State officials said last week that implementing Maryland's Blueprint for the Future will require tough decisions at the local level because they will need to prioritize how education funds are spent.
Buckingham Elementary School students eat lunch in the cafeteria on the first day of school in September.
Photo courtesy of Worcester County Public Schools
Mandatory blueprint will force 'difficult decisions' on spending
Charlene Sharp, Associate Editor
State officials said last week that implementing Maryland's Blueprint for the Future will require tough decisions at the local level because they will need to prioritize how education funds are spent.
During a virtual meeting Feb. 20, members of the State Accountability and Implementation Commission discussed implementation of the state's mandatory Comprehensive Education Reform Plan with Worcester County Commissioners and the Worcester County Board of Education. The blueprint calls for local school systems to increase teacher pay and expand dual enrollment, among other changes aimed at improving Maryland's education.
“It's not going to be business as usual,” AIB chairman Ike Leggett said. “We're not going to be able to fund everything that people have wanted in the past.”
Leggett told Worcester County officials that Maryland students ranked 40th.th and 43rd State leaders felt they needed to spend years developing a plan to overhaul the state's education system, which had achieved national excellence in reading and math. AIB vice-chair Britt Kirwan, who led the initiative, said major changes were needed.
“We will continue to have challenges,” he said.
AIB Executive Director Rachel Heiss outlined the pillars of the Blueprint and how it will be funded. The county allocated $100 million in Maintenance of Efforts (MOE) funds to education last year, but the new local share of the Blueprint is only $73 million. Under the Blueprint, local governments must fund the local share or the MOE, whichever is greater.
Hise emphasized that some of what the school system currently funds is not included in the blueprint.
“Anything that is not in the blueprint may be evaluated by the community,” she said.
Commissioner Chip Bertino asked if these numbers show that $73 million is enough to cover the blueprint's needs. That figure doesn't include transportation, band or track and field, she said.
Bertino said how does county government know if a school board is meeting its blueprint obligations and whether there is a transparent way to know if the obligations are being met from a financial perspective? I asked if it was possible.
“You don't have that now?” Leggett asked.
Bertino said the county doesn't have a level of detail to help officials effectively understand what's going on.
“Other county governments are experiencing the same opportunities for improvement as we are,” Bertino said.
Mr Leggett said it was AIB's expectation that everything related to the blueprint be transparent.
“What we're talking about here is the taxes that the people are paying,” he said.
Mr. Bertino asked about zero-based budgeting, the process of starting a budget from scratch rather than using the previous year's budget amount. Leggett said his approach is to start the budget from scratch, decide on the most important priorities and allocate funds to them. If you don't have enough money for everything on your list, you must decide whether to add resources or remove things from your list. Leggett felt zero-based budgeting was beneficial, but he said budgeting decisions need to be made at the local level.
Kirwan said local school systems can receive support from the state during the implementation of the blueprint through consultants provided by AIB.
“These are people who can bring the strategic thinking to make the adjustments you’re talking about,” he said.
Leggett said the process will require transparency and cooperation.
“We need to be able to access and see everything with taxpayer dollars,” he said. “That transparency is essential.”
He acknowledged that implementing the Blueprint initiatives will require major changes to the school system, but that fundamental changes are needed to improve education across the state.
“The Blueprint doesn't do everything that people might want to do at the local level,” he says. “There will be some difficult decisions.”
John Andes, a school board member and the county's former superintendent, said Worcester County was considered a wealthy jurisdiction by the state and as a result did not receive enough funding. He said the county will receive $1.4 million, or about $200 per student, to implement the blueprint.
“We need more state funding to get this job done,” he said, adding that the blueprint's required pay increases for teachers with National Board of Education certification go beyond what states are providing. It was expensive, he added. “We're going to have to cut somewhere to pay for it. Implementing the blueprint with fidelity will require more state funding.”
Andes argued that Worcester County already supports many of the Blueprint's values and is one of the top-performing school systems in the state. He pointed out that the sub-statistics Leggett shared at the beginning of the meeting were from the National Assessment of Educational Progress, a rating that is not based on individual student or school results.
“This is a barometer, not a census,” he says.
Hise said counties where the local share is lower than the MOE will have difficulty raising funds because the funds are already being spent on certain things.
“Rethinking how we use resources is difficult,” she said, adding that the goal is to get local officials to agree on a set of priorities. “We plan to provide targeted technical assistance to dig deeper. We strongly encourage Worcester County to participate.”
School Board President Todd Ferrante asked if the blueprint implementation schedule could be delayed.
“That's an issue we have to address in the General Assembly,” Leggett said.
At a school board meeting late Tuesday afternoon, Worcester County Public Schools officials said the support services mentioned by AIB during the virtual meeting were not yet available.
“This is something completely new and we are preparing to offer it,” said Annette Wallace, the school system's chief safety and academic officer for grades 9-12. Other officials said school systems would not be able to apply for aid until July 1.
“We certainly will be reaching out to that consultant,” Chief Financial Officer Vince Tolbert said.
Mr. Wallace also addressed comments regarding transparency. She said one of her pillars of the entire blueprint is accountability and transparency.
“Today the question was so clear that it seemed to have been omitted,” she said. “I wanted to make that clear to the board and the public. I don't know why it was omitted when asked.”
She added that there is already accountability within the school system.
“When it comes to accountability, Worcester County Public Schools now, thanks to the leadership and foresight of our Board of Directors, every expenditure you approve every month is posted on our website,” she said. . “I would like to suggest something about the lack of transparency and accountability. It costs 25 cents to go to the bathroom. If you have to pay a quarter to go to the bathroom, like in Europe, then You'll understand.'' That means using the toilet for 25 cents. Everything is there, everything is explained, everything is very transparent. ”
School board member Katie Addis brought up Leggett's comments about zero-based budgeting and asked if that was something the school system could consider. Tolbert said it would be difficult for school systems to do that.
“For some companies, it makes sense,” he says. “I don’t think it makes much sense for the school system.”
Addis said that's probably something the school system could do every five or 10 years.
“The fact that we have a process like that is going to be beneficial not only to the Treasury, but also to the taxpayers who know that things are being monitored,” she said.
