Race to the Top Scopes of Work - An Analysis of Tennessee Districts Plans for Using Local Race to the Top Funds

Taking Note September 2010 ESSAYS ON INNOVATIVE IDEAS AND NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN PUBLIC EDUCATION Race to the Top Scopes of Work: An Analysis of Tennessee Districts’ Plans for Using Local Race to the Top Funds On March 29, 2010, Tennessee was one of just two states awarded funding in the first round of the U.S. Department of Education’s Race to the Top competition. Federal guidelines required that Tennessee’s $500 million award be split evenly between state and local projects. The $250 million for local projects was allocated between the state’s 136 school districts according to the federal Title I formula, which is based on the number of economically disadvantaged students in a district.1 Four-year district awards ranged from $44,709 in Richard City Special School District to $68,670,722 in Memphis City Schools, with a median award of $684,719. This memo outlines the process Tennessee used to assist districts in submitting their scopes of work and analyzes the activities which districts funded in their scopes of work. Background After the excitement of winning Race to the Top (RTTT) settled, it rapidly became clear to state education officials that one of the most immediate tasks was assisting districts in developing their local scopes of work, which were due to the U.S. Department of Education on June 28 (exactly 90 days after Tennessee was awarded RTTT). As a first step in informing districts about the scope of work process, the Tennessee Department of Education (TDOE) hosted three regional meetings across the state on April 21-23, 2010. These meetings were attended by superintendents, school board members, and other key education officials and provided broad guidance on scopes of work. For example, TDOE officials outlined the major components of the state’s RTTT application and emphasized that RTTT funds could not be used to supplant current expenditures and had to be aligned with the strategies outlined in the state’s RTTT application. Within these broad guidelines, however, TDOE emphasized it would try to give districts maximum flexibility. At these regional SCORE • Scope of Work Spending Overview 70 60 50 57.5 55.4 46.3 40 35.2 30 28.9 20 24.0 21.0 10 0 9.2 Standards and assessment  %activities Using data to improve instruction • Turning around low-performing schools  %funding meetings, districts were provided a scope of work template, which was an Excel spreadsheet that required a brief description, performance metric, project personnel, and dollar amount for each budgeted activity. TDOE’s regional field service centers (FSCs) were assigned the task of supporting school systems in writing their scopes of work. Realizing there was often only one employee at each FSC who had the necessary expertise to assist districts, the Tennessee State Collaborative on Reforming Education (SCORE), in collaboration with TDOE, hired a consultant to work in partnership with each FSC to support districts in writing their scopes of work. The consultants, who were selected based on their leadership in their respective region, included four current or former superintendents, three higher education officials, and one local foundation director. 1207 18th Avenue South, Suite 326, Nashville, TN 37212 Great teachers and leaders tel 615.727.1545 These consultants and their FSC counterparts held a total of 12 regional workshops, 55 one-on-one meetings, and 165 telephone conversations with district leaders. In addition, the consultants and FSC directors reviewed every scope of work an average of two times before the scopes were submitted to the state. To coordinate this support network, SCORE facilitated a twice weekly call with senior TDOE staff (often including the Commissioner of Education), FSC directors, and RTTT consultants. On these calls, the state reported the latest news regarding its plans around RTTT implementation and answered questions that the consultants and FCS directors were hearing in the field. Answers to the questions from these calls (as well as answers to questions submitted directly to TDOE) were posted in a continuously updated Frequently Asked Questions • fax 615.727.1569 • www.tnscore.org