The comptroller's report on the Vancouver School Board's budget management was released Friday June 4th. Below are my personal comments on the report.
Overall, the report blames VSB mismanagement for their funding challenges, identifying several unpalatable decisions they could have made to save money, such as increasing rent for non-profits and closing schools . I had hoped that by looking at the VSB books the ministry would be forced to consider how they impact the context in which boards operate and whether they were actually under-funding education but sadly the report missed the opportunity to review the Ministry and its impact on schools.
In her subsequent comments related to the report Minister MacDiarmid has sounded vindicated in her assertion that the VSB's budget woes are of their own making. If this were one board, in one year I would be inclined to agree because boards make costly decisions and some of them may not be the best long term decisions. But boards across the province have been experiencing much the same issues all year and for multiple years and I cannot believe that every board in the Province is mismanaging funds on a continuous basis. Yes I know the ministry is spending more than ever, we all are, its called inflation, costs have also gone up. Is the ministry actually funding what it is demanding schools deliver?
Others have commented that boards have a tendency to defend the status quo and cry out for more funding to maintain the existing system without looking for opportunity to change and modernize the system to reduce costs. There is truth in this, but changing the status quo is hard. In particular it requires flexibility and resources that boards do not have available to them. Caught between provincial contracts, ministry defined educational mandates, standards and processes to support, static unstable funding and parents demanding more programs, small schools and individualized instruction there is not a lot of room for a board to manuever. If parents and the ministry wish boards to do more with less then the boards need to be given the flexibility to change how they deliver education.
Overall, the report blames VSB mismanagement for their funding challenges, identifying several unpalatable decisions they could have made to save money, such as increasing rent for non-profits and closing schools . I had hoped that by looking at the VSB books the ministry would be forced to consider how they impact the context in which boards operate and whether they were actually under-funding education but sadly the report missed the opportunity to review the Ministry and its impact on schools.
In her subsequent comments related to the report Minister MacDiarmid has sounded vindicated in her assertion that the VSB's budget woes are of their own making. If this were one board, in one year I would be inclined to agree because boards make costly decisions and some of them may not be the best long term decisions. But boards across the province have been experiencing much the same issues all year and for multiple years and I cannot believe that every board in the Province is mismanaging funds on a continuous basis. Yes I know the ministry is spending more than ever, we all are, its called inflation, costs have also gone up. Is the ministry actually funding what it is demanding schools deliver?
Others have commented that boards have a tendency to defend the status quo and cry out for more funding to maintain the existing system without looking for opportunity to change and modernize the system to reduce costs. There is truth in this, but changing the status quo is hard. In particular it requires flexibility and resources that boards do not have available to them. Caught between provincial contracts, ministry defined educational mandates, standards and processes to support, static unstable funding and parents demanding more programs, small schools and individualized instruction there is not a lot of room for a board to manuever. If parents and the ministry wish boards to do more with less then the boards need to be given the flexibility to change how they deliver education.
The report identifies several areas for savings but focuses on two main flaws at the VSB that I feel are inappropriate criticism. The first is a lack of management qualification and the second is a lack of strategic long term planning.
In criticizing the boards lack of management qualification the comptroller fails to recognize that School Board Trustees are elected officials. It is hard for the electorate to assess management skills so Trustees are elected as much for their positions on issues as anything else. Boards inherit the management skills of the people that are voted into the position. While I would prefer that Trustees be qualified for the job they are elected to fill, if that is the standard they should be held to then we should also be looking at the qualifications of the MLA's and Ministers who run the multi-billion dollar Provincial government to ensure they are qualified for their jobs. This is not how democracy works and so I feel this is an inappropriate comment seemingly designed to discredit the Trustees rather than provide usable input.
On the second major point, strategic planning I have also complained about the lack of strategic planning in school districts but in working with the district over the past few years it has become clear to me that while school districts may be weak in the area of strategic planning they are also operating in an environment that is entirely unsuited to long-term planning. Budgets must be balanced every year, funding rules and amounts change multiple times a year, the programs and services they are mandated to deliver change every year, rules on disposal of property change every year. School boards operate at the whim of the ministry and without a stable planning environment it is understandable that they focus on short term plans.
In criticizing the boards lack of management qualification the comptroller fails to recognize that School Board Trustees are elected officials. It is hard for the electorate to assess management skills so Trustees are elected as much for their positions on issues as anything else. Boards inherit the management skills of the people that are voted into the position. While I would prefer that Trustees be qualified for the job they are elected to fill, if that is the standard they should be held to then we should also be looking at the qualifications of the MLA's and Ministers who run the multi-billion dollar Provincial government to ensure they are qualified for their jobs. This is not how democracy works and so I feel this is an inappropriate comment seemingly designed to discredit the Trustees rather than provide usable input.
On the second major point, strategic planning I have also complained about the lack of strategic planning in school districts but in working with the district over the past few years it has become clear to me that while school districts may be weak in the area of strategic planning they are also operating in an environment that is entirely unsuited to long-term planning. Budgets must be balanced every year, funding rules and amounts change multiple times a year, the programs and services they are mandated to deliver change every year, rules on disposal of property change every year. School boards operate at the whim of the ministry and without a stable planning environment it is understandable that they focus on short term plans.
In this, the report agrees with me suggesting,
"The Ministry of Education could provide stronger leadership by preparing a long term education plan for the province, articulating the vision for education, and its objectives and strategies. Given that schools are a significant investment in public resources, the education plan should cover a period of 5 to 10 years. This would provide support to districts in their long term strategic planning and provide increased stability to districts and transparency to the public. "
I agree that boards need to do better long term planning but they need to be given the flexibility, experienced management teams and stable planning environment needed to accomplish this.
Dave
"The Ministry of Education could provide stronger leadership by preparing a long term education plan for the province, articulating the vision for education, and its objectives and strategies. Given that schools are a significant investment in public resources, the education plan should cover a period of 5 to 10 years. This would provide support to districts in their long term strategic planning and provide increased stability to districts and transparency to the public. "
I agree that boards need to do better long term planning but they need to be given the flexibility, experienced management teams and stable planning environment needed to accomplish this.
Dave
No comments:
Post a Comment
Parents, you are welcome to comment on our blog, but please keep the community in mind when you do so. We will remove any objectionable material.