Norfolk and Colebrook Public Schools

2012-2022
Planning Executive Summary

Planning, Cooperation, and Consolidation Options and Selection Criteria Analysis.

Jonathan P. Costa, Sr.

Director, School and Program Services
Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final
EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

Norfolk and Colebrook Planning Options Table of Contents

Planning Process and Report Overview..3 Terms and Definitions...................................................................................7 Educational Implications...10 Enrollment/Staff Projections.16 Financial Implications....20 Governance Implications25 Transition Implications..29 Voting and Analysis Results.31

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

Planning Process Overview

Over the past twenty years, there have three major trends that have combined to put tremendous pressure on school governance and finance structures; structures that were conceived and built in simpler times. First, is the shift among all public schools from a universal access educational model to one dominated by the goal of universal proficiency. With this change comes strict accountability to an ever growing number of externally imposed mandates and academic standards. This has created supervision and instructional challenges that require resources and change on a level very difficult to manage on a small scale. Secondly, the costs of the labor, materials, and expenses required to staff and run a public school have increased faster than the rate of inflation over the same time period. Finally, there has been a slow but consistent decline in student enrollment with no future promise of change which has dropped the number of students to levels not seen since the end of World War II. The combined impact of these trends is an ever rising per-pupil expense coupled with challenges of small scale schooling that make it increasingly difficult for a number of Connecticut communities to maintain a consistently high quality academic program. Norfolk and Colebrook are perfect examples of all of these trends. Especially now that Colebrook is facing steep costs to renovate their existing school facility and Norfolks enrollment is declining rapidly, these twin concerns have led these communities to begin a serious study of these issues and to explore what potential solutions might make the most sense for both of the towns involved. While these discussions have been going on informally for years, the momentum for a more structured process and a serious study of possible options got underway at the end of the 2011-2012 school year. Both the Norfolk and Colebrook Boards of Education had addressed the possibility on their own agendas, the Superintendents of the districts were talking administratively, and in June of 2012 the local Boards of Selectman and Finance joined in. As a result, a joint committee with representatives of both towns and all three voting bodies selectman, education and finance, came together to explore all of

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

the facts and ultimately make a recommendation for action back to their respective Boards and communities. Jonathan Costa, the Director of School and Program Services at EDUCATION CONNECTION was hired to facilitate the process and Jay Hubelbank,
EDUCATION CONNECTIONs Director of Finance and Operations, was secured to provide financial and technical assistance in the

analysis of the available data. The local participants and their role and community are listed below: Sue Dyer First Selectwoman Norfolk Sally Carr Board of Education - Norfolk Mike Sconyers Chair, Board of Finance - Norfolk George Counter Superintendent, Norfolk (advisor) Tom McKeon First Selectman Colebrook James Millar Chair, Board of Finance - Colebrook Jeanne Jones Chair, Board of Education - Colebrook Jay Chittum Superintendent, Colebrook (advisor) A process was developed to examine the key issues and a series of meeting dates set for the committee. Meeting at the Norfolk Town Hall in public sessions, the group began to work through the process steps. After studying the current information and the context of public school change facing both districts, the group first unanimously agreed that whatever the potential outcome suggested, they would evaluate it based on a range of educational, financial and logistical implications. These evaluative criteria were arranged into four general categories and are listed here: a) Educational I. II. III. IV. Curriculum and instructional alignment (scope of program and quality of instructional services) Classroom arrangements & balance (size and appropriateness) Equality of opportunity (facility and program) Flexibility and adaptability
EDUCATION CONNECTION

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

August 31, 2012

(Educational continued) V. VI. Special education obligations Supervisory practices

b) Fiscal (Combined and by town) I. Per pupil expenditure II. Buildings and maintenance (ownership & management) III. Logistics, management and transportation IV. ECS impact based on enrollment V. Special education obligations c) Governance I. Representation (proportionality/fairness) II. Stability and flexibility balance III. Approvals and recognition d) Logistical & Other I. Transitional burden II. External support needed and/or community support predicted III. Timeline required lead time Once these criteria were identified, the group discussed the range of options available for study. For logistical and practical reasons, the group again unanimously agreed to narrow the list to four most viable and practical options. They were: 1. maintaining the status quo, 2. a cooperative arrangement between the communities, 3. a tuition arrangement between the two communities, or 4. a legal regionalization of the two districts which would create a new entity with shared regional governance and financial responsibilities. With the options and criteria set, EDUCATION CONNECTION staff (Jonathan Costa, Director of School/Program Services and Jay Hubelbank, Director of Finance and Operations) worked with source documents provided by both districts to frame out the potential working scenarios requested by the committee. These source documents included budgets, enrollment
Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final
EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

studies, and data gathered from the current educational mandates and reform legislation. While most of this information was easily combined, in the minor areas when there were differences between alignments, classifications or budgets, EDUCATION
CONNECTION staff selected a middle path that split the difference between the two communities to model what it would look

like if a middle ground between the two was constructed. This strategy is apparent in the analysis of class size for example and also in some of the supporting budget line information. After defining the key terms, this report seeks to present the requested analysis for the purpose of informing the decision-making of the Joint Committee. All questions or inquiries regarding the process or results of this report can be addressed to Jonathan Costa, the Director of School and Program Services at the EDUCATION CONNECTION.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

Terms and Definitions

Approvals and recognitions how much effort is needed to gain approval for the desired arrangements Buildings and maintenance the costs associated with running, maintaining, and owning the educational facility. Classroom arrangements & balance the equality from student to student of the various classroom sizes and instructional quality that are possible given the combination of enrollment, staff, budget, and facility. Class size how many children are assigned to each grade-level teacher for the year in general education instruction Common Core State Standards the globally benchmarked academic standards in language arts and math that the Connecticut State Board of Education endorsed as Connecticuts official academic standards in July of 2010 (joining 43 other states that had done the same). These standards are more rigorous than Connecticuts previous standards and will require extensive curriculum and instruction adjustments to help students achieve proficiency. Cooperative Arrangement a legally binding annual arrangement where two or more local Boards of Education may empower a regional cooperative entity to manage the informal merger of the functions of the districts involved. Consolidation bringing together the operations of two schools into one not a legal distinction. Curriculum and instructional alignment degree to which the materials and teaching used to educate students are focused on the same things from year to year and school to school. With both communities mostly sending students to the same middle and high school, this alignment has an impact on the preparation of students for academics beyond elementary school. External Support/Community Support Predicted how much outside support would be required for the move and what is the predicted level of community support given the facts that you have at this time. Flexibility and adaptability the number and quality of the options for different assignments and arrangements that can be made when special circumstances or extraordinary needs present themselves within the school population. FTE Full-time employee. For budgeting purposes, the report takes an average predicted cost per employee based on history as a foundation for making estimates on staff costs and/or savings over-time.
Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final
EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

ECS impact Educational Cost Sharing the degree to which the state of Connecticut will subsidize the per-pupil expense of educating children in your community. Equality of opportunity - the equality of opportunity for advancement and learning from student to student of the various classroom arrangements that are possible given the combination of enrollment, staff, budget, and facility. Logistics, management and transportation the associated costs of doing the educational business (beyond the professional staff) running the buildings, constructing budgets, making the busses run on time, etc. Maximum class size the number of children that each local Board of Education has set as the most it would like to see in any given classroom at any given level. In both communities these numbers are considered recommendations and do not carry the weight of policy or regulation. Multi-age grouping Taking children of different ages (second and third grade for example) and teaching them in one classroom at the same time with the same teacher. Non-tested all subjects taught that are NOT assessed through a standardized, state-wide test (usually math, writing, and reading are considered tested areas) Per-pupil expenditure (CSDE adjusted) the total education budget for the community divided by the number of students served by that same budget, MINUS transportation, bonding, special education outplacement, and certain building costs). Per-pupil expenditure (raw) the total education budget for the community divided by the number of students served by that same budget. Reform Bill 458 (PA12-116) the educational reform legislation passed in Connecticut in May of 2012 that creates new expectations for testing, teacher evaluation, professional learning, supervisory practices, certification, and a variety of other new educational mandates. Regionalization the legal process involving two specific community votes (study/approval) in which two or more communities decide to formally merge the operations of their schools into a wholly new legal entity. This new entity has both governance and fiscal authority in the running of the newly organized school district.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

Representation the degree to which a community has a say in the way its children are educated and its resources are allocated. Smarter Balance Assessment Consortia a 36 state consortia that has committed to a new generation of tests that gauge students ability to meet the new Common Core State Standards Stability and flexibility balance achieving a balance between the ability to change things so the system is responsive with the need for stability so people can plan for the long-term solutions needed to make the most out of resources and materials. Specials for budgetary purposes, the designation of music, art, computer, physical education and world language instruction at the elementary level. Special education obligations/support services those educational services that are required and provided to students with special education designations as directed by federal and state law. Supervisory practices the way in which the principal is able to oversee and develop the teachers within a school. Timeline how long will it take to plan and implement the desired change. Transitional burden how much effort will be required to transition from the current arrangement in the two towns to whatever arrangement is desired. Tuition Arrangement The process through which one town sets a price for the value of an education in their community and then charges other communities that price for the education of children sent from their town.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

Educational Implications of a Consolidation

The educational enhancement potential of a consolidation or combination of the Norfolk and Colebrook school districts is easy to demonstrate. The first most superficial improvement will occur regardless of how the towns come together to make it happen. It comes down to the resource and program flexibility gains made by doubling the scale of two small academic programs. As it relates to the foundational instructional program, the data will show that in most cases, the consolidation would double the potential assignments that most students might receive for a grade-level teacher. Additionally, while it will not prevent it, it will greatly reduce the chances of the significant potential disadvantages of truly undersized programs; poor matches between teachers and students, intense personality conflicts between students with no options for change. With current data, if no action is taken, each community will see some class sizes in the single digits. With this few students in a class, the quality of the educational experience can see dramatic swings if you are a student or family to be lucky enough to have all of the relationships work, that is terrific, but it can also go the other way. When it does, there are very few options to solve the problem. While the enrollment data suggests that at some point there will be single grade teachers in a consolidated school, the frequency with which this occurs is greatly reduced from the two single town schools. Increasing the size of the student pool will also alleviate what will certainly be growing financial pressure in both communities for multi-age grouping classrooms which would place students with one teacher for multiple years. This will inevitably occur as class sizes in both schools dwindle to low single digits and the per-pupil expense in each town rises to more than three times the state average. While multi-age grouping is not by definition a bad thing, it can be a risky strategy as it is very dependent on teacher talent and effort as well as teacher and student compatibility. If done poorly, this strategy can place a student in a difficult situation for at least two consecutive years. Bringing the two communities together and increasing the number of students in every grade level will help reduce the pressure to implement this strategy. Another benefit of consolidation is that it will increase or maintain the number of offerings in non-tested and extracurricular areas as well as the delivery of special education support services without an increase in staff time or expense. This
Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final
EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

10

is driven by increased grouping flexibilities, especially as it relates to interventions and support for new higher standards that are being phased in as preparation for the new statewide assessments (The Smarter Balanced Assessments). These significant new tests will replace the current Mastery Test system and are due to begin in Connecticut starting in the 2014-2015 school year. The third and potentially most important educational benefit of combination of district resources is the improved ability of the Norfolk/Colebrook educational communities to adjust and react to the new provisions of Connecticuts reform legislation. This advantage cannot be demonstrated on a spreadsheet and will take more work and effort than simply drawing up new schedules. The combined impact of the laws passed in the last two years are setting about to change the tenor and focus of all public schools and will require significant changes in professional behavior among all public school staff. These changes will greatly stress both educational communities and it is a fact that the smaller the faculty and staff the greater the burden of the transformation on each professional involved. By adapting to these changes together, Norfolk and Colebrook staff will have a more efficient and coordinated response. Among the suggested or required changes that will need to occur over the next 2-5 years that will demand an extended commitment are: Language arts curriculum revision including higher standards and expectations Math curriculum revision including higher standards and expectations Science curriculum revision including higher standards and expectations Instructional changes required for the delivery of each of the revised curricula Transition from the current Mastery Test to a new generation of computer based adaptive assessments (the Smarter Balance assessments) Training and implementation of a new state mandated teacher evaluation model Training and implementation in new state mandated principal evaluation model New models of professional development delivery

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

11

New testing for elementary teachers and administrators on reading instruction.

With all of these educational benefits of consolidation, it is important to note that while combining staffs under any circumstances (meaning cooperative arrangement, tuition or regionalization) will achieve some of the benefits of a larger scale, it will be difficult for either community to realize the benefit of investing in the changes needed for the long-haul without the knowledge that their efforts will be stable and secure as provided under the process of regionalization. The potential with an informal arrangement (cooperative or tuition) that one of the two communities could pull out and leave the other alone with as little as one years notice, will make the systems changes needed to meet these reform challenges difficult to make. Always in the back of both staffs minds will be the what if this does not last hesitation. It will be hard to entice an individual teacher to invest in change if they believe that the materials they create and the support they need from fellow teachers especially at the newly created same grade levels may be temporary. How effective can these reform efforts be in these two communities if there remains an uncertainty regarding whether all of the work and capacity building being undertaken can walk out the door should the collaboration fall apart? A new regional district would involve a total community commitment. Each town would have to vote twice to create it; once officially to study it and then once officially to commit to it. Under these conditions, everyone would know that the new structure is stable, permanent, and that all of their efforts to improve practice will have lasting benefit for those it was intended for. There is a history of other districts pursuing this regionalization strategy for the same reasons. In Connecticut, 19 times other communities have made this choice above the other opportunities available to them. None of these arrangements have been undone once they were created. Alternatively, there are virtually no district examples of cooperative arrangements that have lasted beyond a few years. One example locally existed for a short time. Litchfield and Regional 6 had a cooperative arrangement for the sharing of some academic classes, but coordination of schedules and transportation conflicts put an end to the promise of this program. Similarly, there are no permanent systemic tuition arrangements on a K-6 basis. And while there are some secondary tuition examples, Oxford famously sent all of its high school age students to one of three towns for many years, all that have existed
Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final
EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

12

have included some level of choice and even Oxford finally determined that ceding the control of its high school educational process to others was a level of control loss that it could no longer endorse. What is seen in these examples is the need for permanence and certainty to enable the long-term thinking that is the hallmark of successful organizations. Without this kind of stable commitment, the advantage of combining districts for the purpose of facing the shared educational reform challenge would certainly be limited. Considering the impact of consolidation on other areas of the educational program, the author believes bringing the districts together would not have a significant impact on special education obligations as much of those are determined by statute. Size and scale of service delivery are not as important in this area as expenses are really driven on the needs of the students. The scale of delivery may have a minimal impact, but the need for delivered services will not change in a consolidation or cooperative arrangement between the two towns. Out of district placements or other high impact special education issues are generally random and impossible to predict or plan for. Given the similar size of both districts, both towns have a similar exposure on this issue so putting the towns together, regardless of the type of configuration, will probably not impact special education costs and services. Supervisory practices will certainly be more efficient in any combined model. Regardless of configuration, if consolidation occurs there will be one less building principal and one less superintendent as well as reduced redundancy in support staff (custodial and office support for example). These savings are captured in the budget projections that follow in the next section of this report. An additional educational benefit for students would be more socialization opportunities for students before going to Northwest Regional. With total school populations in both communities forecast to be below 100 within the next 10 years, the diversity of students and the options for friends and relationships in a given age range is very limited. By doubling the size of the school community through a cooperative agreement, tuition or regionalization, students simply will have more options for friendships and learning. Increased efficiencies between the two communities, regardless of the arrangement, will free up resources for program improvement for both support and overall quality as well. This will create an opportunity to maintain and improve
Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final
EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

13

educational quality while saving each community a significant amount of money. Certainly the potential for more art, music, PE, unique instructional supports these will all be decisions to be made by a governing board or committee over time. Any arrangement that brings these two communities together will create an opportunity to balance guaranteed savings to taxpayers with the potential to invest for the improvement of the quality of education for children from both towns. On the issue of physical space, over time, there is enough space at the Botelle School to handle the combined program, even if it were to include a pre-k program. There may be a need for some temporary space reallocation in the first year or two of the program changing offices to instructional space is one option - but after that the classroom requirements will be manageable even by the current physical arrangements. Because of this, any physical space changes required to make the program fit should probably be designed and implemented on a temporary basis. For evidence of potential negative consequences of a consolidation, there are two areas for concern. The first is the inexact science of bringing two organizational cultures together and trying to make a new one. Every school, but especially small schools, has its own unique way of doing things. These patterns of behavior are developed over time and are a powerful force in guiding the school lives of the adults and children that work in them. Combining two different cultures like the ones that certainly exist independently in Colebrook and Norfolk into one new one is a process that must be managed with care. Mixing traditions, habits, names, and identity all of these things can be emotional and potentially disruptive if not successfully navigated. This is not a point to be taken lightly as one of the biggest potential benefits (working together to meet the challenges of the new reform legislation) could be scuttled if the two professional communities are not successfully integrated. If either cooperative arrangement or tuition only strategies are selected, there must be additional vigilance exercised around the potential damage created by two-tiered social strata. If all of the identity of a new school is tied to one town and none of the visiting communities characteristics come with them, then they will always be just visitors. If Botelle is the site, it may not be overt, it may be subtle, but there most certainly will be a sense that the Norfolk kids are just a bit more at home at their school then the traveling transfer kids from Colebrook. This will not be a problem for anyone from Norfolk but it will absolutely be an irritant to the students and parents of Colebrook.
Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final
EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

14

The authors experience in bringing two separate schools together to form a new one (in both New Milford and Newtown) suggests that significant effort must be paid to creating a new school culture that involves everyone and starts from scratch. Name, mascot, traditions all of the things that create identity in a school should be rebooted and joined in by the new staff and new students so that everyone owns a piece of what is new. Starting a new school with students from two towns that hopes to provide an equal educational opportunity for all of the students it serves, should expect to have to invest time and effort to create a new culture and identity capable of serving all of them regardless of their town of origin. Not everything has to be left behind, but the preponderance of what is used should be created for the shared community. Leaving whatever is culturally lost behind is the second potentially negative consequence of a school consolidation. Small communities are close knit and have strong identities and feelings about themselves and their history. The process of leaving some of this behind can be akin to grieving. It will be difficult for some to accept that a mascot, name, song or tradition that has been in town for years may be altered or changed in the move toward a unified, collaborative intercommunity educational approach for the students being served. This is a fact of the process. Old traditions will be supplanted by new ones culture and community will be enhanced and recreated. It is understandable that the desire to protect what is known and predictable is strong, but at some point the question must be asked, at what price educationally and financially is this position to be purchased? On this point, it is important to remember that whatever the potential gains or losses created by consolidation, this process cannot by any parameter be defined as a loss of a small school atmosphere. A new combined Norfolk/Colebrook school community will be bigger than either is now, but by every objective standard, this new larger school community is still going to be really small. So small, in fact, that probably 95% of all elementary schools in Connecticut will be still be bigger than a combined Norfolk/Colebrook school will ever be. This new school community will still have all of the characteristics and advantages of a small-town school atmosphere, it will just have a new identity, cost a lot less to run per-pupil, and potentially deliver a better educational product than the two that preceded it.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

15

Enrollment and Staffing Implications

The data on enrollment and staffing are straightforward. Both communities are headed toward an elementary school population of less than 100 students. Under the best possible circumstance, this will leave one classroom teacher at each grade level in both schools. With some single class numbers well below 10, with the status quo scenario, per-pupil expenditures will be two or three times higher than the state average and as resources are drained from other town projects and priorities there will be significant pressure to move to a multi-age model of some kind to save money. The following tables, drawn from the most recent enrollment studies by Peter Prowda, illustrate the enrollment data trends as they connect to levels of required staffing. The first shows status quo while the next two demonstrate what would occur given a consolidation using each towns separate class size limits and a third option that splits the difference between them.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

16

Enrollment Projections and Staff Implications: - Status Quo

COLEBROOK K 12-13 Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff 17 1 9 1 10 1 14 1 8 1 9 1 11 1 13 1 13 1 13 1 1 7 1 16 1 8 1 9 1 13 1 7 1 8 1 10 1 12 1 12 1 2 12 1 8 1 17 1 9 1 10 1 14 1 8 1 9 1 11 1 13 1 3 17 1 13 1 8 1 18 1 10 1 11 1 15 1 8 1 10 1 12 1 4 17 1 17 1 13 1 8 1 18 1 10 1 11 1 15 1 8 1 10 1 5 12 1 19 1 19 1 14 1 9 1 20 1 11 1 12 1 17 1 9 1 6 19 1 12 1 18 1 18 1 14 1 9 1 19 1 11 1 12 1 17 1 Total Specials 101 7 94 7 93 7 90 7 82 7 80 7 83 7 78 7 83 7 86 7 K 17 1 11 1 14 1 12 1 9 1 10 1 11 1 13 1 13 1 13 1 1 17 1 14 1 9 1 12 1 10 1 8 1 8 1 9 1 11 1 11 1 2 14 1 20 1 16 1 10 1 14 1 11 1 9 1 9 1 10 1 13 1 NORFOLK 3 14 1 14 1 20 1 16 1 10 1 14 1 11 1 9 1 9 1 10 1 4 9 1 13 1 13 1 18 1 15 1 9 1 13 1 10 1 8 1 8 1 5 14 1 9 1 12 1 12 1 17 1 14 1 9 1 12 1 10 1 8 1 6 26 1 15 1 9 1 13 1 13 1 18 1 15 1 9 1 13 1 10 1 Total Specials 111 7 96 7 93 7 93 7 88 7 84 7 76 7 71 7 74 7 73 7

1.68

1.68

13-14

1.68

1.68

14-15

1.68

1.68

15-16

1.68

1.68

16-17

1.68

1.68

17-18

1.68

1.68

18-19

1.68

1.68

19-20

1.68

1.68

20-21

1.68

1.68

21-22

1.68

1.68

Assumes maximum class size of:

18

18

18

22

22

22

22

20

20

20

26

26

26

26

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

17

Enrollment Projections and Staff Implications: - Consolidation (regardless of method)

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

18

Enrollment Projections and Staff Implications: - Complete Integration (regardless of method)

MODEL COMBINED SCHOOL K 12-13 Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff Students Staff 34 2 20 2 24 2 26 2 17 1 19 2 22 2 26 2 26 2 26 2 1 24 2 30 2 17 1 21 2 23 2 15 1 16 1 19 2 23 2 23 2 18 2 26 2 28 2 33 2 19 1 24 2 25 2 17 1 18 1 21 2 26 2 20 3 31 2 27 2 28 2 34 2 20 1 25 2 26 2 17 1 19 1 22 1 24 4 26 2 30 2 26 2 26 2 33 2 19 1 24 1 25 2 16 1 18 1 24 5 26 2 28 2 31 2 26 2 26 2 34 2 20 1 24 1 27 2 17 1 24 6 45 2 27 2 27 2 31 2 27 2 27 2 34 2 20 1 25 2 27 2 24 Total 212 14 190 14 186 13 183 13 170 12 164 12 159 10 149 10 157 12 159 11 Diff Gym 1 0.56 Art Music Library Spanish 1 1 1 1 0.56 0.56 0.56 0.56 Band 1 0.56 Total Diff

0.00

3.36

13-14

0.00

0.56

0.56

0.56

0.56

0.56

0.56

3.36

14-15

-1.00

0.52

0.52

0.52

0.52

0.52

0.52

3.12

-0.24

15-16

-1.00

0.52

0.52

0.52

0.52

0.52

0.52

3.12

-0.24

16-17

-2.00

0.48

0.48

0.48

0.48

0.48

0.48

2.88

-0.48

17-18

-2.00

0.48

0.48

0.48

0.48

0.48

0.48

2.88

-0.48

18-19

-4.00

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

0.4

2.4

-0.96

19-20

-4.00

0.40

0.40

0.40

0.40

0.40

0.40

2.4

-0.96

20-21

-2.00

0.48

0.48

0.48

0.48

0.48

0.48

2.88

-0.48

21-22

-3.00 -19.00

0.44

0.44

0.44

0.44

0.44

0.44

2.64

-0.72 -4.56

Maximum class size of:18

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

19

Fiscal Implications of a Consolidation

While we believe that the educational quality of both communities will be enhanced overall through a consolidation, it is also clear that both could save a significant amount of money as well. Per pupil expenditure in both communities is going to go up at a rate that will result in both being at least twice, and probably three times as much as the state average within the study period. In Norfolk that means that without action, the perpupil will go from the current level of $22,522 in 12-13 to a predicted level of over $40,000 per pupil within the study period. In Colebrook, the levels of spending will grow from the current $17,651 in 12-13 to over $27,000 within the study period. Through consolidation, total expenses incurred by the two communities are reduced through two mechanisms. First, the annual operational savings realized by running one building instead of two. In addition to the physical plant, there is one less principal, one less superintendent, and fewer support staff required. Furthermore, logistics, management and transportation will be consolidated under one contract. Because of the small size of the new combined district, simply bringing existing routes under one contract would save money. Additional savings are possible with route consolidation as well. The small distances involved will allow for the consolidation of bus routes with an insignificant increase in travel time incurred for some students but never more than 10 additional minutes either way as a worst case scenario. Those times can probably be reduced and there may actually be a net savings or net time neutral when all of the routes are finally determined. Taken together, these operational savings are projected to be $441,883 in the first year alone and would total over $4.8 million over the study period. The second area where savings are derived come from staff costs that are reduced over time. As enrollment shrinks, there will be times when only one classroom teacher is needed when there used to be two. Over the ten years, these FTE savings could conservatively save both communities over $1.7 million. If savings from the projected cost of a Colebrook building renovation are factored in (given the three year old plan implemented at current reimbursement and borrowing costs) this would save an additional $2.7 million.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

20

Taken together, the total savings to both communities of a consolidation would be over $9 million over 10 years. One important note to remember is that these savings, because of the different baseline budget starting amounts between the two communities, are unequally generated between Colebrook and Norfolk. If no adjustments are made, the operational and FTE savings especially as it is measured in per-pupil spending disproportionally favors Norfolk taxpayers. Savings from construction and facilities improvements that are avoided by a consolidation benefits Colebrook. Any cooperative or regional arrangement would need to carefully plan how to equalize these savings so that the fiscal advantages of some type of merger are shared more or less equally between the two towns.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

21

Ten Year Budget Projections Per Pupil Spending

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

22

First Year Consolidated Budget Projections

Category Norfolk 2012-13 Colebrook 2012-13 $813,177.00 $178,437.00 $1,260.00 $35,352.00 $4,036.00 $10,200.00 $9,000.00 $133,099.00 $98,195.00 $123,364.00 $93,157.00 $0.00 $275,245.00 $8,320.00 $0.00 $0.00 Combined 2012-13 $1,655,848.00 $521,060.00 $3,660.00 $82,194.00 $7,656.00 $61,696.00 $31,349.00 $285,010.00 $248,342.00 $387,499.00 $273,360.00 $1,000.00 $659,921.00 $58,142.00 $5,355.00 $750.00 Model 2012-13 $1,680,848.00 $521,060.00 $3,660.00 $47,682.00 $7,656.00 $53,176.00 $28,649.00 $153,411.00 $150,147.00 $264,135.00 $213,737.00 $1,000.00 $659,921.00 $49,822.00 $5,355.00 $750.00 Difference

TOTAL 1000 Regular Education $842,671.00 TOTAL 1200 Special Education $342,623.00 TOTAL 1300 Adult Education $2,400.00 TOTAL 2100 Health Supportive Services $46,842.00 TOTAL 2210 Improvement of Instruction $3,620.00 TOTAL 2220 Library/Media & Computer Services $51,496.00 TOTAL 2310 Board of Education $22,349.00 TOTAL 2320 Superintendent's Office-Executive Admin$151,911.00 TOTAL 2400 Support Services-School Administration $150,147.00 TOTAL 2600 Operations & Maintenance of Facility $264,135.00 TOTAL 2700 Student Transporation $180,203.00 TOTAL 2750 Field Trip Transporation $1,000.00 TOTAL 2800 Employer Provided Benefits $384,676.00 TOTAL 2900 Other Support Services - Instructional $49,822.00 TOTAL 3100 Food Services Operations $5,355.00 TOTAL 3200 Community Service $750.00 GRAND TOTAL

-$25,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 $34,512.00 $0.00 $8,520.00 $2,700.00 $131,599.00 $98,195.00 $123,364.00 $59,623.00 $0.00 $0.00 $8,320.00 $0.00 $0.00

$2,500,000.00 $1,782,842.00 $4,282,842.00 $3,841,009.00 $441,833.00

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

23

10 Year Predicted Cost Savings of a Combined District Operation

Fiscal Year Operations Savings Annual $441,833.00 $450,669.66 $459,683.05 $468,876.71 $478,254.25 $487,819.33 $497,575.72 $507,527.23 $517,677.78 $528,031.33 $4,837,948.08 Total Annual Saving

FTE Reduction 0.00 0.00 1.24 1.24 2.48 2.48 4.96 4.96 2.48 3.72 23.56

Cost/FTE

Total Annual FTE Savings $0.00 $0.00 $84,285.20 $85,970.90 $175,380.64 $178,888.25 $364,932.03 $372,230.67 $189,837.64 $290,451.59 $1,741,976.92

2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 2021-22 10 Yr. Total

$65,332.50 $66,639.15 $67,971.93 $69,331.37 $70,718.00 $72,132.36 $73,575.01 $75,046.51 $76,547.44 $78,078.39

$441,833.00 $450,669.66 $543,968.25 $554,847.62 $653,634.89 $666,707.58 $862,507.75 $879,757.91 $707,515.42 $818,482.93

$6,579,925.00

Note: All increases based on a 2.0% annual increase

*Projected savings in this chart do not include construction savings from a possible Colebrook renovation project.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

24

Governance Implications of a Consolidation

As described in a previous section of this report, quality educational experiences depend on the ability to plan for and build capacity for the long-term. Businesses and organizations that can take the long term view can make better decisions about resources and service delivery than those who keep all of their attention focused on the short-term. In this reality is the challenge of making a governance decision about the best pathway forward for a Colebrook and Norfolk school systems. It is a classic risk-reward relationship; the most critical gains in academic programming quality and service delivery are not likely to occur unless a level of commitment to the long-term future is made by both communities. These same issues would come into play should other communities want to join whatever configuration Norfolk and Colebrook come up with as a result of this process. It will most certainly be easier to join an existing arrangement than it will be to start a new one. To reiterate, the more superficial the relationship (from tuition, cooperative arrangement to true regionalization) the lower the return on investment is likely to be. On the other hand, the deeper the commitment to a long-term organizational strategy, the higher the chance is for success in the creation of a successfully combined learning community. The fiscal savings are clear and easy to identify. Striking the right balance in the area of governance is a much more difficult decision. Here is a review of the basic facts comparing the governance issues of each of the options studied by the Committee.

Status Quo:
1. Structure No change, stays as is. 2. Supporting Legislation study of efficiencies in reform bill 458 may result in ECS penalties for districts with perpupil spending above the state average. 3. Guidelines and Implementation No change 4. Stability and Flexibility Balance Very stable governance, unstable finances with little flexibility 5. Approvals and Recognition None needed.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

25

Tuition Only:
1. Structure the Norfolk community would set a price, Colebrook would pay based on the number of students who attend each year. Tuition money would go to Norfolks general fund. Stability of price, implications of students entering or leaving would need to be worked out between the two communities. This does not change the status of the existing Boards of Education. 2. Supporting Legislation none specifically designed for this the two towns simply need to agree. 3. Guidelines and Implementation by mutual agreement no protections or due process. The only rights or structures in this arrangement are those created by mutual agreement through the implementation. 4. Stability and Flexibility Balance weak on stability and choice the arrangement can fall apart at any time and with only one tuition option for parents, there really is no choice or flexibility. 5. Approvals and Recognition easy and by mutual agreement. There is no need for public approval this can be done at the Board level. If either party wants to end the arrangement, its over. Also, a community that has to send its money but has no say in how its spent, may be skeptical about any arrangement that has this as a charactistic.

Cooperative Arrangement:
1. Structure By mutual agreement and as such can take on whatever plan the two communities agree to. To implement this arrangement, a new legal entity is established that has legal authority to manage and implement the cooperative arrangement. Both existing Boards of Education remain and work with the new entity to implement the arrangement but the new entity is the final arbiter of decision making as it relates to the implementation of the cooperative arrangement. They would negotiate contracts, conduct business, evaluate the superintendent, and run the business of the district. 2. Supporting Legislation Connecticut Stature 158A moderately helpful sets up the process but leaves a lot to interpretation.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

26

3. Guidelines and Implementation moderate - a timeframe can be set, by statute, regardless of the contract terms or length, there is a one-year escape option for any Board involved. The legislation provides some guidance, but there is wide latitude given to the parties to set up what works best for them. 4. Stability and flexibility balance weak on stability but strong on flexibility. Governance is conducted by the joint appointed committee what role the rest of the towns governing structure would be would need to be determined. This appointed committee is responsible they are independent of the other boards and have responsibility for the arrangement. They would set the price, budget, instructional parameters, contracts, etc. 5. Approvals and Recognition medium difficulty and by mutual agreement. There is no need for public approval this can be done at the Board level but there are significant legal implications.

Regional Configuration Pre-K through 6

1. Structure Strong - a formal legal arrangement that creates a separate and distinct legal entity. Both local Boards of Education would be replaced by a new, regional Board of Education. This new regional board sets the budget for both towns independent of either towns Board of Finance. Total plurality of two towns determines votes of approval for budget or other referendum issues. 2. Supporting Legislation Connecticut statute 10-46/7 additionally language in 2012 bill 458 make it clear that these structures are supported by the current executive branch administration (Governors Office and Commissioner of Education). 3. Guidelines and Implementation Strong with a long history. 19 others have been created the proportionality and structure can be determined by the communities. Several working models to build from. 4. Stability and Flexibility balance Most stable and predictable but once created weak on flexibility. This is the hardest to create and the hardest to get out of. Basically puts both communities on the same footing and is designed to be long lasting in terms of commitments.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

27

5. Approvals and Recognition Difficult - a plurality of both towns would need to approve the study of such a region and that study would need to be blessed/approved by the State Board of Education. Current political reality suggests that this step would be formality. Following that, both communities would then have to approve the recommendations of the study and the creation of the new regional district. Would probably take two years to go create and implement.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

28

Logistical Implications of a Consolidation

Status Quo
1. Transitional burden none. 2. External support needed/community support predicted none required, although pressure related to costs and educational quality will grow in each community over time if this option is selected. 3. Timeline required lead time none.

Tuition Only
1. Transitional burden medium there are issues to be resolved related to educational, fiscal and governance arenas. These will need to be resolved in an open market with little guidance. 2. External support needed community support predicted hard to know. No support is needed for the boards to act, they could do this unilaterally. Over time, what kind of support would come from towns unequally represented and how that might play out are unknown. 3. Timeline required lead time one year.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

29

Cooperative Arrangement
1. Transitional burden medium there are issues to be resolved related to educational, fiscal and governance arenas. These will need to be resolved in with the guidance of public act 158A. 2. External support needed community support predicted - hard to know. No support is needed for the boards to act, they could do this unilaterally. Over time, what kind of support would come from towns will depend on how the cooperative arrangement is structured and how well it is implemented. 3. Timeline required lead time at least one year.

Regional Configuration
1. Transitional burden high - there are issues to be resolved related to educational, fiscal and governance arenas. These will need to be resolved with the guidance of the Connecticut general statutes and the 19 other districts that have done this before. 2. External support needed community support predicted whatever structure is determined, it must be approved for study by both communities and the outcome approved for implementation both communities as well. This structure cannot be implemented without a plurality of consent in both communities. 3. Timeline required lead time at least one year but probably two.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

30

Voting Terms, Definitions, Approach and Results

While the group brainstormed 17 criteria, it was decided that each of these should carry different weights when considering a long-term solution. Some of these factors are simply more important than others. The group agreed on a suggested weighting of items according to EDUCATION CONNECTION staff understanding of the impact and importance of each item relative to one another. The total score of the combined items would be 100 as a point of reference for comparing the options to each other. With that as background, the group discussed each option and each decision point, coming to a consensus rating for each. At the end of that process, the following scores for each option were agreed upon.

Norfolk/Colebrook Consolidation Report - Final

EDUCATION CONNECTION

August 31, 2012

31