MCPS Hires Nancy Navarro to Clean Up Its Messes and Fix Its Relationship Problems

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SOURCE: https://ww2.montgomeryschoolsmd.org/press/index.aspx?page=showrelease&preview=1&id=13349

Superintendent Monifa McKnight today announced that former Montgomery County Councilmember Nancy Navarro is joining the Montgomery County Public Schools leadership team as Senior Advisor for External Affairs in the Office of the Superintendent.

Navarro served 13 years on County Council, where she represented District 4 and served as Council President multiple times. Navarro is also a former elected member of the Montgomery County Board of Education, where she served as both President and Vice President.

Navarro’s new role will focus on advancing the priorities of the Board of Education and the school system’s key priorities by fostering positive relationships with external partners, engaging in outreach to community stakeholders and collaborating with our Community of Practice as they recommend essential corrective actions across the system.

“Nancy brings exceptional skill and a record of policymaking in Montgomery County on issues that we are now confronting,” Dr. McKnight said. “I look forward to working with her to deepen our relationships across the district that will help us instill respect and compassion in the citizens of tomorrow, achieve excellence for all of MCPS students, and provide a safe and welcoming environment for all.”

While I think someone in MCPS needs to do this work, given that she was entrenched in the school board before, I'm not sure if she's part of the problem or the solution. But she probably can't make things worse than they already are. And she's a Hispanic woman and MCPS desperately needs more Hispanic representation in its leadership ranks so....

No salary or start date

https://moco360.media/2023/11/20/superintendent-mcknight-hires-nancy-navarro-as-senior-advisor-for-external-affairs-at-mcps/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I hope county council sees what a sham this is and laughs in their faces. Why does McKnight always need to hire someone else to do her job? How much is this costing the system?

The council would laugh, except they are asked to fund this ever increasing number of high-priced central office staff. I hope the council says no to the budget increase the school district is asking for next year.

Does anyone know how many central office staff there are? There are approx 11,000 non-teacher staff. That includes everyone from lunch ladies to principals in schools. But that's a 16 to 1 student to (non-teacher) staff ratio which seems crazy.

Security, paras, bus drivers, building services, speech, OT, PT, playground aides, etc. It's a long list of non-teaching positions to make things run.

Yes, but a 16 to 1 ratio is nuts don't you think?

Doesn't seem so. What do other comparably large school systems look like?

Great question. I took these numbers from wiki and had to do some math to separate out staff and teachers. It looks like FCPS has about half the number of non-teacher staff. Or to put a number on it, 5000 fewer employees. That's quite significant. Looks like MCPS is insanely bloated with non-teachers.

MCPS
Students 160,554
Teachers 13,994
Staff 25,232
Non-teacher staff 11,238
Student–teacher ratio 11.5:1

Fairfax Co. PS
Students 178,479
Teachers 13,199
Staff 19,077
Non-teacher staff 5,878
Student–teacher ratio 13.5:1

Can we put something on the ballot that caps the number of admin jobs to a percentage of teachers?

While I 100% agree with you in spirit, they would just fill the roles with consultants. This has to start with BOE members who care more about the students than the organization. But with the teacher's union influencing the elections so heavily, this is a long shot. MCPS will continue downward until it is an unrecognizable shell of its former self. Only then will people finally wake up and make changes. This is still probably a decade away though.

Change will occur when the real estate prices plunge in recognition of our craptastic school system.

Nah, not really. We see this happen in other areas where the large urban public school systems collape. The wealthy can stick around and pay for private. Middle class families flee. And, the poor just continue to use the craptastic public schools.

The question is, why are we letting this happen? I blame Republicans for the no child left behind concept and I blame progressives for taking it to an extreme (equity). This simply isn't working. It's clear that we have to leave a few children behind: kids who don't show up to school, criminals, super-disruptive kids, etc. We should stop focusing 80% of our time and money on this group and focus it on the kids who want to be there.

I agree with this poster. I would say, instead of thinking of it as leaving a child behind, it could be that we are helping each child reach their goals and potential. In other words, instead of all kids going to college if they want to or not, maybe some get certified to do a different job such as plumber or electrician. If that is the path the student wants, why not?

I'm hoping the education elite come to their senses and realize that these equity experiments are failing all of our children. And consider helping each child reach their potential.

My younger child who is now in 3rd grade, has never even had a single reading group. Because they aren't below grade level they are simply ignored whereas the smaller group of kids who are struggling for a variety of reasons get 90% of the teacher time. Now I'm all for helping them but not at everyone else's expense.

[Anonymous]

So glad we've hired Navarro, a tireless warrior for equity, to fight for our children's futures. Equity can only be achieved by dumbing school down to the lowest common denominator but it's so worth it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So glad we've hired Navarro, a tireless warrior for equity, to fight for our children's futures. Equity can only be achieved by dumbing school down to the lowest common denominator but it's so worth it!

At least everyone will be equally miserable in the end. That's the most important thing.

[Anonymous]

We need to see the salary, and if the job was ever publicly posted and any other candidates considered.

If this is just another blatant handout to get around term limits (like it was for Craig Rice), then this should be shamed down- just like his fake position was.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We need to see the salary, and if the job was ever publicly posted and any other candidates considered.

If this is just another blatant handout to get around term limits (like it was for Craig Rice), then this should be shamed down- just like his fake position was.

Can't find anything indicating it was ever posted

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I hope county council sees what a sham this is and laughs in their faces. Why does McKnight always need to hire someone else to do her job? How much is this costing the system?

The council would laugh, except they are asked to fund this ever increasing number of high-priced central office staff. I hope the council says no to the budget increase the school district is asking for next year.

Does anyone know how many central office staff there are? There are approx 11,000 non-teacher staff. That includes everyone from lunch ladies to principals in schools. But that's a 16 to 1 student to (non-teacher) staff ratio which seems crazy.

Security, paras, bus drivers, building services, speech, OT, PT, playground aides, etc. It's a long list of non-teaching positions to make things run.

Yes, but a 16 to 1 ratio is nuts don't you think?

Doesn't seem so. What do other comparably large school systems look like?

Great question. I took these numbers from wiki and had to do some math to separate out staff and teachers. It looks like FCPS has about half the number of non-teacher staff. Or to put a number on it, 5000 fewer employees. That's quite significant. Looks like MCPS is insanely bloated with non-teachers.

MCPS
Students 160,554
Teachers 13,994
Staff 25,232
Non-teacher staff 11,238
Student–teacher ratio 11.5:1

Fairfax Co. PS
Students 178,479
Teachers 13,199
Staff 19,077
Non-teacher staff 5,878
Student–teacher ratio 13.5:1

Can we put something on the ballot that caps the number of admin jobs to a percentage of teachers?

While I 100% agree with you in spirit, they would just fill the roles with consultants. This has to start with BOE members who care more about the students than the organization. But with the teacher's union influencing the elections so heavily, this is a long shot. MCPS will continue downward until it is an unrecognizable shell of its former self. Only then will people finally wake up and make changes. This is still probably a decade away though.

Change will occur when the real estate prices plunge in recognition of our craptastic school system.

Nah, not really. We see this happen in other areas where the large urban public school systems collape. The wealthy can stick around and pay for private. Middle class families flee. And, the poor just continue to use the craptastic public schools.

The question is, why are we letting this happen? I blame Republicans for the no child left behind concept and I blame progressives for taking it to an extreme (equity). This simply isn't working. It's clear that we have to leave a few children behind: kids who don't show up to school, criminals, super-disruptive kids, etc. We should stop focusing 80% of our time and money on this group and focus it on the kids who want to be there.

I agree with this poster. I would say, instead of thinking of it as leaving a child behind, it could be that we are helping each child reach their goals and potential. In other words, instead of all kids going to college if they want to or not, maybe some get certified to do a different job such as plumber or electrician. If that is the path the student wants, why not?

I'm hoping the education elite come to their senses and realize that these equity experiments are failing all of our children. And consider helping each child reach their potential.

My younger child who is now in 3rd grade, has never even had a single reading group. Because they aren't below grade level they are simply ignored whereas the smaller group of kids who are struggling for a variety of reasons get 90% of the teacher time. Now I'm all for helping them but not at everyone else's expense.

They won't. They will double down on DEI BS.

[Anonymous]

If she's so good make her teach and then push her out. Let's see how good she really is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I hope county council sees what a sham this is and laughs in their faces. Why does McKnight always need to hire someone else to do her job? How much is this costing the system?

The council would laugh, except they are asked to fund this ever increasing number of high-priced central office staff. I hope the council says no to the budget increase the school district is asking for next year.

Does anyone know how many central office staff there are? There are approx 11,000 non-teacher staff. That includes everyone from lunch ladies to principals in schools. But that's a 16 to 1 student to (non-teacher) staff ratio which seems crazy.

Security, paras, bus drivers, building services, speech, OT, PT, playground aides, etc. It's a long list of non-teaching positions to make things run.

The fundamental concern with Navarro's hire is that McKnight is not interested in solving her relationship problems with council members and the county executive. She is making an expensive outsourcing through Nancy Navarro to try to solve these relationship problems, but that won't work. You can't outsource your relationship problems - you have to manage that issue yourself. That is a big part of McKnight's job, and if she is unwilling to do it, and/or is uninterested in doing it, she should leave. McKnight has also made a flawed assumption that past and present council members like each other. They do not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I hope county council sees what a sham this is and laughs in their faces. Why does McKnight always need to hire someone else to do her job? How much is this costing the system?

The council would laugh, except they are asked to fund this ever increasing number of high-priced central office staff. I hope the council says no to the budget increase the school district is asking for next year.

Does anyone know how many central office staff there are? There are approx 11,000 non-teacher staff. That includes everyone from lunch ladies to principals in schools. But that's a 16 to 1 student to (non-teacher) staff ratio which seems crazy.

Security, paras, bus drivers, building services, speech, OT, PT, playground aides, etc. It's a long list of non-teaching positions to make things run.

The fundamental concern with Navarro's hire is that McKnight is not interested in solving her relationship problems with council members and the county executive. She is making an expensive outsourcing through Nancy Navarro to try to solve these relationship problems, but that won't work. You can't outsource your relationship problems - you have to manage that issue yourself. That is a big part of McKnight's job, and if she is unwilling to do it, and/or is uninterested in doing it, she should leave. McKnight has also made a flawed assumption that past and present council members like each other. They do not.

Same thing McKnight did with hiring the outside public relations firm for “crisis communications”. Rather than take responsibility to fix the broken relationship between her administration and MCPS students/parents, she chose to outsource it. She clearly has no interest in investing her own time on these efforts so it can’t be a priority at all for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I hope county council sees what a sham this is and laughs in their faces. Why does McKnight always need to hire someone else to do her job? How much is this costing the system?

The council would laugh, except they are asked to fund this ever increasing number of high-priced central office staff. I hope the council says no to the budget increase the school district is asking for next year.

Does anyone know how many central office staff there are? There are approx 11,000 non-teacher staff. That includes everyone from lunch ladies to principals in schools. But that's a 16 to 1 student to (non-teacher) staff ratio which seems crazy.

Security, paras, bus drivers, building services, speech, OT, PT, playground aides, etc. It's a long list of non-teaching positions to make things run.

The fundamental concern with Navarro's hire is that McKnight is not interested in solving her relationship problems with council members and the county executive. She is making an expensive outsourcing through Nancy Navarro to try to solve these relationship problems, but that won't work. You can't outsource your relationship problems - you have to manage that issue yourself. That is a big part of McKnight's job, and if she is unwilling to do it, and/or is uninterested in doing it, she should leave. McKnight has also made a flawed assumption that past and present council members like each other. They do not.

Same thing McKnight did with hiring the outside public relations firm for “crisis communications”. Rather than take responsibility to fix the broken relationship between her administration and MCPS students/parents, she chose to outsource it. She clearly has no interest in investing her own time on these efforts so it can’t be a priority at all for her.

Even worse she chose to treat it only as a communications problem, as if everything is fine and they’re just not communicating well. They don’t communicate well but their comms hires are all politicos who will spin instead of being transparent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I hope county council sees what a sham this is and laughs in their faces. Why does McKnight always need to hire someone else to do her job? How much is this costing the system?

The council would laugh, except they are asked to fund this ever increasing number of high-priced central office staff. I hope the council says no to the budget increase the school district is asking for next year.

Does anyone know how many central office staff there are? There are approx 11,000 non-teacher staff. That includes everyone from lunch ladies to principals in schools. But that's a 16 to 1 student to (non-teacher) staff ratio which seems crazy.

Security, paras, bus drivers, building services, speech, OT, PT, playground aides, etc. It's a long list of non-teaching positions to make things run.

The fundamental concern with Navarro's hire is that McKnight is not interested in solving her relationship problems with council members and the county executive. She is making an expensive outsourcing through Nancy Navarro to try to solve these relationship problems, but that won't work. You can't outsource your relationship problems - you have to manage that issue yourself. That is a big part of McKnight's job, and if she is unwilling to do it, and/or is uninterested in doing it, she should leave. McKnight has also made a flawed assumption that past and present council members like each other. They do not.

Same thing McKnight did with hiring the outside public relations firm for “crisis communications”. Rather than take responsibility to fix the broken relationship between her administration and MCPS students/parents, she chose to outsource it. She clearly has no interest in investing her own time on these efforts so it can’t be a priority at all for her.

Delegating these responsibilities to capable proxies like this firm or Ms Navarro seems like responsibile to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: I hope county council sees what a sham this is and laughs in their faces. Why does McKnight always need to hire someone else to do her job? How much is this costing the system?

The council would laugh, except they are asked to fund this ever increasing number of high-priced central office staff. I hope the council says no to the budget increase the school district is asking for next year.

Does anyone know how many central office staff there are? There are approx 11,000 non-teacher staff. That includes everyone from lunch ladies to principals in schools. But that's a 16 to 1 student to (non-teacher) staff ratio which seems crazy.

Security, paras, bus drivers, building services, speech, OT, PT, playground aides, etc. It's a long list of non-teaching positions to make things run.

The fundamental concern with Navarro's hire is that McKnight is not interested in solving her relationship problems with council members and the county executive. She is making an expensive outsourcing through Nancy Navarro to try to solve these relationship problems, but that won't work. You can't outsource your relationship problems - you have to manage that issue yourself. That is a big part of McKnight's job, and if she is unwilling to do it, and/or is uninterested in doing it, she should leave. McKnight has also made a flawed assumption that past and present council members like each other. They do not.

Same thing McKnight did with hiring the outside public relations firm for “crisis communications”. Rather than take responsibility to fix the broken relationship between her administration and MCPS students/parents, she chose to outsource it. She clearly has no interest in investing her own time on these efforts so it can’t be a priority at all for her.

Delegating these responsibilities to capable proxies like this firm or Ms Navarro seems like responsibile to me.

"Delegating these responsibilities to capable proxies like this firm or Ms Navarro seems like responsibile to me." - Monifa

[Anonymous]

I don't know how many friends Nancy Navarro has on the current council. I think she is a very savvy player and her name carries some influence, but she's been off the council for a year now and memories are short. To me, a lot of Dr. McKnight's problems would be better solved by going to the COB and having heart to heart conversations with councilmembers instead of relying on scripted and occasionally misleading talking points in public sessions.

They (CC) don't trust her (MM) because she hasn't done anything to gain their trust. MCPS begged for a tax increase and believe me, there's nothing politicians want to do less than a tax increase. But they did it, and now the system is crashing and burning even more. She promised great things would happen with that extra money, and what do we have? Front page washington post articles about abusive working conditions, multiple large dollar settlements for sexual assault cases, protests happening outside the BOE regularly, and then she disappears for health reasons for a month in the middle of it while half her "cabinet" is acting?

[Anonymous]

Is she currently out sick?