APS budget is unacceptable

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of APS math graduates in here. Cutting Outdoor Lab and TJHSST don't even come close to balancing the budget.

The sacred cows of option schools need a hard look.

Option schools have been discussed a million times and there aren't budget reasons to reconsider them. They have the same planning factors as the other schools with the exception of K-5 Montessori which gets some classroom aides. They schedule the option schools so that we can use existing buses to do another run in the morning and afternoon to hub stops so there are more hours for drivers, but not more buses. Changing the option programs back to neighborhood schools won't make any difference in staffing or building costs and might not save any transportation costs depending on how many busses are needed after all the boundaries are redrawn.

Get rid of Montessori then. There have always been private schools for families that want different styles of teaching. This doesn’t need to be funded by public dollars.

Immersion switching to 80/20 has a large upfront cost, so scrap it.

I’m in favor of eliminating all option schools, but focusing on those that actually do cost more is a good first step.

I don't think we should get rid of Montessori but since it does cost more, maybe consider a sliding scale fee structure.

Cut it. A sliding scale fee structure still means an elevated cost for the program. No one needs Montessori to learn to read or do math, and those families that do want it — they can find a private school.

Agree with this

My other pet peeve is HB. That program needs to end and it needs to be a neighborhood school.

Nope, not with you there at all. Sorry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of APS math graduates in here. Cutting Outdoor Lab and TJHSST don't even come close to balancing the budget.

The sacred cows of option schools need a hard look.

Option schools have been discussed a million times and there aren't budget reasons to reconsider them. They have the same planning factors as the other schools with the exception of K-5 Montessori which gets some classroom aides. They schedule the option schools so that we can use existing buses to do another run in the morning and afternoon to hub stops so there are more hours for drivers, but not more buses. Changing the option programs back to neighborhood schools won't make any difference in staffing or building costs and might not save any transportation costs depending on how many busses are needed after all the boundaries are redrawn.

Get rid of Montessori then. There have always been private schools for families that want different styles of teaching. This doesn’t need to be funded by public dollars.

Immersion switching to 80/20 has a large upfront cost, so scrap it.

I’m in favor of eliminating all option schools, but focusing on those that actually do cost more is a good first step.

I don't think we should get rid of Montessori but since it does cost more, maybe consider a sliding scale fee structure.

Cut it. A sliding scale fee structure still means an elevated cost for the program. No one needs Montessori to learn to read or do math, and those families that do want it — they can find a private school.

Agree with this

My other pet peeve is HB. That program needs to end and it needs to be a neighborhood school.

But what does that have to do with the budget

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of APS math graduates in here. Cutting Outdoor Lab and TJHSST don't even come close to balancing the budget.

The sacred cows of option schools need a hard look.

Option schools have been discussed a million times and there aren't budget reasons to reconsider them. They have the same planning factors as the other schools with the exception of K-5 Montessori which gets some classroom aides. They schedule the option schools so that we can use existing buses to do another run in the morning and afternoon to hub stops so there are more hours for drivers, but not more buses. Changing the option programs back to neighborhood schools won't make any difference in staffing or building costs and might not save any transportation costs depending on how many busses are needed after all the boundaries are redrawn.

Thank you, there is so much misinformation on this point.

Not sure which way your comment is meant. I'd like to see a line item cost for option schools. Eliminating them won't negate the looming budget deficits; but I suspect streamlining them (ie, eliminating most of them) would contribute similarly to eliminating Outdoor Lab and other nitpicky cuts people are arguing over, while potentially making overall instruction across the system more focused and consistent, and thereby more effective. I'm in support of that.

The comment meant thanks for providing facts in response to the misinformation that option schools cost more.

If you want line items, open the budget book. You can see how many positions are allotted for each individual school which is based on the total number of students, the number of kids with IEPs, and the number of English language learners projected to be at that school on September 1. (The projections for each school are listed in the budget book, and the planning factors used to calculate the number of positions can be found online.)

You can see that, except for Montessori with its additional aides in grades 1-5, the number of staff in each of the option schools is calculated using the same planning factors as the neighborhood schools.

I don’t know how much more “line item” you can get—the annual budget book lists the budget for every staffed position at every single school and the planning factor-driven budget for supplies, maintenance, etc. APS is totally transparent about this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of APS math graduates in here. Cutting Outdoor Lab and TJHSST don't even come close to balancing the budget.

The sacred cows of option schools need a hard look.

Option schools have been discussed a million times and there aren't budget reasons to reconsider them. They have the same planning factors as the other schools with the exception of K-5 Montessori which gets some classroom aides. They schedule the option schools so that we can use existing buses to do another run in the morning and afternoon to hub stops so there are more hours for drivers, but not more buses. Changing the option programs back to neighborhood schools won't make any difference in staffing or building costs and might not save any transportation costs depending on how many busses are needed after all the boundaries are redrawn.

Get rid of Montessori then. There have always been private schools for families that want different styles of teaching. This doesn’t need to be funded by public dollars.

Immersion switching to 80/20 has a large upfront cost, so scrap it.

I’m in favor of eliminating all option schools, but focusing on those that actually do cost more is a good first step.

I don't think we should get rid of Montessori but since it does cost more, maybe consider a sliding scale fee structure.

Cut it. A sliding scale fee structure still means an elevated cost for the program. No one needs Montessori to learn to read or do math, and those families that do want it — they can find a private school.

Agree with this

My other pet peeve is HB. That program needs to end and it needs to be a neighborhood school.

But what does that have to do with the budget

Nothing, HB gets the same staffing allocations in the budget as any other school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of APS math graduates in here. Cutting Outdoor Lab and TJHSST don't even come close to balancing the budget.

The sacred cows of option schools need a hard look.

Option schools have been discussed a million times and there aren't budget reasons to reconsider them. They have the same planning factors as the other schools with the exception of K-5 Montessori which gets some classroom aides. They schedule the option schools so that we can use existing buses to do another run in the morning and afternoon to hub stops so there are more hours for drivers, but not more buses. Changing the option programs back to neighborhood schools won't make any difference in staffing or building costs and might not save any transportation costs depending on how many busses are needed after all the boundaries are redrawn.

Thank you, there is so much misinformation on this point.

Not sure which way your comment is meant. I'd like to see a line item cost for option schools. Eliminating them won't negate the looming budget deficits; but I suspect streamlining them (ie, eliminating most of them) would contribute similarly to eliminating Outdoor Lab and other nitpicky cuts people are arguing over, while potentially making overall instruction across the system more focused and consistent, and thereby more effective. I'm in support of that.

The comment meant thanks for providing facts in response to the misinformation that option schools cost more.

If you want line items, open the budget book. You can see how many positions are allotted for each individual school which is based on the total number of students, the number of kids with IEPs, and the number of English language learners projected to be at that school on September 1. (The projections for each school are listed in the budget book, and the planning factors used to calculate the number of positions can be found online.)

You can see that, except for Montessori with its additional aides in grades 1-5, the number of staff in each of the option schools is calculated using the same planning factors as the neighborhood schools.

I don’t know how much more “line item” you can get—the annual budget book lists the budget for every staffed position at every single school and the planning factor-driven budget for supplies, maintenance, etc. APS is totally transparent about this.

I was the PP and I was indeed saying thanks for clearing up the misinformation that option schools cost most. Lol that someone is demanding line items when they are literally right there in the public budget. Too lazy to look, easier to just spout misinformation! If you look you will see that some schools "cost" a little more or less than others, but this is dependent on the number of ELLs and special ed kids they serve. Schools with more of these kids get more $. I hope no one is seriously challenging that. It has nothing to do with whether a school is "option" or not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t we have three levels of vice presidents of DEI?

All secondary schools have an additional DEI person. They also have discipline deans. Elementary Equity Influencers get a stipend. Central office coordinator positions have increased a lot in the past few years. All of this is costing a lot of money. The question is - do schools truly need these positions?

The answer is a resounding NO. Maybe they would be nice to have if we were flush with cash but we aren't so get rid of them.

[Anonymous]

Option schools cost a ton more for transportation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Option schools cost a ton more for transportation.

How is that? They use existing buses on later routes, they only have hub stops to minimize the length of the routes, and the option schools don't get late buses. Many regular schools have boundaries covering two sides of a freeway and most of their kids are bussed.

How do you know that the incremental cost of bussing for the option programs is "a ton more" than the cost of transportation if we had only neighborhood schools and most of the kids now in option schools were instead using regular buses, late buses, sports buses, etc?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of APS math graduates in here. Cutting Outdoor Lab and TJHSST don't even come close to balancing the budget.

The sacred cows of option schools need a hard look.

Option schools have been discussed a million times and there aren't budget reasons to reconsider them. They have the same planning factors as the other schools with the exception of K-5 Montessori which gets some classroom aides. They schedule the option schools so that we can use existing buses to do another run in the morning and afternoon to hub stops so there are more hours for drivers, but not more buses. Changing the option programs back to neighborhood schools won't make any difference in staffing or building costs and might not save any transportation costs depending on how many busses are needed after all the boundaries are redrawn.

Thank you, there is so much misinformation on this point.

Not sure which way your comment is meant. I'd like to see a line item cost for option schools. Eliminating them won't negate the looming budget deficits; but I suspect streamlining them (ie, eliminating most of them) would contribute similarly to eliminating Outdoor Lab and other nitpicky cuts people are arguing over, while potentially making overall instruction across the system more focused and consistent, and thereby more effective. I'm in support of that.

The comment meant thanks for providing facts in response to the misinformation that option schools cost more.

If you want line items, open the budget book. You can see how many positions are allotted for each individual school which is based on the total number of students, the number of kids with IEPs, and the number of English language learners projected to be at that school on September 1. (The projections for each school are listed in the budget book, and the planning factors used to calculate the number of positions can be found online.)

You can see that, except for Montessori with its additional aides in grades 1-5, the number of staff in each of the option schools is calculated using the same planning factors as the neighborhood schools.

I don’t know how much more “line item” you can get—the annual budget book lists the budget for every staffed position at every single school and the planning factor-driven budget for supplies, maintenance, etc. APS is totally transparent about this.

You don't include extra training/qualifications teachers need for certain option programs. You don't include IB school fees to be an IB school. You don't give any transportation cost data, including impacts of option schools v. those locations being neighborhood schools.

Just because all the schools use the same planning factors - except Montessori - doesn't mean the costs are the same. Some schools SHOULD have different planning factors (ie, high FRL/EL schools should have significantly more teachers and specialists). What about the "costs" of the disparities between schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of APS math graduates in here. Cutting Outdoor Lab and TJHSST don't even come close to balancing the budget.

The sacred cows of option schools need a hard look.

Option schools have been discussed a million times and there aren't budget reasons to reconsider them. They have the same planning factors as the other schools with the exception of K-5 Montessori which gets some classroom aides. They schedule the option schools so that we can use existing buses to do another run in the morning and afternoon to hub stops so there are more hours for drivers, but not more buses. Changing the option programs back to neighborhood schools won't make any difference in staffing or building costs and might not save any transportation costs depending on how many busses are needed after all the boundaries are redrawn.

Thank you, there is so much misinformation on this point.

Not sure which way your comment is meant. I'd like to see a line item cost for option schools. Eliminating them won't negate the looming budget deficits; but I suspect streamlining them (ie, eliminating most of them) would contribute similarly to eliminating Outdoor Lab and other nitpicky cuts people are arguing over, while potentially making overall instruction across the system more focused and consistent, and thereby more effective. I'm in support of that.

The comment meant thanks for providing facts in response to the misinformation that option schools cost more.

If you want line items, open the budget book. You can see how many positions are allotted for each individual school which is based on the total number of students, the number of kids with IEPs, and the number of English language learners projected to be at that school on September 1. (The projections for each school are listed in the budget book, and the planning factors used to calculate the number of positions can be found online.)

You can see that, except for Montessori with its additional aides in grades 1-5, the number of staff in each of the option schools is calculated using the same planning factors as the neighborhood schools.

I don’t know how much more “line item” you can get—the annual budget book lists the budget for every staffed position at every single school and the planning factor-driven budget for supplies, maintenance, etc. APS is totally transparent about this.

I was the PP and I was indeed saying thanks for clearing up the misinformation that option schools cost most. Lol that someone is demanding line items when they are literally right there in the public budget. Too lazy to look, easier to just spout misinformation! If you look you will see that some schools "cost" a little more or less than others, but this is dependent on the number of ELLs and special ed kids they serve. Schools with more of these kids get more $. I hope no one is seriously challenging that. It has nothing to do with whether a school is "option" or not.

Perhaps someone would be kind and post a link to the full budget because the only thing I've found is not a line item version. But even the line item ones I've seen in the past are not completely transparent and entirely clear what some categories cover, for instance. It's these more vague categories that are most likely where unnecessary spending occurs and the first cuts should be made.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Option schools cost a ton more for transportation.

How is that? They use existing buses on later routes, they only have hub stops to minimize the length of the routes, and the option schools don't get late buses. Many regular schools have boundaries covering two sides of a freeway and most of their kids are bussed.

How do you know that the incremental cost of bussing for the option programs is "a ton more" than the cost of transportation if we had only neighborhood schools and most of the kids now in option schools were instead using regular buses, late buses, sports buses, etc?

This is the problem - we don't know exactly what the difference in transportation costs is/would be. Transportation department always says it is more expensive; but it never says how much more. Personally, I suspect it isn't a "ton" more; but that it does cost more overall than if all the buildings were neighborhood schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of APS math graduates in here. Cutting Outdoor Lab and TJHSST don't even come close to balancing the budget.

The sacred cows of option schools need a hard look.

Option schools have been discussed a million times and there aren't budget reasons to reconsider them. They have the same planning factors as the other schools with the exception of K-5 Montessori which gets some classroom aides. They schedule the option schools so that we can use existing buses to do another run in the morning and afternoon to hub stops so there are more hours for drivers, but not more buses. Changing the option programs back to neighborhood schools won't make any difference in staffing or building costs and might not save any transportation costs depending on how many busses are needed after all the boundaries are redrawn.

Thank you, there is so much misinformation on this point.

Not sure which way your comment is meant. I'd like to see a line item cost for option schools. Eliminating them won't negate the looming budget deficits; but I suspect streamlining them (ie, eliminating most of them) would contribute similarly to eliminating Outdoor Lab and other nitpicky cuts people are arguing over, while potentially making overall instruction across the system more focused and consistent, and thereby more effective. I'm in support of that.

The comment meant thanks for providing facts in response to the misinformation that option schools cost more.

If you want line items, open the budget book. You can see how many positions are allotted for each individual school which is based on the total number of students, the number of kids with IEPs, and the number of English language learners projected to be at that school on September 1. (The projections for each school are listed in the budget book, and the planning factors used to calculate the number of positions can be found online.)

You can see that, except for Montessori with its additional aides in grades 1-5, the number of staff in each of the option schools is calculated using the same planning factors as the neighborhood schools.

I don’t know how much more “line item” you can get—the annual budget book lists the budget for every staffed position at every single school and the planning factor-driven budget for supplies, maintenance, etc. APS is totally transparent about this.

I was the PP and I was indeed saying thanks for clearing up the misinformation that option schools cost most. Lol that someone is demanding line items when they are literally right there in the public budget. Too lazy to look, easier to just spout misinformation! If you look you will see that some schools "cost" a little more or less than others, but this is dependent on the number of ELLs and special ed kids they serve. Schools with more of these kids get more $. I hope no one is seriously challenging that. It has nothing to do with whether a school is "option" or not.

Perhaps someone would be kind and post a link to the full budget because the only thing I've found is not a line item version. But even the line item ones I've seen in the past are not completely transparent and entirely clear what some categories cover, for instance. It's these more vague categories that are most likely where unnecessary spending occurs and the first cuts should be made.

Here's the budget book

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2024/02/FY-2025-Superintendents-Proposed-Budget-Document.pdf

School-specific pages are 115-210.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of APS math graduates in here. Cutting Outdoor Lab and TJHSST don't even come close to balancing the budget.

The sacred cows of option schools need a hard look.

Option schools have been discussed a million times and there aren't budget reasons to reconsider them. They have the same planning factors as the other schools with the exception of K-5 Montessori which gets some classroom aides. They schedule the option schools so that we can use existing buses to do another run in the morning and afternoon to hub stops so there are more hours for drivers, but not more buses. Changing the option programs back to neighborhood schools won't make any difference in staffing or building costs and might not save any transportation costs depending on how many busses are needed after all the boundaries are redrawn.

Thank you, there is so much misinformation on this point.

Not sure which way your comment is meant. I'd like to see a line item cost for option schools. Eliminating them won't negate the looming budget deficits; but I suspect streamlining them (ie, eliminating most of them) would contribute similarly to eliminating Outdoor Lab and other nitpicky cuts people are arguing over, while potentially making overall instruction across the system more focused and consistent, and thereby more effective. I'm in support of that.

The comment meant thanks for providing facts in response to the misinformation that option schools cost more.

If you want line items, open the budget book. You can see how many positions are allotted for each individual school which is based on the total number of students, the number of kids with IEPs, and the number of English language learners projected to be at that school on September 1. (The projections for each school are listed in the budget book, and the planning factors used to calculate the number of positions can be found online.)

You can see that, except for Montessori with its additional aides in grades 1-5, the number of staff in each of the option schools is calculated using the same planning factors as the neighborhood schools.

I don’t know how much more “line item” you can get—the annual budget book lists the budget for every staffed position at every single school and the planning factor-driven budget for supplies, maintenance, etc. APS is totally transparent about this.

You don't include extra training/qualifications teachers need for certain option programs. You don't include IB school fees to be an IB school. You don't give any transportation cost data, including impacts of option schools v. those locations being neighborhood schools.

Just because all the schools use the same planning factors - except Montessori - doesn't mean the costs are the same. Some schools SHOULD have different planning factors (ie, high FRL/EL schools should have significantly more teachers and specialists). What about the "costs" of the disparities between schools?

The actual costs at each school are not the same for a lot of reasons; if a school has a lot of newer staff they will be lower on the salary steps and those teachers will cost less than the exact same number of teachers in another building who collectively have more experience. If a building is larger it will have more maintenance allocated to it even if the number of students is similar. The number of walkers and busers varies based on boundaries and neighborhood characteristics. The number of English language learners and kids with IEPs varies based on any number of factors; those students have different planning factors and those teachers have extra training/qualifications.

The point is, the basis for establishing the number of staffed positions (the planning factors) is the same across all schools, and then other things--such as whether to pay for IB tests and AP tests--are separate instructional and funding decisions. And some decisions about how to allocate staff (once funded) or building funds are made by principals--a principal can replace a testing coordinator with a reading specialist, for example. The "option programs" have clear instructional and programmatic differences but every school in APS has unique offerings; no two are staffed exactly alike and deliver education in exactly the same way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t we have three levels of vice presidents of DEI?

All secondary schools have an additional DEI person. They also have discipline deans. Elementary Equity Influencers get a stipend. Central office coordinator positions have increased a lot in the past few years. All of this is costing a lot of money. The question is - do schools truly need these positions?

Absolutely not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lots of APS math graduates in here. Cutting Outdoor Lab and TJHSST don't even come close to balancing the budget.

The sacred cows of option schools need a hard look.

Option schools have been discussed a million times and there aren't budget reasons to reconsider them. They have the same planning factors as the other schools with the exception of K-5 Montessori which gets some classroom aides. They schedule the option schools so that we can use existing buses to do another run in the morning and afternoon to hub stops so there are more hours for drivers, but not more buses. Changing the option programs back to neighborhood schools won't make any difference in staffing or building costs and might not save any transportation costs depending on how many busses are needed after all the boundaries are redrawn.

Thank you, there is so much misinformation on this point.

Not sure which way your comment is meant. I'd like to see a line item cost for option schools. Eliminating them won't negate the looming budget deficits; but I suspect streamlining them (ie, eliminating most of them) would contribute similarly to eliminating Outdoor Lab and other nitpicky cuts people are arguing over, while potentially making overall instruction across the system more focused and consistent, and thereby more effective. I'm in support of that.

The comment meant thanks for providing facts in response to the misinformation that option schools cost more.

If you want line items, open the budget book. You can see how many positions are allotted for each individual school which is based on the total number of students, the number of kids with IEPs, and the number of English language learners projected to be at that school on September 1. (The projections for each school are listed in the budget book, and the planning factors used to calculate the number of positions can be found online.)

You can see that, except for Montessori with its additional aides in grades 1-5, the number of staff in each of the option schools is calculated using the same planning factors as the neighborhood schools.

I don’t know how much more “line item” you can get—the annual budget book lists the budget for every staffed position at every single school and the planning factor-driven budget for supplies, maintenance, etc. APS is totally transparent about this.

I was the PP and I was indeed saying thanks for clearing up the misinformation that option schools cost most. Lol that someone is demanding line items when they are literally right there in the public budget. Too lazy to look, easier to just spout misinformation! If you look you will see that some schools "cost" a little more or less than others, but this is dependent on the number of ELLs and special ed kids they serve. Schools with more of these kids get more $. I hope no one is seriously challenging that. It has nothing to do with whether a school is "option" or not.

Perhaps someone would be kind and post a link to the full budget because the only thing I've found is not a line item version. But even the line item ones I've seen in the past are not completely transparent and entirely clear what some categories cover, for instance. It's these more vague categories that are most likely where unnecessary spending occurs and the first cuts should be made.

Here's the budget book

https://www.apsva.us/wp-content/uploads/sites/57/2024/02/FY-2025-Superintendents-Proposed-Budget-Document.pdf

School-specific pages are 115-210.

Thank you.