GUIDE FOR

SCHOOL BUDGET

CONSULTATION

U N I T E D F E D E R A T I O N O F T E A C H E R S

INTRODUCTION UFT members have the right, under the union contract, to have input in their school’s budget. The union’s priority is the classroom and core services that support the classroom, and having a voice in school budget choices is a critical way to support that priority. Now more than ever it’s important for chapters to exercise this right because of the confluence of two factors: principal empowerment has given principals greater control over spending decisions than in the past while the economic crisis has created a restrictive budgetary climate. This means that decisions about how to allocate scarce resources are more critical and potentially far-reaching than in more flush times. As frontline educators UFT members can bring crucial insights to budget decisions that can help maximize the impact of spending choices, minimize the impact of cuts and keep the focus on the classroom. The union has put together this guide to help you engage in your school’s budgeting process. Budgets can seem intimidating but the concrete tools and explanations here can demystify them for you. Budgets are really a blueprint to the school’s values—budgets make choices about what is more important and what is less important. It’s crucial that our voices and our values are part of what determine our schools’ budgets. THE RIGHT TO INPUT ON THE BUDGET Under Article 8C of our union contract, the chapter chair along with the chapter consultation committee have a right to review as well as to provide input into spending decisions. The contract states:

Before the end of June and by the opening of school in September, to involve faculties and foster openness about the use of resources, the principal shall meet with the chapter leader and UFT chapter committee to discuss, explain and seek input on the use of the school allocations. As soon as they are available, copies of the school allocations will be provided to the chapter leader and UFT chapter committee. Any budgetary modifications regarding the use of the school allocations shall be discussed by the principal and chapter committee. The Board shall utilize its best efforts to develop the capacity to include, in school allocations provided pursuant to this Article 8C, the specific extracurricular activities budgeted by each school.

AVAILABLE BUDGET INFORMATION There is a great deal of budget information available publicly. Chapter leaders, working with their chapter committees and their school’s leadership team members, can use the budget information that the DOE posts as a basis for discussing priorities and programs for this school year. The DOE posts the Galaxy Budget Allocations chart as well as the School Budget

Summary for each school on the school’s website under Statistics (see Appendix A for step-by-step directions). The Galaxy Budget Allocations chart lists the allocation categories and the amount allocated. Some of the funding amounts may change over the course of the year, especially if there are changes in student enrollment. The DOE will also post these changes in the Galaxy Budget Allocations chart. Have someone from the consultation committee regularly check it to see if any new allocations are given to the school. The School Budget Summary summarizes how the principal has scheduled the allocated funds. The School Budget Summary can change on a daily basis if the principal moves scheduled funds from one category to another. This is also something that should be checked regularly. For more detailed information, Chapter leaders should request the Galaxy Table of Organization from the principal. All funds allocated to schools and scheduled to be spent by schools are reflected in the Galaxy Table of Organization. The School Budget Summary is the summary of the Galaxy Table of Organization. Unlike the School Budget Summary, the Galaxy Table of Organization lists every full-time staff member working in the school and their associated budget amounts along with the allocation source, as well as the amounts budgeted for per session, broken down by allocation source, per diem costs and for Other than Personnel Services, or OTPS (such as supplies, equipments and books). See Appendices B, C and D for examples of a Galaxy Budget Allocations, School Budget Summary and Galaxy Table of Organization. GUIDELINES FOR CONSULTATION Tax levy allocations are the greatest portion of the allocations a school receives. This allocation is extremely flexible and can be used for any part of the school’s budget: personnel (the greatest part of any school’s budget) per diem costs, per session, and OTPS (Other than Personnel Services). Schools receive other allocations (called reimbursable allocations) such as Contract for Excellence, Title I, Early Grade Class Size Reduction (EGCSR), Attendance and Drop Out Prevention (AIDP), New York State Textbook Law (NYSTYL). There are allocation memoranda (found on the DOE website at http://schools.nyc.gov/Offices/DBOR/default.htm) that explain how to use each of these allocations (see Appendices E-I for samples). Chapter leaders and chapter committees should have input into their use. One thing that’s important to realize when thinking about utilizing these different allocation sources is that the cost of a teacher to the school differs depending on the allocation source. When a school pays for a teacher from tax levy funds, the cost charged to the school does not include benefits. When a school pays for a teacher using reimbursable funds, the cost of benefits

is included in the charge. Thus, paying for a teacher with reimbursable funds is more expensive to the school. HERE ARE SOME QUESTIONS FOR BUDGET CONSULTATION General Questions: Are there any rollover funds from last school year for this school year? Will there be any

funding available for rollover this year for next year? How will a rollover assist the school in dealing with upcoming budget cuts? Note: The issue of rolling over funds is dealt with by school allocation memorandum #5 (see Appendix E).

What was the projected enrollment this year? Was the school under- or over-projected? Should funds be set aside going into next year to protect against a loss after the October 31 register audit?

Personnel: How many F status positions does the school have? What service are they providing to

the school community? How were Early Grade Class Size monies utilized? Which grades are benefiting from the

reduced class size (K-3)? Note: you can check the allocation source for each person on the Galaxy Table of Organization. If the EGCSR allocation is used for a grade higher than 3rd, it is a misuse of the allocation.

In preparation for possible cuts for next fiscal year, review administrative positions and comp time positions. Can any of these be cut/reduced in order to prevent excessing?

Per Diem: How many absences does the per diem budget you’ve scheduled cover? What about coverage for professional development, either out of the building or lost

prep? Note: As part of the tax levy allocation, the school receives an average of eight absences per staff member. So the amount in the budget should be: the cost of sub ($154.97 per day) x 8 x number of teachers.

Per Session: What per session activities (hours/number of positions) are planned for this year? (Chapter leaders should see postings before they are posted and EVERY per session

activity must be posted) In the absence of a clear plan for per session activities, this is another area that could be

cut. Review how much of the per session budget has been used to decide how much could be cut.

Other than Personnel Services (OTPS): What are the names of the consultants or staff development contracts that have been

chosen for the school? What services do they provide? What is their cost? How is it paid (in a lump sum or distributed throughout the year)? What is the process for assessing their quality and/or effectiveness? If a consultant is paid over the course of the year, is this something to consider cutting? Based on an analysis of the effectiveness of the consultants, should consultants be utilized next year? (See Appendices C and D to see how consultants are listed in the budget.)

What is the plan for supplies, textbooks, furniture, and equipment? How much of the scheduled amount has been spent? How much of the scheduled amount is NYSTYL? How much could comfortably be cut?

Has the school put aside funding for “Transportation of Staff - Non Contract?” (This item appears in the Galaxy Table of Organization – see Appendix D.) This category is used to pay for travel to out-of-city or -state conferences or parking costs incurred by attending local professional development events. What is the procedure for utilizing this money? In light of budget cuts, can the school afford to maintain this category of spending?

Reimbursable Allocations: What is the plan for the use of reimbursable allocations? Contract for Excellence: which of the six areas was chosen? Why? (See Appendix H) Title I: How is the school using the set asides for professional development (10%) and

helping teachers become highly qualified (5%)? (See Appendix F) What are the other components of the Title I plan for the school? (See Appendix F)

Remember that ultimately discussions about budgets are really discussions about priorities. Your school Comprehensive Education Plan (CEP) should reflect the priorities of the school community and the school’s budget should be aligned with the CEP. To make the most effective use of your consultation with the principal, plan ahead! The Chapter leader, working with her/his chapter committee, should develop the chapter’s agenda (or priorities) for the use of allocated funds and craft the arguments to support that agenda. The purpose of consultation would be to push that agenda using evidence, data, and/or educational research. So, for example, if class size is a concern for your chapter, figure out ways to carve out funds to pay for an additional teacher. Equally as important, this might mean identifying areas that could be comfortably cut to prevent excessing. This is a process of collaboration and negotiation. Your efforts as a chapter, combined with the efforts of the School Leadership Team, can influence the decisions the principal makes as well as hold the principal accountable for his/her budgetary choices.

APPENDIX A ACCESSING BUDGET INFORMATION ON THE INTERNET Follow these steps to access information about your school:

Step I: Finding budget information about your school

The first step is to find information about your school. Go to http://schools.nyc.gov. In the center of the page, you will see FIND A SCHOOL.

←

Enter the four-character school ID starting with the borough designation (M, X, Q, K, R) and then the three-digit code for the school (e.g. PS 89X = X089; IS 7Q = Q007; PS 132K = K132; etc.). Then click “go.”

You will then see a page for the school you chose. Click Statistics in the left side navigation bar, which will bring you the current statistics for the school.

Scroll down the menu to Galaxy Budget Allocations and Budget Summary:

Step II: Check your school’s Galaxy Budget Allocations

Click on Galaxy Budget Allocations (the current fiscal year will appear; you can choose prior years in the drop-down box).

(You may notice some items with only $1 allocated. Those are placeholders for the item as the amount is being determined. The allocation process continues throughout the year as programs are developed and refined.)

Once you know approximately what has been allocated for your school, you can take a look at how the allocations have been scheduled.

Step III: Check your school’s Budget Summary

Click on the back arrow at the top of the page. Once you are back to the school’s statistics page, scroll down to the link for Budget Summary.

This page will show you how your principal has scheduled (planned to spend) the allocations the school received.

There may be a discrepancy between the Budget Allocation (below)

… and the Budget Summary (below), which is a picture of how the school planned (scheduled) to use the funds.

If the amount on the School Budget Summary is more than the amount on the Galaxy Budget Allocations, then the school has overscheduled, that is, overspent. If the reverse is the case, the principal may be planning on rolling over funds, may be expecting a reduction, or may need some assistance.

You can read an explanation of the budget categories on this page that explains the categories:

In the Budget Summary, click on the link to the glossary for further explanation:

Appendix B — Sample Galaxy Budget Allocations

Appendix C — Sample School Budget Summary

XYZ School

XYZ School

XYZ School

XYZ School

Appendix D — Sample Galaxy Table of Organization

SCHOOL ALLOCATION MEMORANDUM NO. 05, FY09

DATE: May 22, 2008 TO: COMMUNITY SUPERINTENDENTS, INTEGRATED SERVICE CENTERS

AND SCHOOL PRINCIPALS FROM: Susan Olds, Executive Budget Director SUBJECT: FY08 Surplus Rollover The FY08 Surplus Rollover program allowed schools that had generated surpluses in select allocation categories to transfer these surpluses into their FY09 budgets. A school could roll over the entire balance in the allowable rollover allocation categories (please see Appendix A). All ISC and CFN schools, district 75 schools (Citywide Special Education) and district 79 programs (alternative high schools) which met the eligibility requirements listed below were allowed to participate in the program. Surplus Rollover Criteria Schools could participate in the FY08 Surplus Rollover Program if they met all of the conditions listed below: No allocation categories were over-scheduled. Schools were held accountable for any allocation category overscheduled by more than $100. Exempt allocation categories included TL Summer AC and ASA HH. Please note that schools were responsible for covering costs associated with deleted per-session bulk jobs that were automatically restored to their tables of organization to cover costs due to a lag in payroll postings. Per session budgets were greater than or equal to expenditures. The sum of per session bulk job balances for each, tax levy and reimbursable funded ACs, was positive. Tax levy and reimbursable ACs were not combined for the purpose of evaluating this criterion. Therefore, tax levy balances must have been greater than or equal to zero and reimbursable balances must have been greater than or equal to zero. When the criterion is evaluated in October, the overtime budget and commitments will be evaluated in combination with per session. Total combined prep period and per diem budgets were greater than or equal to expenditures. The sum of per diem and prep period coverage bulk job balances for each, tax levy and reimbursable funded ACs, was positive. Tax Levy and reimbursable funds were not

combined for the purpose of evaluating this criterion. Therefore Tax levy balances must have been greater than or equal to zero and Reimbursable balances must have been greater than or equal to zero.

J O E L I . K L E I N , Chancellor

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 52 Chambers Street, New York, NY 10007

2OTPS budgets were greater than or equal to OTPS expenditures. The sum of OTPS balances for each, tax levy and reimbursable funded ACs, was positive. Tax levy and reimbursable funds were not combined for the purpose of evaluating this criterion. Therefore Tax levy balances must have been greater than or equal to zero and Reimbursable balances must have been greater than or equal to zero. No “people without jobs” in active status as of February 25, 2008, remained without jobs in the school on March 20, 2008, and none remain at the end of the fiscal year on June 30, 2008. No “B-segments” were scheduled in the ASA for Hold Harmless allocation category. Exempted from this criterion are all Hold Harmless items with the following reason codes: “long-term absence”, “pending line-of-duty injury”, or “reassigned pending investigation.” B-segments are jobs scheduled in Galaxy which have an end date prior to the current date. For example, on March 10, 2008, B-segments are all jobs with end dates through March 9th. When schools are evaluated next October on this criterion for their budget status as of June 30, 2008, any job with ASA Hold Harmless funding-- except those with the above reason code exemptions -- regardless of end date, will constitute a criterion failure and will result in a reduction to the remaining 50% payment. No funds are scheduled at the end of the year in ASA for Anticipated Allocations. This condition will only be implemented next October when schools are evaluated on their budget status as of June 30, 2008. No rolled open encumbrances from FY07 remain on the school’s Table of Organization. This condition will only be implemented next October when schools are evaluated on their budget status as of June 30, 2008. No funds were scheduled in the “ASA Centrally Funded Excess Staff” allocation category. No add discrepancies (people with jobs not on the TO) in active status as of February 25, 2008 remained as a discrepancy on March 20, 2008 (and none remain at the end of the fiscal year). No funds are scheduled in the “ASA Return from Reassignment” allocation category as of June 30, 2008. This condition will only be applied in October when schools are evaluated on their budget status as of June 30, 2008. No person scheduled in the “ASA Returns from Leave” allocation category in active status as of February 25, 2008 remained scheduled in the allocation category on March 20, 2008, and no funds are scheduled at the end of the fiscal year on June 30, 2008. No funds are scheduled in the “ASA Returns from Charges or Stipulations” allocation category as of June 30, 2008. This condition will only be applied in October when schools are evaluated on their budget status as of June 30, 2008. Where charges in a school needed to be paid by another location, schools must have ensured that ISCs moved allocations where appropriate.

3Allocation Procedure Fifty percent of the funds rolled over will be added to the school’s initial allocation for FY09. The remaining fifty percent of rolled funds will be released to schools once DBOR staff verifies that schools ended FY08 passing all of the aforementioned financial conditions. If the school fails any of the criteria above, the amount of the failed criteria will be deducted from the remaining fifty percent and any balance left will be released to the school. We anticipate that this review will occur in the fall of 2008. Funds will be rolled into the following unrestricted allocation categories: Allocation Category Fund Source TL One-Time Allocations TL FSF TL One-Time Allocations HS TL FSF TL Instructional Programs TL (ALL OTHER) TL Instructional Programs CW TL CW INSTRUCTION TL Instructional Programs HS TL (ALL OTHER) TL Instructional Programs HS D79 TL (ALL OTHER)

On June 2, 2008 and June 16, 2008 DBOR will send reports on the schools that are participating in the surplus roll program, but which are at risk of not meeting one or more of the thirteen (13) criteria that schools need to meet when their financial condition is evaluated for the end of the year. ISCs can use these reports to help schools take the necessary steps to finish the year passing all criteria. Summary of Appendices Appendix A: Applicable FY08 allocation categories Appendix B: List of participant schools, total rollover amount and first half rollover amount c: Marcia Lyles Lisa Dare

4

Appendix A Allowable Rollover Allocation Categories

Locations eligible to participate in the rollover program were allowed to identify surplus in theses FY08 allocation categories:

TL Children First CW TL Children First Funding TL Children First Funding HS TL EARLY GRADE INITIATIVE CW TL EARLY GRADE INITIATIVE CW ES TL Fair Student Funding TL Fair Student Funding HS TL Fair Student Funding Incremental TL Fair Student Funding Incremental HS TL FSF General Hold Harmless TL FSF General Hold Harmless HS TL Host School MS TL HOST SCHOOL HS TL Instructional Programs TL INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRAMS CW TL Instructional Programs HS TL Instructional Programs HS D79 TL One-Time Allocations TL One-Time Allocations HS TL PROJECT ARTS CW TL PROJECT ARTS D79

SCHOOL ALLOCATION MEMORANDUM NO. 10, FY09

DATE: May 22, 2008 TO: COMMUNITY SUPERINTENDENTS, INTEGRATED SERVICE CENTERS

AND SCHOOL PRINCIPALS FROM: Susan Olds, Executive Budget Director SUBJECT: TITLE I SCHOOL ALLOCATIONS

TITLE I SCHOOL TARGETING A school will be targeted to receive Title I resources if its poverty percentage is at or above the cutoff rate (described below). The poverty rate is the number of Free Lunch Eligible pupils divided by the student enrollment. Pupils are deemed free lunch eligible if there is a completed free lunch form for the child or the student is receiving public assistance that has the same or lower income requirement as free lunch (TANF and Food Stamps). The Human Resources Administration (HRA) provides child specific information for the public assistance categories. Child data is matched to the Department of Education’s pupil data base, ATS, which already contains free lunch data. All data is as of October 31st. From ATS, a school’s register and an unduplicated free lunch eligible count is produced. Dividing poverty by enrollment yields the school’s poverty rate. This measure focuses on a school’s actual student population and is unburdened by issues of attendance zones in a school system with school choice and un-zoned schools. The County Provision requires Title I funds to be allocated among the five boroughs in proportion to each county’s share of poverty counts in the federal census. Separate Title I poverty cutoffs are established for each borough (county). The city-wide rate is 60.00%. Additionally, by Federal law the lowest poverty rate for designating a school Title I eligible is 35.00%. The Title I poverty cutoff rate by borough is:

City-Wide Manhattan Bronx Brooklyn Queens Staten Island

City-Wide Cutoff 60.00% 60.00% 60.00% 60.00% 60.00% 60.00% County Title I Cutoff 60.00% 60.00% 60.00% 60.00% 55.71% 37.84%

J O E L I . K L E I N , Chancellor

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 52 Chambers Street, New York, NY 10007

2 Schools targeted for Title I funds in FY08 that have poverty rates below their respective county cutoff will be grandfathered Title I in FY09. Affected schools will receive a Title I allocation reduced in proportion to their poverty rate divided by the citywide cutoff of 60%. Federal law permits grandfathering for one year only. Program Conversions and Redesigns: In FY09, several school-programs (sub-schools) will break away from their “parent” school to become independent schools. The parent school and the program conversion school will share the poverty rate calculated for the previously combined school. The number of low income students for the combined school will be prorated between the parent and new school in proportion to their projected registers. New Small Schools: New small schools are being established in Title I attendance zones. These schools will be designated Title I for FY09 only. Continued designation will be dependent upon the FY09 number of low income students. These schools will not qualify for grandfather status in FY10. A poverty rate equal to its respective county’s cutoff rate is established for each new school. The estimated poverty count is not added to the overall NYC count. Title I funding will come from the public school share after apportioning the NYC amount among non-public schools, neglected children, and public schools. Phasing-In New Schools and Restructured Schools: For fiscal year 2009, the Title I methodology has been modified to address the needs of new and restructured schools that are adding entirely new grade(s) of students. For these schools, the projected number of eligible students for the new classes will be added to the actual eligible student count from the prior year. The same poverty percentage as the prior year, or the borough minimum where there is no prior year history, will be used when calculating the amount of Title I funds for these schools. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ NON-PUBLIC SCHOOL (NPS) AND NEGLECTED CHILDREN APPROPRIATION The law requires use of comparable criteria to distribute Title I funds to public and non-public school students. This mandate is satisfied by identifying free lunch eligible non-public school students who reside in the attendance areas of Title I designated public schools (see below). Title I funds are divided among each borough's Title I eligible student population to yield the borough's Title I per capita. The eligible population includes public school, non-public school and neglected children (count provided by the State). The per capita multiplied by the respective non-public eligible pupil count becomes the Non-Public School share of the Title I appropriation. Likewise, the Neglected Children Title I appropriation is calculated by multiplying the county per capita by the respective count of neglected children. The Neglected Children programs are administered by both Alternative High Schools Programs and City-Wide Special Education.

3 The measure of poverty for non-public school children uses the same data described above for public school students. The difference is that non-public schools provide free lunch information through an on-line database. The Federal law prohibits the targeting of non-public schools for Title I purposes. Consequently, to identify a non-public school Title I eligible pupil, the following procedure is used:

• Low income non-public school pupils are identified using the same measure as public schools;

• The address of a low income pupil is mapped to a public school attendance zone for the appropriate age and instructional level;

• If the attendance zone is that of a Title I public school, the NPS student is Title I eligible; • If the attendance zone is that of a Non-Title I public school, the NPS student is not Title I

eligible. The public school attendance zones include the Title I schools that meet the established cutoffs and grandfathered schools. PUBLIC SCHOOL ALLOCATIONS Title I funds remaining after deducting the Non-Public School and Neglected Children shares of each borough's appropriation, are available for public school allocation. A portion of this amount is committed to programs such as No Child Left Behind supplemental educational services, prekindergarten program, support for low performing schools, bilingual paraprofessional training, and Saturday Prep Academies. These are either allocated separately to schools or administered centrally. The Title I budget, net of these adjustments, is allocated to elementary, middle and high schools on a per capita basis using the number of eligible children attending Title I designated schools. As described above, allocations for grandfathered schools are prorated. The organization of citywide special education classes, with the delivery to each pupil of services prescribed in their Individual Education Program (IEP), reduces the need for supplemental Title I services. As a result, Citywide Special Education Title I resources will be used to enhance supplementary Title I programs in elementary, middle and high schools. This policy has been in effect since FY94. The public school Title I county per capitas are:

City-Wide Manhattan Bronx Brooklyn Queens Staten Island Public School Allocation Per Capita $1,123.34 $1,061.38 $1,161.38 $1,274.33 $906.77 $1,029.01 Federal law requires all students residing in temporary housing (STH) to be Title I eligible regardless of the school they attend. Consequently, a Non-Title I school will receive a Title I allocation based on the number of STH children enrolled times their respective county per capita amount.

4 Federal law also requires that a minimum of 1% of a school's allocation support parent involvement programs. These programs must be designed in collaboration with parents of Title I participants. A School-wide program (SWP) is based on a comprehensive school-wide program plan designed collaboratively at the school level to improve instruction. In addition to challenging content, the plan incorporates intensive professional development for staff and parents and collaboration, where appropriate, with community organizations to strengthen the school's program.

Allocation Category Fund Source Title I SWP TITLE I SWP 9 Title I Targeted Assistance TITLE I - UMBRELLA 9

Attachment: FY09 Title I School Detail Click here for downloadable FY09 Title I School Detail file SO:bf Cc: Marcia Lyles Lisa Dare Evelyn Castro Anne Wolf

SCHOOL ALLOCATION MEMORANDUM NO. 08, FY09

DATE: June 19, 2008 TO: COMMUNITY SUPERINTENDENTS, INTEGRATED SERVICE CENTERS

AND SCHOOL PRINCIPALS FROM: Susan Olds, Executive Budget Director SUBJECT: EARLY GRADE CLASS SIZE REDUCTION (EGCSR)

These allocations provide support for the reduction of early grade class size in many of our elementary schools. In addition to targeting grades K-3 in schools in need of improvement, the following criteria are taken into consideration when determining EGCSR allocations to specific schools:

o Comparative academic needs of specific schools eligible for this funding; o Overall projected enrollment in eligible grades; and o Capacity utilization of specific schools eligible for this funding:

Early Grade Class Size Reduction allocations give priority to schools where classes are in excess of 20 pupils and academic performance is poor. The program has multiple funding streams: EGCSR STATE PROGRAM (which includes City tax levy), EGCSR STATE - Title IIA and EGCSR FEDERAL - Title IIA. As State funds originally targeted for this program are now consolidated into Foundation Aid, program requirements for state funds have changed and will now conform to federal program requirements.

o The first priority is using funds to reduce class size to an average of 20 students on a grade. If space is not available to form additional classes, funds may support push-in teachers to supplement the instructional program.

o Priority must be given to reducing class size in general education settings. o Each full (1.0) classroom position generates a 0.2 cluster position. For example, two

classroom teachers generate 0.4 cluster positions. These cluster teachers must be the individuals who actually provide coverage for the staff funded by this program.

o Push-in teachers do not require preparation period coverage and no cluster positions may be scheduled for push-in teachers.

Please note that all teachers funded by EGCSR must meet the No Child Left Behind definition of highly qualified. Principals have received printouts from the Division of Human Resources detailing the status of their current staff. Allocations provide teacher positions at the school’s average teacher salary. Schools will be required to budget all teacher positions at their average salary. Guidelines for Calculating Class Size Reduction: Classes created through the early grade class size reduction program may not include classes that would have been organized absent the program. For example, a school with a grade 1 enrollment of 40 students, under the Chancellor’s early grade policy, would be required to organize two classes. Even though the average class size

J O E L I . K L E I N , Chancellor

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 52 Chambers Street, New York, NY 10007

2is 20 pupils, since the classes would have been organized anyway, no EGCSR funds may be used. To assist schools in determining whether classes should be created using EGCSR, a lookup chart is attached. The chart is intended as a guide. There are many situations that could result in different class formations, such as organizing bilingual classes or inclusion classes. The goal is to maximize services to students while maximizing revenues (i.e. prevent program disallowance). As evidence of compliance with funding source guidelines, schools must make the following documentation available if requested:

list of staff funded by the program class rosters for all classes on the grade evidence funded teachers meet the No Child Left Behind definition of highly qualified

The FY09 Early Grade Class Size Allocation is presented on the attached table. SO:bf c: Garth Harries Stephanie Lawkins

SCHOOL ALLOCATION MEMORANDUM NO. 06, FY09 DATE: June 30, 2008 TO: COMMUNITY SUPERINTENDENTS, INTEGRATED SERVICE CENTERS AND SCHOOL PRINCIPALS FROM: Susan Olds, Executive Budget Director SUBJECT: Contracts for Excellence FY09 Discretionary Allocations The DOE receives a portion of its overall budget in the form of Foundation Aid from New York State. While the State allows some of the increase in year-over-year Foundation Aid funding to be used for growth in general operating costs and investment in ongoing programs, the majority is subject to the provisions of the “Contracts for Excellence”. New York City schools received Contracts for Excellence, or C4E, funds for the first time in school year 2007-08.

In 2008-09, New York City schools will once again receive funds subject to the provisions of the Contracts for Excellence, which are as follows:

• Program Area Guidance: C4E dollars should be allocated in one or more of the following six program areas:

Class Size Reduction

Time on Task

Teacher and Principal Quality Initiatives

Middle School and High School Restructuring

Full-Day Pre-Kindergarten; and

Model Programs for English Language Learners (New in 2008-09)

For more information on eligible program options within these six program areas, please refer to Chapter 7 of the FY09 “Resource Guide to School Budgets”, which can be accessed here: http://schools.nyc.gov/AboutUs/BudgetsFairStudentFunding/Materials/default.htm.

• Students with the Greatest Education Need: C4E funds must be used to improve the performance of students with the greatest educational need, including:

English Language Learners (ELLs)

Students with disabilities

Students in poverty; and

Students with low academic achievement / at risk of not graduating

2008-09 Contracts for Excellence Allocations

Schools will directly receive C4E funds in two forms in FY09:

Discretionary Allocations

Allocation Category Contracts for Excellence (new in FY09)

Funding Type Reimbursable (new in FY09)

Funding Restrictions Subject to spending on programs in the six C4E-eligible areas

Other Schools will be required to choose program area from a drop-down menu in Galaxy when scheduling funds

Targeted Allocations Meeting the C4E Eligibility Standards – Not Covered in this SAM

Allocation Categories TL FSF (funding for CTT classrooms)

TL ASD (funding for ASD classrooms)

Others TBD

Funding Type Tax-Levy

Funding Restrictions Funds to be allocated for specific C4E-eligible uses

Other Not covered in this SAM. Schools will be notified if they have C4E-eligible targeted allocations in their FY09 budgets

Discretionary Allocations Schools were allocated C4E Discretionary funding according to an indexing system developed by the State Education Department (SED) and based on data submitted to SED by schools in conjunction with 2006-07 NCLB accountability. Index SED calculated a “Concentration of Need” factor for each eligible school, using the following data to represent C4E targeted student populations:

A Students with Limited English Proficiency (LEP/ELL)

2006 LEP/ELL %

B Students with Disabilities (SWD) 2006 SWD %

C Students Receiving Free Lunch (Poverty) 2006 Free Lunch %

D Students with Low Academic Achievement

2006 Weighted Low Academic Achievement %; see Appendix A for calculation

Concentration of Need Factor Metric A + B + C + D

Please note that for schools that did not submit student population data for the purposes of 2006 NCLB Accountability (e.g., 2007 new schools), or for which SED was missing data, average school type metrics were used. Please see Appendix B for a table of these school type averages. After these Concentration of Need factors were calculated, schools were then rank-ordered from lowest to highest Concentration of Need factor and grouped them into quartiles of approximately equal numbers of students based on 10/31/07 audited data.

C4E regulations mandate that 75% of the city’s total C4E funding goes to the top 50% of needy schools, as identified through this ranking system, with SINI schools receiving at least their pro rate share of all funds regardless of quartile. In keeping with this mandate, funds were distributed on a per capita basis according to the following schedule:

For Schools In: # Students Funded Per Capita for SINI/SRAP Schools

Per Capita for In Good Standing / No Status Schools

Quartiles 1 & 2 $198.75 $112.16

Quartiles 3 & 4

10/31/07 audited enrollment x Concentration of Need

Factor $235.28 $235.28 All discretionary allocations will be made through a “Contracts for Excellence” allocation category in Galaxy. A list of all school-level allocations as well as a spreadsheet containing all targeted student population metrics used in calculating Concentration of Need factors and quartiles may be accessed using the links below. C4E Student Population Metrics C4E Allocations by School cc: Jennifer Bell-Ellwanger Stephanie Lawkins

Appendix A: Weighted Low Academic Achievement Metric Calculation

A B C E/S ELA E/S Math Grad Rate Total

Non-Achievement %

2006 Level 1 + Level 2 / Tested

Population

2006 Level 1 + Level 2 / Tested

Population

100 % - 2002 Cohort

Graduation Rate

Pupils Tested Population

Tested Population

Students in 2002 Cohort

Sum of Pupils A – C

Enrollment Weight

Pupils/Sum of Pupils A-C

Pupils/Sum of Pupils A-C

Pupils/Sum of Pupils A-C

Weighted Non-Achievement %

Non-Achievement

% x Enrollment

Weight

Non-Achievement

% x Enrollment

Weight

Non-Achievement

% x Enrollment

Weight

School Total Weighted Non-Achievement %

Sum of Weighted

Non-Achievement

% A-C Appendix B: School Type Averages by Targeted Student Population (based on SED data)

School Type LEP/ELL % SWD % Free Lunch % Low Academic Achievement %

Elementary 0.16 0.15 0.69 0.33 High school 0.12 0.11 0.62 0.43 K-8 0.13 0.14 0.65 0.40 Middle School 0.12 0.15 0.71 0.51 Secondary School 0.07 0.13 0.66 0.49

SCHOOL ALLOCATION MEMORANDUM NO. 51, FY09

DATE: October 30, 2008 TO: COMMUNITY SUPERINTENDENTS, INTEGRATED SERVICE CENTERS

AND SCHOOL PRINCIPALS FROM: Susan Olds, Executive Budget Director SUBJECT: ATTENDANCE IMPROVEMENT/DROPOUT PREVENTION (AIDP) AND TAX LEVY ATTENDANCE TEACHER ALLOCATIONS

Attendance Improvement Dropout Prevention (AIDP) and Tax Levy (TL) funding is being provided to support attendance teacher positions. The allocation provides resources for 253 attendance teacher positions. The allocation is displayed on the attached table. This school year the attendance teachers for schools in the School Support Organizations (SSOs) were assigned by the Integrated Service Centers (with the exception of 22 attendance teacher positions assigned to the Empowerment Support Organization networks, which will remain the same as the previous school year and 4 positions assigned to the Children First Networks). Funding for the attendance teachers was provided to each school based upon the average teacher salary for that school. Each payroll school was also provided with an additional $800 allocation per attendance teacher to cover the cost of travel and other OTPS expenditures. In many instances the attendance teachers are itinerant and will serve more than one school. The Attendance Content Experts from the ISCs, in collaboration with school principals will be responsible for the supervision and rating of the attendance teachers (Attendance Teacher responsibilities are included on Appendix A). SAM #55 Attendance Improvement/Dropout Prevention (AIDP) allocation once released will provide limited discretionary funds to designated schools for additional attendance support staff to include attendance teachers, guidance counselors and family assistants. Funds should be scheduled in the following allocation categories: TL Attendance and AIDP Attendance. SO: ddz Attachments Cc:

J O E L I . K L E I N , Chancellor

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 52 Chambers Street, New York, NY 10007

Kathleen Grimm Marcia Lyles Elayna Konstan Eric Nadelstern Stephanie Keating Lilian Garelick JoEllen Lynch