant funds (e.g. Title I, Special Education) could put other district funding sources at risk, as well as increase the district’s legal exposure. Any decisions regarding these areas must be made at the district level.

Contracting and Records Management Flexibility

Schools enter into their own agreements outside of district guidance and processes

Tight N/A Compliance

Expertise

Description and Potential Implications

Variability in how local schools enter into contractual arrangements could create significant legal liability risk for the district and the local school. Central office staff have key expertise in this area that principals and school staff may not.



3. How Will Schools Determine Which Flexibilities they Should Pursue?

Now that we have established the district’s guiding principles that frame what schools can

and cannot do in this environment with greater local school autonomy, it is important to

recall the primary rationale for pursuing Charter System status was to dramatically improve

student performance through greater freedoms and flexibility with accountability.

Just because a school can pursue an idea or innovation, there is a necessary next step to

determine whether it is an appropriate strategy for a particular school. Principals and School

Governance Councils would still need to build a solid case for how a particular proposal

would meet their school’s identified need, and, more importantly, how the idea or concept

would drive sustainable improvements in student achievement.

This determination will be achieved through developing strong School Strategic Plans (SSPs)

and a consistent Request for Flexibility (RFF) evaluation process.

KEY POINT: There is a difference between wishing to change a specific district policy or

process, and developing new, research-based ideas to address student or staff opportunity

areas within a school and community.

Part I. School Strategic Plans (SSPs)

The School Strategic Plan (SSP) process provides a logical course for Principals, School

Leadership Teams and School Governance Councils to determine school needs and

corresponding long-term outcomes. Through the strategic planning process, schools will likely

develop creative approaches to help them realize their goals. Some of these innovations

and ideas will fall within the school’s existing scope of authority, while others may require

waivers from district or state policy or law. To request a waiver from a state or district law or

policy, a school must submit an Earned Request for Flexibility (RFF) proposal to the district.2

2 Note the distinction between Earned Requests for Flexibility and Universal Requests for Flexibility (which do not require waiving of a law or policy nor district review). Universal Requests for Flexibility are currently limited to initiatives such as student uniforms and parent involvement requirements. For more information on Universal Requests for Flexibility, see http://portal.fultonschools.org/CharterSystem/Documents/SGC%20Guidance%20Documents.pdf.


http://portal.fultonschools.org/CharterSystem/Documents/SGC%20Guidance%20Documents.pdf

Part II. Earned Requests for Flexibility (RFFs)

Requests for Flexibility (RFFs) give schools, their stakeholders, and, where applicable, district

administrators the opportunity to assess the feasibility and merit of proposed ideas or

innovations.

The Earned RFF proposal builds off the school’s strategic plan and addresses critical factors

including, but not limited to:

A well thought-out action plan;

Evidence of sufficient research or an indication of the likelihood of success;

A discussion of the potential implications for personnel, operations, schedule, etc.;

and

Budget implications and forecasted resource needs.

The Earned RFF proposal process includes a 30-day public comment period, a School

Governance Council vote, and a district review and approval phase. All Earned RFFs must

be approved by a 2/3 majority vote of the School Governance Council and the

Superintendent in order to be implemented.

Part III. Requests for Flexibility Timeline

Figure 2 presents an overview of the Earned RFF proposal process and timeline for

submissions that Cohort 1 schools will follow during the 2013-2014 school year. 3 A detailed

Earned RFF template, instructions and due dates will be available on the Charter System

website (www.fultonschools.org/CharterSystem) in September 2013.

3 The milestones and deliverables shown on the timeline in this document will also apply to upcoming Cohort 2 and 3 schools and School Governance Councils as they join the Charter System in future years. Note that this timeline may be revised in the future.


http://www.fultonschools.org/CharterSystem

Figure 2 – “Earned” Request for Flexibility (RFF) Timeline [2013-2014 School Year]

Part IV. Initiating Change within the Charter System While school leaders are empowered to implement many changes at their schools without

undergoing the processes described in this section, the system strongly encourages school

leaders to solicit feedback early and often from members of the school community before

implementing significant changes in school policy or practice.

Fulton’s new shared governance structure provides a unique opportunity for school leaders

to get valuable feedback from representative voices within their school communities, gauge

support for proposed ideas or innovations, and quell possible areas of concern before

enacting major changes.

School leaders are expected to work closely with their School Governance Councils and

Governance and Flexibility Facilitators when deciding whether and how to implement new

strategic efforts within their schools.


Conclusion The Fulton County Schools Board of Education fully believes that unleashing the innovative

energies of local school leaders and communities, through the increased ownership in

decision-making that our Charter System status provides, will drive tremendous gains in

student achievement and be a model for reform across the nation.

This document is just one example of the support and guidance the district will continue to

provide to encourage thinking differently about how we operate, and prioritize actions that

improve student outcomes system-wide.

Additional resources and information will be frequently updated at the following websites.

Charter System Website

www.fultonschools.org/CharterSystem

Strategic Plan 2017: Building Our Future Website

www.fultonschools.org/StrategicPlan2017

BOARD OF EDUCATION Linda Schultz, President

Linda McCain, Vice President Julia C. Bernath • Linda P. Bryant • Gail Dean

Catherine Maddox • Katie Reeves

Robert M. Avossa, Ed.D., Superintendent


http://www.fultonschools.org/CharterSystem

http://www.fultonschools.org/StrategicPlan2017

Overview of Fulton County’s Charter System

Fulton County SchoolsSeptember, 2013

1

District profile• Physically bisected by Atlanta Public Schools

– More than 70 miles between northern and southern most points

– Comprised of 13 cities

• Fourth largest school district in GA– Over 95,000 students – 100 schools

• 6,800 certified teachers• Diverse student population

– A majority minority District– 45% free and reduced lunch– 6% English language learners– 10% special ed./needs

2DRAFT

Building our Future 2017

3

Fulton County Schools envisions a system that is agile and responsive to the needs of

each student…BUT:

• The graduation rate across Fulton is too low

• Budget cuts have become the new normal

• Our schools need to learn to do more (Common Core/Georgia Performance Standards/PARCC) with no additional funds

Our Theory of Action: Local Decision Making Promotes InnovationThere is untapped innovation and excellence in our schools

and communities that can be released with shared governance and flexible systems.

4

Local School Decision Making Autonomy is Key

• Recognize Diversity: 95,000 unique kids – Vast diversity in socioeconomic, preparation, languages, interests, etc.

• Decision Closer to Kids: Decentralizing authority empowers community engagement

• Supports Learning Community Model: Schools communities are best positioned to develop unique solutions for their students

Fulton Charter System Basics

What it IS…• One unified system where Superintendent

is accountable for student achievement

• Existing attendance boundaries policy

• A systemwide, consistent curriculum with potential flexibility based on community interest

• Existing funding formula per school with potential flexibilities within each school

• All employees hired and managed by the system with a system salary schedule.

What it IS NOT…• A collection of individual charter schools

with dissimilar accountabilities

• New attendance lotteries or special enrollment requirements

• A set of “theme” oriented schools with very different standards

• Different funding allocations for individual schools

• Employees hired by the charter school with salaries set by the school.

5

Cohort 1 Schools: 20 Early Adopters• Non‐startup charter schools will

transition to the School Governance Council model over the next three years

• In Spring 2012, we asked principals to determine which cohort (1,2 or 3) to join– Intentionally made this a self‐

selecting process– End result: 20 schools with strong

representation of all school levels (ES, MS, and HS), Learning Communities and Title I schools in Cohort 1 6

Northeast ‐ 4

Level

High ‐ 5Learning Community

Profile of Cohort One Schools

Northwest ‐ 5Central ‐ 5South ‐ 6

Middle ‐ 4Elementary ‐ 11

School Governance Councils responsible for strategic direction of school

7

• Approve the school strategic plan

• Approve the annual budget recommendations

• Request flexibility from the District for innovation

• Participate in hiring of the Principal, when vacant

• Provide annual feedback on Principal performance

• 3 parents/guardians elected by parents/guardians with children enrolled at the school

• 2 teachers elected by the school employees• 2 school‐based employees appointed by the Principal• 2 community members nominated by the Principal & approved by the SGC members

• Principal (non‐voting)• For high schools: 2 students (non‐voting)

8

School Governance Councils have school and community representation

9

Candidate Guide

Candidate posters displayed in school

Advertisement for Candidate “Meet and Greet”

Metrics of Success

• No “empty” seats

• 220 candidates for 95 slots

• 3,015 total voters

• 60% employee turnout

Cohort 1 elections administered centrally

Online elections tool

GOTV stickers

Training is Essential to the Transition

Fulton Leadership and Innovation Academy• Ensure good governance

• Establish common understanding of data and school finance

• Provide problem‐solving and decision analysis tools

• Ensure principal has sufficient support

10

Training Modules

1. Strategic School Design

2. Decision Analysis

3. Governance Overview

4. Strategic planning Processes

5. Problem Analysis

6. Executive Leadership Skills

7. Executive Coaching

8. School Finance

9. Requests for Flexibility

11

Strategic Planning Model

Step 1

• Environmental Scan• Organizational Assessment

Step 2• Analyze Implications

Step 3• Define Long‐term Outcomes

Step 4• Develop Theory of Change: Focus Areas and Objectives

Step 5• Define Measures and Targets

Step 6• Develop Strategic Initiatives

Step 7• Create Action Plans

Step 8• Assess Ongoing Work

Step 9• Develop Monitoring Plan

PHAS

E 1

PHAS

E2

PHAS

E 3

April to July

July

July

August

September

September

October/November

October/November

November/December

Inform

ation &

Needs Analysis

Outcomes & The

ory of Change

Actio

n Plan

&

Mon

itorin

g

The district has defined two types of School Flexibility Options

12

Universal Flexibility

Earned Flexibility

• Establish parent involvement requirements

• Implement dress codes for students

• Create Professional development focus aligned with school strategic plan.

• Create credit‐bearing internships, apprenticeships and other real‐world experiences aligned with students’ career and academic interests.

• Develop additional courses or partner with universities to allow students to excel beyond a traditional high school curriculum by relaxing seat time requirements

• Use qualified professionals, in addition to certified teachers, to teach applications of science and math

The Seed Fund Supports InnovationIn Spring 2013, the legislature appropriated $7.8M to Fulton County to support the Charter System, with an expectation of a $4m annual allocation

13

Fulton County Approach• Hold separate from general

fund• Inspire creative thinking

from School Governance Councils

• Demonstrate to the State that these funds are invested responsibly

“Funds appropriated pursuant to this Code section shall be used…to advance student achievement goals and school level governance training objectives pursuant to the charter.“

Title 20 ‐ §20‐2‐165.1

Tools will build idea‐generating capacity

Knowledge Management System• Share best

practices

• Document local innovations

• Catalogue use and outcomes of new ideas nationwide

14

What We’ve Learned• Inclusiveness is difficult but necessary

• Clearly defining roles, rationale, and specific outcomes is critical – Sweat the small stuff

• Work with early adopters first who are best suited to accommodate the uncertainty

• Board support is absolutely essential15

The Fulton Charter System Website has been a valuable resource for our community

16

www.fultonschools.org/CharterSystem

• Cohort 1 Implementation materials, tools, and guidance

• Responses to Commonly Asked Charter System Questions

• All Presentations and related documents

• Charter System Application2012 GSPRA “Gold Award”

Winner

Fulton County GA Autonomy Framework

Education

Transcript of Fulton County GA Autonomy Framework