DISTRICT ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT
This chapter of the report reviews the organization and management of the Fort Bend Independent School District (FBISD) in five major sections.
- A. Governance
- B. Planning
- C. District Management
- Part 1
- Part 2
- D. School Management and Site-Based Decision-Making
- E. Policies and Procedures
C. DISTRICT MANAGEMENT (PART 1)
Dr. Don W. Hooper has served as FBISD superintendent for the past five and one-half years and is the chief executive officer of the district. The superintendent's cabinet is the district's executive leadership team responsible for day-to-day operations and administration. The cabinet consists of the associate superintendent of Achievement and Development, associate superintendent of Technology, area superintendents for Areas I-III, associate superintendent Facilities and Planning, associate superintendent of Business and Finance, associate superintendent of Human Resources and the associate superintendent of Community Relations.
Exhibit 1-8 presents FBISD's organization.
Exhibit 1-8 Source: FBISD Superintendent's Office.
FBISD Organization
1999-2000The superintendent meets with the cabinet each Monday morning. Cabinet meetings typically last two to four hours and include extensive discussions of issues affecting administration and operation of the district, the issuance of directives by the superintendent, status reports by cabinet members and planning for semi-monthly board meetings.
The superintendent's management philosophy relies on the concept of executive stewardship, which he describes in a book he co-authored entitled, Public Relations for School Leaders, (2000). According to Dr. Hooper, executive stewardship is the balance between leadership and management. To achieve this balance, the superintendent needs to empower cabinet members to be open, free and creative, as well as focused enough to define and accomplish specific objectives. In striking this balance, the superintendent's management philosophy views leadership development and accountability to be crucial to the success of FBISD.
FINDING
FBISD has a relatively flat organization structure that places specific emphasis on cross-functional teaming. The superintendent formed an Executive Steering Team (EST) to act as the management leadership that is responsible for streamlining the district. The purpose of the EST is to provide FBISD team activities that meet the needs of the district's customers while ensuring that activities that do not contribute to performance are eliminated. As a result, EST's mission is to transform FBISD into a learning organization that quickly responds to dynamic, complex demands for efficiency and accountability, while maintaining the district's focus on student success. For example, the functions of the EST include:
- Streamlining the work of the district;
- Making continuous learning a part of every job;
- Identifying and selecting major issues to be addressed by specialty teams;
- Establishing expectations and timetables for the results of special projects;
- Ensuring resources are available for project success such as training, time and funding and allocating sufficient meeting time for projects;
- Determining the criteria for evaluating the process of using project teams to solve problems;
- Monitoring the demands of leadership and management time, coordination of activities and participation of team members;
- Identifying and selecting participants for team projects;
- Leading and managing the process of updating the district's ongoing improvement plan; and
- Monitoring the progress of student success and making adjustments to continuously improve student success, while maintaining a balance between achievement and development.
The EST is a tool for continuous improvement to ensure that FBISD's overall organization is productive by working with and through people and by delegating authority to accomplish desired objectives. Using the EST as a continuous improvement team that develops a series of self-directed work groups, the superintendent has opened communication among units within the district, used cross-functional teams to eliminate "turf" battles and encouraged feedback from administrators throughout the district. Additionally, it is important to note that administrative rank and corresponding decision-making authority within the organization is not considered when teams are configured and leaders selected.
COMMENDATION
FBISD has a streamlined organization structure using self-directed work teams to effectively manage district operations, enhance interdepartmental communication and encourage continuous feedback from administrators throughout the district.
FINDING
The superintendent requires all cabinet members to complete and submit to him weekly plans that list specific objectives, which each one plans to accomplish by the end of the week. The plan also lists activities that are required to accomplish the objectives, along with each activity's priority and estimated date and time it will be completed. Additionally, the plan lists scheduled meetings and correspondence for the week. At least 50 percent of cabinet members' time must be left unscheduled to allow for unforeseen situations, such as parent conferences, special requests, unscheduled meetings, and the like. The cabinet members and superintendent use the weekly plan as a management tool to ensure that each remains focused on accomplishing the overall goals and objectives of the district.
COMMENDATION
FBISD cabinet members and administrators use mandatory weekly planners as an effective planning and management tool to ensure they remain focused on the district's goals and activities.
FINDING
In keeping with his philosophy that leadership development is critical to FBISD's success, the superintendent uses a variety of private sector leadership training and management techniques to develop administrators who can manage FBISD. These techniques are used to implement and manage processes that contribute to the overall quality and efficiency of district management and operations.
Examples include techniques originated by Stephen Covey, W. Edwards Demming and Peter Drucker. FBISD's administrative leadership team, consisting of assistant principals through the superintendent's cabinet, receives annual training through "Architecture of Leadership Sessions" (ALS) that focus on leadership, executive stewardship, planning and scheduling, decision-making, process improvement, quality management, motivation, performance appraisal and conflict resolution. ALS training is designed to increase leadership capacity throughout the organization and is based on the following principles:
- Leadership is key to organizational improvement.
- Organizational improvement means people improvement. Leaders improve their organization by developing their people.
- Leadership can be learned.
- Effective leaders share a common set of traits and behaviors.
- Administrators must exhibit both management and leadership capabilities. One must know how and when to manage or lead appropriately.
- Leaders motivate all stakeholders towards a common vision for the future. These visions are translated into goals for their organizations and expectations for people.
- Quality systems involve training, focusing on and monitoring achievement, establishing alignment and measuring processes.
Exhibit 1-9 presents a sample of ALS training scheduled for the administrative leadership team during 1998-99 and 1999-2000.
Exhibit 1-9 Source: Architecture of Leadership Sessions Training Schedule, 1998-1999 and 1999-2000.
Architecture
of Leadership
Training Sessions,
1998-1999
and 1999-2000
Month/Date Management Training Session September 16, 1998 Data Enhanced Decision-Making October 7, 1998 Executive Stewardship November 4, 1998 Risk and Motivation: Falling Through the Cracks November 18, 1998 Forging the Link Between Cause and Commitment: Covey Path Finding December 2, 1998 Covey Leadership: Panel of Principals April 7, 1999 Leaders as Staff Developers June 3, 1999 Honoring Success/Start-Stop-Keep September 1, 1999 Identification of Leadership/Administrator Proficiencies and Training Recommendations October 6, 1999 NSCI Live Forum on School Improvement December 1, 1999 Leadership Gifts January 12, 2000 Peter Drucker on Leadership and Dealing with Hornets February 2, 2000 Revisiting "Quality" in Education February 16, 2000 Ruby Payne Training: "A Framework for Understanding Children from Poverty" FBISD also has a Future Principals Academy for assistant principals that uses identical leadership training techniques to develop principals from within the organization. This academy leverages the managerial and leadership skills of FBISD central and school administrators to provide innovative training to assistant principals. The district finds that assistant principals who complete the training offered by the Future Principals Academy are often more qualified than sitting principals in other districts to become principals within FBISD.
COMMENDATION
FBISD uses best practices private sector management techniques to manage district operations, provide leadership training for its administrators and promote continuous improvement practices.
FINDING
The review team conducted focus groups with elementary and middle school principals in Areas I-III and individual interviews of seven high school principals. Additionally, the review team conducted self-administered surveys of a total of 69 principals and assistant principals throughout FBISD. Based on input received during the focus groups and survey results, principals feel that both the superintendent and central administration is very supportive of them. During focus groups and individual interviews, the overwhelming majority of principals told the review team the superintendent provided them the resources necessary to administer their schools and area superintendents are available to them on an as needed basis and will come to their schools whenever needed.
Seventy-nine percent of respondents to the principal and assistant principal survey either agreed or strongly agreed that central administration supports the education process. Moreover, 85 percent of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that the superintendent is a respected and effective instructional leader.
Verbatim comments recorded from the principal and assistant principal survey also support the general feelings about the level of support from the central administration. Sample verbatim responses include:
- "Fort Bend is an outstanding district. Central administration works hard to see that all your needs are met. I am proud to have been a part of this great organization."
- "I feel fortunate to work in a district that has strong leadership, high standards for curriculum and support from central administration."
- "Fort Bend does a fine job educating students in such a fast-growing area with such a diverse population. As a principal, I feel supported by the school board, administration and my patrons. Our children are learning things in a good place to learn. Are we perfect? No, but our district continually strives to improve and make the most of all kids."
COMMENDATION
FBISD's central office provides school principals the support services necessary to improve student achievement throughout the district; cabinet members and administrators are continuously available to them on an as-needed basis.
FINDING
FBISD has an in-house staff attorney to control the cost of legal fees and related expenses. The staff attorney provides direct legal support and advice to administrators and campus personnel with contractual matters, employee grievances, student discipline hearings, interpretation of board policy, employment and Equal Employment Opportunity matters, Workers' Compensation, Open Records and Open Meetings Act issues and special education matters.
Additionally, the staff attorney conducts investigations of alleged incidents of serious misconduct, including sexual harassment, employee assaults of students or fellow employees, felonies or offenses involving moral turpitude. The staff attorney also coordinates and monitors services provided by outside legal counsel, particularly services related to special education matters, litigation and special legal matters requiring outside expertise. Exhibit 1-10 summarizes legal fees paid to outside counsel by FBISD for the past three years.
Exhibit 1-10
Legal Fees Paid to Outside Counsel
1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99
Source: FBISD Legal Fee Run, 4/3/2000.As shown in Exhibit 1-10, FBISD's legal fees averaged $306,910 over the past three years, notwithstanding a 98-percent increase in legal fees between 1997-98 and 1998-99. Outside legal fees increased between 1997-98 and 1998-99 because of an employee lawsuit ($70,000), an investigation requested by the Texas Education Agency related to suspected erasures on TAAS for three schools ($50,000) and condemnation proceedings and lawsuits to acquire land to build new schools ($60,000).
If the unusual year of 1998-99 were excluded from the calculation of average legal fees, FBISD's average legal fees for 1996-97 and 1997-98 would total $288,250. This figures compares favorably with school districts of similar size. For example, Cypress-Fairbanks ISD hired an in-house attorney in November 1996 and average legal expenses for the 1996-97, 1997-98 and 1998-99 school years dropped from $329,475 to $249,236.
COMMENDATION
FBISD employs a staff attorney to handle routine legal matters and effectively control the costs of legal fees and expenses paid to outside counsel.
FINDING
FBISD central administration has engaged in "selective policy initiatives" for specific areas of the district. In July 1998 and February 1999, the former Area I superintendent told principals that schools with "acceptable" ratings that employment contracts for the principals would be held until the results of their TAAS scores were available. The Area I superintendent explained that the superintendent supported this action because several schools' TAAS scores had dropped from "recognized" to "acceptable" ratings and improvements in student performance needed to be made. Immediately following the February 1999 Area I principals meeting, 12 principals received a letter from the superintendent, dated March 8, 1999, stating: "As you are aware, based upon your supervisor's evaluation, it was my recommendation not to extend your contract. Therefore, for the 1999-2000 school year, your contract status will be the second year of a two-year contract." Area I principals also said that the statement, "based upon your supervisor's evaluation," is not accurate because they were not formally evaluated by the previous Area I superintendent based on 1998 TAAS results. Rather they were orally informed that their contracts would be held. Exhibit 1-11 presents a scanned copy of the letter received by Area I principals.
Exhibit 1-11
Letter to Area I Principals Regarding
Contract Status for the 1999-2000 School Year
Source: FBISD Superintendent.More significantly, Area II and Area III principals in schools with "acceptable" ratings did not receive the same letter, nor did they receive a verbal warning that their contracts would be held pending the receipt of TAAS results. During focus group discussions, Area II and Area III elementary principals and middle school principals confirmed that this particular initiative was selectively implemented in Area I. Verbatim comments recorded in the self-administered principal and assistant principal survey also supported comments from elementary and middle school principal focus groups.
The superintendent said the decision to not to extend Area I principals' contracts and to treat the
1999-2000 year as the second year of a two-year contract was a "pilot" initiative for Area I to determine if the pressure of "non-renewal" would focus their attention on improving student performance. He also said that the cabinet, board and principals throughout the district were aware that this was a pilot. From the superintendent's perspective, pilots in certain areas of a school district were perfectly acceptable and, after evaluating the results in Area I, the district decided not to implement the initiative districtwide.Based on the results of elementary and middle school focus groups, interviews with high school principals and members of the superintendent's cabinet, the policy decision to pilot contract non-renewal for principals of "acceptable" schools in Area I was selectively implemented. Moreover, the pilot initiative was not communicated clearly to the cabinet and principals throughout the district. Neither members of the cabinet, nor principals throughout the district were aware that non-renewal of principals' contracts in Area I--contingent upon receipt of TAAS results-- was a pilot initiative. In fact, principals told members of the review team that they were notified of the Area I action by their colleagues.
Recommendation 7:
Apply policies on staff performance related to student achievement fairly and consistently across the district.
FBISD should implement all policy initiatives affecting student performance consistently across the district to ensure that all areas are treated equitably. In the future, pilot initiatives should be implemented districtwide and the related purpose for implementing the initiative should be clearly communicated to cabinet members, principals and any other employee groups that may be affected. This process will eliminate the perception that one area is handled differently from other areas within the district.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES AND TIMELINE
1. The superintendent drafts a policy requiring all initiatives affecting student performance to be implemented consistently throughout the district. November 2000 2. The board approves the policy. November 2000 3. The superintendent implements the policy and issues a memorandum indicating that all policy initiatives affecting student performance will be implemented districtwide. December 2000 4. The superintendent directs cabinet members to communicate all policy initiatives affecting student performance to principals throughout the district as necessary. January 2001 and Ongoing FISCAL IMPACT
This recommendation could be implemented with existing resources.
FINDING
FBISD does not use an administrative staffing allocation model as a baseline for assigning school administrative support positions. Rather, the district uses its annual budget process to determine school administrative staffing needs. The process is outlined in FBISD's Campus Personnel Budget Process Information 2000-2001 Personnel Budget Requests. In this document each principal is required to review its current staffing levels, assess future staffing needs and make staffing requests for the
2000-01 school year. The document includes specific information to help principals make staffing assessments. This information includes a budget timeline, instructions and overview of the budget process, rosters of professional and paraprofessional staff currently at the school, staffing benchmark data obtained from a national survey compiled by the Educational Research Service and a Staff Allotment Request Form.
Exhibit 1-12 shows FBISD's staffing process and related timelines outlined in Campus Personnel Budget Process Information, 2000-2001 Personnel Budget Requests.
Exhibit 1-12 Source: FBISD Campus Personnel Budget Process Information, 2000-2001 Personnel Budget Request.
FBISD Staffing Process
2000-01
Timeline Activities February 1, 2000 Begin advanced 200-2001 employment in critical areas. March 28, 2000 Personnel budget information to be reviewed with principals at area meetings. March 28 - April 5, 2000 Campus principals develop budget requests under guidance of area superintendents. April 7, 2000 Area superintendents forward campus packet to Human Resources April 8-9, 2000 Human Resources compiles campus personnel budget request from hard copies. April 10, 2000 Principals meet with Human Resources to prioritize non-teaching personnel requests. April 11, 2000 Area superintendents meet to consider campus personnel budget requests and make tentative recommendations. April 11, 2000 Human Resources Committee meetings with principals to review requests as needed. April 14, 2000 Area superintendents review campus personnel budget recommendations from Human Resources. April 17, 2000 Area superintendents review campus personnel budget approvals; makes decisions on next steps. April 18, 2000 Recommendations for 2000-2001 personnel budget submitted to the superintendent for review and approval. April 18, 2000 Preparation of board agenda item. April 19, 2000 Board agenda item due in superintendent's office. April 24, 2000 Board action on personnel budget recommendations. April 27-28, 2000 Principals/supervisors notified of board action on personnel budget recommendations. TSPR obtained staffing benchmark data from a national survey compiled by the Educational Research Service, which is used to compare staffing levels for each school with those found in large-sized school districts across the nation. The document cautions principals that benchmark data is to be used only for comparative purposes because school and district priorities and needs, together with financial data, will be the basis for determining final staffing allocations for the next school year.
The school administrative staffing benchmarks included in the document are broad for various categories of school administrators and cannot be used to effectively compare administrative positions. For example, benchmark data shows a range of one assistant principal for every 550.4 students to one assistant principal for every 1,472.6 students.
The benchmarks do not define the respective ranges for elementary, middle and high schools. As a result, the benchmark data is not useful to individual schools in determining the appropriate baseline staffing for school administrative positions.
Even though staffing benchmark data is provided in the Campus Personnel Budget Process Information, 2000-2001 Personnel Budget Requests, FBISD's superintendent's philosophy is to staff schools based on need and other considerations--such as school safety and district leadership training--as long as the positions can be justified. Accordingly, each elementary, middle and high school is assigned assistant principal positions in varying numbers without considering enrollment because the district's staffing philosophy requires assistant principals to be responsible for instruction and school safety.
Further, the assistant principal position is used as a training ground for future leadership positions within the district. As a result, when baseline school administrative staffing is established, FBISD does not use an allocation model based on enrollment to provide equity in schools throughout the district. For example, all elementary schools are assigned one assistant principal regardless of enrollment. Middle schools are assigned between three and four assistant principals without considering variances in enrollment. High schools are also assigned assistant principals without adequately considering enrollment.
Exhibits 1-13 through 1-15 show the existing administrative staffing for FBISD elementary, middle and high schools.
Exhibit 1-13
FBISD School Staffing
Selected Administrative Positions for Elementary Schools, 1999-2000
Source: FBISD Campus Organization Charts for Elementary Schools, 1999-2000.Exhibit 1-14
FBISD School Staffing
Selected Administrative Positions for Middle Schools, 1999-2000
Source: FBISD Campus Organization Charts for Middle Schools, 1999-2000.Exhibit 1-15
FBISD School Staffing
Selected Administrative Positions for High Schools, 1999-2000
Source: FBISD Campus Organization Charts for High Schools, 1999-2000.The review team compared school administration staffing guidelines in peer districts selected by FBISD administrators to FBISD's school administration staffing allocation methodology. Cypress-Fairbanks ISD and Round Rock ISD both use campus staff allocation formulas that consider student enrollment.
Exhibits 1-16 and 1-17 present sample campus allocations for staffing middle schools in Cypress-Fairbanks and Round Rock ISDs.
Exhibit 1-16 Source: Cypress-Fairbanks ISD Campus Staff Allocations, 2000-01 School Year
Peer District Comparisons
Sample for Middle Schools in Cypress-Fairbanks ISD
Student
EnrollmentPrincipal Assistant
PrincipalsCounselors Clerical/Support 0 - 1349 1.0 2.0 3.0 7.0 1250 - 1649, Free and
Reduced Lunch exceeds 20%
and mobility index exceeds
10.01.0 3.0 4.0 7.0 1350 - 1649 1.0 3.0 3.0/4.0* 7.0 1550 - 1649, Free and
Reduced Lunch exceeds 20%
and mobility index exceeds
10.01.0 4.0 4.0 7.0 1650+ 1.0 4.0 4.0 7.0
*Schools with enrollment fewer than 1,550 students allocated 3.0 counselors
Enrollment greater than 1,550 allocated 4.0 counselors.Exhibit 1-17 Source: Round Rock ISD Superintendent's Staffing Guidelines, January 4, 2000.
Peer District Comparisons
Sample for Middle Schools in Round Rock ISD
Student
EnrollmentPrincipal Assistant
PrincipalsCounselors Clerical/Support* 0 - 499 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0/6.0 500 - 749 1.0 1.0 2.0 6.0/7.0 750 - 999 1.0 1.5 3.0 7.0/8.0 1000 - 1249 1.0 2.0 4.0 8.0/9.0 1250 - 1499 1.0 2.5 5.0 9.0/10.0 1500 - 1749 1.0 3.0 5.0 10.0/11.0
*Round Rock ISD has a basic clerical/support allocation of 5.0 FTE. One support staff
position is added when enrollment reaches 450 students and additional support staff is
added for each 249 students above 450.
