Welcome to Scribd. Sign in or start your free trial to enjoy unlimited e-books, audiobooks & documents.Find out more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
EMID Member Superintendents White Paper DRAFT

EMID Member Superintendents White Paper DRAFT

Ratings: (0)|Views: 157|Likes:
Published by EMID Families
White paper draft presented to the EMID Board on 12 October 2011
White paper draft presented to the EMID Board on 12 October 2011

More info:

Published by: EMID Families on Oct 13, 2011
Copyright:Public Domain

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

12/10/2014

pdf

text

original

 
 1
East Metro Integration District, ISD 6067(EMID) member Superintendent
s’
 
WHITE PAPER
 Concerning future programs and servicesoffered byEMIDDraft of October 12, 2011
EMID Vision
: EMID’s
vision is to create integrated communities in which all learners haveknowledge, skills and attitudes necessary for success in an increasing diverse andinterdependent world
EMID Mission
: EMID’s mission is to provide and promote integrated o
pportunities for students,families, and staff that expand cultural understanding and support academic achievement.
 
 2
Introduction
Brief History
The first Joint Powers Agreement was approved in 1995. The original member districts were St.Paul, Roseville and North St. Paul/Maplewood. This Joint Powers Agreement was formed toencourage St. Paul and the surrounding districts of Roseville and North St. Paul/Maplewood topartner in desegregating the St Paul schools. This partnership created a movement of studentsof color to suburban districts which at that time had not experienced any significantdemographic changes in their enrollment. The enrollments of the districts surrounding St. Paulwere majority Caucasian. With changes in legislation, voluntary districts were encouraged to join with the other three districts. This new membership created the East Metro IntegrationDistrict. Out of this newly formed collaborative grew a magnet school, Harmabee. A secondmagnet school, Crosswinds, was built a couple of years later. These magnet schools were builtwith the purpose ofofferingparents a choice of having their children educated in an integratedlearningenvironment. Moreover, they were formed to respond to the mission and vision of EMID as it was formed at that time. Today East Metro Integration District is a ten districtcollaborative: St. Paul, Roseville, South Washington County, Stillwater, White Bear Lake, InverGrove Heights, South St. Paul, Spring Lake Park, Forest Lake, and WestSt.Paul/Mendota Heights.Programs and services offered by EMID now include the Office of Equity and Integration with apurpose of offering professional development and student programs, member developedshared services for the member districts, and the two magnet schools.
Strategic Planning
During the 2008-2011 schools years there was compelling evidence that it was time for abroader, more comprehensive re-evaluation of the mission of EMID. The first evidence of thisneed was the withdrawal of two member districts; North St. Paul/Maplewood in 2008/09 andMahtomedi in 2009/10.Also during this period two new districts joined EMID: Forest Lake andSpring Lake Park Lake. The second major change during this time period was in July 2010 whena new superintendent was hired to replace the retiring superintendent. The newsuperintendent refocused the mission of EMID to concentrate not only on the programs of thetwo magnet schools serving 880 students, but also to give greater attention to services andprograms to the full 120,000 student enrollment of the member districts. In November 2010the new superintendent initiated a strategic planning process. That process focused on datacollection in three areas; a) utilization of outreach services provided to member districts, b) thefuture of Harmabee and Crosswinds, and c) funding of EMID programs and services. This datacollection commenced in January 2011. Stakeholders were interviewed in focus groups, inperson, phone interview, or via electronic surveys. Stakeholders included in the data collectionwere school board members, superintendents, EMID administrators, parents, and teachers. Amajor initiative of the strategic planning process was to develop ideas of how to increasecollaboration among the ten districts, given that a large portion of resources were allocated tofund the two magnet schools. The magnet schools enrolled less than 1% of the students frommember districts. (See Attachment A for an overview of the data collected.)
 
 3
Recommendations of the Strategic Plan
The recommendations from the strategic plan data collection were discussed at meetings of thesuperintendents and school board. A comprehensive discussion was held July 20, 2011 at aschool board, district superintendents, and EMID administration retreat. Therecommendations focused on the
magnet schools
were outlined in 3 options:Option 1: Strengthen schools under current structure: EMID schools have the potentialto transform into models of integration and high student achievement; however, it mayrequire additional time and investment.Option 2
:
Transfer governance of schools to different operator
:
The nature andenvironment of the schools seem to be highly valued, though direct student education is
a small portion of EMID’s overall purpose and core competency. Therefore, perhaps
EMID should refocus its efforts away from operating the schools.Option 3: Merge students back into home district schools
:
this option is similar to option
2, in terms of reprioritizing EMID’s focus.
This also assumes that current EMID studentscould smoothly integrate back into home district schoolsThe recommendations that focused on the
shared services and outreach
were outlined in thefollowing:There is an opportunity for EMID to shift from mostly direct service to focus onstrengthening and coordinating member district programs.EMID as a coordinator of member district programming has the potential to leveragecurrent offerings to increase overall participation without dramatically increasing costs.EMID as a technical assistant to member districts can deliver its knowledge base of 
bestpractices
to strengthen and develop member district programs.Each of the above recommendations has ramifications on the delivery of programs services tomember districts.Regarding the
funding for EMID programs and service
s the data indicated the following:A majority of EMID revenues is spent on the magnet schools, including a significantamount of integration revenue.Budget breakdown for EMID is:
Revenue:
 
Expenditures:
Tuition: $5.3 million A) Magnet Schools $ 8.7 millionIntegration: $3.8 million $2.million from IntegrationOther: $2.9 million $5.3 million tuitionTOTAL $12,000,000 $1.4 otherB) District costs: $ 1.4 millionC) Shared Services: $720,000D) OEI: $940,000E) Federal: $240,000TOTAL: $12,000,000

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->