EDLD 5342 School Finance Week 1, Pt. 4

Part 4 – Comparing District Improvement Plans and the importance of funding focus

Austin I.S.D and Huntsville I.S.D.

When examining the Austin ISD Improvement Plan and the Huntsville ISD Improvement Plan with emphasis on the districts goals and desired results, I observed that the Austin ISD plan did not include goals that were SMART  (Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Realistic and Time-bound).  The Huntsville ISD plan is written to include goals that are SMART.  In particular I observed that the Austin plan did not have goals that could be measured or evaluated in a specific time.  For example, “increase number of students graduating within four years of enrolling in the 9^th grade for the first time ” is listed on page 29  as a measurable evidence of change, but there is no identification of the percentage of increase needed for success with this goal.  A similar goal in the Huntsville ISD plan reads, “Utilize the Personal Graduation Plans (PGPs) to identify students not on track for graduation and plan interventions so that all students graduate within four years of enrolling as a 9^th grader.” (Huntsville ISD District Improvement Plan 2010-2011, 4H, page 16)

Both plans included the funding sources associated with the goals and objectives identified. In the Austin ISD Improvement Plan, page 29, the source and resources were listed as Title 1 ARRA funds, School Improvement ARRA funds, teachers to teach after regular school hours, on-line courses for those classes not taught by HQ teachers.  The Huntsville ISD DIP, page 16, lists Title II, Title III and local funds as the funding sources and DMAC as a resource necessary to monitor the PGPs.

The major similarity between the Austin ISD District Improvement Plan and the Huntsville ISD District Improvement Plan was the utilization of a chart-based report that had similar headings.  The Austin plan included Desired Result, Measureable Evidence of Change, Activities, Resources, Timelines and the Huntsville ISD DIP headings were Improvement Strategy, Person(s) Responsible, Resources, Timeline, Monitoring.  The primary difference that I observed between the two plans was the lack of specific budget monies assigned to the goals of the Austin DIP and the specific monies assigned to the Huntsville DIP.