Skip to content
Quick Start for:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive Summary Overview
Summary of Costs and Savings by Recommendation (Exhibit 5)

In March 2001, Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Rylander began a review of the Christoval Independent School District (CISD) as part of a six-district project that also included reviews of the neighboring San Angelo, Veribest, Grape Creek, Water Valley and Wall school districts. These six districts are located geographically near each other in Tom Green County. Based upon more than six months of work, this report identifies CISD's exemplary programs and suggests concrete ways to improve district operations. If fully implemented, the Comptroller's 43 recommendations could result in net savings of more than $295,000 over the next five years.

Improving the Texas School Performance Review

Soon after taking office in January 1999, Texas Comptroller Carole Keeton Rylander consulted school district officials, parents and teachers from across Texas and carefully examined past reviews and progress reports to make the Texas School Performance Review (TSPR) more valuable to the state's school districts. With the perspective of a former teacher and school board president, the Comptroller has vowed to use TSPR to increase local school districts' accountability to the communities they serve.

Recognizing that only 51 cents of every education dollar is spent on instruction, Comptroller Rylander's goal is to drive more of every education dollar directly into the classroom. Comptroller Rylander also has ordered TSPR staff to share best practices and exemplary programs quickly and systematically with all the state's school districts and with anyone else who requests such information. Comptroller Rylander has directed TSPR to serve as a clearinghouse of the best ideas in Texas public education.

Under Comptroller Rylander's approach, consultants and the TSPR team will work with districts to:

  • Ensure students and teachers receive the support and resources necessary to succeed;
  • Identify innovative ways to address the district's core management challenges;
  • Ensure administrative duties are performed efficiently, without duplication, and in a way that fosters education;
  • Develop strategies to ensure the district's processes and programs are continuously assessed and improved;
  • Challenge any process, procedure, program or policy that impedes instruction and recommend ways to reduce or eliminate obstacles; and
  • Put goods and services to the "Yellow Pages Test": government should do no job if a business in the Yellow Pages can do that job better and at a lower cost.

Finally, Comptroller Rylander has opened her door to Texans who share her optimism about the potential for public education. Suggestions to improve Texas schools or the school reviews are welcome at any time. The Comptroller believes public schools deserve all the attention and assistance they can get.

For more information, contact TSPR by calling toll-free 1-800-531-5441, extension 5-3676, or see the Comptroller's Website at www.window.state.tx.us .

TSPR in Christoval ISD

CISD is located in Tom Green County approximately 19 miles south of the county seat of San Angelo, Texas. Agriculture and ranching comprise a large percentage of the economy within the county. The district has seen a shift in its demographics over the past five years. Historically, the population base was 100 percent rural. However, with the growth now being seen in the neighboring communities of Dove Creek and Knickerbocker, the population base is more equally split between rural and suburban. Enrollment is expected to increase as both of these communities send their students to Christoval.

CISD's enrollment for 2000-01 totaled 379. The district has two campuses, an elementary school that includes students from kindergarten through grade six, and a high school that includes students from grades 7 through 12. The district is served by the Texas Education Agency's (TEA) Regional Education Service Center XV (Region 15) in San Angelo.

The Comptroller contracted with Gibson Consulting Group Inc., an Austin-based firm, to assist with the review. The team interviewed district employees, school board members, parents, business leaders and community members and held a public forum on Wednesday, March 28, 2001, at the Christoval High School from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. To obtain additional comments, the review team conducted small focus group sessions with teachers. The Comptroller's office also received letters and phone calls from a wide array of parents, teachers and community members.

To ensure that all stakeholders had an opportunity to provide input, surveys were sent to administration and support staff, teachers, parents and students. A total of 131 respondents answered surveys: 11 central administrators and support staff, 18 teachers, 60 parents and 51 students completed written surveys. Details from the public forum, focus group session and surveys appear in Appendices A through E.

The review team also consulted two databases of comparative educational information maintained by the Texas Education Agency (TEA)-the Academic Excellence Indicator System (AEIS) and the Public Education Information Management System (PEIMS).

CISD selected peer districts for comparisons based on similarities in student enrollment, student performance and community and student demographics. The districts chosen were Apple Springs, Brookeland, Leggett, Meadow and Slidell.

Exhibit 1 details the demographic characteristics of CISD, its peer school districts, Region 15 and the state.

Exhibit 1
Demographics of CISD, Peer Districts,
Region 15 and State Student Populations
2000-01
  Ethnic Groups Economically
Disadvantaged
District Number Percent
African
American 		Percent
Hispanic 		Percent
Anglo 		Percent
Other 		Percent
Christoval 379 0.8% 17.4% 81.8% 0.0% 24.8%
Slidell 336 0.0% 8.3% 91.1% 0.6% 27.1%
Meadow 323 0.6% 61.6% 37.8% 0.0% 64.1%
Brookeland 322 14.9% 2.5% 81.1% 1.5% 48.8%
Apple Springs 272 20.2% 2.9% 76.5% 0.4% 59.2%
Leggett 247 22.3% 12.1% 65.6% 0.0% 72.5%
Region 15 50,696 3.6% 47.9% 47.8% 0.7% 53.5%
State 4,071,433 14.4% 40.5% 42.1% 3.0% 49.2%
Source: TEA, PEIMS, 2000-01.

During its more than six-month review, TSPR developed recommendations to improve operations and save taxpayers more than $482,000. Cumulative net savings from all recommendations (savings minus recommended investments or expenditures) would reach $295,000 over a five-year period.

A detailed list of costs and savings by recommendation appears in Exhibit 5. Many TSPR recommendations would not have a direct financial impact, but would improve the district's overall operations.

Acknowledgments

The Comptroller's office and Gibson Consulting Group Inc. wish to express their appreciation to the CISD Board of Trustees, Superintendent Gary Sherman, the secretary to the superintendent, Terri Hoffman, as well as district employees, students, parents and community residents who helped during the review.

Christoval ISD

In 2000-01, the district served a population of 379 students: 81.8 percent are Anglo and 17.4 percent Hispanic. More than 24 percent of the student body of the district is considered economically disadvantaged. CISD's enrollment has remained relatively constant since 1996-97, from 360 students to 379 students in 2000-01, a 5.3 percent increase (Exhibit 2).

Exhibit 2
CISD Actual Student Enrollment History
School
Year 		Actual
Student
Enrollment 		Percent Change
From the
Prior Year
1996-97 360 N/A
1997-98 376 4.4%
1998-99 379 0.8%
1999-2000 378 -0.3%
2000-01 379 0.3%
Source: TEA, AEIS, 1996-97 through 1999-2000 and PEIMS 2000-01.

The district's budget is nearly $3 million for 2000-01. For 1999-2000, compared to its peer districts, CISD had the third-lowest property value per pupil (Exhibit 3).

Exhibit 3
CISD Taxable Property Value per Pupil
Compared to Peer Districts
1999-2000
District Property Value
per Pupil
Apple Springs 102,432
Brookeland 312,674
Christoval 156,972
Leggett 239,377
Meadow 121,174
Slidell 101,384
Texas 198,090
Source: TEA, AEIS, 1999-2000.

CISD's adopted tax rate for 2000-01 was $1.594, an increase of 9.3 percent over its 1999-2000 adopted tax rate ($1.459).

On August 16, 2001, the Texas Education Agency released the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS) results for the 2000-01 school year. CISD received an overall Recognized rating, the same as its 1999-2000 rating. According to these latest reports, the district's two schools each earned Exemplary ratings; an improvement for the high school, which earned a Recognized rating in 1999-2000. Because this information came late in the review process, and because information regarding the cumulative test results will not be available until November 2001, the data presented throughout the rest of this report reflects 1999-2000 information.

The district's 1999-2000 TAAS passing rate for all tests taken in grades 3 through 8 and grade 10 was 87.7 percent, above both the Region 15 average of 82.2 percent and the state average of 79.9 percent. The 1999-2000 rate was 5.3 percent higher than the district's 1998-99 TAAS passing rate of 83.3 percent. The percentage of CISD students tested in 1999-2000, 89.5 percent, is close to the state average of 90.2 percent.

Overall, the review team found CISD to be a district that focuses on student achievement and holds the line on costs. CISD was rated as Recognized in 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1999-2000. CISD's high school earned Recognized ratings for the past five years, and the elementary school earned Exemplary ratings for the past two years.

Every CISD student starts out in the recommended high school program and is only moved into the minimum program if there is no other alternative. This practice precedes the 2001 legislative requirement that students graduate with at least the recommended high school graduation program beginning with the class of 2004-05. More students in CISD complete the recommended plan than in its peer districts, Region 15 or the state.

The district uses several strategies to control costs and maximize its limited dollars. Since 1996-97, CISD has effectively managed its fund balance by controlling expenditures. Over the five-year period, the district placed an average of 4.8 cents of every revenue dollar earned per student directly into the general fund balance. This has allowed CISD to maintain a fund balance near or in excess of the TEA's three-month recommendation.

Other district methods to control costs include, but are not limited to, organizational restructuring and partnerships. After the business manager left CISD in May 2001, the district transferred that position's duties to the PEIMS coordinator. As a result of this restructuring, the district reduced the number of full-time administrative employees from three to two without a loss of productivity. CISD also increased student safety without spending local funds by allowing the Sheriff's Department to train its drug dogs on school premises. Consequently, CISD did not have expenditures in the area of safety and security for 1999-2000, while the state average for Security and Monitoring costs was 0.6 percent.

As the district works to improve its services, the board, Superintendent Sherman and administrators have a number of challenges to address, including:

  • improved planning efforts;
  • enhanced federal, state and local revenues;
  • better documented procedures; and
  • adequately maintained facilities.

Key Findings and Recommendations

Improve Planning Efforts

  • Develop a long-range strategic plan that integrates the DIP and CIP and links the plan to the budget, with alternative scenarios for growth. CISD has no overall strategic planning process, and focuses primarily on the short-term academic planning required by state law. While the district annually prepares district and campus level plans that appropriately address instructional issues, the plans do not address the administrative or support functions of the district, nor are they linked with each other or to the district's budget. By integrating the district and campus-level plans, incorporating non-instructional functions into the planning process and linking the plans into the budget process, the district will be better positioned to monitor progress toward its goals and more directly link spending to district priorities.
  • Establish a Budget Planning Committee to identify the district's goals and financial constraints for the next five years and prepare a budget calendar. The district does not follow a formal budget calendar during its annual budgeting process, nor does it develop multi-year budgets. Department and campus heads individually develop their budgets and meet informally with the superintendent to review the budgets prior to the superintendent's final decision on each department and campus budget. This process does not allow cooperative interaction between departments and campuses so that everyone understands where the district's resources are spent. Establishing a Budget Planning Committee to develop multi-year budgets and prepare a budget calendar would enhance CISD's ability to set priorities based on its current and future needs and financial constraints.
  • Reactivate the facilities planning committee, develop a long-range facilities master plan and maintain a facilities inventory. The district does not have a formal long-range facilities master plan nor does it maintain an inventory of its space. In August 1999, with the assistance of a facilities planning committee, the district successfully passed a bond package and resolved its short-term facilities needs for a cafetorium, band hall and additional classrooms. However, long-term needs remain and the lack of a facilities inventory limits the district's ability to plan and measure efficiency. Reactivating the facilities planning committee to develop a long-range facilities master plan and inventory will ensure that long-term facilities needs are met.

Enhance Federal, State and Local Revenues

  • Identify opportunities for grants and submit the applications. While CISD successfully applied for the Telecommunications Infrastructure Fund (TIF) and the Technology Integration in Education (TIE) grants in 2000-01, it does not adequately pursue additional federal funding that is available to school districts for targeted purposes through various programs or titles. By aggressively pursuing grant funds, the district could significantly enhance its revenue to provide additional innovative educational resources to its students.
  • Optimize interest income. The district is not maximizing its interest income potential by holding a large portion of overnight balances in non-interest bearing accounts. While the district maintains a local maintenance account that bears interest, it transfers funds from that account to three clearing accounts to cover checks that it writes. Using zero balance accounts and sweeping all undedicated funds into local maintenance accounts, would allow the district to increase its annual interest income by $15,345.
  • Encourage increased meal participation. Although CISD students cannot leave campus for lunch, its student meal participation rates remain low. Given that a 70-75 percent participation rate is not unusual for closed campuses, CISD's 2000-01 participation rates for breakfast (18.1 percent) and lunch (47 percent) represent a significant issue for the district. By expanding its daily lunch entrees and sponsoring innovative programs, CISD could increase its participation rates significantly, thereby increasing federal reimbursement funds.

Better Documented Procedures

  • Document maintenance performed on each vehicle. CISD does not keep records on maintenance performed on district vehicles. Additionally, the district does not track the cost of parts and labor of vehicle repairs. The lack of maintenance records inhibits the district's ability to determine which vehicles are becoming costly to maintain and should be replaced. Documenting vehicle maintenance would help the district ensure preventive maintenance is performed on time, identify recurring problems and weigh the cost of repairing versus replacing vehicles.
  • Develop a disaster recovery plan for technology that includes centralized back-ups. The district does not have a disaster recovery plan in place and is further exposed by fragmented back-up procedures. The district does not perform daily back-ups of tapes, and it distributes back-up duties among several individuals. Developing a disaster recovery plan for technology that includes centralized tape back-ups would protect the district's computing resources in the event of a catastrophe.

Adequately Maintain Facilities

  • Hire an additional full-time custodian for the district and train custodians to care more effectively for the campuses. The district does not apply a defined set of cleaning standards or frequencies for cleaning various types of space, nor does it employ an adequate number of custodial staff. Consequently, district employees are not pleased with the cleanliness of the campuses. By hiring an additional full-time custodian, adequately training the custodians and implementing cleaning standards, the district could maintain clean campuses.

Exemplary Programs and Practices

TSPR identified numerous "best practices" in CISD. Through commendations in each chapter, the report highlights model programs, operations and services provided by CISD administrators, teachers and staff. Other school districts throughout Texas are encouraged to examine these exemplary programs and services to see if they could be adapted to meet their local needs. TSPR's commendations include the following:

  • CISD challenges all high school students to achieve at the highest level by making the recommended high school program the standard for students. Every CISD student starts out in the recommended high school program and is moved into the minimum program only if there is no other alternative. This practice precedes the 2001 legislative requirement that students graduate with at least the recommended high school graduation program beginning with the class of 2004-05. Consequently, more students in CISD complete the recommended plan than in its peer districts, Region 15 or the state. In 1999-2000, 69 percent of CISD students completed the recommended high school program, while 57 percent of students completed the program in 2000-01.
  • The district actively recruits teachers with multiple certifications to optimize its use of teaching resources. One of the ways the district has addressed limited resources and facilities is through recruiting teachers who can serve multiple functions. For example, the district is currently recruiting a math and science teacher for the sixth grade. The district also is looking to hire teachers who are certified to teach math and science, as well as coach. This practice allows the district to save both salary and benefit expenses. Instead of hiring separate individuals for these subjects, the district can pay a stipend and not incur an additional full salary.
  • CISD defines possible payroll deductions and gives employees the opportunity to invest through payroll deductions. The district developed an orientation package that explains all possible deductions, including state retirement benefits, insurance premiums and leave without pay policies. The employees also are allowed to request additional investment options for their own investment strategies, such as annuities or mutual funds. The district will make the necessary arrangements to make payments on employees' behalf through payroll deductions.
  • CISD has strong internal cash controls in place. CISD maintains strong internal cash controls by separating its cash receipts from the bank statement reconciliation. The business manager reconciles all of the district's bank accounts each month; the elementary principal's secretary and the PEIMS coordinator handle all cash receipts from the elementary campus and the high school campus, respectively; and the business manager ensures the accuracy of all deposit slips before the district deposits funds into appropriate bank accounts.
  • CISD effectively manages its fund balance by controlling expenditures. Since 1996-97, the district has placed an average of 4.8 cents of every revenue dollar earned per student directly into the general fund balance. This has allowed CISD to maintain a fund balance near or in excess of TEA's three-month recommendation.
  • The district successfully applied the Construction Manager-at-Risk method to build quality facilities at lower cost. The district hired a construction manager-at-risk to perform all pre- and during construction tasks such as providing a preliminary evaluation of CISD's program and project budget; regularly monitoring project costs; and securing and transmitting to the architect and engineers required guarantees, affidavits, releases, bonds and waivers. Additionally, the district formed a committee of three board members with construction experience to oversee the project. This knowledge base on the board gave the district a measure of quality control that many small districts do not have. The total cost of the project is expected to be $1.4 million under budget.
  • The district allows the county to use its grounds for drug dog training in the evenings, providing drug detection services at no cost to the district. CISD has addressed drug problems by allowing the Sheriff's Department to train their drug dogs on the school premises. The dogs are trained inside the high school and elementary school, the parking lots and the football field. In 1999-2000, CISD did not have expenditures in the area of safety and security, while the state average for Security and Monitoring costs was 0.6 percent.

Savings and Investment Requirements

Many TSPR's recommendations would result in savings and increased revenue that could be used to improve classroom instruction. The savings identified in this report are conservative and should be considered minimums. Proposed investments of additional funds usually are related to increased efficiencies or savings or improved productivity and effectiveness.

TSPR recommended 43 ways to save CISD more than $482,000 in gross savings over a five-year period. Reinvestment opportunities will cost the district $186,475 during the same period. Full implementation of all recommendations in this report could produce net savings of $295,733 by 2005-06.

Exhibit 4
Summary of Net Savings
TSPR Review of Christoval Independent School District
Year Total
2001-02 Initial Annual Net Savings
2002-03 Additional Annual Net Savings
2003-04 Additional Annual Net Savings
2004-05 Additional Annual Net Savings
2005-06 Additional Annual Net Savings
One Time Net (Costs)/Savings 		$43,818
$72,570
$72,570
$61,570
$57,570
($12,365)
TOTAL SAVINGS PROJECTED FOR 2001-2006 $295,733

A detailed list of costs and savings by recommendation appears in Exhibit 5. The page number for each recommendation is listed in the summary chart for reference purposes. Detailed implementation strategies, timelines and the estimates of fiscal impact follow each recommendation in this report. The implementation section associated with each recommendation highlights the actions necessary to achieve the proposed results. Some items should be implemented immediately, some over the next year or two and some over several years.

TSPR recommends the CISD board ask district administrators to review the recommendations, develop an implementation plan and monitor its progress. As always, TSPR staff is available to help implement proposals.