Superintendents Toolkit 2013

Superintendent’s Toolkit

February 2013

Legislative & Communications Issues & Talking Points

Welcome to revamped Superintendent’s Toolkit

Table of contents

Legislative Issues

On behalf of the IASA Board of Directors, I am pleased to present to you the revamped Superintendent’s Toolkit. Similar to the IASA Annual Report and our monthly newsletter Leadership Matters, we have gone to

 Top 10 Strategies for Communicating with Legislators

 Budget/Cost Shift

an online format that utilizes “flipping book” technology.

 Unfunded Mandates

 Pension Reform

By using this technology, not only can we go “green,” but we also can update and add to the content at any time. We will change the cover date each time we update the toolkit. You can access a topic either by flipping through the publication like a magazine, or by simply clicking on an item in the Table of Contents. The material in this toolkit is divided into two major sections: Legislative and Communications. The Legislative section contains tips on how to work with legislators as well as white papers on legislative topics of current interest. Each issue paper contains sections on the background of the issue, an explanation of the issue, suggested talking points and a list of resource links for members that wish to research a topic more in depth. The Communications section includes a brief template for putting together a school communications plan as well as general talking points related to issues that superintendents face on a regular basis. We will continue to add to the content as needed. We welcome your suggestions for new issues or topics and any materials you have to offer as a resource. This revamped Superintendent’s Toolkit not only is the work of Chief of Staff/Director of Governmental Relations Diane Hendren and Director of Communication Mike Chamness, but involved a steering committee from the IASA Board of Directors that included Diane Robertson, Brad Hutchison, Dr. Catherine Finger, Dr. Jason Henry, and Dr. Thomas Bertrand. We hope that this Superintendent’s Toolkit provides you the necessary “tools” with which to help meet the ever- increasing demands of being a school superintendent.

 PTELL

 ISAT Cut Scores

 Certified School Nurse

 Special Education Class Size

Communications Issues

 School Communications Template

 Suggested Talking Points

 Threat of Violence Posted on Social Media  School Shootings (not in your district)

 Strike threat

 Budget Cuts/Closing School Building

 Board Members/Staff Attending Conferences

 School Closing for Illness

 Sample Letters

 RIF Situations

 Weapon at School

Yours for better schools,

 Death in School District

 Advance Illinois Report Card

Dr. Brent Clark IASA Executive Director

Legislative Issues

Note from IASA Chief of Staff/Director of Governmental Relations The legislative issues included in this section of the Superintendent’s Toolkit are designed to provide you with background, a definition of the issues, some suggested talking points and links to a variety of resource materials that we have collected. In some cases, they will need to be customized with your specific school district information or updated facts and figures, and we have tried to highlight those areas. I know that you are already aware of these issues. This information is to provide you with the resources with which to communicate with your legislators, the media or the general public. The information also can easily be turned into letters to the editor. As Director of Governmental Relations for IASA, I always am available to assist members with issues that may arise in your district. My email is dhendren@iasaedu.org and the office phone is (217) 753- 2213. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance. Diane Hendren, Chief of Staff / Director of Gov’t Relations

Diane Hendren

Top 10 strategies for communicating with legislators

As we enter into what promises to be another difficult and challenging legislative session, I thought it might be a good time to talk about our relationship with our legislators. Drawing not only on my years of working with legislators, but also from advice I have gathered from many sources, I would like to offer “Top 10 Strategies” for effective communications with our elected officials: 1. Know your issue. IASA has produced information on the major issues, and that information can be found in this publication 3. Focus your message on the effect on children because they are the most important group when it comes to education. 4. Recognize that there usually are other viewpoints on an issue. Learn what they are and develop a rebuttal to advocate your position while showing respect for the other viewpoints. 6. Don’t give up. Perseverance is important, and the relationship with a legislator usually is a long- term commitment. A superintendent probably didn’t learn everything about school finance in one meeting, and legislators probably won’t either. Educating them is the key. 7. Be positive in your communications with legislators. People invest in success, so showcase things that are going well. 2. Keep your message simple and have a one-page fact sheet to leave with your legislator. 5. Be firm in your positions, but don’t be argumentative.

your district mailing list, invite them to tour your buildings and set up regular meetings in their district offices to discuss education issues when they are out of session and have more time to focus on education. Communicate during session by phone or in writing, including email. Your goal is to develop a relationship where they will pick up the phone and call you to solicit your opinion on issues involving public education. 9. Developing a working relationship with your legislator is a two-way street. Instead of always asking them to do something for us, if you have a legislator who has demonstrated a strong commitment to education, you can help them stay in office by attending one of their fundraisers or events. When session is over, a thank you for representing the school districts, staff, parents and students always will be well received. Recognizing them at board meetings for the real and meaningful things they have done to help the district is another way to foster good relationships. 10. Remember, the final legislative outcome seldom is perfect. Don’t let perfect become the enemy of good.

8. Get to know your legislators in person and communicate with them regularly. Put them on

Budget/Cost Shift Background:

The state budget for public education in Illinois has been on a downward spiral the past few years with General State Aid being prorated or cut by 5% in FY12 and by 11% in FY13.

Transportation funding has been reduced by 42% from FY10 levels.

Funding for Mandated Categoricals has been on a roller-coaster ride, having risen from FY04 through FY10, then falling 8.4% in FY11, rising by 0.04% in FY12 and dropping by 1.44% in FY13. The governor is scheduled to deliver his Budget Address to the General Assembly on March 6, but preliminary numbers released by his office in January call for a $400 million cut to the public education budget for FY14 to reach as much as a $1.4 billion cut by FY16 if the income tax increases are allowed to expire and nothing is done regarding the unfunded liability of the state’s pension systems. The Education Funding Advisory Board (EFAB) in its annual report to the General Assembly delivered in January of 2013 called for an increase in the GSA foundation level to $8,762, citing a national education funding model. The price tag to reach that level in FY14 would be $4.7 billion. Meanwhile, ISBE’s proposal for FY14 included an $874 million increase, $745 million of which would be needed to restore GSA to the foundation level of $6,119 as opposed to the 89% foundation-level funding for this school year. In sharp contrast to both EFAB’s and ISBE’s proposals to fund public education, Illinois remains dead last in the country in terms of providing funding for public education as illustrated in the chart to the left.

(Continued on page 6)

Budget/Cost Shift

(Continued from page 5)

Issue:

There appears to be a concerted public relations effort to tie funding for public education, public safety and human services to the pension reform issue. The governor has used the pension issue as the reason he is projecting deep cuts in the FY14 education budget, with some projections calling for GSA to be cut as much as 20 percent or more. The FY13 education funding debate included one proposal by the governor to eliminate Transportation funding. Wrapped up in the pension reform issue is the state’s desire to incrementally shift its portion of the normal pension costs to local school districts. The governor, Speaker Madigan and Senate President Cullerton all have supported the cost shift. The governor has cited a snapshot in time of cash reserves in some school districts to try and make his case that school districts could handle the cost shift.

Talking points:

1. Always try to describe the impact on students in your district as a way to make your points related to budget issues. Use the budget spreadsheet listed on page 7 to present data and to determine the numbers in some of the talking points that follow. 2. The notion that school districts easily can absorb more budget cuts or the state shifting its portion of the pension costs to local districts is just not true. 3. Districts already have had to absorb an 11 percent cut in General State Aid over the past two school years and a 42 percent cut in transportation reimbursement over the past three school years. 4. Districts also have lost Corporate Personal Property Replacement Tax (CPPRT) funding, a total of more than $ XX being lost in (your district) . 5. We already have cut everything we can cut without reducing programs and educational opportunities for our students. 6. Cutting teachers and staff also results in an

unemployment cost because so many districts are making cuts. If laid off teachers and staff cannot find jobs, districts must pay more than half of their salaries in unemployment, meaning you have to cut twice as many people to achieve the savings goal. 7. Consider these facts (if applicable):  We have a deficit operating budget of $ XX this year, meaning we have had to dip into our reserve funds to avoid cutting programs. We already have cut everything we can in order to maintain programs and educational opportunities for our students.  The amount drained from our reserve funds totaled more than $ XX , or more than XX percent of all of our reserve funds.  History shows that once a district begins operating with a deficit budget, the deficits tend to snowball.

(Continued on page 7)

Budget/Cost Shift

Resources:

 Illinois public schools vs. CPS for funding issues  IASA sample spreadsheet for school budget overview

 Education Funding PowerPoint

 Breakdown of FY12 GSA

(Continued from page 6)

 ISBE overview of General State Aid funding

 ISBE history of GSA funding

8. The cash reserves that school districts have built up by being good stewards are a school district’s only safety net when it comes to state budget cuts, late state payments or unexpected expenses. 9. Many of the reserves are limited by law in the ways they can be used, with some reserved expressly for things like building projects and torts. 10. Once the cash reserves are drained, the only options left for school districts are to raise local property taxes – if that is even possible – or to cut staff and programs even further than they already have been cut. 11. The real impact of those cuts are things that affect the quality of education for children, including:  Larger class sizes  Fewer course offerings  Longer bus rides  Inability to implement new technology or programs  Elimination of extracurricular programs

 ISBE history of Mandated Categoricals funding

 EFAB calls for GSA

foundation level increase to $8,762

 State pension drain

expected to hit schools, government operations  Illinois’ Economic and Fiscal Policy Report  Public School Funding in Illinois

Unfunded Mandates

Background:

Between 1991 and 1999, Illinois imposed 12 unfunded mandates on public schools. Between 2000 and 2012, 110 unfunded mandates were required. Since the 2007-08 school year, schools have to comply with 63 more mandates.

Issue:

Despite unprecedented cuts to the state’s public education budget that saw General State Aid funded only at 89 percent of the foundation level in FY13 – and is projected to go as low as 80 percent in FY14 -- the list of unfunded mandates continues to grow and now tops more than 100. The mandates are costly and, in many cases, exceed federal mandates. Some of the major categories of unfunded mandates include special education, school transportation, Response to Intervention, and No Child Left Behind.

Resources:

 School Management Alliance unfunded mandates letter to legislators  Instructional Mandates Task Force Report -- 2011  Mandates enacted since 1992  Sample letter to editor – A Look at State Mandates (Dr. James T. Rosborg)  Sample spreadsheet showing cost of unfunded mandate (Dr. James T. Rosborg)

Talking points:

 While the intent of most

stringent than the longstanding federal mandate. It cost our district $ XXX,XXX a year. unfunded mandates end up competing with one another. All of the unfunded mandates coupled with shrinking budgets will mean larger general education class sizes at a time when the NCLB and Common Core Standards mandates require more individual instruction for students who need extra help to meet those standards.

mandates is laudable, school districts have no funding with which to implement them.  The end result of the budget cuts and the unfunded mandates is that many school districts have had to cut teachers and programs in order to comply with the mandates.  Many state mandates exceed federal mandates.  For example, in 2009 Illinois imposed its own mandate regarding a smaller class size for special education students. The state mandate was more

 The bottom line is that the

Pension Reform

Background: The State’s unfunded pension liability is approaching $100 billion according to estimates from the Governor’s Office of Management and Budget. The biggest part of that liability is the result of the

state either underpaying or skipping entirely its payments to the five state pension systems – the Teachers Retirement System (TRS), the State University Retirement System (SURS), the State Employees Retirement System (SERS), the General Assembly Retirement System (GARS), and the Judges Retirement System (JRS). The second biggest part of the unfunded liability is the 3 percent compound cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) that Tier 1 retirees currently get. The unfunded liability figure is based on living up to a ramp that was adopted in 1995 calling for all five of the pension systems to be 90 percent funded by 2045. The systems currently are funded at about 40 percent. There are three main buckets of money that fund the state’s pension systems: 1) Employee contributions, 2) Employer (the state) contributions, and 3) income derived from the investment of pension assets. The pension plan was changed in 2010 to create a Tier 2 category of employees. Employees hired after January 1, 2011 contribute a higher percentage of their salaries and receive a reduced COLA. The Illinois Constitution was amended during the 1970 Constitutional Convention to add a pension protection clause (Article XIII, Section 5) that states: “Membership in any pension or retirement system of the State, any unit of local government or school district, or any agency or instrumentality thereof, shall be an enforceable contractual relationship, the benefits of which shall not be diminished or impaired.” Issue:

Various pension reform bills have been proposed the past few years, most of them aimed at reducing the compound COLAs of Tier 1 employees and retirees, a provision estimated to save the state about $30 billion of the unfunded liability. The current piece of legislation that seems to be the primary vehicle during this session of the General Assembly is Senate Bill 1. Governor Pat Quinn endorsed SB 1 as his preferred pension reform bill during his State of the State address February 6. SB 1 actually has two distinct parts to it: Part A is essentially the Nekritz-Biss-Cross bill (referred to as the “NBC Bill”), while Part B is the so-called “choice” plan that is designed to be used as a constitutional backstop to take effect in case any part of Part A is ruled unconstitutional. Part A includes:  The pensionable salary cap set at the higher of an employee’s salary when the bill is signed or the Social Security cap ($113,700).  An increase in employee contributions of 2 percent over a two-year period.

Resources:

The Great Pension Debate: Detailed analysis of the Illinois



Constitution’s Pension Clause

Martire: Blame “Pension Ramp” for state’s liability Eric Madiar Abstract: Is welching on public pension promises an option for Illinois?





(Continued on page 10)

(Continued from page 9)

 A four-year freeze – as opposed to the six-year freeze from a previous proposal -- on the cost-of-living adjustment (COLA), and when the COLA resumes not paying it until a retiree reaches age 67 and then allowing the 3 percent compound COLA only on the first $25,000, the first $20,000 for retirees who also receive Social Security.  A requirement to fully fund the state’s pension systems by 2043.  A stronger guarantee that the state will make its required payments to the pension systems.  The provision requiring employees and retirees to choose between the compound COLA or accepting a reduced COLA but having access to the state’s health care plan and being able to count future increases for pension benefits. The Senate passed the choice bill in May of 2012, but only for SERS and GARS. The House never voted on that bill. SB 1 also includes TRS and SURS, but currently does not include the judges’ system, the stated reason being to avoid a conflict of interest. SB 1 also does not include the controversial provision for the state to shift its portion of the normal pension costs to local school districts, but Senate President John Cullerton (D-Chicago) has said that he expects the cost shift to be introduced as a separate bill after pension reform passes. Part B includes:

Talking points:

6. Regarding the cost shift issue, IASA’s position has been that we are opposed to the cost shift because of the negative impact it would have on districts already struggling because of the huge cuts to General State Aid and Transportation the past few years. 7. If the cost shift must happen, then IASA’s position is that it needs to be phased in at one- half of 1 percent per year, that it should be capped at half of the normal pension costs with the state retaining half of that cost, and that a source of revenue must be identified to pay for the shift to local districts. 8. Reserve funds are not a good revenue source to utilize as they are a school district’s only safety net to protect against late or reduced payments by the state, unexpected costs or to plug the budget hole for districts that have operating deficits – which now is about 67 percent of districts according to ISBE. 9. Even districts that currently pay the teachers’ portion of the pension contributions according to their labor contract cannot be expected to use that money to pay for the cost shift because teachers unions consider that to be part of the total compensation package.

1. All references to the pension issue should be framed in the context of constitutionality and the impact on education. (For example, one long -range unintended consequence of slashing pension benefits for educators might be to make teaching and the field of education a less attractive pursuit for future college students.) 2. The discussion by superintendents should be about the impact on teachers and the long-term effect the cuts might have on attracting and retaining good teachers. 3. The IASA has consistently said it would support reform measures to stabilize and sustain the pension systems as long as those changes are constitutional, implemented fairly and include a real guarantee that the state would meet its pension obligations. 4. Specifically, IASA has said that it even would support employees paying more for their promised benefits as long as the amount was based on actuarial numbers and did not include paying for any of the unfunded liability caused by the state skipping its payments. 5. Teachers and school administrators have faithfully made each and every pension contribution required of them.

(Continued on page 12)

PTELL

Background:

The Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (PTELL), which was implemented in 1991, limits the amount that local taxing bodies in tax-capped counties can increase their tax levies each year to 5 percent or the rate of inflation as defined by the Consumer Price Index (CPI), whichever is less.

When the law was implemented, its intent was to protect landowners at a time when property values were increasing. Now, with Equalized Assessed Valuation (EAV) falling in many places, the ability to increase the tax levies is one of the only ways school districts can maintain their local tax revenues.

Issue:

Resources:

House Bills 89 (Rep. Jack Franks, D-Woodstock) and 95 (Rep. David McSweeney, R-Barrington Hills) are slightly different versions, but both are designed to prevent local taxing bodies from increasing their tax levies when property values fall. Both proposals would eliminate the authority of school boards to increase local revenue to keep pace with inflation or to maintain local revenue when the EAV drops. HB 89 states that in tax-capped communities where the total taxable EAV is less than the previous year, the allowable increase in a district’s tax extension would be 0 (zero) percent or the rate approved by voters. HB 95 would automatically freeze a district’s tax extension for three years unless local voters approve a different rate through referendum.

 Ed-Red position paper

 PowerPoint presentation on effects of PTELL  Sample letter to legislator (Mundelein HS District 120/October 2011)  Sample PTELL press release (Lake County/November 2011)

Talking points:

1. Because each year’s levy is based upon the previous year’s levy, reductions would become permanent, continuous and compounding. 2. The provisions of PTELL already limit a school district’s ability to increase its tax levy to the lesser of the CPI or 5 percent. The average annual increase of the CPI since PTELL was created is 2.4 percent; it was 1.5 percent in 2011. 3. Because the State of Illinois ranks last in the nation in the percentage of financial support of public education, school districts rely heavily on local property taxes. 4. Freezing local resources results in an increase in

the amount of General State Aid for which a school district qualifies. However, GSA was cut by 5 percent in FY12 and by 11 percent in FY13 – and some are estimating a 20 percent cut in FY14. 5. This issue is not about school districts wanting more money; it is about staying even with inflation and keeping the local revenue stable. 6. The bottom line given the drastic cuts in state funding for public education coupled with freezing a school district’s ability to increase the tax levy is that school districts will have to lay off teachers and cut programs.

ISAT Cut Scores

Background:

The Illinois Standards Achievement Tests (ISAT) were implemented in 1999, essentially replacing the Illinois Goal Assessment Program (IGAP) tests. The ISAT has undergone changes since 1999, evolving into the current form that tests third- through eighth-graders in math, reading and science. Based on their scores, students fall into one of four categories: Exceeds Standards, Meets Standards, Below Standards, and Academic Warning. Historically, Illinois students have fared very well on the ISAT, especially when compared to the scores for 11 th -graders on the Prairie State Achievement Exam (PSAE). The ISAT is expected to be replaced in a couple of years by the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) test. The Illinois State Board of Education (ISBE) voted in January of 2013 to adopt a new grading scale for the ISAT tests in an attempt to try and align those results with the results of the PSAE, as well as to try and align the test with the new Common Core Standards. The net result of these changes will be an expected substantial drop in the percentage of students that attain at least the Meets Standards ranking. In fact, by taking the 2012 scores and applying the new grading scale, the statewide percentage of students achieving at least the Meets Standards would have fallen from 89 in math and 79 in reading to 60 percent in both subjects. School districts will need to inform parents, citizens and the media about the changes in the ISAT cut scores in order to alleviate the backlash and questions that are likely to come when the interactive report cards come out in the fall of 2013 containing the results of this spring’s tests based on the new grading scale. Issue:

Resources:

Talking points:

ISBE raises testing standards (State Journal-Register/Jan. 24, 2013) ISBE press release regarding increase in ISAT cut scores (Jan. 24, 2013) IASA template for letter to parents or letter to the editor

1. The percentage of students meeting the standards for the ISAT is not reflective of a drop in performance; it is because ISBE raised the grading scale in an attempt to align the scores with results from the test that is given to 11 th -graders. 2. In fact, the actual ISAT test scores for our students were (the same/better) than last year. It is the equivalent of a teacher raising the scale to get an “A” from 90-100 to 94-100. 3. Like any standardized test, the ISAT is a snapshot in time and just a single indicator regarding student performance. We will study these results and use them to help inform us about aligning our curriculum with the new federal and state standards in a ways that are beneficial for our students. 4. The timing of implementing a change in the cut scores and other changes to the ISAT when a new test (PARCC) is coming in 2014 doesn’t seem to make any sense.







Facts about ISAT (ISBE)



Certified School Nurse

Background:

Having Certified School Nurses (CSNs) make recommendations for a child’s special-education needs has been required by ISBE since 1976. In 2010, after some school superintendents complained how difficult it was to find CSNs, the agency allowed RNs and advanced practice nurses to make such recommendations. After the rule changed in 2010, a number of groups, including the Illinois Association for School Nurses (IASN), Illinois Education Association (IEA), Chicago Teachers Union (CTU) and American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), pushed the state board to revert back to the original language.

The rule mandating the use of CSNs was scheduled to be implemented July 1, 2013, but State Superintendent Dr. Chris Koch, after meeting with a group that included members of IASA’s Legislative Committee, said that implementing the rule would not be feasible by July 1. Dr. Koch also said he would work with the stakeholder groups to try and find a permanent solution.

Issue:

If ISBE succumbs to the pressure from the IASN and the unions and decides to go forward with the CSN mandate, it will cost schools more money than the current practice of using Registered Nurses (RNs). There also is a problem with finding CSNs in many parts of the state and currently there are only three colleges offering the necessary coursework. IASA is pushing for a compromise solution that might include specialized webinar and online training for RNs, but would not require certification or the hiring of the more expensive CSNs. Any new or amended rule would require the approval of the Joint Committee for Administrative Rules (JCAR) and would have to include a minimum of two 45-day comment periods. If or when a new or amended rule is posted, we will need to send letters to JCAR supporting our position on this issue. Meanwhile, State Rep. Linda Chapa LaVia (D-Aurora) has introduced House Bill 1373 that would require school districts to employ CSNs for special education students.

(Continued on page 14)

Certified School Nurse

(Continued from page 13)

Talking points:

 The current system in which most districts utilize Registered Nurses as part of the team that participates in the Individualized Education Plan (IEP) for special education students is working. There are no identifiable cases to demonstrate a need for having the certification.  The nurses provide

or even a doctor to the IEP meeting to provide medical input. Forcing school districts to hire or contract for CSNs at a time of drastic cuts in state funding for education would cause many school districts to lay off teachers and/or cut educational programs. To illustrate the point, General State Aid was cut by 11 percent this school year and projected to be cut by as much as 20 percent next school year, and Transportation has been cut by 42 percent over the last three years.



Resources:

School nurse mandate being re-examined (State Journal-Register story 2/8/13) CSN testimony during House hearing (2012)

CSN letter to JCAR (2012)

important medical input as part of the IEP process, but the process is a team effort, with the final

decisions being in the hands of the special education director.  Parents can, if they want, bring a nurse

Special Education Class size

Background:

In 2009, the State of Illinois imposed its own mandate on schools regarding smaller class sizes for special education students than the federal government mandate, with no flexibility to increase class size in certain situations.

From 1999 until recently, the State also was under a federal court settlement agreement stemming from the Corey H. federal lawsuit. The agreement governed some aspects of special education in Illinois. The State now is out from under that settlement agreement.

Issue:

State Superintendent Dr. Chris Koch has said that he intends to discuss the special education class size mandate with ISBE Board members at the February 2013 meeting and that he believes class size should be determined at the local level, not by the State.

In his February 11 Weekly Message, Dr. Koch said:

“…Our current rules go beyond federal law and I have always been of the mind that the state should not dictate limits on class size. “Class size is an issue that is best addressed locally. We are no longer under the Corey H. settlement agreement and our data shows that these artificial limits are actually keeping students with disabilities out of general education classrooms. It is limiting these special education students’ access to the curriculum and instruction they deserve and need to be successful. I understand that there are those who will not agree with me; however, I do believe it’s what’s best for all students.” At the urging of State Superintendent Dr. Chris Koch, the Illinois State Board of Education voted 5-1 on February 20, 2013 to review proposing eliminating the unfunded mandate that placed special education class size limits on Illinois school districts. Based on the State Board's action, there will be a 45-day public comment period after which board members will make a decision on whether to send to the Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR) language to remove the mandate (Part 226).

Talking points:

1. The Illinois mandate that is more stringent than the federal rules regarding class size for special education students has proven to be very expensive for many school districts. 2. By the state superintendent’s own words, an unintended consequence is that the mandate not only has resulted in larger general education class sizes, but it also has kept special education

students out of general education classrooms. By so doing, it actually has limited special education students’ access to curriculum and instruction they deserve. 3. We agree with Dr. Koch that class size – for general or special education – is best determined at the local level.

Note from IASA Director of Communications The suggested talking points and sample letters included in this section of the Superintendent’s Toolkit are designed to provide you with some general talking points on a variety of issues that have arisen throughout the state. In most cases, they would need to be customized with your specific school district information, and we have tried to highlight those areas. Some talking points may not even apply to the situation in your district. In most cases, talking points can easily be turned into letters or vice-versa.

Michael Chamness Director of Communications

Also, it is our suggestion that you always run the talking points and/or letters by your board president, school attorney and, if applicable, your local law enforcement agency to make sure everyone is on the same page and that everyone agrees on the facts. As Director of Communications for IASA, I always am available to assist members with issues that may arise in your district. My email is mchamness@iasaedu.org, the office phone is (217) 753- 2213, and my cell phone is (217) 836-5019. Please do not hesitate to call at any time if I can be of assistance.

Mike Chamness

School Communications Template

Step 1: Assemble a Communications Planning Team Who should be on that team might differ from district to district, but it should include:  Superintendent

 Assistant superintendents  Communications director  Principals  Board member  Subject matter experts, such as school safety officer, head custodian, transportation director Step 2: Logistics Logistical issues include:  Who the chief spokespeople will be for the district, going at least three deep in priority order, and making sure they are properly trained  Where media inquiries should be directed  Identifying a site and an alternate site for conducting on-site press briefings at each school (considerations include number of media that cover your district, background for TV shots or photos, acoustics and your exit path when the briefing is concluded)  Identifying a working area and an alternate working area for the media – away from access to students -- in case of an ongoing major event (considerations include number of media expected, access to power, restrooms, food service)  Developing and keeping current a list of media contacts and contact information  Developing method(s) to immediately get your message to parents Step 3: Identifying issues The Communications team should identify potential issues for the district based on high probability or high consequence. Some examples of high probability issues might include:  Contract negotiations/strikes

 RIF of teachers/staff  Budget cuts/deficits  Staff or student discipline  Bullying  Test scores  Bomb threats  Transportation incidents Examples of low probability but high consequence might include:  School shooting or violence  Tornado  Fire  Location-specific threats like nuclear power plant accident, earthquake, flooding

(Continued on page 18)

School Communications Template

 Developing the messages to go with the issues identified and developing the message “playbook.”  Writing press releases.  Writing messages from the superintendent to parents or for regular media use  Writing columns and Op Ed pieces for the superintendent.  Managing message content on the district website.  Developing and updating the media contact list and developing, along with the superintendent, professional working relationships with the media that cover your school district.  Writing summaries of school board meetings to get the district message out as opposed to depending solely on the media to cover the meetings.  Reviewing local media coverage each morning and summarizing coverage related to the district for the superintendent and others on the Communications Team to make sure everyone has situational awareness.  Providing media training for members of the Communications Team if appropriate. If not, then outside training needs to be provided for those who have a role in the Plan as well as others who might be contacted by the media (principals & board members, for example) Step 6: Good news plan This is a separate listing because it often is overlooked as a component of a Communications Plan. The components include:  Developing a system by which administrators, staff, teachers and even students can submit story ideas and information about innovative programs and success stories.  Developing a way to get those stories to the appropriate media outlets, understanding that every media market is different and within each market there are media outlets that probably would use the district’s “good news” items.  Developing a plan for a district to use its own resources (website, direct email, Twitter and other social media) to spread the good news to

(Continued from page 17)

Step 4: Creating messages for issues identified The goal is to be prepared to immediately respond to media and parents when something occurs. By drafting messages for each issue and placing them in a “playbook,” you can very quickly tweak them with specific details for a particular incident or occurrence. Tips for creating messages include:  Be succinct. The media typically will use only short sound bites 10-20 seconds in length.  A good goal is no more than three main points, each no more than 10-15 words in length with supporting sub-points if necessary.  If your message is much longer, you allow the reporter or editor to determine which sound bite or quote to use.  Once the message is drafted, prepare a list of potential follow-up questions the media might ask and draft suggested responses. You almost always can anticipate what might be asked. This will help ensure that your spokespeople do not get surprised by a media question and are well prepared to respond as opposed to trying to respond off the cuff. It also will help ensure that everyone who has access to the information can be saying the same thing.  Practice the messages – and staying on message – even using staff to conduct mock press briefings.  Stay on message using bridging techniques with phrases like “As I said,” “The real issue is,” and “I can’t answer that because of (ongoing investigation, legal issue, privacy issue), but what I can tell you is…” Step 5: Identifying people for jobs and tasks The list of jobs and tasks associated with a Communications Plan will vary from district to district and some of them will flow from the plan itself, like being a spokesperson, being assigned to stay in the media room and others. Jobs and duties that might be part of a comprehensive Communications Plan include:

Suggested talking points: Threat of violence posted on social media

1. We received a report this morning of a threat of violence that had been posted on ( Twitter/Facebook ). 2. We take all such threats seriously, and we took immediate action by contacting the ( local police department ) and by bringing the student who allegedly made the ( tweet/posting ) into the office. Police officers searched the school for weapons and interviewed the student(s) allegedly involved. 3. We followed our school safety plan. We ( did/did not ) have to lock down or evacuate the school based on advice from law enforcement. 4. Any disciplinary actions we take will be based on the results of the investigation and according to district policy. We cannot talk about other details because of student privacy laws and the fact that this involves a police investigation. 5. As we said earlier, we took immediate action and followed our school safety plan that had been reviewed by law enforcement authorities. 6. Because this involves a law enforcement investigation, all other questions should be directed to the ( local police department ).

Suggested talking points: School shootings (not in your district)

1. Begin with an expression of sympathy for the victims and their families and empathy for the citizens and your school counterparts. 2. Stress that the safety and welfare of students is the top priority in your school district, and -- while there is no plan that can totally prevent a random act of senseless violence like this -- that your district has a school safety plan in place that has been reviewed by law enforcement authorities and practiced by faculty and staff. 3. There always are lessons learned from each incident and as those emerge your plan will be reviewed to implement those lessons learned as appropriate. 4. Add that if any of our students have questions or are having problems in light of this tragic event, your district will make counselors available to them. If there are follow-up questions regarding the security precautions that you have in place, say that you won’t go into detail on those security features or the school safety plan because that could compromise the security or the plan.

Suggested talking points: Strike threat

 No one wants a strike and we would be very disappointed if it came to that, but the Board and I feel that our final offer is as far as we can go and still maintain the well- rounded, quality education we offer students in our school district.

 In our view, the real issue is the long-term financial stability of the district and how that is connected to providing our students the best education possible.

 This school year, we have seen a cut of 11 percent in General State Aid and our Transportation funding has been cut by 42 percent. Between all of the cuts to state funding and decreases in local revenues, we have lost $ XXXXX over the past XX years.  We understand the teachers’ disappointment. We have wonderful teachers. But given the financial situation and the trend of getting less and less from the state, for us to do more in this contract very likely would result in staff reductions, larger class size and having to cut or eliminate programs like XXXXXXXXX .  We think our offer is fair when compared to teacher salaries in districts of similar size. In the end, it comes down to what is best in the long-term for our students and our community.

Suggested talking points: Budget Cuts/ Closing school building

As disappointed as we are to have to close the XXXXXX building, it is the one move we can make that will help the district quickly get back on the road to financial stability and help preserve educational programming and options for our students.

The state has cut 42 percent in Transportation reimbursements also has made deep cuts to General State Aid. This school year, the state cut GSA by XX percent, which translates into about a $ XXX,XXX loss for our school district. Last year, the district outspent its revenues by nearly $ XXX,XXX . We cannot continue down that path. We already have cut everything we could cut without harming our educational programs. We realize that this move will impact a lot of people. We studied other budget-cutting op- tions, but we feel like this move is less harmful overall for our district than the series of cuts affecting a variety of programs that would have been necessary to generate similar savings.

By closing the XXXXX building, we can save an estimated $ XXX,XXX per year while maintain- ing our educational and extracurricular programs.

Like everyone in our community, we want to save our schools. Providing the best possible educational opportunities for our students is the top priority. The only way we can ensure our ability to preserve those educational opportunities going forward is to get our district back on a path of fiscal stability as quickly as possible.

Suggested talking points: Board members/ staff attending conferences

1. Training for board members is now required by law, including:  Minimum of four hours of professional development leadership training on education and labor law, financial oversight and accountability and fiduciary responsibilities.  Training on the Performance Evaluation Reform Act (PERA) evaluations  Training on the Open Meetings Act 2. The Illinois Association of School Boards (IASB) encourages board members to develop ongoing professional development plans so that they can continue to gain knowledge and skills that can be applied to their board service. 3. Conferences often offer a level of subject-matter expert speakers, presentations and training that an individual school district cannot afford to provide. 4. While online training can be effective in some instances, face-to-face interaction with school board members from other districts throughout the state and even in other states is a valuable source of information when it comes to:  Applying new educational strategies  Use of technology  The implications of new federal and state laws or mandates  Effective use of standardized tests 5. Bottom line is that school board members need to be as aware as superintendents of emerging issues, new laws and mandates and new strategies and approaches for public education if they are going to be effective in their roles as the people who set policies, control budgets of more than $ XXX dollars and hire and fire teachers and administrators. 6. Conferences remain one of the best, most cost-efficient ways to provide ongoing professional development opportunities for board members as long as those conferences are selected with those things in mind. 7. Cite any specific examples of any cost-saving tips, ideas or anecdotes that may have come from board members attending a conference.  The new performance evaluation processes  Other emerging issues in public education.

Suggested talking points: School closing for illness

1. As soon as the outbreak of the ( illness ) became apparent, we contacted the (local Health Department) and followed their advice, including closing the school to try and limit the spread of the illness. 2. We also communicated information about the situation to parents and staff, including symptoms to look for, what to do if your child became ill and the public health depart- ment’s advice on how to best prevent the spread of the illness. 3. Our teachers, staff and students have been briefed about ways to help prevent the spread, including washing your hands often and our teachers have supplies to wipe down the desks and doorknobs. 4. In short, we have taken every step the public health department suggested because the safety and welfare of our students is our top priority.

Sample letter: RIF situations

Date

Dear Parents,

I am writing to inform you about a situation in (your school district) that unfortunately has caused us to implement a Reduction in Force (RIF) of teachers and staff. We have excellent teachers and staff members and are very disappointed to have to make these personnel reductions that were caused by the state’s cut to public education funding the past few years. Not only has the state cut transportation funding by 42 percent during the past three years, but it also cut General State Aid by 11 percent in FY13 and estimates are that GSA may be cut by as much as 20 percent for FY14, which would cost our district $ XXXXXX . General State Aid accounts for about XX percent of our revenues, with property taxes accounting for about XX percent and federal funding about X percent. I have attached a one-page fact sheet listing titled “Funding Facts for the XXXXXX School District.” The final point of the fact sheet is a projection that our district will end this school year with a deficit of more than $ XXX,XXX . Unfortunately, we do not see any signs that the trend of state and federal cuts to education will change in the near future. In fact, it may get worse. We already have made cuts in all of those areas that we could without cutting personnel and programs. We must take action now in order to gain financial stability going forward for our school district. As painful as these cuts are for everyone involved, holding the line on budget deficits is the only way we can continue to provide the best possible educational programs and opportunities for our students today and in the future.

We appreciate your concern and support for public education and the students in our school district.

Sincerely,

Name Superintendent School District

Sample letter: Weapon at school

Date

Dear Parents,

I am writing to inform you of an incident that occurred in one of our schools. It came to our attention that a student brought ( a weapon ) to school. Because of privacy laws protecting students, I cannot go into more detail except to say that the student who brought the (weapon) to school has been disciplined according to school policy. The safety and welfare of all of our students is a top priority in our school district, and we take all reports pertaining to school security very seriously. Upon learning about the (weapon) being brought to school, we immediately took action to recover and contacted the (local law enforcement agency).

Thank you for your continued support of the students in (your school district).

Sincerely,

Name Superintendent School District