Houston ISD Performance Review

LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Houston Independent School District
Management and Performance Review
PREPARED BY LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF
WWW.LBB.STATE.TX.US NOVEMBER 2019

Management and Performance Review
PREPARED BY LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF
WWW.LBB.STATE.TX.US NOVEMBER 2019

LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD
Robert E. Johnson Bldg. 512/463-1200
1501 N. Congress Ave. - 5th Floor Fax: 512/475-2902
Austin, TX 78701 http://www.lbb.state. tx. us
November 8, 2019
Dr. Grenita Lathan

Interim Superintendent
Dear Dr. Lathan:
The attached report reviews the management and performance of Houston Independent School
District's (ISD) educational, financial, and operational functions.
The report's recommendations will help Houston ISD improve its overall performance as it
provides services to students, staff, and community members. The report also highlights model
practices and programs being provided by Houston ISD.
Some of the recommendations provided in this report are based on state or federal laws, rules or
regulations, and should be promptly addressed. Other recommendations are based on
comparisons to state or industry standards, or accepted best practices, and the district should
review to determine the level of priority, appropriate timeline, and method of implementation.
The Legislative Budget Board engaged American Institutes for Research, Palmer Consulting
Services, LLC, Prismatic Services, Inc., Ressel & Associates, LLC, and WestEd to assist LBB
staff to conduct and produce this review.
The report is available on the LBB website at http://www.lbb.state.tx.us.
Respectfully submitted,
1
..•. -···_1 / _/·101 ()
,.,
l/ .1.1/; l'-.._.-....- t:/ . l,,,, --��
\.L)
· �<.... J?
. , •" _)
!/
John McGeady
Assistant Director
Legislative Budget Board
/jp
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 12666 • Austin, TX 78711-2666

November 8, 2019
Page 2
cc: Diana Davila Rhonda Skillern-Jones

Holly Maria Flynn Vilaseca Jolanda Jones
Elizabeth Santos Anne Sung
Dr. Sergio Lira Wanda Adams
Sue Deigaard
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY....................................................................................................................1
1. DISTRICT ORGANIZATION, PLANNING, AND GOVERNANCE.................................................15
2. EDUCATIONAL SERVICE DELIVERY............................................................................................47
3. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT......................................................................................................79
4. ASSET AND RISK MANAGEMENT...........................................................................................119
5. PURCHASING AND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT....................................................................133
6. HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT.....................................................................................155
7. FACILITIES USE AND MANAGEMENT......................................................................................173
8. SAFETY AND SECURITY MANAGEMENT.................................................................................209
9. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT .....................................................................227
10. NUTRITION SERVICES MANAGEMENT..................................................................................245
11. TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT AND FLEET OPERATIONS ...........................................275
12. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT................................................................................................295
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF – ID: 4986 TEXAS MANAGEMENT AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW – NOVEMBER 2019 i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Legislative Budget Board’s (LBB) School Performance areas. The district regularly adopts an annual budget in which
Review Team conducted a review during calendar year 2019 projected revenue is inadequate to pay for planned
of the Houston Independent School District (ISD) at the expenditures, which totaled nearly $2.1 billion during school
request of the district’s Board of Education. LBB staff year 2018–19. As a result, the district must use its fund
conducted the onsite review during spring 2019 and balance to cover the excess spending. Efficient spending of
completed the analysis during fall 2019. limited resources is critical for Houston ISD’s ongoing,
sustainable success.
The School Performance Review Team identified 94
significant findings and recommendations in five major The review team found opportunities for the district to
categories, based upon the analysis of data and the onsite improve its financial practices. Houston ISD does not
review of the district’s educational, financial, and operational provide timely financial reporting in order to perform
services and programs. Some of the recommendations budget monitoring throughout the year. Other than for
provided in the review are based on state or federal laws, rules major construction projects supported by bond funding,
or regulations, and should be addressed promptly. Other the district conducts limited capital budgeting during its
recommendations are based on comparisons to state or normal budget cycle. Houston ISD’s board has not
industry standards, or accepted best practices, and the district determined an optimal threshold for reserves in the district’s
should review to determine the level of priority, appropriate general fund, internal service funds, and enterprise funds.
timeline, and method of implementation. In addition, the district has not evaluated its self-insured
funds to determine if the programs are operating efficiently.
By implementing the recommendations, LBB staff project
For school year 2018–19, the health insurance fund is
that Houston ISD could save an average of $42.0 million
projecting a $2.1 million loss. The workers’ compensation
annually, with a total five-year savings, including onetime
fund is estimated to have losses of $1.9 million during the
cost decreases, of $237.4 million.
same period. The district’s alternative certification program
has operated at an annual loss of from $200,000 to more
FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS than $500,000 for the past three years, and the trend
The following five major categories of findings and appears to be continuing. Eliminating the program would
recommendations are discussed in this report: save nearly $1.2 million annually.
(1) strengthen spending practices and improve Other financial management oversight is lacking. With
financial monitoring; limited staff managing $1.5 billion in investments, Houston
(2) reorganize and realign staff, departments, ISD lacks effective cash management oversight of the district’s
and functions; investment portfolio. The district does not pay invoices on
time consistently, averaging 44 days to pay, which increases
(3) standardize programs and services; the risk of paying interest on overdue invoices. Houston ISD
also is not managing its financial coordination with the
(4) improve communication, planning, and
Houston ISD foundation; for example, the district provides
procedures; and
more staff to the not-for-profit foundation than the affiliation
(5) improve board operations. agreement authorizes.
This report begins with a summary of the findings and Houston ISD lacks procedures to ensure consistency and
recommendations in each category. quality control of the system of authorizing and paying more
than $19.8 million in overtime pay to staff. Some staff
STRENGTHEN SPENDING PRACTICES AND IMPROVE received nearly 50.0 percent of their annual salary in overtime
FINANCIAL MONITORING pay. The district could save nearly $2.0 million during the
Houston ISD’s spending practices and monitoring of its first year of implementing improved management of the
financial activities are not efficient or effective in multiple overtime process. Houston ISD campuses award ad hoc
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF – ID: 4986 TEXAS MANAGEMENT AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW – NOVEMBER 2019 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
stipends and extra-duty pay with little oversight, resulting in the department’s operational deficiencies diminish routing
inconsistent implementation across campuses. During school efficiency and service delivery. For example, the lack of an
year 2017–18, the district paid nearly $3.2 million in ad hoc effective process to monitor student ridership data limits
stipends and more than $13.8 million in extra-duty pay. the Transportation Department’s ability to decrease costs
Improving controls of these payments could result in $1.7 by consolidating routes and buses, eliminating stops, or
million in annual savings. Houston ISD lacks effective equalizing loads. The district also does not manage its
controls to process staff terminations in the payroll system bus fleet efficiently. Houston ISD retains 21.0 percent
resulting in overpayments to staff that leave the district more buses than industry standards recommend and has
before their contracts have ended. The district has written off kept 35 nonfunctioning vehicles in a terminal parking lot
more than $26.0 million in staff overpayments and is for several years.
determining whether to forgive the debt or pursue the
With approximately 31.1 million square feet of facilities,
amounts owed through collection efforts. Additionally,
including nearly 300 campus facilities to manage, Houston
Houston ISD’s staff and board travel processes are inefficient,
ISD has experienced challenges in performing effective
which risks overspending on travel, a $3.4 million budget
financial oversight. The district lacks an appropriate
line item, on average.
methodology for developing campus utilization rates. The
Houston ISD’s use of purchasing cards with vendors lacks review team analysis found significant surplus campus
clear management, auditing guidelines, and financial capacity, suggesting that the district should consider closing
controls. During school year 2017–18, the district reported campuses. The district duplicates work by contracting with
119,000 purchasing card transactions, spending $28.1 program management firms while also staffing construction
million. The district could save an estimated $1.4 million project managers. Houston ISD spends $8.0 million annually
annually with more controls of purchasing cards. Houston for contracted custodial services despite employing district
ISD also lacks a process to manage and administer contracts staff with the capacity to perform these services. The district
effectively. During school year 2017–18, the district spent could save $6.5 million annually by dissolving the contract.
more than $300.0 million for professional and contracted The district employs more than 50 staff to operate three
services. The district has entered more than 1,700 active warehouses with a school year 2018–19 inventory value of
contracts that have a total value of $7.2 billion. Additionally, more than $900.0 million. However, the district’s warehouse
Houston ISD lacks adequate structures, contract language, operations are inefficient and are not structured to provide
and performance measures to monitor the academic the best value to the district. Houston ISD could save more
effectiveness of in-district charter campuses. than $500,000 annually by improving surplus furniture
warehouse operations.
The district’s nutrition program has opportunities to improve
financial oversight. The review team identified $21.8 million To strengthen spending practices and improve financial
in annual savings for the district’s $125.0 million Nutrition monitoring, Houston ISD should take actions in the
Services program that serves free breakfast, lunch, and dinner following areas.
for all students. The district does not hold operations
managers or food service team leads accountable for financial BUDGETING AND FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT
and operational management of the campus cafeteria sites.
• Prepare updated financial statements comparing
Houston ISD also provides meals to adults through catering
actual amounts to budgeted amounts and share the
programs and staff cafeterias. These programs are operating
information with the board monthly, highlighting
inefficiently with insufficient revenue to cover costs, losing
major budget variances and including budget
more than $400,000 during school year 2018–19. The
amendments that require board approval.
Nutrition Services Department uses less than half of the
available space in its 219,000-square-foot food production • Track and prepare an ongoing list of capital needs
facility, which squanders district resources. and develop a capital needs budget to present to the
board annually.
The district’s transportation function also is not operating
efficiently. The Transportation Department is responsible • Establish a board policy that requires a specific level
for more than 1,100 buses and 800 routes and drivers of unrestricted fund balance for the general fund,
that transport 25,000 students across the district. However, internal service funds, and enterprise funds.
2 TEXAS MANAGEMENT AND PERFORMANCE REVIEW – NOVEMBER 2019 LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF – ID: 4986
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Analyze the self-funded insurance funds compared • Revise travel procedures for more efficient
to coverage offered by an independent insurance travel processing.
provider and present the findings to the board.
OPERATIONAL INEFFICIENCIES
• Increase the annual revenue of the alternative
• Develop a plan to improve catering and adult-only
certification program to meet operating expenses or
meal operations to a financially accountable position.
eliminate the program and seek partnerships with
other certifying organizations to meet Houston ISD’s • Develop and implement procedures and systems to
ongoing needs. provide oversight and consistent management of
campus cafeteria operations.
• Enhance controls of cash and investment
management processes. • Use the contracted consultant’s report to eliminate
• Increase academic and financial oversight of inefficiencies and decrease costs at the Nutrition
in-district charter campuses. Services Department.
• Develop a bus replacement plan that includes

PURCHASING AND CONTRACTS industry-standard criteria and decrease the
• Promote accountability and decrease the number of number of spare and surplus school buses in the
invoices paid late by deducting from departmental district’s inventory.
and campus budgets late payment charges billed to
the district by vendors. • Develop and implement a process to count
transported students regularly and assess ridership
• Update the affiliation agreement between the to consolidate stops and routes and improve
district and the Houston ISD Foundation to reflect on-time performance.
actual practices and promote accountability and
transparency to the public. FACILITIES MANAGEMENT
• Develop an accurate facility utilization rate for each
• Develop and implement efficient auditing guidelines
and financial controls for purchasing card processing campus and ensure that campuses maintain industry-
to safeguard district assets and ensure that all standard utilization rates.
transactions follow district procedures. • Reassign the custodial vendor’s responsibilities to
• Develop clear, consistent, and uniform procedures for district custodial staff.
contract development, management, and review at • Review the efficiency of each warehouse function and
the district level, including training for all staff with implement processes to make the most productive
contract responsibility. use of warehouse services.
• Eliminate program management contracts and
REORGANIZE AND REALIGN STAFF, DEPARTMENTS,
charge existing district staff with performing
AND FUNCTIONS
those responsibilities.
Like in other school districts, the majority of Houston ISD’s
PAYROLL AND TRAVEL spending is to employ staff to support students and to
manage the district’s infrastructure, systems, and processes.
• Establish controls to monitor overtime, reassess
During school year 2017–18, Houston ISD’s payroll as a
staffing levels in key departments, and decrease
percentage of all funds was 75.0 percent, supporting more
overtime costs.
than 26,000 total staff. Employing an appropriate number of
• Strengthen controls over ad hoc stipends and staff and ensuring that they are organized properly promotes
extra-duty pay. an efficient and effective use of those resources.
• Strengthen the process for staff terminations in the The top of Houston ISD’s organizational structure—the
human resources and payroll system to eliminate superintendent’s supervisory responsibilities and the large
overpayments and complete the corrective action number of executive leadership positions—is not effective or
plans recommended by external and internal auditors. efficient. Additionally, Houston ISD does not organize its
Human Resources Department efficiently. The number of safety and security committee resulted in uncertainty
general managers has remained at five positions, while among staff regarding which department was responsible
staffing at lower levels in the department has decreased, for the committee. Houston ISD fragments the
diminishing the Human Resources Department’s support to organizational structure and construction responsibilities
campuses and other district departments. By contrast, the across the Construction Services Department and the
Transportation Department assigns more staff to each Facilities Services Department by requiring the Facilities
terminal manager than recommended by industry standards. Services Department to complete small construction
The terminal managers each oversee an average of 14 staff. In projects. The district lacks oversight and segregation of
addition, a shortage of 65 bus drivers makes it difficult for duties regarding the fiscal administration of bond projects,
the district to cover all bus routes and results in overtime creating the potential that bond proceeds will not be
payments. Finally, Houston ISD’s central academic offices safeguarded and deployed in the most efficient manner.
frequently restructure, often with limited communication to
Houston ISD should reorganize and realign by taking action
staff about the changes. These changes challenge the central
in the following areas:
office staff’s ability to plan and support campuses and makes
it difficult for campus staff to access support from the district. • Modify the district’s organizational structure
to decrease the superintendent’s supervisory
Other Houston ISD departments are not structured to maximize responsibilities and streamline the number of
the programs and services offered. In some cases, two executive leadership positions.
departments or functions are duplicating services or are not
coordinating efficiently, resulting in poor services to students. • Reorganize the Human Resources Department and
These duplicative services are evident in the following areas: adhere to best practices for an effective and equitable
span of control.
• Educational Technology and Instructional
• Reorganize Transportation Department functions
Technology;
and develop strategies to improve recruitment and
• Office of Communications and the Strategic retention of staff.
Engagement and Outreach Department; • Combine Educational Technology and Instructional
• Police Department and Risk Management Technology into one organization, based in the
Department; Academic Department.
• Construction Services Department and Facilities • Consolidate the Office of Communications and the
Services Department; and Strategic Engagement and Outreach Department to
streamline the district’s communications functions.
• Office of the Chief Financial Officer and the fiscal
• Consolidate the safety functions and form a
administration of the bond projects.
districtwide safety and security committee to address
The separation of the Educational Technology and safety issues.
Instructional Technology teams causes confusion, lack of • Evaluate all position titles and job responsibilities
coordination, and duplication of efforts. Houston ISD’s within the Construction Services Department and
Office of Communications and the Strategic Engagement Facilities Services Department and ensure that titles
and Outreach (SEO) Department perform similar and responsibilities match the functions performed
duties, including writing news stories and managing by each position.
crisis communication, which causes confusion in the
district and the community. Consolidating the Office of • Ensure that the Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Communications and the SEO Department could save provides fiscal oversight and accountability in
nearly $500,000 annually. The district divides its safety and monitoring construction projects, provides input
security functions between the Police Department and the during the planning stages, and advises the board as
Risk Management Department, which results in inefficiency project overruns and savings are identified.
and poor communication and planning. It also has resulted • Address communication deficiencies among central
in the omission of key safety and security responsibilities. academic office functions to improve transparency
For example, the failure to maintain the statutorily required with internal and external stakeholders.
STANDARDIZE PROGRAMS AND SERVICES Houston ISD’s method for building new campuses results in
Houston ISD manages most of its programs primarily in a high architectural costs, long design times, and the
decentralized manner. Independent campus decisions result districtwide use of inconsistent designs and materials. The
in a student experience that differs across the district, and lack of standardization in the furniture, fixtures, and
students may not be served consistently. Campuses receive a equipment selection process results in inconsistencies among
per-unit allocation based on the number of students enrolled campuses that can be expensive or burdensome. Authorizing
in each campus. principals to choose different desks, chairs, bookshelves, or
electronic equipment requires maintenance and custodial
The district’s School Support Offices do not provide support staff to stock different supplies to clean and repair equipment
to campuses and principals in a standard or consistent on the campuses. These discrepancies can result in greater
manner. Houston ISD lacks a unifying framework, strong expenditures for parts and increased labor hours for cleaning
oversight, and written procedures for school support officers. and repair.
This lack of structure results in inconsistent supports for
campuses, contributing to high turnover among campus Houston ISD should standardize programs and services by
principals and limiting the effectiveness of the role of taking action in the following areas:
principal supervisors. The district’s campus-level planning
• Systematize the district process for developing,
process is ineffective, and implementation varies. In addition,
reviewing, and implementing school improve-
Houston ISD lacks an effective process to ensure consistent
ment plans.
development of master schedules. This inconsistency limits
the district’s ability to maximize staffing resources and ensure • Develop and implement districtwide structures that
that all students have access to the courses they need to support a consistent and systematic approach for
graduate. The district’s discipline practices are not consistent supervising and supporting campus principals.
across all campuses. Discretionary enforcement of code of
conduct violations varies by campus. Houston ISD does not • Implement systemic approaches to master scheduling,
ensure that all students have consistent campus-level access including improved training and oversight.
to educational supports and resources, including counseling
• Standardize campus practices, communicate
services, library services, and fine arts programs. Principals
expectations, and hold principals accountable for
determine staffing and programming decisions with few
student discipline management.
district-level mandates, resulting in inconsistencies.
• Provide consistent access to high-quality counseling
The district lacks requirements regarding how much
programs, library services, and fine arts opportunities
technology campuses acquire, resulting in a range of
throughout the district.
technology availability among campuses. The student-per-
device ratio for elementary school and middle school • Establish and enforce minimum standards for
campuses ranges from one to four students per device, and technology funding and require campuses to replace
these campuses have the option to have technical support devices on a regular cycle.
positions. Although the district requires these positions for
high schools, it does not enforce the requirement, and some • Develop guidelines for meal scheduling to
high schools do not have technical support staff. The absence assist principals.
of these staff also results in lost time and productivity for • Hold principals accountable for ensuring that all
teachers and may limit the use and availability of technology competitive foods sales on campuses comply with
at campuses. United States Department of Agriculture regulations.
Regarding the district’s nutrition services, principals set meal • Develop or maintain districtwide building prototypes
schedules, resulting in inconsistent student meal programs. for all campus types.
Some principals schedule meal times without the cafeteria
having enough seats for all students which may not provide • Develop a furniture, fixtures, and equipment
students enough time to eat. In addition, some principals standard for elementary, middle, and high
allow vendors to sell competitive food during meal times that school campuses to provide consistency across
do not meet federal regulations. district facilities.
IMPROVE COMMUNICATION, PLANNING, implemented their own help desk ticket systems and use
AND PROCEDURES different tools for onsite requests, bypassing the Technology
Clearer communication, more comprehensive planning, and Department’s help desk. As a result, performance data
better-documented procedures could ensure consistency and districtwide is not reported to the Technology Department
quality in Houston ISD’s service delivery to internal and help desk and help desk functions performed by each campus
external customers. can vary from those performed by the district.
Improved planning and implementation could maximize Clarity in police and security operations is critical to ensure
service delivery to Houston ISD’s nearly 210,000 students. student, staff, and visitor safety. The Houston ISD Police
The district increased its nonacademic supports, also called Department does not have procedures to ensure the
wraparound services, to address students’ obstacles to learning. development and regular updating of key department
These obstacles may include mental and physical health, food documents regarding resource sharing and communication.
insecurity, housing instability, violence, and family crises. Several memorandums of understanding in the department
However, the district’s implementation of its wraparound are outdated and underutilized.
services initiative lacks effective coordination, planning,
Houston ISD does not plan efficiently for its long-term
procedures, and evaluation. The district does not enforce state-
facilities needs through enrollment projections and facilities
mandated truancy intervention requirements. Staff reported
assessments, leaving it vulnerable to unexpected costs. The
inconsistency in truancy interventions among campuses.
Maintenance Department does not engage in long-range
Increased student attendance could result from improved
planning and performs maintenance reactively. Improved
management of truant students, resulting in more than $3.5
facilities maintenance planning could save nearly $1.4
million in annual revenue due to state funding based partly on
million annually.
the district’s number of students in average daily attendance.
Houston ISD has inconsistent procedures for campuses to
Improved financial planning could benefit the district. Houston
report donations. Departments that track donations do not
ISD lacks a strategic planning process to align the district’s
coordinate their activities and have differing rules regarding
departmental budgets with its goals. Although the district
cash donations. The district lacks effective oversight over
determines campus budgets by student enrollment, Houston
district partnerships with external organizations. Campuses
ISD develops department budgets primarily by using the prior
and departments form their own partnerships without
year’s budget amounts. This budget method does not identify
reporting them to the Strategic Partnerships Department.
department priorities or link department funding to goals.
Without effective oversight, the success of partnerships
In addition, the district lacks a process that ties campus-level cannot be evaluated accurately.
budget expenditures to the individual goals of school
In the procurement function, Houston ISD’s procedures
improvement plans. Without a formal process that connects
contain inefficiencies and lack central oversight and effective
spending to goals, the district does not hold principals
controls. The district lacks an efficient process to distribute
accountable for failing to meet budget-related goals.
shopping cart purchase transactions and has processing
Although the majority of the district’s budget is for salaries
systems that do not interface with the system used by the
and benefits, Houston ISD has below-market salaries and
Bond Office in the Construction Services Department. The
lacks procedures to ensure consistent application of the salary
district may not be tracking aggregate spending because of
guides for all positions districtwide.
the use of direct payments instead of the shopping cart
Departments that support students also have an opportunity purchase process in some instances. Houston ISD also lacks
to improve. The Transportation Department lacks efficient a comprehensive vendor evaluation, selection, and approval
methods to communicate with stakeholders. For example, process for its more than 15,000 vendors. The district
the department does not always notify campuses and parents identifies all qualified vendors, and staff choose any vendor
about late buses or other interruptions of service. The district without soliciting more specific quotes or bids. The practice
does not have a current plan for technology and lacks clear of not requiring staff to submit conflict-of-interest
direction to utilize technology advancements and integrate disclosures presents the possibility of staff inappropriately
them into operations and instruction. The district has selecting a vendor based on a personal relationship or for
duplicative help desk systems; some campuses have financial gain.
Houston ISD should improve its communication, planning, • Update procedures to manage partnerships with
and procedures in the following areas. external organizations and develop a system to track
all district partnerships.
STRATEGIC PLANNING
• Develop procurement processes for greater
• Develop, implement, and evaluate a strategic plan productivity and efficiency, ensure that purchases are
for a long-term, comprehensive system of the tracked, and increase communication and training to
district’s wraparound services initiatives. purchasing end users.
• Implement a strategic planning and budget • Evaluate vendor management procedures to ensure
model that ties the district’s departmental that practices are transparent and equitable and
budgets to specific, measurable goals outlined by provide the best value for the district.
the administration.
• Develop an enforcement mechanism to ensure that
• Tie campus budgets to school improvement plan campuses are utilizing all required interventions
goals and hold principals accountable for achieving before making truancy case referrals.
the results on their campuses when the budgets
are approved. IMPROVE BOARD OPERATIONS
• Develop a three-year to five-year technology plan Houston ISD’s board does not function effectively as a
aligned to the district improvement plan. governing unit. The board’s conduct fosters an atmosphere
of distrust and animosity, resulting in a lack of confidence
• Develop a comprehensive long-range facility in leadership among district staff and the community.
master plan that incorporates accurate Board members’ actions have diminished the board’s ability
information about facility replacement costs to deliberate critical academic, financial, operational, and
and enrollment projections. administrative issues effectively. Some board members have
overstepped their oversight function, exhibiting behavior
• Develop long-term planning strategies for
that suggests a lack of understanding or disregard for their
the Maintenance Department, such as a
defined roles and responsibilities. Staff stated that board
staffing allocation model and a preventive
members place large demands on staff time with requests
maintenance program.
for information that often is not relevant to the role of
board members.
PROCEDURES IMPROVEMENT
• Strengthen controls over promotion and pay Performing their responsibilities as a board is challenging in
and perform a limited-scope classification and some areas. For example, the board does not successfully
compensation study. organize or conduct board meetings in a professional manner.
The board agenda process is not consistent, the focus is not
• Establish processes to strengthen Transportation on improving student outcomes, and the board does not
Department internal and external communications follow parliamentary procedures consistently. The district’s
and solicit feedback from stakeholders. board committees also are ineffective and not well-defined.
The district does not maintain a formal list of all board
• Analyze the help desk data regularly and standardize committees, a description of the roles and responsibilities of
help desk processes districtwide. each committee, or clearly defined goals. These committees
• Charge specific positions with reassessing, do not report regularly to the full board regarding their
maintaining, and regularly updating key district activities. Additionally, the board lacks a process to review
documents, such as memorandums of understanding and update board policies regularly and updates them on an
and service expectations. ad hoc basis. Of more than 800 board policies examined by
the review team, the district issued nearly 48.0 percent before
• Review the different ways that donations are reported calendar year 2011. Lack of a board policy review process
to the district and develop a unified plan to accept increases risk to the district of maintaining outdated policies
and track campus donations. that do not comply with state and federal laws.
To improve board operations, the district should take actions Equalized Wealth Level for the first time during school year
in the following areas: 2016–17. The district’s recapture payment for that year was
$101.0 million. Houston ISD has experienced a trend of slow
• Develop comprehensive operating procedures for all
student population growth combined with rapid property
essential board functions and establish a process to
value growth. This trend has affected the district’s recapture
evaluate the board’s overall effectiveness annually.
payment that grew to $194.1 million during school year
• Hire a professional mediator to conduct team- 2017–18. For school year 2018–19, the LBB estimates a
building sessions to resolve issues affecting trust recapture payment of $272.7 million.
among board members, and develop a formal self-
Pursuant to House Bill 3, Houston ISD’s maintenance and
policing structure to address potential violations of
operations (M&O) tax rate is estimated to decrease from
board ethics policies.
$1.04 per $100 of property valuation to $0.97 for school
• Amend board policy to require board members year 2019–20. Before the legislation’s enactment, Houston
to attend trainings regarding their roles ISD would have been required to pay an estimated $308.6
and responsibilities. million for school year 2019–20 and $395.6 million for
school year 2020–21 in recapture payments to the state.
• Enforce board policies during board meetings, follow
Pursuant to the legislation, summer 2019 estimates indicate
the Lone Star Governance Framework, and provide
that Houston ISD will not have to make any recapture
training for board members regarding acceptable
payments to the state for school year 2019–20 and will pay
parliamentary procedures.
an estimated $45.4 million for school year 2020–21.
• Develop and implement a clearly defined process for Pursuant to the legislation, the LBB estimates that Houston
the formation and maintenance of board committees. ISD will receive an increase of $97.5 million in total state
and local revenue for school year 2019–20 and can expect an
• Develop and implement procedures that establish increase of $124.8 million in total state and local revenue for
a timeline and framework to review and update all school year 2020–21 compared to what the district otherwise
board policies systematically. would have received. Included in these amounts is an
estimated $16.4 million in state funding attributable to the
FINANCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL OVERVIEWS transportation allotment for school year 2019–20. Before the
The following is Houston ISD’s financial and educational legislation’s enactment, Houston ISD received no state
overview. In addition, a summary of LBB’s School funding from the transportation allotment.
Performance Review program is mentioned, including
Houston ISD’s legislators. Senate Bill 11, Eighty-sixth Legislature, 2019, addressed
school safety measures and standards, including the
FINANCIAL OVERVIEW development of the school safety allotment. The allotment
The LBB’s School Performance Review Team were onsite in provides $9.72 per student in ADA to improve school safety
the district during spring 2019 before the implementation of and security. Houston ISD is estimated to receive an additional
significant amendments to school finance law. House Bill 3, $1.8 million for school year 2019–20 in related funding.
Eighty-sixth Legislature, 2019, made significant changes to Senate Bill 500, Eighty-sixth Legislature, 2019, appropriates
the Foundation School Program (FSP). The legislation affected $475.0 million in additional state aid to be distributed to
Houston ISD’s entitlement, which is the amount of state aid school districts affected by Hurricane Harvey due to decreasing
the district receives, and the calculation of the district’s property values. During August 2019, Houston ISD received
recapture payment. Two of the major drivers of FSP entitlement $133.9 million in onetime aid from this source.
to a school district include the district’s student population
and its property values. During fiscal 2019, Houston ISD had For school year 2018–19, Houston ISD adopted a budget of
an average daily attendance (ADA) of 194,669. During the approximately $2.0 billion. With $2.1 billion in adopted
same period, Houston ISD’s property value used to calculate budgeted expenditures, the district approved its deficit
FSP entitlement was $174.2 billion. As a result of Houston budget with a plan to spend more than it receives in revenue.
ISD’s property value growth outpacing its student population The budget deficit is funded from the district’s fund balance.
growth in recent years, the district exceeded the Tier 1 The highest expenditure categories for each of these years are
FIGURE 1
HOUSTON ISD ENROLLMENT AND GENERAL FUND OPERATING BUDGET
SCHOOL YEARS 2016–17 TO 2018–19
CATEGORY 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19 2018–19 CHANGE FROM 2016–17 PERCENTAGE CHANGE
Enrollment 215,408 213,528 209,772 (5,636) (2.6%)
General Fund Operating Budget (1) $1,593 $1,716 $2,035 $442 27.7%
Note: (1) Amounts for school year 2016–17 and school year 2017–18 are actual and school year 2018–19 are budgeted. Amounts are rounded
to millions. Excludes debt service and capital outlay.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, February 2019.
instruction and plant maintenance and operations. School five years, except school year 2014–15, when the top rating
leadership, data processing services, transportation, and for FIRST was Pass. During school year 2018–19, Houston
guidance and counseling services also were significant ISD received a 4.0 Smart Score, with an academic
expenditures during these years. performance rating of average academic progress and a very
low spending rate.
Figure 1 shows Houston ISD’s student enrollment and
general fund budget for school years 2016–17 to 2018–19. A survey conducted by the review team indicated that most
Enrollment decreased by 5,636 students, and the general district staff do not agree that the district’s financial
fund budget increased by 27.7 percent during this period. management is efficient and effective. Figure 2 shows the
results of the district staff survey.
The most recent actual instructional expenditure data
reported for school year 2017–18 show that the district spent EDUCATIONAL OVERVIEW
$6,109 per student compared to the state average of $6,574.
Houston ISD is the largest school district in Texas and the
School districts in Texas receive two financial accountability seventh-largest school district in the nation. During school
ratings, including the School Financial Integrity Rating year 2018–19, Houston ISD’s enrollment was 209,772
System of Texas (FIRST) and Smart Score. Houston ISD students, served by 11,465 teachers. The district operated
scored a FIRST rating of A/Superior for school year 2018– 280 campuses, including eight early childhood centers, 160
19. Houston ISD has scored A/Superior for each of the last elementary schools, 38 middle schools, 37 high schools, and
FIGURE 2
HOUSTON ISD STAFF SURVEY RESULTS
FEBRUARY 2019
Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; February 2019.
37 other campuses, including those serving combined FIGURE 3

academic levels and alternative campuses. HOUSTON ISD STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS
SCHOOL YEAR 2018–19
Figure 3 shows the demographics of Houston ISD compared STUDENTS HOUSTON ISD STATE
to state averages. During school year 2018–19, approximately Hispanic 62.1% 52.6%
79.8 percent of students were categorized as economically African American 23.4% 12.6%
disadvantaged, greater than the state average of 60.6 percent. White 8.9% 27.4%
The district identified 31.7 percent of students as English Asian 4.2% 4.5%
learners (EL), greater than the state average of 19.4 percent. Two or More Races 1.2% 2.4%
The district also identified 65.2 percent of students as at risk American Indian or Alaskan Native 0.2% 0.4%
of dropping out, which was greater than the state average of Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0.1% 0.2%
50.0 percent.
Economically Disadvantaged 79.8% 60.6%
Academic achievement varies considerably among English Learners 31.7% 19.4%
Houston ISD campuses, ranging from nationally ranked At Risk 65.2% 50.0%
campuses to chronically low-performing campuses. Houston Sources: Texas Education Agency, Public Education Information
Management System Standard Reports, school year 2018–19;
ISD decreased the number of improvement-required Houston ISD, school year 2018–19 Facts and Figures.
campuses from 58 in school year 2014–15 to six in school
year 2017–18. Houston ISD received an overall accountability
The Commissioner of Education appointed a conservator
rating of B for school year 2018–19.
in September 2016 to provide district-level support for
TEA issues state accountability ratings for each district and Houston ISD’s campuses that were rated improvement
campus. From school years 2013–14 to 2016–17, TEA required. The Texas Education Code, Section 39.102, states
issued Houston ISD a district accountability rating of met that if a campus remains in this status for five years, the
standard. During school year 2017–18, TEA did not rate Commissioner may close the campus or replace the district’s
the district due to a special provision for the hardships elected board with state-appointed managers. To avoid
experienced by the district during Hurricane Harvey. these sanctions, four campuses—Henry Middle School,
Figure 4 shows the state accountability ratings for Houston Highland Heights Elementary School, Kashmere High
ISD’s campuses for school years 2013–14 to 2017–18. School, and Wheatley High School—must achieve ratings
Houston ISD’s accountability ratings have improved each of met standard during school year 2018–19. The review
year since school year 2014–15. The review team visited the team’s assessment of Houston ISD’s educational service
district during spring 2019, before the implementation of delivery operations were conducted before the
significant revisions to the state accountability system. Commissioner’s decision about the district’s status.
FIGURE 4
HOUSTON ISD CAMPUS ACCOUNTABILITY RATINGS, SCHOOL YEARS 2013–14 TO 2017–18
MET STANDARD IMPROVEMENT REQUIRED
NUMBER PERCENTAGE NUMBER PERCENTAGE
YEAR CAMPUSES RATED (1) OF CAMPUSES OF CAMPUSES OF CAMPUSES OF CAMPUSES DISTRICT OVERALL RATING
2013–14 264 220 83.3% 44 16.7% Met Standard
2014–15 275 217 78.9% 58 21.1% Met Standard
2015–16 275 237 86.2% 38 13.8% Met Standard
2016–17 278 251 90.3% 27 9.7% Met Standard
2017–18 (2) 275 252 91.6% 6 2.2% Not Rated
Notes:
(1) Data includes paired campuses. For purposes of assigning accountability ratings, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) combines data for
campuses that do not serve grade levels that administer State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) with campuses that
serve grade levels that administer STAAR.
(2) Seventeen campuses and the district overall were not rated for school year 2017–18 due a special TEA provision related to the effects of
Hurricane Harvey. Seven of these campuses maintained their improvement required status from the prior year.
Sources: Texas Education Agency, Texas Academic Performance Report, school years 2013–14 to 2017–18; Houston ISD Facts and Figures,
school years 2013–14 to 2017–18.
FIGURE 5
HOUSTON ISD STUDENT ACADEMIC MEASURES COMPARED TO REGION 4 AND STATE (1), SCHOOL YEAR 2017–18
COLLEGE-READY GRADUATES COMPLETING ENGLISH
ADVANCED DUAL-CREDIT COURSE COMPLETION AND MATHEMATICS (2)
Houston ISD Houston ISD
Region 4 Region 4
State State
35% 36% 37% 38% 39% 40% 41% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%
SAT OR ACT PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS TESTED AVERAGE SAT SCORE
Region 4 Region 4
State State
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 900 950 1000 1050

STUDENTS SCORING AT OR GREATER THAN CRITERION GRADUATES ENROLLED IN TEXAS INSTITUTION OF HIGHER
ON SAT OR ACT (3) EDUCATION
Region 4 Region 4
State State
44% 46% 48% 50% 52% 54% 56% 58% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Notes:
(1) Region 4=Regional Education Service Center IV.
(2) To be considered college-ready, a graduate must have met or exceeded the college-ready criteria on the State of Texas Assessments of
Academic Readiness (STAAR) exit-level test, or the SAT or ACT standardized college admissions tests.
(3) Criterion refers to the scores on the SAT and ACT college admissions tests. For these tests, the criterion scores are at least a composite
24 on the ACT and at least 1110 total on the SAT.
Source: Texas Education Agency, Texas Academic Performance Report, school year 2017–18.
Figure 5 shows various academic measures of Houston ISD state. Houston ISD scored greater than the regional and
compared to the average of other school districts in state averages for advanced dual-credit course completion
Regional Education Service Center IV (Region 4) and the and for the percentage of students that have completed
SAT or ACT college admissions tests. Houston ISD scored FIGURE 6

less than regional and state averages in college-ready HOUSTON ISD STATE LEGISLATORS
graduates completing both English and mathematics,
students scoring at or above criterion for SAT or ACT, PERCENTAGE OF HOUSTON ISD
LEGISLATOR REPRESENTED BY LEGISLATIVE DISTRICT
average SAT score, and graduates enrolled in Texas
Texas Senate
institutions of higher education.
Borris Miles 39.0%
LBB SCHOOL PERFORMANCE REVIEW Carol Alvarado 26.0%
BACKGROUND Joan Huffman 20.0%

John Whitmire 15.0%
The Texas Legislature established the Texas School
Performance Review in 1990 to “periodically review the Texas House of Representatives
effectiveness and efficiency of the operations of school Sarah Davis 12.0%

districts, including the district’s expenditures for its officers’ Shawn Thierry 12.0%
and employees’ travel services. A review of a school district Alma Allen 10.0%
may be initiated by the board at its discretion or on the Garnet Coleman 10.0%
request of the school districts. A review may be initiated by
Jessica Farrar 10.0%
a school district only by resolution adopted by a majority of
Gene Wu 9.0%
the members of the board of trustees of the district. If a
review is initiated on the request of the school district, the Jim Murphy 8.0%
district shall pay 25 percent of the cost incurred in Christina Morales 7.0%
conducting the review” (the Texas Government Code, Harold Dutton, Jr. 5.0%
Section 322.016). Ana Hernandez 5.0%
The LBB’s School Performance Review Team conducts Armando Walle 4.0%
comprehensive and targeted reviews of school districts’ and Jarvis D. Johnson 3.0%
charter schools’ educational, financial, and operational Senfronia Thompson 3.0%
services and programs. The review team produces reports Note: Totals may not sum to 100.0 percent due to rounding.
that identify accomplishments, findings, and Source: U.S. Census data, 2010.
recommendations based upon the analysis of data and onsite

study of each district’s operations. A comprehensive review Houston ISD is served by Region 4, located in Houston.
examines 12 functional areas and recommends ways to Figure 6 shows Houston ISD’s state legislators and
decrease costs, increase revenues, reduce overhead, streamline the percentage of Houston ISD represented by their
operations, and improve the delivery of educational, legislative districts.
financial, and operational services. School districts typically
are selected for management and performance reviews based The chapters that follow contain a summary of the
on a risk analysis of multiple educational and financial district’s findings and numbered recommendations.
indicators. The LBB also considers requests for reviews. Detailed explanations for the recommendations follow
the summary and include fiscal impacts. Each chapter
To gain an understanding of the school district’s operations concludes with a fiscal chart listing the chapter’s
before conducting the onsite review, the review team requests recommendations that have an estimated savings or cost
data from the district and multiple state agencies, including for school years 2019–20 to 2023–24.
TEA, the Texas Department of Agriculture, and the Texas
School Safety Center. For the Houston ISD review, LBB staff Figure 7 shows the estimated fiscal impact of all 94
implemented additional methods for obtaining feedback on recommendations in the performance review. The district
district operations, including surveys of parents, community should determine the actual fiscal impact after reviewing the
members, and district and campus staff. While onsite, the recommendations to determine the level of priority,
review team gathered information through multiple appropriate timeline, and method of implementation.
interviews and focus groups with district and campus
administrators, staff, and board members.
FIGURE 7
FISCAL IMPACT OF HOUSTON ISD RECOMMENDATIONS, SCHOOL YEARS 2019–20 TO 2023–24
TOTAL 5-YEAR ONETIME
(COSTS) OR (COSTS) OR
(COSTS) OR SAVINGS 2019–20 2020–21 2021–22 2022–23 2023–24 SAVINGS SAVINGS
Gross Savings $42,498,765 $42,283,446 $42,091,386 $41,919,916 $41,766,698 $210,560,211 $27,647,116
Gross Costs ($103,605) ($103,605) ($103,605) ($103,605) ($103,605) ($518,025) ($317,550)
Total $42,395,160 $42,179,841 $41,987,781 $41,816,311 $41,663,093 $210,042,186 $27,329,566
1. DISTRICT ORGANIZATION, PLANNING, AND GOVERNANCE
Houston Independent School District (ISD) is located in Houston ISD’s board committees are ineffective and
Houston and covers 312.0 square miles. During school year not well-defined.
2018–19, Houston ISD had 209,772 students. The district
Houston ISD’s board does not function effectively as
is the state’s largest, and the nation’s seventh largest school
a governing unit.
district. Houston ISD is governed by a nine-member board
of trustees (board), whose members are elected from nine
separate districts to serve staggered four-year terms, with RECOMMENDATIONS
elections held every two years. Recommendation1:Modifythedistrict’sorganizational
structure to decrease the superintendent’s supervisory
Dr. Grenita Lathan has served as Houston ISD’s interim
responsibilities and streamline the number of executive
superintendent since April 2018. She previously served as the
leadership positions.
district’s chief academic officer. The previous superintendent
resigned to become chancellor of New York City Public Recommendation 2: Systematize the district
Schools. The Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance process for developing, reviewing, and
Review Team conducted an onsite review to the district from implementing School Improvement Plans.
January 2019 to February 2019. At the time of the onsite
review, Houston ISD had hired an executive search firm to Recommendation 3: Hire a professional mediator
search for a permanent superintendent. The superintendent to conduct team-building sessions to resolve issues
reports to the board, and 18 staff report to the superintendent. affecting trust among board members, and develop
a formal self-policing structure to address potential
violations of board ethics policies.
FINDINGS
Houston ISD does not have an effective and Recommendation 4: Enforce board policies
efficient organizational structure relative to the during board meetings, follow the Lone Star
superintendent’s supervisory responsibilities and the Governance Framework, and provide training
large number of executive leadership positions. for board members regarding acceptable
parliamentary procedures.
Houston ISD’s campus-level planning process
is ineffective, and implementation varies Recommendation 5: Amend board policy to require
among campuses. board members to attend trainings regarding their

roles and responsibilities.
Houston ISD’s board conduct fosters an atmosphere
Recommendation 6: Develop and implement
of distrust and animosity, resulting in a lack of
confidence in leadership among district staff and procedures that establish a timeline and
the community. framework to review and update all board
policies systematically.
Houston ISD’s board does not successfully organize
Recommendation 7: Develop and implement a
or conduct board meetings in a professional manner.
comprehensive superintendent evaluation process.
Houston ISD board members’ behavior suggests a
lack of understanding or disregard for their defined
roles and responsibilities. a clearly defined process for the formation and
maintenance of board committees.
Houston ISD lacks a process to review and update
Recommendation 9: Develop comprehensive
board policies regularly.
operating procedures for all essential board
Houston ISD lacks a clearly defined process to functions and establish a process to evaluate the
evaluate the superintendent. board’s overall effectiveness annually.
DISTRICT ORGANIZATION, PLANNING, AND GOVERNANCE HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
BACKGROUND president can call special meetings at his or her discretion or

An independent school district’s governance structure, staff upon request by three board members. The Board Services
management, and planning process provide the foundation Department posts all meetings to the district website at least
for effective and efficient education of students. An elected 72 hours in advance.
board of trustees (board) governs each school district in From January 2018 to January 2019, the district held 38
Texas. The board focuses on decision making, planning, and special meetings. The special meetings covered topics
providing resources for achieving goals. The board sets goals, including board training and workshops, adopting the
objectives, and policies and approves plans and funding annual budget and tax rate, town hall meetings, community
necessary for school district operations. The superintendent meetings, staff discussions, and budget workshops.
implements policy, manages district operations, recommends
staffing levels, and allocates the resources to implement The public may attend all meetings and may address the
district priorities. The board and superintendent collaborate board on topics of interest. Individuals must register in
as a leadership team to meet district stakeholder needs. advance to speak at board meetings. To comment on a
specific agenda item, individuals must complete an online
Houston ISD serves most of the area within the Houston city form or register in person with the Board Services Department
limits and students in nine nearby municipalities and some by 9:30 am on the day of the meeting.
unincorporated areas in Greater Houston. These areas include
all of the cities of Bellaire, West University Place, and Southside Board meetings are broadcast live on Houston ISD TV, a
Place. The district also enrolls students from the Harris County television station operated by the district that is available on local
portion of Missouri City, and portions of Jacinto City, Hunters Houston cable networks and on the district’s website. Monthly
Creek Village, Piney Point Village, and Pearland. board meetings and agendas are archived online. At the time of
the review team’s onsite review, all board meetings from January
The district has 280 campuses, including eight early childhood 2012 to February 2019 were available to view online.
centers, 160 elementary schools, 38 middle schools, 37 high
schools, and 37 combined or other types of campuses. Figure The district’s mission statement is to “equitably educate the
1–1 shows Houston ISD campuses by enrollment. whole child so that every student graduates with the tools to
reach their full potential.” Figure 1–3 shows the district’s
Figure 1–2 shows Houston ISD’s board members, districts, core beliefs.
titles, and length of service. The next board election will be in
November 2019 for four seats. Figure 1–4 shows the board’s goals for the district.
The board holds public meetings at 5:00 pm on the second Figure 1–5 shows Houston ISD’s organizational structure at
Thursday of every month in the Houston ISD Board the time of the review team’s onsite review, including the 18
Auditorium. Board Policy BE (LOCAL) states that the board positions that report directly to the superintendent.
FIGURE 1–1
HOUSTON ISD CAMPUSES BY ENROLLMENT
CAMPUS NUMBER OF CAMPUSES ENROLLMENT PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS (1)
Early Childhood Centers 8 3,524 1.7%
Elementary 160 100,793 48.1%
Middle 38 33,054 15.8%
High 37 47,785 22.8%
Combined or Alternative (2) 37 24,616 12.1%
Total 280 209,772
Notes:
(1) Numbers may not total 100.0 percent due to rounding.
(2) These campuses serve students in multiple categories (elementary, middle, and high) and/or alternative campuses.
Source: Houston ISD 2018–19 Facts and Figures Report.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT DISTRICT ORGANIZATION, PLANNING, AND GOVERNANCE
FIGURE 1–2
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION
MEMBER TITLE DISTRICT TERM EXPIRATION LENGTH OF SERVICE (1)
Diana Dávila President District VIII 2019 2 years and 8 months
Holly Maria Flynn Vilaseca First Vice President District VI 2021 1 year and 8 months
Elizabeth Santos Second Vice President District I 2021 8 months
Dr. Sergio Lira Secretary District III 2019 8 months

Sue Deigaard Assistant Secretary District V 2021 8 months
Rhonda Skillern-Jones Member District II 2019 6 years and 8 months
Jolanda Jones Member District IV 2019 2 years and 8 Months
Anne Sung Member District VII 2021 1 year and 9 months

Wanda Adams Member District IX 2021 4 years and 8 months
Note: (1) The length of service is as of February 2019.
Source: Houston ISD, February 2019.
FIGURE 1–3
HOUSTON ISD CORE BELIEFS
• We believe that equity is a/the lens through which all policy decisions are made.
• We believe that there should be no achievement gap among socioeconomic groups or children of ethnic diversity.
• We believe that the district must meet the needs of the whole child, providing wraparound services and social and emotional
supports.
• We believe our classrooms/schools should be safe, vibrant, joyful spaces where students are guaranteed access to a challenging
and deep educational experience.
• We believe that instruction should be customized/personalized to meet the learning needs for each individual child, including
students with disabilities, gifted and talented students, and English Language Learners, so they have the support and opportunity
they need to flourish.
• We believe that recruitment and retention of qualified and effective personnel are the keys to enhancing the quality of education and
increasing student achievement.
• We believe that the community has a right to transparent operations across the district in all schools, departments, and divisions.
• We believe that meaningful engagement with the community is important in all major decision making.
Source: Houston ISD Mission and Beliefs, 2019.
FIGURE 1–4
HOUSTON ISD BOARD OF EDUCATION GOALS
2019
Goal 1 The percentage of students reading and writing at or above grade level as measured by the percentage of students at the
Meets Grade Level standard on the State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) for grade three through
English II shall increase by 3.0 percentage points annually from 37.0% to 46.0% from spring 2017 to spring 2020.
Goal 2 The percentage of graduates meeting the Global Graduate standards as measured by the College and Career Readiness
component of the Texas accountability system shall increase 3.0 percentage points annually from the 2017 graduates’
baseline of 52.0% to 67.0% by 2022.
Goal 3 Among students who exhibit below satisfactory performance on state assessments, the percentage who demonstrate at
least one year of academic growth, as measured by the STAAR Progress Measure, shall increase 3.0 percentage points
annually in reading and in math from 57.0% in spring 2017 to 66.0% in spring 2020.
Source: Houston ISD Beliefs and Goals, 2019.
FIGURE 1–5
HOUSTON ISD ORGANIZATION
Board of Education
Chief Audit Executive
Chief of Police Interim Superintendent General Counsel

of Schools
Chief Strategy Chief Government Chief Chief Chief Chief

and Innovation Relations and Financial Academic Communications Operating
Officer Strategy Officer Officer Officer Officer Officer
Chief Information Chief of Staff Area Chief Chief Human

Officer Superintendents – 6 Development Resources Officer
Officer
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, March 2019; Houston ISD, February 2019.
DETAILED FINDINGS The superintendent directly supervises 18 staff from

eight functional areas, including educational service
DISTRICT ORGANIZATION (REC. 1)
delivery, technology, human resources, safety and security,
Houston ISD does not have an effective and efficient financial management, district operations, legal services, and
organizational structure relative to the superintendent’s public relations.
supervisory responsibilities and the large number of executive
leadership positions. Given the breadth of this position’s responsibilities, it is
challenging for the superintendent to supervise all of these
The role of a superintendent is broad and extensive. The reporting positions effectively. Daily operational reporting
superintendent is responsible for a large number of district requirements, especially for a large district such as Houston
functions such as setting the district vision and goals, ISD, can be significant with this reporting structure.
collaborating with the board, being involved in the Although the number of staff a supervisor can manage
community; managing finances, serving as an instructional effectively varies by organization, a general rule for an
leader, and delegating daily activities that accomplish executive ranges from six to eight direct reports.
instructional and operational requirements. Figure 1–6
shows descriptions of a superintendent’s duties developed by For comparison purposes, Figure 1–7 shows the
the Texas Association of School Boards (TASB). superintendent’s supervisory responsibilities at the 10
most populous school districts in Texas. None of these
Houston ISD is the seventh-largest school district in the districts assigns more than 10 positions to report directly to
U.S. Effective oversight of a district this size requires a the superintendent.
superintendent to manage his or her time and duties
efficiently. However, Houston ISD’s organizational Figure 1–8 shows the same information for the 10 most
structure, shown in Figure 1–5, requires the superintendent populous school districts in the U.S. Houston ISD assigns
to spend a significant amount of time managing staff, more positions to report directly to the superintendent
which decreases the remaining time available to carry out than any of these districts, including larger districts. The
other crucial responsibilities. New York City Department of Education assigns 10
FIGURE 1–6
TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS’ DESCRIPTIONS OF SUPERINTENDENT DUTIES
2019
DUTY DESCRIPTION
Policy Development and Implementation The superintendent advises the school board regarding the need for new policies
based on input from staff and advisory committees, legislators, and state agency staff.
Following the superintendent’s policy recommendation, if the board adopts the policy,
the superintendent develops and implements appropriate procedures to satisfy the new
policy’s requirements.
Administration The superintendent provides administrative leadership and manages district daily
operations.
Recommendation and Evaluation of Staff The superintendent recommends staff to be hired; is responsible for performance
evaluations; and makes suggestions for renewal, nonrenewal, and dismissal of staff (as
provided by policy).
Budget The superintendent prepares a budget, makes revisions as requested by the board,
administers the board-adopted budget, and makes purchasing decisions as defined by
board policy and budget constraints.
Facilities Planning The superintendent leads the administrative effort to plan for, operate, maintain, evaluate,
and supervise improvements to school and district facilities.
Communication The superintendent communicates with a diverse range of individuals and groups, such
as legislators, the Texas Education Agency, the regional education service center, parents,
board members, principals, attorneys, teachers, local business owners, and the media.
The superintendent is the face of the district and works to build strong relationships with
all these individuals to form beneficial partnerships and to lobby for the district.
Source: Texas Association of School Boards, My Texas Public School website, 2019.
FIGURE 1–7
positions, and the Los Angeles Unified School District SUPERINTENDENT’S POSITION MANAGEMENT IN THE 10
assigns 12 positions. LARGEST SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN TEXAS
During onsite interviews, the superintendent and staff
DIRECTLY REPORTING
indicated that the high number of direct reports to the DISTRICT STUDENTS POSITIONS
superintendent is due to shifting the six area superintendents Houston ISD 213,528 18
from reporting to the chief academic officer to the Dallas ISD 156,726 8
superintendent for school year 2018–19. This transition
Cypress–Fairbanks ISD 116,138 7
occurred because the district is in a critical stage of trying to
Northside ISD 106,086 7
get several campuses that the Texas Education Agency (TEA)
Fort Worth ISD 86,039 10
rated Improvement Required through the state’s
Austin ISD 81,346 9
accountability system. If these campuses continue to perform
unsatisfactorily, the district could face TEA sanctions, Katy ISD 77,331 8
including the replacement of the school board with an Fort Bend ISD 74,957 10
appointed board of managers. The interim superintendent Aldine ISD 67,234 10
previously served as the chief academic officer, and this shift North East ISD 65,805 5
enables her to work directly to improve student achievement
Sources: Texas Education Agency, Texas Academic Performance
by continuing to supervise the area superintendents. Reports, school year 2017–18; district websites, 2019.
According to the superintendent, the district will revisit this
reporting structure after the state accountability issue has
superintendents at other large school districts in Texas and
been resolved. However, even without the area
the U.S.
superintendents, the superintendent still would have 12
positions reporting directly to her, which exceeds best This organizational structure also causes the district to
practice standards and the supervisory workloads of maintain a large number of executive leadership positions.
FIGURE 1–8
SUPERINTENDENT’S POSITION MANAGEMENT IN THE 10 LARGEST U.S. SCHOOL DISTRICTS
SCHOOL YEAR 2016–17 (1)
DISTRICT STUDENTS STATE OR TERRITORY DIRECTLY REPORTING POSITIONS
New York City Department of Education 995,336 New York 10
Los Angeles Unified School District 667,273 California 12
Puerto Rico Department of Education 437,202 Puerto Rico N/A (2)
Chicago Public Schools 405,655 Illinois 9
Miami–Dade County Public Schools 347,366 Florida 9
Clark County School District 314,059 Nevada 8
Broward County Public Schools 256,472 Florida 17
Houston ISD 215,408 Texas 18
Hillsborough County Public Schools 194,525 Florida 7
Hawaii Department of Education 179,601 Hawaii 8
Notes:
(1) School year 2016–17 was the most recent data available for comparison of all U.S. school districts.
(2) No data was available for the organizational structure of the Puerto Rico Department of Education.
Sources: World Atlas, 2019; district websites, 2019.
Executive leadership positions are administrators who oversee which positions manage a particular function. However,
the major functions of the district. They meet regularly with Houston ISD’s organizational structure has multiple
the superintendent as a group, known as the superintendent’s positions that oversee educational service delivery reporting
cabinet, to help make important governance decisions and directly to the superintendent. The chief academic officer,
coordinate school improvement initiatives. The chief strategy and innovation officer, and six area
superintendent determines which positions are elevated to superintendents all oversee academic functions and all report
executive leadership status, and the six area superintendents directly to the superintendent. Thus, the superintendent’s
are now part of that group. In other districts, these positions management and oversight of the district’s educational
typically carry job titles such as director or deputy service delivery function is fragmented into eight staff and
superintendent, but executive leadership positions in areas that require separate meetings, discussions, evaluations,
Houston ISD carry the title of chief. and administration.
As shown in Figure 1–5, the district maintains 12 chief Additionally, all the chiefs occupy the same level on Houston
positions. The chief of police is statutorily required to ISD’s organizational chart and the same pay scale; however,
report to the superintendent. The other 11 chiefs and the they have a wide discrepancy in their responsibilities and
six area superintendents report directly to the superintendent supervisory duties. For example, the chief operating officer
at the district’s discretion. As shown in Figures 1–7 and manages the district’s transportation, facilities, food service,
1–8, Houston ISD maintains a comparatively high number and safety and security functions, which collectively encompass
of executive leadership positions. During onsite interviews,
approximately 6,600 staff. By contrast, the chief government
some district staff and board members expressed concern
relations and strategy officer monitors and analyzes local, state,
that Houston ISD has more chief positions than necessary.
and federal policy issues affecting the district and oversees two
The interview statements suggested that the district lacks a
staff. Similarly, the chief financial officer oversees six
clear process to determine which positions become
departments and more than 300 staff, and the chief
executive leadership.
development officer oversees 19 positions in two departments.
Effective districts limit the number of staff at the executive In comparison, the chief of staff position oversees seven
leadership level to certain key positions, and avoid positions in the Board Services Department and works with
maintaining executive leadership positions that oversee the different departments as needed and as requested by the
same function. This practice streamlines reporting superintendent. The duties and responsibilities of all these
assignments and clarifies for district staff and the community positions are essential to the district. However, placing all of
FIGURE 1–9
HOUSTON ISD REVISED ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE
MARCH 2019
Superintendent
Chief Chief Chief of Staff Chief Human General Counsel

Academic Communications Resources Officer
Officer Officer
Chief Strategy Chief Chief Chief Chief of Police

and Innovation Financial Operating Information
Officer Officer Officer Officer
Source: Legislative Budge Board School Performance Review Team, March 2019.
them at the same level organizationally increases administrative but it will not be an executive leadership position.
costs and the amount of time required for the superintendent The chief of staff should supervise this position.
to manage staff. The title of director is consistent with the
leadership titles of other high level supervisors
Houston ISD should modify the district’s organizational
throughout the district.
structure to decrease the superintendent’s supervisory
responsibilities and streamline the number of executive In addition to streamlining the number of positions that
leadership positions. report directly to the superintendent and reducing
The district should revise its organizational structure to administrative costs, eliminating the positions of chief
eliminate operational inefficiencies in all areas of the district’s development officer and chief government relations and
activities. Figure 1–9 shows the recommended revised strategy officer aligns the district’s organizational structure
organizational structure. with those of other large districts in the U.S., including New
York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and Clark County, Nevada. In
The district should realign the number of positions Texas, the same structure is used by Dallas ISD, Cypress-
that report directly to the superintendent from 18 to 10 Fairbanks ISD, and Austin ISD.
through the following actions:
The roles and duties of the Houston ISD chief of staff
• reassigning the six area superintendents to report to
position are not consistent with those typical of an executive
the chief academic officer;
leadership position. This position’s duties are significantly
• eliminating the chief development officer position and less than those of most of the chiefs of staffs in the districts
developing a director of community relations position. shown in Figures 1–7 and 1–8. To streamline the district’s
This position will have the same duties as the previous reporting structure and increase equity of responsibilities
chief development officer position, but it will not be among the chief positions, the chief of staff should supervise
an executive leadership position. The chief of staff the recommended positions of director of community
should supervise this position. The title of director is relations and director of government relations.
consistent with the leadership titles of other high level
The departments and staff that currently report to the chief
supervisors throughout the district; and
development officer and the chief government relations and
• eliminating the chief government relations and strategy officer should remain the same. However, the chief
strategy officer position and developing a director of staff and the respective new director positions should
of government relations position. This position evaluate the other leadership positions in the departments
will have the same duties as the previous chief that report to them and recommend additional organizational
government relations and strategy officer position, adjustments, which could include changes or shifts to the
number, titles, roles, and salaries of those positions that FIGURE 1–10
report to the recommended new director positions. ESTIMATED ANNUAL SAVINGS OF HOUSTON ISD’S
REORGANIZATION
Having the area superintendents report to the chief academic MARCH 2019
officer aligns the district’s instructional functions with the ACTION ANNUAL SAVINGS/(COST)
curriculum and assessment functions. This structure provides Eliminating the chief development $233,233
officer position
a better infrastructure for the district to continue to focus on
student outcomes. Developing a director of ($125,674)
community relations position
The fiscal impact of this recommendation results in annual Eliminating the chief government $233,233
savings of $215,118 through the following calculations: relations and strategy officer
position
• eliminating the chief development officer position Developing a director of ($125,674)
government relations position
saves the district $233,233 annually in salary
($194,361) and benefits ($38,872); Total $215,118
Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
• eliminating the chief government relations and strategy Team, March 2019.
officer position saves the district $233,233 annually in
salary ($194,361) and benefits ($38,872); and
year and helps to identify and organize strategies and
• adding two director positions, including a director
resources to increase student achievement.
of community relations and director of government
relations, costs the district $251,348 annually. The Houston ISD campus improvement plans are called school
average annual salary of a Houston ISD director is improvement plans (SIP). The principal of each campus
$104,728. Accounting for the cost of annual benefits, works with the campus’ Shared Decision-Making Committee
the total cost of each director position is $125,674 (SDMC) to annually develop its SIP. SDMC consists of
(salary of $104,728 and benefits of $20,946). Two certain campus instructional and non-instructional staff,
director positions would cost $251,348 ($125,674 x 2). parents, and community and business representatives. Its
purpose is to assist the campus principal with implementing
Figure 1–10 shows the total annual savings of implementing planning processes and site-based decision making. After the
the recommended reorganization of the district. SIP is developed, the principal submits it for review to the
school support officer (SSO) or the lead principal who
CAMPUS LEVEL PLANNING (REC. 2) oversees the campus. Following this review and board
approval, the SIP is posted on the district’s website.
Houston ISD’s campus-level planning process is ineffective,
and implementation varies among campuses. According to Board Policy BQ (LEGAL), an SIP must
address the following tasks:
The Texas Education Code, Section 11.251, states that “the
board of trustees of each independent school district shall • assess the academic achievement for each
ensure that a district improvement plan and improvement student at the campus using the state’s student
plans for each campus are developed, reviewed, and revised achievement indicators;
annually for the purpose of improving the performance of • set the campus performance objectives based on
all students.” Houston ISD Board Policy BQ (LEGAL) the achievement indicators, including objectives for
states that “each school year, the principal of each school special needs populations, such as students in special
campus, with the assistance of the campus-level committee, education programs, pursuant to the Texas Education
shall develop, review, and revise the campus improvement Code, Chapter 29, Subchapter A;
plan for the purpose of improving student performance for
all student populations, including students in special • identify how the campus goals will be met for
each student;
education.” Thus, each campus is statutorily required to
produce an annual improvement plan that guides the • determine the resources needed to implement
problem-solving and planning processes throughout the the plan;
FIGURE 1–11
EXAMPLE OF A HOUSTON ISD SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
Source: Houston ISD, school year 2018–19.
• identify staff needed to implement the plan; Although each campus produces its SIP annually, the process
to develop, review, and use SIPs is not consistent among
• set timelines to reach the goals;
campuses at Houston ISD. During onsite interviews,
• measure progress toward the performance objectives principals reported varying descriptions of the SIP
periodically to ensure that the plan is resulting in development process. For example, several principals said
academic improvement; they developed SIPs by copying and pasting the same goals
from the previous year’s SIP. Other principals report
• provide for a program to encourage parental including the SDMC in the development process. Others
involvement at the campus; develop the SIPs on their own and present them for approval
to the SDMC. A few principals said they develop SIPs by
• include goals and methods for violence prevention
conducting a summative evaluation of whether the previous
and intervention on campus; and
year’s goals were met. However, most reported developing
• set goals and objectives for the coordinated health their SIPs without considering whether their campuses had
program at elementary school, middle school, or accomplished previous goals and objectives.
junior high school campuses.
Additionally, most principals reported receiving little or
Figure 1–11 shows an example of a goal presented in no feedback from SSOs or lead principals on their SIPs.
an SIP. The district does not have a consistent process by which
the SSO or lead principal can hold principals accountable diminished the board’s ability to deliberate the critical
for meeting SIP goals. No principal interviewed said that academic, operational, and administrative issues affecting the
the achievement of or failure to meet SIP goals factored district openly and effectively.
into their evaluations or substantive discussions with
Board members stated that divisions within the board have
SSOs. Many principals interviewed could not recall whether
engendered feelings of suspicion and hostility. The following
their campuses met the previous year’s SIP goals and were
examples show the Houston ISD board’s lack of unity:
not aware of progress made toward accomplishing the
current year’s goals. Most agreed that the district does not • two Houston ISD board members traveled together
place much importance on SIPs, and several said that the to Austin to discuss issues facing the district with
SIPs were completed each year merely to meet state and state legislators. They did so without the knowledge
federal requirements. of other board members and without informing
Houston ISD’s Government Relations Department,
Houston ISD should systematize the district process for
even though onsite interviews stated that board
developing, reviewing, and implementing School
members are aware of the department’s role in serving
Improvement Plans.
as the district’s point of contact for elected officials
The Leadership and Teacher Development Department and policy makers;
should develop comprehensive principal training for • during the October 2018 board meeting, the
SIP development. This training should define SIP board passed a motion to remove the current
elements, include instruction for conducting a interim superintendent, Dr. Lathan, and replace
comprehensive needs assessment, and using the resulting her with a previous superintendent, Dr. Abelardo
data to develop base goals, objectives, and strategies. Saavedra. The motion came during a vote to extend
Houston ISD should seek assistance from Regional the interim superintendent’s contract and passed
Education Service Center IV, which provides training for with the support of five board members. The
developing SIPs. remaining four board members were not aware the
The chief academic officer and the area superintendents motion was going to be brought, and no discussion
also should establish and implement a process to train occurred before the vote. Several days later, board
SSOs and lead principals to review and monitor SIPS members announced they were rescinding the
effectively. This process should include holding the appointment of Dr. Saavedra and reinstating Dr.
campuses accountable for meeting SIP goals. Lathan. However, this episode launched an ongoing
investigation by TEA into possible violations of the
The district could implement this recommendation with Open Meetings Act by the five board members who
existing resources. supported the motion;
BOARD DISTRUST (REC. 3) • the divisions within the board have precluded
Houston ISD from conducting an effective
Houston ISD’s board conduct fosters an atmosphere of
superintendent search process. Best practices
distrust and animosity, resulting in a lack of confidence in
promoted by TASB recommend that a
leadership among district staff and the community.
superintendent search takes no more than four
The National School Board Association (NSBA) states that months. However, at the time of the onsite review,
effective school boards “lead as a united team with the Dr. Lathan had been the interim superintendent
superintendent, each from their respective roles, with strong for 10 months, and the district had not set an
collaboration and mutual trust.” Similarly, TEA’s publication end date for the superintendent search. Some
Framework for School Board Development states that “to board members support Dr. Lathan becoming the
effectively meet the challenges of public education, school permanent superintendent, and others do not. The
boards must function together as a leadership team.” superintendent search has been affected as factions
However, the Houston ISD board often does not function within the board work against each other to delay
effectively as a group with common goals and objectives, but and circumvent the process. On March 25, 2019,
rather as individuals with their own personal agendas. The the TEA conservator called a halt to the search until
feelings of enmity and distrust among board members has TEA completes its investigations of the district; and
• in August 2018, having already approved the type of orientation structure may convey to new members
school year budget in June, the board approved that the board is a collection of individuals and not a
an amendment by a five-to-four vote to provide a cohesive group.
salary raise for teachers. During onsite interviews,
During onsite interviews, board members and staff said that it
several board members and Houston ISD staff
is difficult to get agreement among all board members to
indicated that this action was a violation of board
engage in team-building trainings, and that some board
policy intended to satisfy teacher organizations at
members are opposed to engaging in these training. Board
the expense of increasing a budget that was already
members said that team-building trainings were held in
in a deficit. However, board members in favor
January and February 2019, but not all board members
of the raise responded that miscommunications
attended every meeting.
occurred concerning whether the approved budget
had included raises for teachers. They stated that the Board Policy BBF (LOCAL) contains the code of ethics for
district exacerbated this miscommunication by not board members, which includes 18 standards that board
producing a salary schedule for teachers until weeks members agree to uphold during their tenures. These
after the budget was approved. All of this discussion standards include broad values such as being fair and just,
occurred in public as members commented about keeping information confidential, being diligently prepared,
each other during press conferences and through focusing on responsibilities, being honest, and swearing to
local media. This public behavior has increased the not use one’s position for personal gain. However, the policy
frustration among members on both sides of this does not include procedures to administer the ethics policy
issue, with each contending that the other was not or guidelines outlining sanctions for board members who
operating in good faith. violate these standards.
Some of the feedback provided by board members to the Some Houston ISD staff and community representatives
review team and to media during the past year also indicates a reported that the board’s infighting and lack of cohesion has
lack of communication and trust among board members. generated feelings of instability and unease throughout the
During onsite interviews, board members reported verbal district. From July 2018 to November 2018, the review team
attacks and physical threats made against them by other board surveyed community representatives about their opinions of
members. During onsite interviews, board members also Houston ISD. The aspect of the district that received the
decried the lack of decorum and professionalism in the way most negative feedback was the school board. The primary
members communicated with each other and in their behavior complaint was the board’s lack of professionalism. A similar
during regular board meetings and closed sessions. Some survey of district staff indicated that morale was low
board members said they perceive a lack of respect from many throughout the organization. This feedback was confirmed
of their colleagues, and all board members acknowledged a during onsite interviews in which staff consistently stated
general lack of trust that pervades all board activities. that low morale among district staff was due in part to the
lack of confidence in the board’s leadership. Some staff stated
Another example of the lack of collaboration among board their beliefs that the board’s unprofessional behavior was
members is the absence of team-building training. Board contributing to staff leaving the district, and others said that
Policy BBD (LEGAL) states “the entire board, including all frustration with the board was eroding community support
board members, shall annually participate with their in the form of decreased donations and volunteer enrollment.
superintendent in a team-building session.” However,
Student enrollment for school year 2018–19 decreased from
according to board training records, the board did not
the previous school year by more than 4,400 students, or 2.0
participate in the required team-building training during
percent. This amount was the largest decrease in student
calendar year 2018. Additionally, newly elected members
enrollment in the past 12 years, a fact that some staff and
are required to attend orientation training. Houston ISD’s
community members attributed to parent frustration with
orientation of new board members meets state requirements,
the board’s perceived lack of professionalism.
but established board members do not participate in the
training and it contains no team-building elements. Thus, The Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Council
new members do not have the opportunity to meet, interact on Accreditation and School Improvement encourages
with, or ask questions of established board members. This school districts to use the services of a professional mediator
as a best practice to address internal conflicts, distrust, BBD (LOCAL) requires the board president to announce
and poor communication among school board members. the status of each board member’s continuing education
The goal of mediation is for a neutral third party to credit annually at the last regular board meeting before the
help board members reach a consensus and settle district’s uniform election date. As a measure of
disputes on their own. Rather than imposing a solution, a accountability, the board should amend this policy to
mediator works with the conflicting sides to explore the include whether the board collectively engaged in team-
interests underlying their positions. Mediation can be building training during the previous year. The Board
effective at enabling parties to express their feelings and Services Department also should modify new board
explore their grievances. Working with parties together, member orientation to include a team-building element
and sometimes separately, mediators try to help them that involves all board members.
achieve a resolution that is sustainable, voluntary,
The fiscal impact assumes the expense of a Houston-area
and nonbinding.
professional mediator at $500 per hour. The fiscal impact
Houston ISD should hire a professional mediator to assumes a onetime cost of $12,000 for the team-building
conduct team-building sessions to resolve issues affecting sessions, including two 8.0-hour sessions totaling $8,000
trust among board members, and develop a formal self- ($500 x 16 hours) and two 4.0-hour follow-up sessions
policing structure to address potential violations of board totaling $4,000 ($500 x 8).
ethics policies.
BOARD MEETINGS (REC. 4)
The board president should work with the board secretary
and the superintendent to identify a professional mediator Houston ISD’s board does not successfully organize or
skilled in working with public school boards. The board conduct board meetings in a professional manner.
should approve the professional mediator and authorize the
A typical school board meeting includes several business
board president to contract with the mediator to conduct
items, such as approving the school calendar, adopting
team-building sessions.
curriculum, overseeing construction, monitoring the
After the board hires a professional mediator, the district budget, and approving vendor contracts. An
board should schedule a minimum of two 8.0-hour team- effective school board links the discussion of district
building sessions, followed by two 4.0-hour follow-up business with its overall goal of improving student
sessions. The mediator should work with the board to academic achievement. Additionally, board meetings
identify the root causes of the communication and provide the public, including campus staff, with an
trust issues that limit board effectiveness. The mediator opportunity to provide input into the district’s decision-
should help board members understand each other’s making process. The community’s opinion of the district
personal and philosophical differences and work to achieve often is shaped by how successfully the board manages
common ground on divisive issues. As a result, board meetings. As stated in NSBA’s publication, Telling Your
members should begin to restore mutual trust, respect, and Story, “no amount of positive school press or superintendent
open communication. charisma can overcome bad behavior broadcast live during
school board meetings.”
The board also should incorporate a self-policing structure
into board policy. The policy should include an outline of Houston ISD board meetings are not managed effectively
specific prohibited actions and clearly defined sanctions for or efficiently. Board meetings often do not support
members who violate the policy. For example, the board established board beliefs nor move the district forward in
could establish a discipline process by which a two-thirds achieving district goals. The following elements cause
vote of members could discipline a member for conduct Houston ISD board meetings to be unsuccessful:
deemed detrimental to the board. The penalties could
• the agenda process is not consistent;
include public reprimand, formal censure, and removal
from committee assignments. • the focus of board meetings often is not on
improving student outcomes; and
The Board Services Department should work with the
board president to ensure that board members attend the • board meetings do not follow parliamentary
required team-building training annually. Board Policy procedures consistently.
AGENDA PROCESS Additionally, some board members said they believe that the
Houston ISD’s process to develop and disseminate an agenda agenda process is not transparent and that some board
for each board meeting is described in Board Policy BE members manipulate the process. Houston ISD’s Board Policy
(LOCAL) and Board Policy BE1–BE3 (REGULATION). It BE (LOCAL) states that an item shall be placed on the agenda
begins when the superintendent prepares the agenda for all if it is supported by at least three board members. During
board meetings in consultation with the board president. onsite interviews, some board members and staff said that this
The preliminary agenda is composed of documents and provision has contributed to division and infighting among
issues submitted by board members, staff who directly report board members. Many said that small groups of board
to the superintendent, departments, and campus offices. The members often meet to discuss agenda items without involving
Board Services Department publishes the preliminary agenda the board president or the full board. Some board members
internally for initial review by the superintendent. perceive this practice as disrespectful to the superintendent
and the board president. They say it inhibits the board from
The Board Services Department coordinates the preparation functioning as an effective governing body and encourages
of the agenda and distributes the preliminary agenda via secrecy and distrust among members.
email, usually one week after the most recent board meeting.
According to Board Policy BE2 (REGULATION), board When board members discuss agenda items in smaller groups,
members must submit items for inclusion on the preliminary the district is at risk of violating the Open Meetings Act. The
agenda before noon on the day the preliminary agenda is Texas Government Code, Section 551.101, requires meetings
published. After the preliminary agenda is published, staff of governmental bodies, including school boards, to be open
that directly report to the superintendent may recommend to the public, except for expressly authorized closed sessions,
changes to an existing item, suggest a new item, or and to be preceded by public notice of the time, place, and
recommend withdrawal of an item. Houston ISD sets a date subject matter of the meeting. A meeting of a governmental
by which all agenda preparation must be complete. Although body occurs anytime a quorum of its members is present to
processes exist to add an item later, the administration discuss public business. Thus, a gathering of five or more
strongly encourages staff to consider presenting such items at Houston ISD board members to discuss district business
a subsequent board meeting. The Board Services Department qualifies as a board meeting subject to all statutory
will not add an item to the agenda without written approval requirements, including public notice requirements. During
from the superintendent or designee. Following the onsite interviews, board members charged that other members
superintendent’s approval, the Board Services Department violated the Open Meetings Act during the agenda review
sends the updated agenda to board members and staff nine process, and TEA’s investigation into this matter was ongoing
days before the next board meeting. at the time of the onsite review. Violations of the Open
Meetings Act can result in civil penalties.
One week before the regular monthly board meeting, the
board holds an agenda review meeting with all board members,
BOARD MEETING FOCUS
the superintendent, and key district staff. The meeting provides
an opportunity to discuss items that will be voted upon during NSBA’s publication The Key Work of School Boards states that
the regular monthly meetings. After the meeting is complete, “board members’ primary agenda is raising student
the Board Services Department finalizes the agenda for the achievement and engaging the community to obtain that
monthly board meeting and publishes it on the district website. goal.” Similarly, Houston ISD’s mission statement reads “the
Board’s mission is to equitably educate the whole child so
However, this process, as outlined in board policy, is not always
that every student graduates with the tools to reach their full
understood nor adhered to by board members and staff.
potential.” However, Houston ISD board meetings are not
During onsite interviews, several board members expressed
focused on improving or monitoring student achievement.
uncertainty as to how items were placed on the agenda. District
staff and board members familiar with the agenda process said Beginning in July 2017, TEA assigned a conservator to
that it was not followed consistently. Board members and staff observe and report on Houston ISD’s board activity due to
reported that items have been added after the agenda was concerns about the effectiveness of board governance and the
finalized, and items have been brought up during the monthly board’s ability to affect academics positively. The conservator
meetings that had not been discussed or approved during worked with the board to implement the Lone Star
agenda preparation or the agenda review meeting. Governance (LSG) framework, which is a continuous
improvement model intended to guide school boards toward the needs of nonlegislative organizations. Examples of
improving student outcomes. The State Board of Education Robert’s Rules of Order include:
has approved the framework, developed by TEA, to provide
• no meeting should be called to order until a quorum
the critical areas of development for all public school boards.
of members is established;
Figure 1–12 shows a description of the LSG framework.
• the chair of the organization calls the meeting to order;
All Houston ISD board members attended a two-day LSG
• members must be recognized by the presiding officer
workshop offered by TEA in 2018. Following the workshop,
before speaking;
the board began using a continuous improvement timeline
that requires the board to perform monthly self-evaluations • a motion to take action must precede any discussion
to assess if it effectively is shifting the focus of board meetings of an issue;
toward improving student outcomes. • motions must be seconded; and
In June 2018, the conservator began monitoring Houston • formal votes are taken by voice or ballot.
ISD board meetings to track the extent to which issues An organization that observes Robert’s Rules of Order
discussed during meetings fit into the LSG framework. From typically follows an established sequence for conducting
June 2018 to December 2018, the Houston ISD board business in an orderly manner during a meeting, including
devoted approximately 90.0 percent of its time to discussing the following steps:
items and issues that were not part of the LSG framework
and that TEA does not consider relevant to enhancing • reading and approval of previous board minutes;
student outcomes. This misuse of time is a particular concern • reports of officers, boards, and standing committees;
for Houston ISD considering that TEA academically rated
some of its campuses as Improvement Required. • reports of special committees;
• unfinished business; and
Figure 1–13 shows the results of TEA’s monitoring of
Houston ISD board meetings from June 2018 to • new business.
December 2018.
Robert’s Rules of Order is the standard template from which
Review team observations of Houston ISD board meetings most school boards structure their meetings. Houston ISD
during this time period show that the board spends a Board Policy BE (LOCAL) states “the board shall observe the
considerable amount of time engaged in staff issues, parliamentary procedures as found in Robert’s Rules of Order,
making repeated requests of Houston ISD staff for Newly Revised, except as otherwise provided in board
additional information, arguing with each other, and procedural rules or by law.” During onsite interviews,
arguing with community members. This resulted in long Houston ISD board members acknowledged that the board
meetings in which the board did not adequately address attempts to follow Robert’s Rules of Order, and that members
important district business. This inadequacy contributes to received copies of the rules from the board president.
the public distrust of the board and the perception that it Members are encouraged to seek out and attend training on
spends too much time on topics that do not benefit students these rules, but it is not required in board policy.
or the district. However, Houston ISD board meetings consistently do not
follow Robert’s Rules of Order, particularly regarding debate
ADHERENCE TO PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURES decorum. Figure 1-14 shows examples of Robert’s Rules of
Order for debate decorum and whether Houston ISD board
Parliamentary procedures are the code of rules, ethics, and
meetings follow them regularly.
customs governing meetings and other operations of
deliberative assemblies. Self-governing organizations, such as The Houston ISD board’s lack of adherence to parliamentary
school boards, follow parliamentary procedures to debate procedures also extends to interactions between the board
and reach group decisions with the least possible disunity. and community representatives. Board Policy BE1
The most widely used manual of parliamentary procedures in (REGULATION) requires that each regular board meeting
the U.S. is Robert’s Rules of Order. This manual, revised in include an open forum for the public to express compliments
2011, adapts the rules and practice of the U.S. Congress to and concerns. Board Policy BE (LOCAL) adds that meeting
FIGURE 1–12
LONE STAR GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK
CALENDAR YEAR 2019
SECTION DESCRIPTION ELEMENTS
Vision The board ensures The board carries out the following actions:
creation of a shared
vision that promotes • keeps the district focus on the educational welfare of all children;
enhanced student • adopts a shared vision based on community beliefs to guide local education;
achievement. • ensures that the vision supports the state’s mission, objectives, and goals for education
established by law or rule;
• ensures that the district vision expresses the present and future needs of the children and
community;
• uses the vision to assess the importance of individual issues that come before the board
and demonstrates its commitment to the vision by using the vision to guide all board
deliberations, decisions, and actions; and
• Individual board members should not have individual agendas separate and apart from the
shared vision.
Structure The board provides The board carries out the following actions:
guidance and
direction for • recognizes the respective roles of the legislature, State Board of Education, the Texas
accomplishing the Education Agency, and local boards of trustees in the governance of the public schools;
vision. • fulfills the statutory duties of the local board of trustees and upholds all laws, rules, ethical
procedures, and court orders pertaining to schools and school employees;
• focuses its actions on policy-making, planning, and evaluation, and restricts its involvement
in management to the responsibility of oversight;
• adopts a planning and decision-making process consistent with state law and rule that uses
participation, information, research, and evaluation to help achieve the district’s vision;
• ensures that the district planning and decision-making process enables all segments of
the community, parents, and professional staff to meaningfully contribute to achieving the
district’s vision;
• develops and adopts policies that provide guidance for accomplishing the district’s vision,
mission, and goals;
• adopts a budget that incorporates sound business and fiscal practices and provides
resources to achieve the district’s vision, mission, and goals;
• adopts goals, approves student performance objectives, and establishes policies that
provide a well-balanced curriculum resulting in improved student learning;
• approves goals, policies, and programs that ensure a safe and disciplined environment
conducive to learning;
• oversees the management of the district by employing a superintendent and evaluating the
superintendent’s performance in providing education leadership, managing daily operations,
and performing all duties assigned by law or rule and in support of the district’s vision; and
• adopts policies and standards for hiring, assigning, appraising, terminating, and
compensating school district personnel in compliance with state laws and rules.
Accountability The board The board carries out the following actions:
measures and
communicates how • ensures progress toward achievement of district goals through a systematic, timely, and
well the vision is comprehensive review of reports prepared by or at the direction of the superintendent;
being accomplished. • monitors the effectiveness and efficiency of instructional programs by reviewing reports
prepared by or at the direction of the superintendent and directs the superintendent to make
modifications that promote maximum achievement for all students;
• ensures that appropriate assessments are used to measure achievement of all students;
• reports district progress to parents and community in compliance with state laws and
regulations;
• reviews district policies for effective support of the district’s vision, mission, and goals;
• reviews the efficiency and effectiveness of district operations and use of resources in
supporting the district’s vision, mission, and goals;
• evaluates the superintendent’s performance annually in compliance with state laws and
regulations; and
• annually evaluates its own performance in fulfilling the board’s duties and responsibilities,
and the board’s ability to work with the superintendent as a team.
FIGURE 1–12 (CONTINUED)

LONE STAR GOVERNANCE FRAMEWORK
CALENDAR YEAR 2019
SECTION DESCRIPTION ELEMENTS
Advocacy The board promotes The board carries out the following actions:
the vision.
• demonstrates its commitment to the shared vision, mission, and goals by clearly
communicating them to the superintendent, the staff and community;
• ensures an effective two-way communication system between the district and its students,
parents, employees, media, and the community;
• builds partnerships with community, business, and governmental leaders to influence and
expand educational opportunities and meet the needs of students;
• supports children by establishing partnerships between the district, parents, business leaders,
and other community members as an integral part of the district’s educational program;
• leads in recognizing the achievements of students, staff, and others in education;
• promotes school board service as a meaningful way to make long-term contributions to the
local community and society; and
• provides input and feedback to the legislature, State Board of Education, and the Texas
Education Agency about proposed changes to ensure maximum effectiveness and benefit to
the schoolchildren in their district.
Unity The board The board carries out the following actions:
works with the
superintendent to • ensures that its members understand and respect the need to function as a team in
lead the district governing and overseeing the management of the district;
toward the vision. • develops skills in teamwork, problem solving, and decision-making;
• establishes and follows local policies, procedures, and ethical standards governing the
conduct and operations of the board;
• understands and adheres to laws and local policies about the board’s responsibility to set
policy and the superintendent’s responsibility to manage the school district and to direct
employees in district and campus matters;
• recognizes the leadership role of the board president and adheres to law and local policies
about the duties and responsibilities of the board president and other officers;
• adopts and adheres to established policies and procedures for receiving and addressing
ideas and concerns from students, parents, employees, and the community;
• makes decisions as a whole only at properly called meetings and recognizes that individual
members have no authority to take individual action in policy or district and campus
administrative matters; and
• supports decisions of the majority after honoring the right of individual members to express
opposing viewpoints and vote their convictions.
Source: Texas Education Agency, Framework for School Board Development, 2019.
FIGURE 1–13
TEXAS EDUCATION AGENCY TIME-TRACKING TOOL RESULTS OF HOUSTON ISD BOARD MEETINGS
JUNE 2018 TO DECEMBER 2018
PERCENTAGE OF
FRAMEWORK ACTIVITY MINUTES MINUTES USED (1)
Vision Student outcome goal setting and monitoring; constraints setting and 183.0 3.6%
monitoring
Structure Debating and voting on any item up for board consideration 175.0 3.5%
Accountability Superintendent evaluation and board self-evaluation 0.0 0.0%
Advocacy Community engagement; student and family engagement; community training 0.0 0.0%
Unity Board training 159.0 3.1%
Other Any time spent on an activity that is not in the framework categories 4,522.0 90.1%
Student Outcome 517.0 10.2%
Goal-focused Minutes
Total 5,039.0 100.0%
Note: (1) Totals may not sum due to rounding.
Source: Texas Education Agency, June 2018 to December 2018.
FIGURE 1–14
ROBERT’S RULES OF ORDER FOR DEBATE DECORUM COMPARED TO HOUSTON ISD BOARD MEETINGS
JANUARY 2018 TO DECEMBER 2018
DOES HOUSTON ISD
FOLLOW THIS RULE
DURING BOARD
RULES MEETINGS ASSESSMENT
When a question is pending, a member can No Houston ISD board members engage in personal attacks
condemn the nature or likely consequences against other members and Houston ISD staff.
of the proposed measure in strong terms, but
he must avoid personalities and under no
circumstances can he attack or question the
motives of another member.
Members of an assembly cannot address one No Members sometimes address each other directly.
another directly, but must address all remarks
through the chair.
During debate, no member should be No During onsite interviews, board members and staff reported
permitted to disturb the assembly by that board members text, whisper, walk around the dais,
whispering, walking across the floor, or in any abruptly leave, and communicate with other board members
other way. when not recognized by the chair during board meetings.
No member shall speak more than twice No Members often speak more than twice on a particular subject
during the same day to the same question and regularly exceed 10 minutes in doing so.
(only once on an appeal), nor longer than 10
minutes at one time.
Until a matter has been brought before the No Members discuss topics and issues that are not brought up
assembly in the form of a motion proposing a officially in the form of a motion.
specific action, it cannot be debated.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, March 2019; Robert’s Rules of Order, Newly Revised, 2011.
attendees must conduct themselves appropriately and must length and to the board members’ inability to finish the
not disrupt or interfere with the proceedings. The policy business before them. Community members’ behavior also
defines the following prohibited behaviors: contributes to the chaotic and tense atmosphere that prevails
at many board meetings, during and after which police have
• possessing a weapon at the meeting;
arrested certain community members during the past two
• waving or displaying signs, placards, posters, or school years. During onsite interviews, board members have
banners in such a manner as to pose a potential safety reported feeling unsafe at meetings, and some have reported
hazard or disrupt the proceedings; receiving threats. Board members often request Houston
ISD police escorts after meetings.
• applauding, booing, cheering, or making other
audible expressions of approval or disapproval in Additionally, some board members and Houston ISD staff
a loud or raucous manner calculated to disrupt the said that board leadership and district administrators do not
meeting; or constrain disruptive community member behavior
sufficiently during meetings. Board Policy BED (LOCAL)
• using profane or vulgar language or gestures during
limits each community members speaking on agenda items
presentation to, or interaction with, the board.
to 2.0 minutes, but citizens consistently speak past the
Nevertheless, some community members consistently allotted time. Board Policy BE (LOCAL) states that any
disrupt board meetings in violation of board policy. The violation of the standards of behavior results in a warning.
behaviors observed include visitors speaking to the board Repeat violations result in removal of the individual
outside of the allotted time for community feedback, responsible and possible criminal penalties. Observations of
including instances of yelling and swearing at board members Houston ISD board meetings show few occasions in which
during discussions of agenda items. These interruptions board members attempted to halt the disruptive behavior of
often slow down board meetings, which contributes to their community members. On some occasions, board members
have discouraged Houston ISD police officers’ efforts to is focused on matters that fall within the LSG
control disruptive citizens. framework. Including these activities in the board
calendar will help ensure that the board consistently is
Effective school boards set the vision and goals for the school working toward conducting meetings that address the
district and hold the district accountable for student district’s priorities.
academic results. This task requires the board to engage in
policy-making, problem solving, planning, and evaluation Houston ISD also should consider contracting with a
during board meetings. When board meetings are managed parliamentarian to help the board conduct effective
and organized poorly, the board cannot perform the duties of meetings. A parliamentarian is an expert in rules of order
governing the district effectively. and proper meeting procedures and can assist in
drafting and interpreting bylaws and rules of order.
Board meetings also are the primary means of community The parliamentarian also serves as a resource to the
interaction with board members and district staff. Public chair, unobtrusively guiding and supporting during
perception of the district is shaped by how efficiently and the meeting. The chair can and should consult with
effectively the board manages and organizes its meetings. the parliamentarian to resolve uncertainty. Houston
Board meetings that devolve into arguments and shouting ISD should work only with a parliamentarian
matches involving members and the community reflect experienced in Robert’s Rules of Order and familiar
poorly on the district, eroding public confidence in the with the LSG framework.
board’s leadership and direction.
The district could implement this recommendation with
Houston ISD should enforce board policies during board existing resources. The fiscal impact assumes that the cost of
meetings, follow the Lone Star Governance Framework, and board members attending Robert’s Rules of Order training
provide training for board members regarding acceptable can be paid for in the existing board training budget. The
parliamentary procedures. fiscal impact does not assume the cost of the parliamentarian’s
The board should include a refresher lesson on the meeting contract, which can vary. The district should evaluate
process, as defined in board policy, at the next board workshop several parliamentarians to determine which best meets the
to ensure that all members are familiar with its various district’s needs and fits within the board’s budget.
elements. This training should include a thorough explanation
of the agenda process and what is expected of board members BOARD ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES (REC. 5)
and community members during meetings. The board also Houston ISD board members’ behavior suggests a lack
should provide a thorough explanation of the meeting process of understanding or disregard for their defined roles
during orientation training to ensure that newly elected board and responsibilities.
members understand how meetings are organized and
conducted. Houston ISD’s board policies discussing board The school board is the district’s educational policy-making
meetings are clear and concise. The board should work together body. Effective school boards focus on oversight of
to ensure they consistently follow and enforce these policies. management, policy-making, planning, and evaluation,
leaving the implementation of these policies and the
The board also should attend a team training on Robert’s daily administration to the superintendent. Figure 1–15
Rules of Order, followed by quarterly self-evaluations for the shows the role of the school board compared to the role of
first year after attending the training to assess how well the the superintendent.
board members implement the rules. The board also should
The Houston ISD school board does not adhere consistently
attend annual training on the Open Meetings Act, and an
to the oversight and policy-making roles shown in Figure
overview of the law should be included as part of new board
1–15. During onsite interviews, district staff reported that
member orientation.
board members consistently overstep their oversight functions
Additionally, the Houston ISD board should follow the to have more of a role in the daily administration of the district.
LSG framework presented by the TEA conservator and In the review team’s survey of Houston ISD staff, only 17.0
incorporate the continuous improvement timeline into percent of respondents agreed with the statement “school
its calendar and planning. The timeline sets quarterly board members understand their role as policy makers and
goals for the board to meet concerning how much time stay out of the day-to-day management of the district.”
FIGURE 1–15
ROLE AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE SCHOOL BOARD AND THE SUPERINTENDENT
CALENDAR YEAR 2019
ROLE/RESPONSIBILITY SCHOOL BOARD SUPERINTENDENT
District policy Develops and adopts Suggests and implements
Budget and finance Adopts and monitors Prepares, administers, and monitors
Instruction and curriculum Adopts goals, approves student performance Recommends student performance goals and
objectives, and establishes policies that improve objectives and oversees staff efforts to implement
student learning them.
Staff Adopts policies and standards for hiring, Interviews, recommends, hires, evaluates, promotes,
assigning, appraising, terminating, and and trains district staff.
compensating school district staff in compliance
with state laws and rules
Student services Approves goals, policies, and programs that Recommends goals and programs to provide students
ensure a safe and disciplined environment with a healthy and safe learning environment and
conducive to learning oversees staff efforts to implement them.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, March 2019; Texas Education Agency, Framework for School Board
Development, 2019; Texas Association of School Boards, 2019.
Staff said in interviews that board members place large FIGURE 1–16
demands on staff time with requests for information that often HOUSTON ISD BOARD MEMBER REQUESTS FOR
INFORMATION
is not relevant to their role as board members. Information FEBRUARY 2018 TO NOVEMBER 2018
requested includes, for example, various staff salaries, staff
AVERAGE DAYS
resumes, a list of all staff sorted by length of tenure, a list of all MONTH REQUESTS TO COMPLETE
software programs used within the district, and a list of all high February 70 7
schools that support and implement voter registration efforts
March 42 9
for students age 18. Staff said they are not always certain how
April 73 6
board members have used the information provided to them.
During onsite interviews, several board members said some of May 44 9
the requests for information were based on personal agendas June 33 5
and were not related to developing district policy or informing July 20 5
planning decisions. August 37 6
Many requests are time-consuming for staff to fulfill, September 43 5

requiring days or months to complete. Examples of these October 39 6
requests include the number of assessments administered in November 42 6
each classroom at various campuses, the length of time of Total 443 6
each assessment, and the complete list of committees at every
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
campus in the district. Team, March 2019; Houston ISD, February 2019.
The number of information requests from board members

became so numerous that the superintendent instructed the duties that are intended to help achieve district goals.
Board Services Department to develop an electronic system Additionally, the number and nature of these requests, which
to track all requests. This system details the request made by often concern minor and routine district activities, indicate
board members, to whom the request was referred, and how that some members do not understand their oversight roles.
many days were required to complete the request. Figure
During onsite interviews, Houston ISD staff reported that
1–16 shows board member request data from February 2018
several board members have tried to influence district hiring
to November 2018.
practices to encourage employing and promoting certain staff
The time required to respond to board member requests based at least partially on their race or ethnicity. Houston ISD
decreases staff’s available time to implement assigned job staff also stated that some board members have personal
agendas that affect the budgetary process. For example, FIGURE 1–17
members reportedly have threatened to not approve the district HOUSTON ISD BOARD MEMBER TRAINING HOURS
COMPARED TO STATE REQUIREMENTS
budget unless certain programs and initiatives are included, CALENDAR YEAR 2018
even if these programs would increase a budget that is already
TRAINING DID MEMBER MEET THE
in a deficit. Additionally, staff stated that some board members BOARD MEMBER HOURS 5.0-HOUR REQUIREMENT?
attempt to influence campus administration by advising and Board Member A 24.25 Yes
consulting with individual principals. Staff also said that some
Board Member B 9.75 Yes
principals consult board members directly to address issues
occurring at their campuses or with district administrators. Board Member C 8.25 Yes
This practice usurps the leadership and authority of Houston Board Member D 49.0 Yes
ISD administrators and establishes an atmosphere of distrust Board Member E 36.0 Yes
and uncertainty about decision making at the district and Board Member F 37.25 Yes
campus levels. This practice makes it difficult for the
Board Member G 22.75 Yes
superintendent to effectively implement key districtwide
Board Member H 40.50 Yes
initiatives essential to improving student achievement.
Board Member I 39.75 Yes
A lack of understanding of roles and responsibilities among Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
school board members can result from a lack of training. The Team, March 2019; Houston ISD, 2019.
Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 2, Chapter 61,
Subchapter A, Section 61.1, requires all board members to members do not attend the required trainings or continue to
receive 5.0 hours of continuing education annually. A review overstep their roles post-training, the board should amend
of Houston ISD board member training records show that board policy to authorize public censure of board members
all board members receive the continuing education required for repeated violations.
by statute. Houston ISD’s local board policy contains no
additional requirements for such training. Figure 1–17 The district could implement this recommendation with
shows board member training records compared to state existing resources through the board’s existing training budget.
requirements for calendar year 2018.
As shown in Figure 1–17, all Houston ISD board members BOARD POLICIES (REC. 6)
met the training requirements, and most exceeded them. Houston ISD lacks a process to review and update board
However, board member records do not indicate the types of policies regularly.
training received; therefore, the review team could not
determine how much of a board member’s continuing A key school board responsibility is to review and adopt
education related to the roles and responsibilities of the board. policies that guide how the district operates. Each of the
following policy types serves a unique purpose:
Houston ISD’s board should amend board policy to
• legal policies represent existing laws and are updated
require board members to attend trainings regarding their
as laws change; the board reviews, but does not adopt
these policies;
The board should develop and implement a local policy to
• local policies are directives from the board to the
require each board member to receive 3.0 hours of annual
school district that represent local board positions
training regarding roles and responsibilities. This training
and often are unique to the district. Local policy
would be in addition to the 5.0 hours already required by
typically expands on or qualifies directives or options
administrative rule. The Board Services Department should
provided by law. Each district adopts, updates, and
monitor the board members’ continuing education to
readopts local policies as needed;
identify training related to roles and responsibilities that
individual members have not attended. The board president • regulations are intended to implement board policies
should announce and record in the board minutes the status that school administrators develop. Regulations
of each board member’s continuing education status at the provide detailed guidelines, descriptions, practices,
last regular board meeting of the school year. If board and procedures for district operation; and
• exhibits, also known as forms, are supporting FIGURE 1–18

documents for policies and regulations. An exhibit HOUSTON ISD BOARD POLICY MANUAL ORGANIZATION
MARCH 2019
can be a form to be completed by students, parents,
SECTION AND TITLES POLICY CODES
staff, or the public; or a chart, table, or illustration
that accompanies a policy or regulation. A – Basic District Foundations AA – AID
B – Local Governance BA – BR
Board policy and the accompanying regulations and exhibits
C – Business and Support Services CAA – CY
assist the district to complete the following tasks:
D – Personnel DA – DPB
• provide direction and save time;
E – Instruction EB – EMI
• comply with and implement laws and regulations; F – Students FB – FP
• establish and define rights; G – Community and Governmental Relations GA – GRC

Sources: Houston ISD Board Policy Manual, March 2019.
• establish stability and continuity;
• define responsibilities and ensure accountability; The review team examined 808 Houston ISD board policies.
• inform the community, parents, staff, and students; Figure 1–19 shows the topic heading for each policy and the
date that each was adopted.
• protect the district in case of a legal challenge; and
Figure 1–19 shows the following information:
• comply with state accreditation standards.
• 387 board policies, 47.9 percent, were issued
Houston ISD, in an effort to revise and update board before 2011;
policy, subscribes to the policy service offered by TASB.
This service provides the district with at least quarterly • the greatest number of policies, 235, relate to Business
updates of recommended legal policy changes based on and Support Services; of these, 128, or 54.5 percent,
changes in laws and regulations. These updates form the were issued before 2011;
basis of the district’s legal policies. Houston ISD maintains • 91 local policies, 46.0 percent, were issued before
a board policy manual containing seven major sections. 2011; and
Figure 1–18 shows the organization of the Houston ISD
Board Policy Manual. • 254 regulations, 81.4 percent, were issued before 2011.
Legal policies represent existing statute and often provide

During onsite interviews, district staff and board members
basic requirements that a district must follow. The board
reported that Houston ISD does not review and update
develops local policies that expand on corresponding legal
board policy on a regular schedule, but rather on an ad hoc
policies to establish specific requirements unique to the
basis. The board’s Policy Committee does not review policy,
district. Houston ISD’s lack of a policy review process places
and its purpose is unclear. No process is in place to ensure
the district at risk of maintaining outdated local policies and
that the board develops new policies regularly and writes
regulations that do not comply with state and federal
local policies to address the legal policies. When TASB
regulations or increasing inefficiency in district operations. A
alerts the district to legal policy changes, the district sends
review of the district policy manual identified some key
these changes to the departments that are impacted for
policies that have not been updated recently, including the
review and comment. After the departments have
following policies:
responded, the district submits the policy to the board
policy committee for review before being placed on the • Board Policy BBE (LEGAL), updated in 2017,
board agenda. However, during onsite interviews, some addresses authority granted to board members.
board members reported that they were not aware of this However, the corresponding Board Policy BBE
process; that the board policy committee does not submit (LOCAL) has not been updated since 2001. Board
legal policy changes to the entire board regularly for review; Policy BBE (LEGAL) states, “A district shall create
and all board members are not informed consistently of a policy on visits to a district campus or facility by
legal policy changes. a member of the board.” BBE (LOCAL) contains
FIGURE 1–19
HOUSTON ISD BOARD POLICIES BY TITLE, TYPE, AND YEAR ISSUED
MARCH 2019
YEAR ISSUED
POLICIES BEFORE 2011 TO 2014 TO 2017 TO
SECTION TITLE EXAMINED 2011 2013 2016 2019
A Basic District Foundations 15 2 4 2 7
B Local Governance 98 46 11 7 34
C Business and Support Services 235 128 34 30 43
D Personnel 163 90 22 24 27
E Instruction 109 43 13 18 35
F Students 137 52 21 23 41
G Community and Governmental Relations 51 26 6 10 9
Total 808 387 111 114 196
POLICIES BEFORE 2011 TO 2014 TO 2017 TO
TYPE OF POLICY EXAMINED 2011 2013 2016 2019
Local 198 91 33 48 26
Legal 298 42 47 54 155
Regulations 312 254 31 12 15
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, March 2019; Houston ISD Policy Online, March 2019.
information regarding the authority of the board visitor requirements in local policy requires each
but not policy regarding campus visits by board campus to formulate its own plan. These individual
members. During onsite interviews, several board plans can lead to controversy, such as when one
members expressed frustration with the district’s lack Houston ISD principal instituted a campus dress
of a consistent process or policy regarding acceptable code for parents that reportedly displeased many
visits by board members to campuses; people in the community; and
• Board Policy BQB (LEGAL), updated in 2017, • Board Policy CDA (LEGAL), last updated in 2018,
establishes campus-level planning and decision- outlines the statutory requirements a district must
making committees and defines their roles and follow when establishing an investment policy for
responsibilities. These committees serve an important district funds. The corresponding Board Policy CDA
role in advising and supporting the improvement (LOCAL) has not been updated since 2000 and does
of student performance at each campus. The not provide a description of the district’s investment
corresponding Board Policy BQB (LOCAL) has not policy. It states, “The investment policy adopted by
been updated since 2001; the board in compliance with Government Code
• Board Policy GKC (LEGAL), updated in 2017, 2256.005(a) shall be available at the Office of Finance
details the statutory requirements for district visitor and Business Services.” Houston ISD no longer has an
policies. The corresponding GKC (LOCAL) was last Office of Finance and Business Services. Additionally,
updated in 2007 and provides no details regarding for the purposes of this review, Austin ISD, Dallas
Houston ISD’s campus visitor policy. The policy states ISD, and Cypress–Fairbanks ISD have been selected
that visitors must report to the campus administrative as peer districts. Peer districts are districts similar to
office upon entering the campus. Observations of Houston ISD that are used for comparison purposes.
campus visitor management procedures did not All three peer districts have updated their Board
indicate any safety violations and demonstrated that Policy CDA (LOCAL) within the last two calendar
campuses were following similar requirements for years, and all three specifically outline their district
visitors. However, the lack of any guidance regarding investment policies within the board policy.
FIGURE 1–20
HOUSTON ISD POLICY REVIEW SCHEDULE EXAMPLE
SECTION TITLE POLICIES TO BE EXAMINED YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4
A Basic District Foundations 15 15
B Local Governance 98 98
C Business and Support Services 235 78 79 78
D Personnel 163 163
E Instruction 109 109
F Students 137 137
G Community and Governmental Relations 51 51
Total 808 202 228 215 163
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, March 2019; Houston ISD, March 2019.
Policy-making is an essential process for school board After the board reviews and approves policy recommendations
members to make sound decisions regarding complex issues. from the PRS, TASB will develop a revised policy manual. To
Effective districts develop policy to improve student maintain this level of review, the district should budget for a
outcomes and learning. Even though Houston ISD uses the PRS every five years and an internal review process between
TASB Policy Service to review and update legal policy, the PRS sessions.
outdated local policies and regulations still exist. Weak,
Following the PRS session, the district should work with the
outdated, or poor policies can cause confusion in district
TASB Policy Service consultant to develop an internal review
operations and increase the district’s risk of not complying
system to maintain and revise policy as needed. After the
with state and federal laws and regulations.
district establishes a method of review, the superintendent
TASB recommends that school boards participate in a and board should assign staff the task of maintaining the
thorough policy review and audit every five years to seven review schedule. Policies can be divided by topic or category
years, following a change in superintendent, or following and delegated to staff or board members who have an
significant turnover in board membership. TASB offers understanding of the policy area. Some policies may warrant
districts a policy review session (PRS) through which a feedback and consultation with a stakeholder group.
consultant works with the board and the superintendent to
Figure 1–20 shows an example of a four-year review schedule
evaluate and revise district policies. This process provides
that the district could implement. This suggested schedule
policy recommendations for the board to consider and
distributes the number of policies for the district to review
approve, which results in a newly updated policy manual.
equitably during the four-year period, ensuring that district
During onsite interviews, district staff and board members
staff regularly review all policies internally and in addition to
could not say whether or when the district last participated
any proposed changes by the PRS.
in a PRS.
The fiscal impact assumes that the district will schedule a
Houston ISD should develop and implement procedures
PRS with TASB for a onetime cost of $24,000. This amount
that establish a timeline and framework to review and update
includes the cost for the PRS session; travel, lodging, and
all board policies systematically.
meals for the TASB facilitators while in the district; and a
The district should schedule a PRS with TASB. This process revised policy manual that will result from the PRS.
will require the superintendent and board to complete the
following actions: SUPERINTENDENT EVALUATION (REC. 7)
Houston ISD lacks a clearly defined process to evaluate
• examine and update district policies;
the superintendent.
• receive training on best policy-making practices; and
A superintendent functions as the chief executive officer
• gain a deeper understanding of the district. of a district. The superintendent oversees the district’s
daily operations, manages its financial resources, and The Texas Education Code, Section 21.354, states that
facilitates its long-range planning. According to NSBA, “funds of a school district may not be used to pay an
employing and evaluating the superintendent is one of the administrator who has not been appraised under this
school board’s most important duties. section in the preceding 15 months.” Dr. Lathan has served
as Houston ISD’s superintendent for 17 months as of
The Texas Education Code, Section 21.354, requires an September 2019. Although the district might receive a
annual appraisal of a school district’s superintendent using waiver or special accommodations from TEA due to the
one of the following options: superintendent’s interim status, the fact that the board has
not evaluated Dr. Lathan places the district at risk of
• the Commissioner of Education’s recommended
violating this statutory provision. Additionally, the previous
appraisal process and performance criteria; or
superintendent was employed by the district for more than
• an appraisal process and performance criteria 18 months without having an evaluation, which also
developed by the district in consultation with violates Section 21.354.
district- and campus-level committees and adopted
If a school board does not oversee the superintendent
by the board.
effectively, it abdicates one of its primary responsibilities.
Houston ISD’s Board Policy BJCD (LOCAL) states, “The Having hired the superintendent as its chief executive
board shall prepare a written evaluation of the officer, the board delegates authority to him or her to
superintendent annually” and that “the instrument used to operate the district and lead the staff. The board is
evaluate the superintendent shall be based on the responsible for monitoring the performance of the
superintendent’s job description and performance goals individual charged with ensuring that the district is making
adopted by the board.” progress and complying with board policy and all applicable
laws. The lack of a superintendent evaluation process puts
However, the Houston ISD board has not evaluated the district at risk of losing focus and failing to achieve its
its superintendent since November 2015. The board goals, which could affect student achievement. The
appointed Houston ISD’s current interim superintendent, consistent use of a superintendent evaluation instrument
Dr. Lathan, on April 1, 2018. Although she has served and evaluation procedure enables the board to compare the
as interim superintendent through the end of school superintendent’s performance progress.
year 2017–18 and through school year 2018–19, the board
Houston ISD should develop and implement a
has not established measurable goals or performance comprehensive superintendent evaluation process.
criteria to evaluate her. During onsite interviews, board
members said that they have not established an evaluation The board and superintendent should collaborate to
process for Dr. Lathan because she originally was hired to follow the superintendent evaluation process as outlined in
serve temporarily as superintendent until the board found a board policy. The board could use the evaluation tool
permanent replacement. developed for the previous superintendent as a template for
moving forward. Board members also should attend
The previous superintendent, Richard Carranza, held superintendent appraisal training before participating in
the position from August 18, 2016 until March 4, 2018, the superintendent’s evaluation.
but he also did not receive a formal evaluation from the
Additionally, Houston ISD’s school board attorney should
board. The board developed an evaluation tool for
contact TEA to determine whether employing Dr. Lathan
Superintendent Carranza for school year 2017–18 that
for 17 months without an evaluation constitutes a violation
contained detailed goals and objectives. However, the board
of statute. Finally, the district should amend board policy
did not conduct the evaluation because the superintendent
to establish implementation dates for the steps of the
left the district before the end of the school year. Of the
superintendent evaluation process. This amendment should
nine current board members, two were on the board in
include a date to develop goals and a date to conduct and
2015 for the most recent superintendent evaluation.
complete the superintendent’s evaluation.
During onsite interviews, most board members reported
being unfamiliar with the district’s superintendent The district could implement this recommendation with
evaluation process. existing resources.
BOARD COMMITTEES (REC. 8) FIGURE 1–21

HOUSTON ISD BOARD COMMITTEES
Houston ISD’s board committees are ineffective and SCHOOL YEARS 2017–18 TO 2018–19
not well-defined. COMMITTEE TYPE
Effective school boards often appoint a subset of members to Audit Committee Standing
one or more board committees, which perform detailed work State Legislative Committee Standing
that would be too time-consuming and inefficient for the full Federal Legislative Committee Standing
board to accomplish. The types and functions of board Policy Committee Ad hoc
committees vary by district. However, effective districts COMMITTEES THAT OPERATED DURING THESE SCHOOL YEARS
establish strategic, lean structures that support only the BUT HAVE DISBANDED
committees needed to facilitate and elevate the board’s work. Budget Committee Ad hoc
Ideally, board committees have clearly defined functions,
Special Education Ad hoc
meet only as needed, and routinely report to the full board
on their work. Team, March 2019; Houston ISD, February 2019.
Board committees can be standing or ad hoc. Standing

committees are established permanently and often are committees. For example, multiple board members
defined explicitly in board policy. Ad hoc committees are expressed concern regarding the function of the policy
established for specific purposes and for limited duration. committee. The role of a policy committee in most school
These committees typically carry out their assigned functions, boards typically is to oversee the review of policies adopted
make recommendations to the full board, and disband. by the board and to ensure that policies are in accordance
with federal and state mandates. However, board members
During school years 2017–18 and 2018–19, Houston ISD
acknowledged that the Houston ISD board does not have a
maintained several board committees. Board members told
policy review process and members could not define
the review team that the board president asks members for
precisely the responsibilities of the policy committee. This
their committee preferences and distributes committee
lack of a defined purpose and reporting structure has caused
assignments during the annual board retreat in January.
many board members to perceive that the policy committee
The only standing board committees established in board is a means for some board members to meet and develop
policy are the audit committee and two legislative committees. policies to place on the board’s meeting agenda without the
Figure 1–21 shows Houston ISD’s standing and ad hoc board input of the full board. Additionally, because Houston ISD
committees during school years 2017–18 and 2018–19. does not post the minutes of board committee meetings on
its website, board members that are not on committees and
The review team derived information regarding these
people in the community may not know what transpires at
committees from onsite interviews with board members
committee meetings.
and staff. Houston ISD does not maintain a formal list of
all board committees, nor does the district keep descriptions Because board committees are not required to report regularly
of the roles and responsibilities of each committee. During to the full board and are not defined clearly, committee
onsite interviews, board members and staff were uncertain members cannot be held accountable for carrying out their
as to which board committees still operated. Several duties. Poorly managed committees hinder the board’s ability
members and staff did not understand the purpose and to oversee and manage the district effectively, and this poor
function of the various committees. Some board members management can generate frustration and distrust among
reported not knowing when and how often the various board members.
committees met, and some could not describe the process
In the 2012 article “High-Performing Committees: What
that the board uses to determine when it is necessary to
makes Them Work,” the Association of Governing Boards
form an ad hoc committee.
(AGB), states that “committees are where boards do the bulk
Houston ISD board committees also lack clearly defined of their work. Consequently, a board should design and
goals and do not report regularly to the full board regarding implement an infrastructure that serves its needs and those of
their activities. This lack of communication has contributed the institution it represents as effectively and efficiently as
to feelings of mistrust and confusion around board possible.” AGB also says that effective organizations maintain
fewer committees, and boards that have large numbers of • adopt a budget and set a tax rate; and
committees are “destined to be more operational in their
• communicate with the community.
focus rather than strategic … spreading themselves too thin
to have a significant impact on the institution.” Based on the findings presented previously, the Houston
ISD board does not implement its primary duties effectively.
In its 2018 paper on best practices for board committees, the
Figure 1–22 shows the responsibilities of a school board
Ohio School Board Association (OSBA) states that effective
and assesses whether the Houston ISD board is meeting
boards assign board committees with a charge or mission at
them successfully.
the beginning of each year when board members are
appointed to them. In addition, OSBA says that effective Not only does Houston ISD’s board unsuccessfully carry out
boards form ad hoc committees with a specific purpose and its required duties, but it displays many characteristics of a
with start and end dates. poorly functioning school board. For example, in a 2003
report titled “Effective Superintendents, Effective Boards:
Houston ISD should develop and implement a clearly
Finding the Right Fit,” the Education Writers Association
defined process for the formation and maintenance of
developed a list of criteria for a functional school board.
board committees.
Figure 1–23 shows these criteria and compares each to the
The board should amend board policy to require a actions of Houston ISD’s board.
discussion and evaluation of existing committees at the
As shown in Figure 1–23, the Houston ISD board meets one
board retreat each January. It also should establish and
of the 10 criteria for a functional board. The Houston ISD
implement a process to determine when and how to form
board’s lack of functionality also is apparent in board
ad hoc committees.
members’ comments. The following comments are from
The full board should develop clear descriptions and defined board members made during onsite interviews and taken
goals for each committee. The Board Services Department from a 2019 Houston Chronicle article addressing the state of
should provide a list of all existing committees and their Houston ISD’s board:
descriptions to the board each February and should publish • “The board completely lacks decorum or
the list on the district’s website. professionalism and we don’t hold anyone accountable
Additionally, all committees should have deliverables and a for anything”;
timeline for their completion. Each committee should report • “We do not trust each other”;
at least quarterly to the full board at regular board meetings
regarding its progress toward accomplishing its goals. Finally, • “The board has no understanding of its role. We don’t
the Board Services Department should publish minutes of understand what governance is”;
board committee meetings on the district’s website no later • “Board dysfunction is the biggest challenge the
than three business days after the meeting. district faces. I’m surprised the administration has
The district could implement this recommendation with managed any academic gains with the current board’s
existing resources. behavior”;
• “As long as we have the divided personalities, it’s

BOARD OPERATIONS (REC. 9) going to be very hard for us to see the same goal and
Houston ISD’s board does not function effectively as a the one focus, and that’s educating kids”; and
governing unit. • “I have felt like this year (2018), there’s been no
productive work done by the board.”
TASB groups school board responsibilities into the
following categories: Two factors that contribute to the Houston ISD board’s lack
of functionality are the lack of board operating procedures
• adopt goals and priorities and monitor success;
and a lack of a board self-evaluation process.
• adopt policies and review for effectiveness;
Although the district has local and legal board policies
• hire and evaluate the superintendent; pertaining to board member authority, board meetings, and
FIGURE 1–22
PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITIES OF A SCHOOL BOARD COMPARED TO HOUSTON ISD’S BOARD
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL BOARD ACTIVITY IN 2018
DOES THE HOUSTON
ISD BOARD MEET THIS
RESPONSIBILITY DESCRIPTION RESPONSIBILITY? ASSESSMENT
Adopt goals and The board sets the course for the district Yes The Houston ISD board developed three
priorities and by adopting goals and priorities and goals centered on improving student
monitor success monitors progress toward these goals. educational outcomes. The board developed
The board has a vision statement to a mission statement that guides the goals.
guide it when setting goals. The board receives reports every board
meeting regarding the progress the district is
making toward achieving these goals.
Adopt policies The board adopts local policies that No Board policies are reviewed and revised on
and review for guide how the district operates. Local an ad hoc basis, and no process is in place
effectiveness school boards govern by adopting to ensure that new policies are developed
policies that must be consistent with and regularly and that local policies are written
within the scope authorized by federal to address the legal policies. Among the
and state laws and regulations. district’s local board policies, 46.0 percent
were issued before 2011.
Hire and evaluate The board determines whom to hire as No The Houston ISD board has not conducted
the superintendent superintendent. The board assesses an evaluation of a superintendent since
the superintendent’s progress toward November 2015. The current interim
achieving district goals through annual superintendent has been in the position since
written performance evaluations and April 2018, and the board has not established
ongoing discussions. any measurable goals or performance criteria
by which she can be evaluated.
Adopt a budget The superintendent and staff formulate Partially The Houston ISD board adopts a school
and set a tax rate the school district budget and present budget and tax rate each year. However,
it to the board for approval. After during calendar year 2018, the board
conducting a public hearing to receive adopted a deficit budget and approved an
comments, the board adopts the budget amendment to add $5.0 million to the budget
and approves a tax rate to ensure that one month after approving it.
the budget is funded adequately.
Communicate with Board members are the link between No The Houston ISD board allots time for public
the community the school system and the public. As comment at board meetings. However,
advocates for public education, board the board’s interaction with the community
members help build support and report often is unprofessional and adversarial.
district progress by communicating with Additionally, board members’ public animosity
the community, students, staff, parents, and distrust toward each other has affected
and media. This communication often public perception of the district negatively.
is conducted at board meetings, which
are open to the public and at which
time is allotted for members to hear
stakeholders’ input and concerns.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, March 2019; Texas Association of School Boards, My Texas Public
School website, March 2019.
related board operating routines and guidelines, the Houston • setting annual goals;
ISD board does not have defined operating procedures. These
• establishing training requirements;
procedures are a set of instructions to help board members
carry out their responsibilities. Board operating procedures • communicating with the community and the media;
typically outline practices for the following activities:
• evaluating the superintendent; and
• developing board meeting agendas;
• developing district hiring practices.
• conducting board meetings;
Operating procedures assemble all this information into one
• electing board officers; source that board members can reference when, for example,
FIGURE 1–23
CRITERIA OF A FUNCTIONAL SCHOOL BOARD COMPARED TO THE HOUSTON ISD BOARD
ASSESSMENT OF SCHOOL BOARD ACTIVITY DURING CALENDAR YEAR 2018
DOES THE HOUSTON ISD
BOARD MEET
CRITERIA THIS CRITERION? ASSESSMENT
Board focuses on a clear set of Yes The Houston ISD board has developed board goals and receives
beliefs, a plan to carry them out, updates regarding their progress at each board meeting.
and constant monitoring
Board establishes an effective No Houston ISD’s orientation process for new board members has no
process to orient new board team-building elements and does not include opportunities to meet,
members, provides continuous interact with, or ask questions of established board members.
training, and builds collaboration
The board did not engage in the statutorily required annual team-
building training during calendar year 2018, and the board does not
foster collaboration among members.
Board focuses on improving No From June 2018 to December 2018, according to Texas Education
student academic achievement Agency data, the Houston ISD board meetings lasted a total of
5,039 minutes, approximately 90.0 percent of which were devoted
to discussing items and issues that were not considered relevant to
enhancing student outcomes.
Differences between board No Houston ISD board members often engage in public disagreements
members are never personal in that result in name calling and personal accusations of impropriety.
public
Board works together to represent No Houston ISD’s board does not function effectively as a team with
the whole district common goals and objectives, but as individuals with their own
personal agendas.
Board members understand their No Houston ISD board members consistently overstep their oversight
roles and responsibilities role and try to be involved in the district’s daily administration.
Board works through the No Houston ISD staff report that some board members attempt to
superintendent influence campus administration by personally advising and
consulting with individual principals. Staff also state that some
principals meet directly with board members to address campus
issues or problems with district administrators.
Board operates openly and No Although Houston ISD’s board attempts to involve the community
involves the community in decision in its decision-making process, these attempts are not effective.
making Community input during board meetings often is not productive and
involves tension and disagreement between community and board
members. Additionally, board members and community members
say they believe that some board members work together in small
groups outside of public meetings to manipulate board agendas
and the board process.
Board communicates as one body No Houston ISD board members often do not speak as a group to the
with the community and the media community and the media. Members speak against other members
and district administrators during community events and board
meetings. Additionally, board members have held individual press
conferences and media interviews in which they spoke out against
other members and publicly acknowledged the deep division within
the board.
Board shares expectations with No Houston ISD’s board has not evaluated a superintendent since
the community before hiring a 2015 nor set any formal goals or expectations for the current
superintendent. When hired, interim superintendent.
the board sets goals, monitors
progress, and provides feedback to
the superintendent
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, March 2019; Education Writers Association, Effective Superintendents,
Effective Boards Finding the Right Fit, 2012.
they are uncertain about board policy on a particular topic or uncertainty throughout the organization. Most important,
how best to carry out their responsibilities. however, a poorly functioning school board can affect
negatively student achievement.
The district’s lack of board operating procedures may
contribute to board members not understanding their roles The Natural Resources Management and Environment
and responsibilities and the board’s processes. Department’s publication Standard Operating Procedures
defines a standard operating procedure (SOP) as a document
Additionally, Board Policy BG (LEGAL) states that the that “describes the regularly recurring operations relevant” to
board may determine whether to use a self-evaluation tool, an organization. SOPs carry out an organization’s operations
except as ordered by the Commissioner of Education. During correctly and consistently. The publication offers the
onsite interviews, board members and staff reported not following model for the development of SOPs:
knowing about any self-evaluation process for the board, nor
could any members recall the last time the Houston ISD • identify the person or department responsible for key
board conducted a formal self-evaluation. procedure, project, or document;
Board self-evaluations offer the following benefits: • draft and verify written procedures associated with
the procedure, project, or document;
• holding the board accountable to themselves, district
staff, and the community; • authorize the SOP through formal approval;
• encouraging board members to reflect on their • implement and monitor implementation of

individual and collective behavior and performance; procedures in the SOP; and
• fostering open communication; • regularly review, update, and archive

procedures documents.
• improving decision making by enhancing a common
understanding of philosophies and goals; TASB’s Effective Board Practices: An Inventory for School
Boards, 2011, identifies the following characteristics of
• resolving differences of opinion and challenging effective boards:
assumptions;
• they have a clear picture of what their work entails;
• providing insight into how and why decisions are the board understands its job relative to the work
reached; of others and knows the tools at its disposal for
• enabling new board members to understand board performing the job; and
processes; • they have formalized their work; the board has
• identifying strengths and weaknesses of collective and developed and follows clearly defined procedures and
individual board member performance; schedules for doing its work.
• holding the board accountable for its role as TASB also recommends that school boards complete self-
representative of the public; and evaluations as part of the annual team-building requirement
and use this tool as an opportunity for the board and
• providing a starting point for effective goal setting executive leadership team to determine improvements and
and long-range planning. what subsequent boards need.
Without a self-evaluation process, the board cannot hold DeSoto ISD developed a local board policy that requires its
itself accountable for effectively supporting the completion board to conduct an annual self-evaluation. This policy
of district goals or assessing its overall performance during details the items that should be part of the process and
the school year. provides options for where it may occur. DeSoto ISD’s Board
Policy BG (LOCAL) states:
When a school board is not functioning properly, all facets of
the district are affected negatively. Ineffective school boards At least annually, the board shall conduct a self-
lower district morale, erode community support for the evaluation of board and board member performance.
district, and establish a general atmosphere of instability and The evaluation shall consider such items as role
recognition, relationship with others, performance at • develop and adopt board policy that establishes
board meetings, and self-improvement activities. The a board-driven process to initiate a recall election
procedure shall also include a review of those factors for board members who exhibit hostility, promote
that facilitate effective board meetings. The board may mistrust, or actively undermine the governance
solicit suggestions for improvement from others through process; and
established district communication channels. This
evaluation may be conducted in a regular meeting, a • modify the structure of the Houston ISD board
special meeting, or in a workshop setting. by: (1) requiring the annual election of the board
president and vice president positions through
Houston ISD should develop comprehensive operating a districtwide public vote, which could lessen
procedures for all essential board functions and establish a factionalism; or (2) transitioning from a system of
process to evaluate the board’s overall effectiveness annually. electoral districts to an at-large system in which all
voters may vote for all board positions. In the new
The board and superintendent should review examples of system, all board positions could be elected at large,
other districts’ board operating procedures and use or the district could develop a hybrid system in which
these examples as a template to develop Houston ISD’s some positions have electoral districts and some are
board operating procedures. The procedures should include elected at large.
a guide for all primary responsibilities of the board,
including but not limited to developing board meeting The district could implement this recommendation with
agendas, conducting board meetings, evaluating the existing resources.
superintendent, budget planning, program requirements,
and board roles and responsibilities. The board annually
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
should review and distribute the operating procedures to all
board members. The Board Services Department should During the onsite field work, the review team observed
provide the procedures to new board members as part of its additional issues regarding the district’s programs and services
orientation process. to students, staff, and the community. These observations are
presented for consideration as the district implements the
Houston ISD also should establish a process to annually report’s other findings and recommendations:
evaluate the board’s overall effectiveness and use the results to
plan for board training and team-building activities. The • All superintendents in Texas are required to have
board should develop a local policy that requires it to conduct a superintendent certification. If a superintendent
a self-evaluation and that outlines the essential features of the does not have this certification, the district must
process. The board can use the self-evaluation tools developed request a waiver from TEA. Houston ISD’s previous
by TASB or use those developed by other districts as superintendent never received a superintendent
templates. The self-evaluation process should include the certification, and the district never applied for a waiver.
following essential features: Houston ISD was one of only seven districts in Texas
during school year 2017–18 whose superintendent was
• identifying areas for board improvement based on not certified nor issued a waiver. Ensuring that the next
existing standards of effective governance: superintendent meets the certification requirements
• detailing actions to modify or change board processes could help improve district management and avoid the
or actions related to identified improvement risk of violating statutory requirements;
opportunities; and • The position of chief at Houston ISD holds great
• assigning board members or committees to implement responsibility, including serving as an executive
the required changes by a specific date. leadership position, overseeing large numbers of staff,
and managing significant departmental budgets. It
Considering the level of the issues observed in Houston is important that the district establish employment
ISD’s board, the district may need to take additional steps to requirements so that candidates that are hired to be a
improve board effectiveness. The board and the district chief meet high standards of certification, educational
should consider the following potential solutions: advancement, and experience in their fields;
• Houston ISD’s regular board meetings average more

than four hours long. One contributing element to
the meeting length is that the board does not use a
consent agenda. A consent agenda is a board meeting
practice that is used to group routine business and
reports into a single agenda item that can be approved
in one action, rather than filing separate motions for
each item;
• Board Policy BBD (LOCAL) states that the board

president will announce the status of each board
member’s continuing education credit annually at
the last regular board meeting before the district’s
uniform election date. This meeting typically is in
November. However, during calendar year 2018,
the president did not announce the training hours at
any board meeting. Making this announcement and
placing the training hours into board minutes may
improve accountability for board training;
• Houston ISD maintains a Legal Services Department

with eight full-time attorneys. The department
also contracts with external lawyers and law offices
to assist with district caseloads. The department,
however, does not have a case management software
system to assist it with its work. A case management
system improves efficiency by providing an electronic
means to organize and streamline case and matter
management, time and billing, litigation support,
research, communication and collaboration, data
mining and modeling, and data security, storage, and
archive accessibility; and
• The district does not consolidate all of its attorneys

into the same department. In addition to the eight
attorneys in the Legal Services Department, the
Business Office Department employs one financial
management attorney, who oversees district tax
collections and some construction contracts. Moving
the financial management attorney from the Business
Office to the Legal Services Department may
streamline legal functions.
FISCAL IMPACT
Some of the recommendations provided in this report are based on state or federal laws, rules, or regulations, and should be
promptly addressed. Other recommendations are based on comparisons to state or industry standards, or accepted best practices,
and the district should review to determine the level of priority, appropriate timeline, and method of implementation.
The Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance Review Team has identified a fiscal impact for the following
recommendations:
TOTAL
5-YEAR ONETIME
RECOMMENDATION 2019–20 2020–21 2021–22 2022–23 2023–24 SAVINGS SAVINGS
1. DISTRICT ORGANIZATION, PLANNING, AND GOVERNANCE
1. Modify the district’s organizational $215,118 $215,118 $215,118 $215,118 $215,118 $1,075,590 $0
structure to decrease the
superintendent’s supervisory
responsibilities and streamline the
number of executive leadership positions.
3. Hire a professional mediator to conduct $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($12,000)
team-building sessions to resolve issues
affecting trust among board members,
and develop a formal self-policing
structure to address potential violations of
board ethics policies.
6. Develop and implement procedures $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($24,000)
that establish a timeline and framework
to review and update all board policies
systematically.
Total $215,118 $215,118 $215,118 $215,118 $215,118 $1,075,590 ($36,000)
The School Performance Review Team could not determine a fiscal impact for other recommendations. However, the
implementation of Recommendation 7 to develop and implement a comprehensive superintendent evaluation process could
ensure that the district avoids financial sanctions from TEA for paying an administrator who has not been evaluated during the
preceding 15 months.
2. EDUCATIONAL SERVICE DELIVERY
Houston Independent School District (ISD) is the largest Houston ISD lacks an effective process to promote
school district in Texas and the seventh-largest school district principal retention and ensure rigorous instruction
in the U.S. During school year 2018–19, Houston ISD during campus leadership transitions.
operated 280 campuses, including eight early childhood Houston ISD does not ensure that all students
centers, 160 elementary schools, 38 middle schools, 37 high have consistent campus-level access to educational
schools, and 37 other campuses, including those serving supports and resources, including counseling services,
combined academic levels and alternative campuses. The library services, and fine arts programs.
district enrollment for school year 2018–19 was 209,772
Houston ISD does not support its English learner
students, served by 11,465 teachers. The student population
was 62.1 percent Hispanic, 23.4 percent African American, student population effectively.
8.9 percent White, 4.2 percent Asian, 1.2 percent two or Houston ISD lacks an effective process to ensure
more races, 0.2 percent American Indian/Alaskan Native, consistent development of master schedules.
and 0.1 percent Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander. Houston ISD’s implementation of its wraparound
Houston ISD has a decentralized organization, prioritizing services initiative lacks effective coordination,
local decision making through shared decision-making planning, procedures, and evaluation.
committees at each campus. Houston ISD’s central academic Houston ISD lacks adequate structures, contract
offices includes more than 20 departments to support and language, and performance measures to monitor the
provide resources to campuses. As a district of choice, Houston effectiveness of in-district charter campuses.
ISD offers multiple placement options for students, including
magnet programs at more than 125 campuses, 13 in-district RECOMMENDATIONS
charter campuses, and alternative placements for students with Recommendation 10: Address communication
specialized academic, behavioral, and health needs. deficiencies among central academic office
Academic achievement varies considerably among Houston functions to improve transparency with internal
ISD campuses, ranging from nationally ranked campuses to and external stakeholders.
chronically low-performing campuses. Houston ISD Recommendation 11: Develop and implement
decreased the number of campuses rated improvement districtwide structures that support a consistent
required from 58 during school year 2014–15 to six campuses and systematic approach for supervising and
during school year 2017–18. Houston ISD received an supporting campus principals.
overall accountability rating of B for school year 2018–19
Recommendation 12: Develop comprehensive
from the Texas Education Agency.
processes for principal placement and retention
and instructional transitions at the campus level.
ACCOMPLISHMENT
Houston ISD’s Career and Technical Education Recommendation 13: Provide consistent access
programs offer various courses and certifications to to high-quality counseling programs, library
meet students’ diverse needs. services, and fine arts opportunities throughout
the district.
FINDINGS Recommendation 14: Implement a process for
Houston ISD’s central academic offices have frequent continuous evaluation of the structure, staffing,
staff and organizational changes, limiting their ability instructional delivery, and resources of the district’s
to support campuses adequately. supports for its English learner students.
Houston ISD lacks a unifying framework, strong Recommendation 15: Implement systemic
oversight, and written procedures for school approaches to master scheduling, including
support officers. improved training and oversight.
EDUCATIONAL SERVICE DELIVERY HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
Recommendation 16: Develop, implement, approximately 79.8 percent of students were categorized as
and evaluate a strategic plan for a long-term, economically disadvantaged, greater than the state average of
comprehensive system of the district’s wraparound 60.6 percent. The district identified 31.7 percent of students
services initiatives. as English learners (EL), greater than the state average of
19.4 percent. The district also identified 65.2 percent of
Recommendation 17: Increase academic and
students as at risk of dropping out, which was greater than
financial oversight of in-district charter campuses.
the state average of 50.0 percent.
BACKGROUND The Texas Education Agency (TEA) issues state accountability

ratings for each district and campus. In school years 2013–
An independent school district’s educational service delivery
14 to 2016–17, TEA issued Houston ISD a met standard
function provides academic services to Texas students based
district accountability rating. During school year 2017–18,
on state standards and assessments. A school district should
TEA did not rate the district due to a special provision for
identify and support students’ educational needs, provide
the hardships experienced by the district during Hurricane
instruction, and measure academic performance. Educational
Harvey. Figure 2–2 shows the state accountability ratings for
service delivery must meet the needs of a variety of student
Houston ISD’s campuses for school years 2013–14 to 2017–
groups and requires adherence to state and federal regulations
18. Houston ISD’s accountability ratings have improved
related to standards, assessments, and program requirements.
each year since school year 2014–15.
Management of educational services is dependent on a
The Commissioner of Education appointed a conservator in
district’s organizational structure. Larger districts typically
September 2016 to provide district-level support for Houston
have multiple staff dedicated to educational functions.
ISD’s campuses that were rated improvement required. The
Educational service delivery identifies district and campus
Texas Education Code, Section 39.102, states that if a
priorities, establishes high expectations for students, and
campus remains in this status for five years, the Commissioner
addresses student behavior. The system should provide
may close the campus or replace the district’s elected board
instructional support services such as teacher training,
with state-appointed managers. To avoid these sanctions,
technology support, and curriculum resources. To adhere to
four campuses, Henry Middle School, Highland Heights
state and federal requirements, districts must have systems to
Elementary School, Kashmere High School, and Wheatley
evaluate student achievement across all content areas, grade
High School, must achieve ratings of met standard during
levels, and demographic groups.
school year 2018–19. The Legislative Budget Board’s School
Figure 2–1 shows the demographics of Houston ISD Performance Review Team visited the district in March
compared to state averages. During school year 2018–19, 2019. The review team’s assessment of Houston ISD’s
FIGURE 2–1
HOUSTON ISD STUDENT DEMOGRAPHICS
STUDENTS HOUSTON ISD STATE
Hispanic 62.1% 52.6%
African American 23.4% 12.6%
White 8.9% 27.4%
Asian 4.2% 4.5%
Two or More Races 1.2% 2.4%
American Indian or Alaskan Native 0.2% 0.4%
Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 0.1% 0.2%
English Learners 31.7% 19.4%
At Risk 65.2% 50.0%
Sources: Texas Education Agency, Public Education Information Management System Standard Reports, school year 2018–19; Houston ISD,
school year 2018–19 Facts and Figures.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL SERVICE DELIVERY
FIGURE 2–2
HOUSTON ISD CAMPUS ACCOUNTABILITY RATINGS
MET STANDARD IMPROVEMENT REQUIRED
NUMBER PERCENTAGE NUMBER PERCENTAGE DISTRICT OVERALL
YEAR CAMPUSES RATED (1) OF CAMPUSES OF CAMPUSES OF CAMPUSES OF CAMPUSES RATING
2013–14 264 220 83.3% 44 16.7% Met Standard
2014–15 275 217 78.9% 58 21.1% Met Standard
2015–16 275 237 86.2% 38 13.8% Met Standard
2016–17 278 251 90.3% 27 9.7% Met Standard
2017–18 (2) 275 252 91.6% 6 2.2% Not Rated
Notes:
(1) Data includes paired campuses. For purposes of assigning accountability ratings, the Texas Education Agency (TEA) combines data for
campuses that do not serve grade levels that administer State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) with campuses
that serve grade levels that administer STAAR.
(2) Seventeen campuses and the district overall were not rated for school year 2017–18 due a special TEA provision related to the effects of
Hurricane Harvey. Seven of these campuses maintained their improvement required status from the prior year.
Sources: Texas Education Agency, Texas Academic Performance Report, school years 2013–14 to 2017–18; Houston ISD Facts and Figures,
school years 2013–14 to 2017–18.
educational service delivery operations were conducted principals. Five of the six areas are based on geography and
before the Commissioner’s decision about the district’s status. categorized into East, North, Northwest, South, and West
areas. The sixth area is Achieve 180, the district’s model for
Figure 2–3 shows Houston ISD’s educational service delivery
school improvement. The Achieve 180 campuses are
organization. Houston ISD’s primary senior staff for
identified based on accountability ratings and are located
academics are the chief academic officer (CAO) and the chief
within all of the district’s geographical areas.
strategy and innovation officer (CSIO), who report directly
to the superintendent. During school year 2018–19, the Houston ISD implemented Achieve 180 during school year
CAO managed 737.3 full-time-equivalent (FTE) staff 2017–18 to increase student achievement at campuses that
positions and a budget of $79.9 million, excluding grants received TEA accountability ratings of improvement required
and grant-funded positions. The CSIO managed 124.0 FTE for school years 2015–16 and 2016–17. The Achieve 180
positions and a budget of $17.5 million, excluding grants model includes the following six elements of support
and grant-funded positions. The CAO oversees departments identified by district staff that address students’ needs to help
and offices including Advanced Academics, Elementary them achieve academically:
Curriculum and Development, Secondary Curriculum and
Development, Special Populations (including Special • leadership excellence – provide campus leaders with
Education, Interventions Office, and Multilingual Programs), professional development options and campus-specific
Leadership and Teacher Development, Research and supports including: nurses, counselors, and librarians;
Accountability, Student Assessment, Federal and State targeted assistance funds; and additional compensation;
Compliance, School Choice, and Student Support Services.
The CSIO oversees departments and offices including Career • teacher excellence – place experienced and
Readiness, College Readiness, Equity and Outreach, Post- appropriately certified teachers in every classroom,
secondary Programming and Innovation, and Linked and dedicated associate teachers to alleviate the
Learning. The chief of staff who primarily facilitates effects of teacher absences; provide extensive teacher
coordination among positions that report directly to the development specialists to support campus-specific
superintendent, also serves in an academic capacity as the professional development and individualized coaching
district’s coordinator of school improvement. for teachers; prioritize Achieve 180 campuses for
teacher staffing and incentive compensation;
Six area superintendents oversee the district’s campuses.
School support officers report to the area superintendents • instructional excellence – provide students with
and supervise and provide support to assigned campus multiple options for accelerated learning; monitor
FIGURE 2–3
HOUSTON ISD EDUCATIONAL SERVICE DELIVERY ORGANIZATION
Superintendent
Area Chief Academic Chief of Staff Chief of Strategy

Superintendents Officer and Innovation
Assistant Assistant Assistant

Superintendent Superintendent Superintendent
of Equity and of College of Postsecondary
Outreach Readiness Programming
and Innovation
Assistant Assistant
Superintendent Superintendent
of Linked of Career
Learning Readiness
Officer of Officer of Officer of Officer of Assistant

Elementary Special School Support Superintendent
Curriculum Populations Services Services of Student
and Instruction (1) Assessment
Officer of Officer of Officer of Assistant Assistant
Secondary Leadership Student Superintendent Superintendent
Curriculum Development Support of Research of School
and Instruction and Choice
Accountability
Note: (1) This position was eliminated during the School Performance Review Team’s onsite fieldwork.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, March 2019.
students’ changing literacy and numeracy skills, and The superintendent requires that each Achieve 180 campus
use formative assessments to track student progress; fill essential staff positions such as a nurse, counselor, and
track data to determine areas in need of assistance and wraparound resource specialist; positions which are
address accordingly; optional for other campuses. Houston ISD also prioritizes
• school design – provide a positive and enriching requests for support and resources from Achieve 180
academic environment for students through courses, campuses over other campuses.
materials, and technology to support their college
Houston ISD’s departments of Elementary Curriculum and
and career readiness efforts;
Development and Secondary Curriculum and Development
• social and emotional learning support – remove provide teachers with access to digital curriculum, aligned
nonacademic barriers to students’ high academic assessments, and instructional resources based on the Texas
achievement; provide or connect students to Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). The district provides
behavioral, physical, and mental health resources curriculum supports to all campuses, including scope and
through district programs including Wraparound sequence; pacing calendar; vertical alignment matrix; master
Services; and courses and unit planning guides; and college readiness
• family and community empowerment – provide resources. These departments also provide teachers with
a welcoming environment for families to increase districtwide professional learning opportunities and teacher
parent advocacy and two-way communication development specialists, instructional coaches who support
between home and campus. content and pedagogy development.
During school year 2018–19, Houston ISD received a grant for The director of CTE oversees the CTE Department and
dyslexia services from the U.S. Department of Education. The reports directly to the assistant superintendent of career
district partnered with Neuhaus Education Center to train a readiness. The CTE Department oversees distribution of
centralized team of dyslexia interventionists in the Basic Language funds, accountability measures, grant funding requirements,
Skills Program to serve all students identified with dyslexia. and compliance, including teacher credentials.
The district contracted with an external consulting firm to After researching CTE best practices in other school districts,
audit special education services in school year 2017–18 in Houston ISD centralized CTE funding and programming during
response to issues with identification and services. The board school year 2017–18. The CTE Department monitors campus
and district leadership developed a strategic five-year plan to CTE activity and ensures compliance with spending. The
implement the audit’s recommendations. The district structure enables the district to leverage funds to make large
restructured the organization of special education staff, purchases and to address equity of CTE services across the district.
including centralizing special education staff and budgets,
and hired an assistant superintendent of special education. Houston ISD’s CTE Department provides professional
The assistant superintendent of special education reports to development for staff throughout the district. CTE
the officer of special populations, who reports to the CAO, Department staff identified a districtwide need for industry
and oversees implementation of the strategic plan. Research and pedagogic training to further build CTE teacher capacity
and Accountability Department staff report regularly to the and developed a professional development initiative for CTE
board and stakeholders on progress toward goals. teachers for school year 2019–20 to increase industry
knowledge and skills and instructional best practices.
DETAILED ACCOMPLISHMENT Houston ISD’s CTE students can graduate high school with
CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION any of TEA’s five endorsements. Endorsement are a series of
related courses that are grouped together by topic or skill set,
Houston ISD’s Career and Technical Education (CTE) and include all 16 career clusters, or groupings of occupations.
programs offer various courses and certifications to meet
students’ diverse needs. Figure 2–4 shows the programs of study in the 16 career
clusters offered by Houston ISD’s CTE program at high
The district provides CTE courses at the middle school and
school campuses, all of which offer CTE programs.
high school levels and career exposure at the elementary
school level. The district enrolled more than 43,000 CTE In collaboration with campuses, the CTE Department
students during school year 2017–18 and expanded planned 14 CTE programs at 13 high school campuses for
participation each year of the program. school year 2019–20. Additional CTE program offerings
FIGURE 2–4
HOUSTON ISD CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION (CTE) PROGRAMS OF STUDY BY HIGH SCHOOL CAMPUS
CAMPUSES OFFERING CAMPUSES OFFERING
PROGRAMS OF STUDY PROGRAMS OF STUDY PROGRAMS OF STUDY PROGRAMS OF STUDY
Agriculture, Food, and Natural Resources 9 Hospitality and Tourism 8
Architecture and Construction 7 Human Services 3
Arts, Audio/Video Technology 10 Information Technology 23
and Communications
Business Management 10 Law, Public Safety, Corrections, 7
and Administration and Security
Education and Training 2 Manufacturing 5
Finance 8 Marketing 5
Government and Public Administration 1 Science, Technology, Engineering, 18
and Mathematics
Health Science 11 Transportation, Distribution, and Logistics 11
Source: Houston ISD, March 2019.
include graphic design and illustration programs; welding; • conflicting listings of the same staff in multiple positions
education and training; and construction programs at Austin in various district directories and staffing reports;
High School and Milby High School offered in partnership
• one district staff said that the supervisor, who was
with a major construction company.
new to the position, resigned the previous day;
The district provides more than 200 industry-based
certifications, including 73 from TEA’s approved College, • the review team was informed of a staff dismissal,
Career, and Military Readiness list. The district offers CTE although the same name is listed on district
certification beginning in grade 7, when students can receive organizational charts and the district website; and
certifications for achievement in areas such as financial • attrition of an officer-level academic position during
literacy. The CTE Department selects the district’s the review team’s onsite fieldwork and subsequent
certification offerings from TEA-approved certifications, in elimination of the position, although the district
collaboration with local workforce advisory members. website continues to direct stakeholders to contact
District staff and advisory members collaborate to evaluate that former staff.
trends in the regional labor market to determine pertinent
additional certifications for the district’s CTE students. The district’s website and organizational charts show area
superintendents as reporting directly to the CAO; however,
By implementing a comprehensive, well-leveraged CTE program,
district staff stated that these positions reported directly to
Houston ISD is preparing students for successful futures.
the superintendent during school year 2018–19.
DETAILED FINDINGS The organizational structure of Houston ISD’s academic
ACADEMIC SERVICES COMMUNICATION (REC. 10) departments has inconsistencies in job titles for departmental
leaders and the number of direct reports assigned to
Houston ISD’s central academic offices have frequent staff
supervisors. For example, some positions that report directly
and organizational changes, limiting their ability to support
to the CAO are officers, and others are assistant
campuses adequately.
superintendents. The district attaches different titles to staff
Responses from district staff during onsite interviews that appear to be at the same level of organizational
indicated confusion about the reporting structure of their leadership, such as directors, assistant superintendents, or
own positions, and confusion about the shifting structure of senior managers. District publications also refer inconsistently
the organization. Administrators indicated that district-level to units of staff organizations as departments, divisions,
effectiveness is compromised by constant change, making it offices, or functions, further complicating a clear
difficult to have traction or make significant progress. District understanding of the district’s organizational structure both
staff described a focus on obtaining vacated higher-ranking internally and externally.
positions, perceived as distracting some staff from the duties
of their current positions. District staff said that the district unexpectedly places staff in
vacant classroom positions or temporary campus support
District staff stated that the district’s organizational chart is
roles, such as reassigning teacher development specialists to
often outdated and does not provide reliable, updated
classrooms mid-year. District staff indicated that
information for all stakeholders. For example, various
reassignments were intended as a temporary measure to fill
departmental managers and other district staff said that they
teacher shortages when teacher resignations created vacancies.
are unclear about whom to contact for support, and the
The perceived threat of reassignment, and possible related
organizational chart is not a resource for contact information.
geographic location, reportedly contributes to lowered
The review team observed the following examples of morale. District staff said that they work in an environment
departures and internal confusion regarding updated staffing and culture that has little stability, and that the possibility of
and reporting information: the state replacing the district Board of Education has
• supervisors and other staff providing conflicting harmed morale. Among campus staff surveyed by the review
interpretations of their reporting relationships; team, 33.3 percent agreed that district administrators provide
services to campuses efficiently.
• discrepancies in organizational structural information
provided by staff and within the district’s publications District staff described a perception that district leaders
and website; sometimes hired or promoted colleagues to important
positions without regard to their qualifications or without a consistent system to track and communicate expectations
transparent hiring process. District administrators stated that about the district’s central office. The district should use
their staff are not qualified equally, and that some are placed available resources to rebuild trust between stakeholders and
without the departmental staff having an opportunity to the central academic office.
interview and assess them for requisite skills.
The district has high turnover and a lack of systems and existing resources.
frameworks that might promote stability and continuity
when turnover is high. District turnover has resulted in PRINCIPAL SUPPORT (REC. 11)
principals avoiding the district office, according to a Houston ISD lacks a unifying framework, strong oversight,
respondent that added that principals no longer know the and written procedures for school support officers (SSO).
district staff.
Houston ISD provides support and guidance for campus
Effective districts provide clear, accurate information to all principals through the school office system. The district’s six
internal and external stakeholders and coordinate resources school offices represent each of its five geographic areas and
to best meet student needs. Best practices for district websites the Achieve 180 campuses. Each school office includes an
include maintaining detailed organizational charts. area superintendent, director, area office staff, and SSOs.
Within Houston ISD’s organizational structure, the SSOs’
Houston ISD should address communication deficiencies
primary focus is to develop and guide principals in improving
among central academic office functions to improve
instruction and student outcomes at their campuses. The job
transparency with internal and external stakeholders.
description for an SSO, last revised during calendar year
The district should develop a process to promote instructional 2012, includes the following responsibilities:
effectiveness and procedures to guide transparent
• managing programs that improve math, improve
communication during any future organizational
reading, decrease grade-level retentions and dropouts,
restructuring. The district should require detailed, accurate,
and increase graduation rates;
timely internal and external communication tools and
publications to facilitate strong transitions and minimize • improving satisfaction of parents, students, teachers,
negative effects of realignments. and principals;
The district should require the chief academic officer to • developing position statements regarding the
maintain current organizational charts on the district website. populations to be served and aligning resources of
It should task all supervisors, or their designees, with revising budget, staff, and time;
internal and external organizational charts within five days of
• increasing the number of effective teachers;
staffing changes.
• ensuring compliance of assigned campuses with
The Human Resources Department should analyze the
federal and state regulations and requirements related
staffing structure of central office staff to determine equity of
to various data and operational regulations; and
position title, benefits, and duties. The superintendent
should implement any related recommendations to increase • performing other job-related duties as assigned.
the efficiency, effectiveness, and equity of the academic
Each campus principal has an assigned SSO, although more
organizational structure.
experienced principals instead may be assigned to a lead
The district should conduct needs assessments and develop principal. SSOs and lead principals have the same job
long-term, targeted plans to maximize district-level supports responsibilities. However, unlike other SSOs, lead principals
and services to support campuses in effectively meeting evaluate fewer principals, concurrently serve as principals on
student needs. their own campuses, and receive stipends for these additional
responsibilities. SSOs and lead principals participate in a
District staff should define roles and responsibilities for all
monthly professional development series.
academic departments and staff clearly. The district should
develop clear, transparent job descriptions and performance The district invests significant resources in the SSO structure.
evaluation metrics for all academic departments, and a Job descriptions and organizational charts provided by the
district show that the SSO position is at pay grade 34. For Some staff and stakeholders attributed high mobility among
school year 2018–19, pay grade 34 salaries ranged from SSOs to the positions being a stepping stone to positions in
$86,315 to $142,420 Lead principals receive an annual other districts and other careers in the region. Another
stipend of $20,000. District organizational charts showed component of the SSO job description states that SSOs
that the district had 23 SSOs and 17 lead principals for should want, and be able, to take on a superintendent
school year 2018–19. Without factoring in any staffing position. The district provides leadership development
modifications not represented in the data, SSO salaries and programs for aspiring SSOs, but does not have systems in
lead principal stipends total approximately $3.1 million. place to incentivize SSO retention.
However, the SSO position at Houston ISD is not administered The informal SSO role, including a lack of a guiding
effectively or efficiently. SSOs lack written procedures, framework and clear expectations, could result in inconsistent
frameworks, or a handbook to guide their activities. support for principals across the district. Principals may
receive different levels of support from different SSOs, which
The district also lacks an effective formal process for SSO may lead to inequitable instructional services and resources.
evaluation. SSOs report directly to their assigned area With high SSO turnover, campus principal performance
superintendent and are evaluated using an annual scorecard. expectations and school improvement priorities may change
This scorecard includes target-setting documents for the or gaps in principal supervision and support may occur.
beginning of the year, an end-of-year performance report,
and some specific performance metrics for the SSO position. When SSOs are not strategically assigned to campuses,
However, district staff did not indicate that this system was individual SSO strengths may not be aligned to principal
consistently utilized, prioritized, and accessed regularly by needs. Frequent reassignment means SSOs are spending
SSOs and their supervisors. District staff stated that informal more of their time learning about needs than meeting those
conversations guide job performance, and that SSOs receive needs, and in the absence of a clear framework of expectations,
informal evaluations each semester through presentations to SSOs may be slower to provide key supports to principals.
the superintendent, area superintendents, and other academic
The development and maintenance of productive SSO and
staff about the performance of their assigned campuses.
principal partnerships is limited by turnover and by the
Houston ISD also lacks a process to examine the SSO role
expectation of turnover. Principals whose assigned SSO
and the consistency of SSO support.
positions have turned over frequently are less likely to invest
Additionally, the type and quality of services and supports time in relationships with those positions and related
that SSOs provide campus principals vary. During onsite activities. Changing SSO and campus assignments make it
interviews, staff described some SSOs as interacting with first more difficult to build trust between SSOs and principals.
year principals as collaborative coaches, and others taking a With no clear continuity in SSO support, fewer checks and
directive approach. balances exist to ensure that campus principals make effective
decisions and that teachers and students receive adequate
Houston ISD also lacks a transparent process for matching supports for teaching and learning.
SSO skills to principal needs when assigning SSOs to
campuses. During onsite interviews, staff stated that area The Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), a
superintendents frequently reassign SSOs, and that there is nationwide organization of public officials that head state
no clear understanding of what guides SSO placement departments of elementary and secondary education,
decisions. The district does not maintain district-level published Model Principal Supervisor Professional Standards
turnover data, but interviews with school office and campus in 2015. To provide comprehensive support for principals,
staff demonstrated a high level of turnover among SSOs. For CCSSO recommends that principal supervisors, such as
example, some current and former district principals SSOs, carry out the following actions:
described having nine SSOs during the course of seven • dedicate their time to helping principals grow as
school years. Staff also indicated that Houston ISD lacks instructional leaders;
standard procedures to maintain SSO placements from year
to year, and that the district often reassigns SSOs during the • coach and support individual principals and engage
summer with little communication or discussion with the in effective professional learning strategies to help
principals affected. principals grow as instructional leaders;
• use evidence of principals’ effectiveness to determine • reflective – re-examine their practices and dispositions
necessary improvements in principals’ practice to foster habitually to develop the knowledge of experience
a positive educational environment that supports the necessary to succeed in pursuing new and more
diverse cultural and learning needs of students; effective approaches;
• engage principals in the formal district principal • equity-minded – ensure that all students are treated
evaluation process in ways that help them grow as fairly, equitably, and have access to excellent teachers
instructional leaders; and necessary resources; and
• advocate for and inform the coherence of • systems-focused – are committed to developing
organizational vision, policies, and strategies to systems and solutions that are sustainable and effective
support campuses and student learning; districtwide and that generate equitable outcomes for
all campuses and stakeholders.
• assist the district in ensuring the community of
schools with which principal supervisors engage are Houston ISD should develop and implement districtwide
culturally/socially responsive and have equitable access structures that support a consistent and systematic approach
to resources necessary for the success of each student; for supervising and supporting campus principals.
• engage in their own development and continuous The area superintendents should develop a standard operating
improvement to help principals grow as instructional procedures manual for SSOs to provide internal and publicly
leaders; and available written documentation of expected roles and
responsibilities. The district also should develop a principal
• lead strategic change that continuously elevates needs assessment and strategic placement process to match
the performance of campuses and sustains high- SSO skill sets with principal needs and to ensure continuity
quality educational programs and opportunities of support.
across the district.
The district should revise SSO job descriptions for clarity
In addition, CCSSO’s standards establish that effective and completeness, and should ensure that performance
principal supervisors exhibit the following qualities: metrics are consistently understood and utilized to evaluate
• growth-oriented – believe that students, education the structure and staffing of SSOs providing principal
professionals, educational organizations, and the support. District staff should publish an annual one-page
community can grow and improve continuously to report about principal support and SSO effectiveness,
realize a shared vision for student success through increasing transparency for all stakeholders.
dedication and hard work; The district should study the retention and mobility of SSOs
• collaborative – share the responsibility and the work to identify strategies for stabilizing SSO leadership.
for realizing a shared vision of student success; The district should use the CCSSO Model Principal Supervisor
• innovative – break from established ways of Standards to establish a framework of expectations and an
performing functions to pursue fundamentally new effective feedback and evaluation mechanism for SSOs. The
and more effective approaches when needed; district also should provide professional development for SSOs
that focuses on effective implementation of their role as
• analytical – gather evidence and engage in rigorous coaches and evaluators of principals.
data analysis to develop, manage, refine, and evaluate
new and more effective approaches; The district should provide SSOs with principal supervisory
tools and platforms to enable consistent evaluation, feedback,
• ethical – explicitly and consciously follow laws, policies, and coaching of principals. SSOs should develop coaching
and principles of right and wrong in all matters; plans for each principal and align those plans to concepts
established in the SSO trainings.
• perseverant – are courageous and persevere in doing
what is best for students even when challenged by The district could implement this recommendation with
fear, risk, and doubt; existing resources.
CAMPUS INSTRUCTIONAL LEADERSHIP TURNOVER According to the National Association of Secondary School
(REC. 12) Principals, the national average tenure of principals at their
campuses was four years during school year 2016–17.
Houston ISD lacks an effective process to promote principal
Houston ISD academic staff said that they do not collect or
retention and ensure rigorous instruction during campus
analyze data on principal turnover regularly. However, during
leadership transitions.
school year 2015–16, Houston ISD conducted an analysis of
Many Houston ISD campuses experience principal turnover, district principal turnover rates. The report indicated that
increasing the risk of poor academic outcomes for students principals had an average of 3.5 years of experience at their
and low morale for teachers. Newly assigned principals are current campuses. This same analysis demonstrated that
not required to maintain instructional and programmatic campuses in the bottom 5.0 percent of performance were led
priorities, and the district lacks structures to maintain by principals with an average of 1.8 years of experience at
instructional rigor during leadership transitions. Some their current campuses. Additionally, campuses that had
reassignments take place midyear, which further complicates significant achievement gaps had principals with an average
programmatic shifts implemented by new principals. of 1.9 years of experience at their campuses. This analysis
Teachers said that this type of frequent program turnover is a suggests that the lowest-performing campuses in Houston
major challenge to their effectiveness, and campuses that are ISD had a principal turnover rate of more than 50.0 percent,
unable to retain principals experience instructional instability. twice the national average.
Teachers also stated that program turnover decreased morale,
High principal turnover rates can affect district finances,
led to inefficient use of teachers’ time, and was perceived to
depleting funding from instructional services to replace staff.
exacerbate teacher turnover.
A 2014 report from the School Leaders Network estimates
Campus principals experience frequent reassignments, and the cost of new principals (i.e., within the first three years
the district does not approach hiring and placement after hiring) to range from $75,000 to $100,000 per hire in
systematically by matching available talent with campus addition to salary. These costs include principal preparation
needs throughout all areas. During onsite interviews, staff programs, recruiting services, and transitional training such
said that the rotation of principals was routine practice, and as internships, coaches, and mentors.
that district administrators may not have reasonable timelines
According to Ronfeldt, Loeb, and Wyckoff’s 2013 article,
and expectations for principals that are new to their campuses.
principal turnover also is correlated greatly to increased
Placement of new principals is more common in lower- teacher turnover, specifically among the most effective
performing campuses. These campuses also have higher rates teachers. Among teachers that stay, Hargreaves and Goodson’s
of principal turnover. Among the Achieve 180 campuses, 2008 research suggests that regular principal turnover also
35.0 percent received new principals from school years leads to teacher disengagement in improvement reforms.
2016–17 to 2017–18. In January 2018, 64.0 percent of the
Principal turnover also is concerning because of the
Achieve 180 campus principals had fewer than five years of
expectation of principals to lead school improvement and
experience. The TEA conservator described this lack of
because of the time that measurable improvement requires.
principal experience as presenting “a barrier to sustained
Research suggests that principals must be in place at least five
achievement.” During that month, Houston ISD reported
years to implement large-scale change effort fully, including
changes in campus leadership at five Achieve 180 campuses.
the recruitment, retention, and capacity-building of staff.
Although districts often replace principals at low-performing
Continuing turnover of principals can make it difficult for
campuses, Houston ISD does not retain these turnaround
campuses to focus on consistent implementation of policies
principals successfully.
and programs and to commit to improvement.
Houston ISD’s principal salaries meet or exceed the average
Principal turnover also typically contributes to rapid changes
principal salaries in surrounding districts, and Houston ISD
in campus direction, because each incoming leader institutes
received a grant to provide principals with stipends for
new programs that can further destabilize the campus,
working on Achieve 180 campuses. However, the district
particularly when turnover occurs multiple years in a row.
does not have incentive systems to retain principals, especially
systems focused on long-term retention at chronically low- Effective districts mitigate instructional risks to students by
performing campuses. implementing structures to promote instructional continuity
during principal transitions. Committees of stakeholders, Houston ISD should analyze and adjust its existing principal
including veteran teachers and campus academic department recruitment incentives to prioritize multi-year principal
heads, can be used to guide instruction when campus retention incentives.
leadership changes.
The district should provide novice principals and experienced
Houston ISD should develop comprehensive processes for principals that are new to campuses from three years to five
principal placement and retention and instructional years to improve student achievement. New principals have
transitions at the campus level. more immediate effects on elements such as campus climate,
teacher retention, and implementation of new district
The district should study the longevity of principals and map
policies and programs. Districts and principal supervisors
the progression of in-district principal transfers to better
should set reasonable performance expectations for what
understand patterns of principal turnover. The district should
they can achieve within a year.
use this information to identify root causes for principal
instability and to drive improvement plans for principal The district could implement this recommendation with
capital management. existing resources.
The district also should track the longevity of principals that INCONSISTENT CAMPUS-LEVEL RESOURCES FOR STUDENTS
have completed different preparation programs and hold (REC. 13)
these programs accountable for providing new principal Houston ISD does not ensure that all students have
support and for retention rates. consistent campus-level access to educational supports and
The district should survey principals to better understand resources, including counseling services, library services,
their perception of working conditions within Houston ISD. and fine arts programs.
The Great Principals at Scale toolkit from New Leaders and Houston ISD’s implementation of its decentralized system
the Bush Institute provides a sample principal survey, authorizes principals to have extensive discretion of
guidance, and rubric to review results. programming and staffing decisions at each campus. In this
The district should anticipate that principal turnover will system, principals choose whether to provide students with
occur and attempt to insulate campuses from the negative access to certified counselors, high-quality library services, or
effects of principal reassignment by establishing practices extensive fine arts opportunities. Some campuses in the district
that promote stability of implementation at campuses. Such offer students access to resources that meet or exceed best
practices could include the following protocols: practices, and other campuses fail to meet minimum standards.
• requiring a static campus leadership or instructional COUNSELING SERVICES

leadership team to be in place at the time a principal Students in Houston ISD lack consistent access to school
is moved; counselor services that meet national standards.
• efforts to maintain consistency in SSO oversight of a During school year 2018–19, Houston ISD employed 213.1
campus through a transfer from one principal to the next; FTE counselor positions for 209,772 students. This amount
• appointing or maintaining of one or more teacher is an approximate ratio of one counselor per 984 students, a
leaders to provide continuity related to instructional much higher ratio than the national average of one counselor
supports and expectations; and for approximately 450 students and the American School
Counselor Association (ASCA) recommendation of one
• a deliberate process for transitioning leadership. counselor per 250 students.
The district also may seek to limit changes made by a new Figure 2–5 shows Houston ISD’s student-to-counselor ratio
principal that arrives at a campus after the school year has by campus for school year 2017–18. Among campuses, 1.1
begun. Some immediate changes may be welcome and percent had student-to-counselor ratios that met ASCA
required, but having extra oversight and some limitations recommendations, and 9.1 percent had ratios at or less than
placed on the degree of midyear change will help to ensure the national average. The majority of Houston ISD campuses
greater stability of improvement implementation, which has had ratios that were more than twice the national average or
been shown to increase achievement. employed no certified counselors.
Although the district provides guidelines and job descriptions FIGURE 2–5
for school counselors, individual campus principals have HOUSTON ISD STUDENT-TO-COUNSELOR RATIOS
discretion for the utilization of counseling resources. The
STUDENT-TO-COUNSELOR RATIO PERCENTAGE OF CAMPUSES (1)
district authorizes each principal to determine the number of
250:1 or less 1.1%
school counselors to employ, regardless of the number of
251:1 – 450:1 9.1%
students at the campus. Additionally, each campus implements
the roles of school counselors differently. Principals may 451:1 – 900:1 29.5%
designate one or more staff to carry out counselor job duties. Greater than 900:1 11.0%
No requirements regarding qualifications for these designees No counselor 49.2%
are in place, and Houston ISD staff did not have a clear, shared Notes:
understanding of how counselors’ duties are assigned or (1) Houston ISD provided data for 264 campuses.
(2) Part-time counselors are considered 0.5 full-time-equivalent
monitored across designees. Some campuses employ highly positions.
trained, qualified counselors at ratios that enable them to meet (3) Percentages may not sum due to rounding.
all students’ needs. However, other campuses may have Team, March 2019; Texas Education Agency, Texas Academic
incomplete counseling services provided by various staff that Performance Report, school year 2017–18.
do not have counselor training.
Houston ISD maintains a clear job description for school with the small staff, especially for campuses that have a
counselors and provides supports and expectations for counselor designee or multiple designees for counselor duties.
performance consistent with the ASCA standards. Counselors provide crucial services for the academic and
District guidelines and counselor job descriptions establish social well-being of students in all grade levels. Counseling
the following counselor duties: services have a direct impact on student attendance, behavior,
engagement, and college enrollment, so inequities in these
• implementing a comprehensive counseling and services can further exacerbate achievement gaps. School
guidance program to address the needs of all students; counselors support student academic and social/emotional
• interpreting standardized test results and other growth and help make critical connections for students to
assessment data to help students make educational postsecondary opportunities, including college, career and
and career plans; military options. Effective counseling programs are important
to the school climate and a crucial element in improving
• developing a personal graduation plan for each student achievement. Research from Carrell and Carrell,
student, updated annually; assigning students to the McIntosh, and Upthall indicates regular student access to a
correct courses to meet graduation requirements and school counselor is a necessity, particularly for students most
facilitate college entrance; in need of intervention and support in high-poverty districts.
• coordinating and partnering with college and career Students who have greater access to school counselors and
readiness programs to support career awareness comprehensive school counseling programs, particularly
and academic planning in a range of postsecondary those at high-poverty-area campuses, are more likely to
opportunities, and providing information on succeed academically and behaviorally. A 2018 evaluation of
financial aid; and school counseling programs in Missouri by the Center for
• ensuring that all English learners are scheduled in School Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, the
courses appropriate to their learning needs and are Missouri Department of Secondary Education, and the
served in their English classes by teachers with English Missouri School Counselor Association showed that students
as a Second Language (ESL) endorsements. in secondary campuses with a counselor-to-student ratio of
1:250 students or less had graduation rates 5.0 percentage
At the district level, the Academic and Career Counseling points higher than campuses with more than that ratio. This
Department within the Office of Strategy and Innovation’s finding was true even when controlled for student
Career Readiness Department employs four counseling demographics, area poverty, and campus funding levels.
specialists to support and monitor school counselors. District Results from ASCA’s 2019 article Measuring the Impact of
staff reported that monitoring all district campuses is difficult School Counselor Ratios on Student Outcomes indicated school
counselor ratios of 1:250 have a significant correlation with ºº continuation schools;

lower student absenteeism and higher math, verbal, and
ºº academic programs; and
writing scores on the SAT college readiness examination.
Preliminary findings in Connecticut school districts with ºº any other alternatives available to district
lower student-to-counselor ratios show higher graduation students; and
rates, higher college entrance and persistence rates, lower
chronic absenteeism rates, and fewer suspensions. The • use attendance, behavior, and course performance
presence of comprehensive school counseling programs in data to identify students who are chronically tardy or
Rhode Island was found to be related to multiple positive absent, or who have disciplinary problems – and provide
student outcomes ranging from better attendance to a support and/or a referral to a community provider.
stronger sense of connection to school. High school students
LIBRARY SERVICES
that have more access to school counselors and related college
and career counseling services are more likely to graduate and The district lacks a process to ensure that its libraries’ budget,
less likely to have behavioral issues. staff, collection size, and collection age align with public school
library standards. These standards provide students at different
The California Department of Education provides the
campuses with variable access to high-quality library services.
following guidelines for effective school counseling service:
Campus principals have full discretion over staffing and budgets
• conduct a systematic review of each student’s academic for campus libraries, resulting in inconsistent campus-level
progress annually to ensure the proper alignment of library services. Some campus principals choose to offer high-
student course load and assignment with promotion quality campus libraries staffed with certified librarians, and
and graduation requirements; other campuses have inadequate or nonexistent library services.
• identify students that are not earning credits at a Houston ISD operates a Library Services Department to
rate that will enable them to graduate with the rest support campus libraries. The Library Services Department
of their class; tracks and advocates for library services and can provide
campuses with recommendations regarding library services.
• ensure that all English learners are scheduled However, district staff have no authority to set minimum
in courses appropriate to their learning needs and requirements, to mandate trainings for librarians, or to
are served in their English classes by teachers with require campus alignment with library services best
ESL endorsements; practices. Board Policy EFB2 (REGULATION) requires
• meet annually with each student and the student’s district staff to provide a “status report on a school-by-
parent or guardian to discuss the following factors: school basis of compliance with state recommendations,”
but staff only provided a districtwide summary report and
ºº student’s academic record; campus library information without reports on compliance
ºº educational options available to the student; with state recommendations.
ºº course work and academic progress needed for The Texas State Library and Archives Commission’s (TSLAC)
satisfactory completion of high school; School Library Programs: Standards and Guidelines for Texas
establish criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of public school
ºº effect of such course work and academic progress libraries. These guidelines, which are the state recommendations
on the student’s options for postsecondary referenced in Houston ISD’s policy, include collection size,
education and employment; and collection age, and staffing. TSLAC’s guidelines classify libraries
into five categories: distinguished, accomplished, proficient,
ºº any unmet social–emotional needs or barriers the
developing, and improvement needed.
student is facing, with the goal of assigning proper
campus staff for interventions and support; Figure 2–6 shows the district’s campus library collection
sizes, including the average number of books per student for
• ensure that students understand the educational options
Houston ISD’s campus libraries compared to TSLAC
available to them, including to the following resources:
standards. Ratings for Houston ISD’s campus libraries’
ºº regional occupational centers and programs; collections range from distinguished to improvement needed.
FIGURE 2–6
HOUSTON ISD CAMPUS LIBRARIES’ BOOKS PER STUDENT COMPARED TO TEXAS STATE LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES
COMMISSION STANDARDS, SCHOOL YEAR 2018–19
CAMPUS LEVEL (1) DISTINGUISHED (2) ACCOMPLISHED PROFICIENT DEVELOPING IMPROVEMENT NEEDED
Early Childhood Centers 3 1 1 2 1
Elementary School Campuses 91 20 15 15 19
Middle School Campuses 15 2 5 5 15
High School Campuses 9 2 3 1 26
Multilevel Campuses 6 1 3 2 4
Notes:
(1) Houston ISD provided data for 267 campuses.
(2) Distinguished=18 books per elementary student, 16 books per secondary student; Accomplished=16 books per elementary student, 14
books per secondary student; Proficient=14 books per elementary student, 12 books per secondary student; Developing=12 books per
elementary student, 10 books per secondary student; Needs Improvement= fewer than 12 books per elementary student, fewer than 10
books per secondary student.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, March 2019; Houston ISD, school year 2018–19; Texas State Library
and Archives Commission, School Library Programs: Standards and Guidelines for Texas, 2017.
Houston ISD’s number of items per student varies greatly. Houston ISD’s library staffing varies by campus. Some
Some elementary school campuses average fewer than five campuses have libraries that meet or exceed proficiency in
items per student, and other elementary campuses average TSLAC staffing guidelines, and other campuses have libraries
more than 30 items. Most of Houston ISD’s high school that rate needs improvement according to staffing standards
campus libraries average fewer than 10 books per student. or have no library services at all. During school year 2017–
Figure 2–7 shows Houston ISD’s campus library collection 18, Houston ISD’s Library Services Annual Report indicated
ages compared to TSLAC’s standards. Most Houston ISD that 35.0 percent of libraries employed certified librarians,
campus libraries are rated as developing and improvement 25.0 percent employed certified teachers, 27.0 percent
needed, and other campuses have newer average collection employed clerks, and 13.0 percent had vacancies in campus
ages. Students in Houston ISD libraries encounter a range of library leadership. According to a May 2018 article in
book ages and conditions, with some students having access Education Week, 61.0 percent of Houston ISD’s campus
only to older, poorer-condition items. librarians have left the district during the past decade,
FIGURE 2–7
HOUSTON ISD CAMPUS LIBRARY COLLECTION AGES COMPARED TO TEXAS STATE LIBRARY AND ARCHIVES COMMISSION
STANDARDS, SCHOOL YEAR 2018–19
CAMPUS LEVEL (1) DISTINGUISHED (2) ACCOMPLISHED PROFICIENT DEVELOPING IMPROVEMENT NEEDED
Early Childhood Centers 0 0 0 2 6
Elementary School Campuses 10 15 20 33 82
Middle School Campuses 11 3 6 5 17
High School Campuses 16 6 5 5 9
Multilevel Campuses 3 1 3 5 4
Notes:
(1) Houston ISD provided data for 267 campuses.
(2) Distinguished=average copyright date no more than 10 years, while following a recognized replacement and removal process;
Accomplished=average copyright date no more than 12 years; Proficient=average copyright date no more than 14 years;
Developing=average copyright date no more than 16 years; Needs Improvement=average copyright date is more than 16 years.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, March 2019; Houston ISD, school year 2018–19; Texas State Library
and Archives Commission, School Library Programs: Standards and Guidelines for Texas, 2017
resulting in the district being one of 20 nationwide with the Principals in Houston ISD have the authority to decide what
biggest decreases in librarian positions during the period. is offered on their campuses and can elect to not offer arts
programming. Therefore, campuses are not required to
Lack of sufficient library staff and books, aged collections,
provide students with equitable access to fine arts learning
and inadequate budgets affect the quality and usefulness of
and participation. Some campuses have rigorous fine arts
library services and the library’s ability to meet student needs.
programming and experiences, and others have limited fine
Libraries are considered effective and efficient resources in arts programming. Principals have discretion over campus
improving student achievement. Campuses that do not have funds, so campus fine arts departments may not be allocated
high-quality library programs are not providing the same campus funds. For example, some visual arts teachers are not
opportunities for students to learn as campuses that do. allotted supplies, and some campuses do not allocate funds
Efforts to promote literacy achievement may be compromised, for repairs of musical instruments. Only fine arts magnet
particularly for students in high-poverty-area campuses who programs receive additional allocations for fine arts.
may not have access to neighborhood libraries or literacy
The district supports fine arts integration through Fine
resources at home. A 2015 Washington State study found
Arts staff in the Elementary Curriculum and Instruction
that the presence of a certified school librarian was a predictor
Department, including district integration specialists.
of higher elementary school and middle school math scores.
However, the district has not developed systems to
The study ranked school library programs based on certified
ensure consistent, equitable fine arts experiences for all
staffing, library accessibility, resources, and technology. Even
students. During school years 2016–17 and 2017–18,
after controlling for school size and poverty, the study found
the East Region implemented an initiative inspired by
that the one key factor distinguishing high-performing,
the work of a board member to expand fine arts
high-poverty campuses from low-performing, high-poverty
opportunities for area students. The initiative resulted
campuses is a quality library program.
in additional arts opportunities including afterschool
Nationwide, research suggests that reading, writing, and programs, musical and dance performances, choir, and
graduation rates improve where campuses employ certified a ballet residency program. However, these expansions
school librarians. TSLAC’s 2001 analysis of school libraries were limited in scope and did not result in long-term,
in Texas, presented in the publication Texas School Libraries: districtwide systems that increased access to fine arts for
Standards, Resources, Services, and Students’ Performance, all students.
determined that school libraries have a measurable impact on
The New York City Partnership for Arts and Education
student achievement. At the elementary school and middle
Program was founded to restore and maintain access to arts
school levels, approximately 4.0 percent of the variance in
education in New York City Public Schools. The program
state test scores was attributed to school libraries; that
conducted an evaluation in 2001 to determine the effects of
percentage more than doubled to 8.2 percent at the high
fine arts education on student outcomes. Teachers and
school level. Library variables, including library staffing and
principals reportedly saw improvement in the following
items per student, outweighed the effects of other campus
areas: performance in other disciplines, engagement,
variables, including computers per student, teacher
attendance, connecting lessons from differing subject areas,
experience, and even teacher turnover ratio.
quality of work, and behavior. Also, students who participated
The American Association of School Librarians (AASL) is a in arts programming achieved higher standardized test scores,
professional library association that provides numerous earned more high school equivalency certificates and
resources for establishing comprehensive school libraries and diplomas, and improved their engagement in mathematics
fully leveraging libraries. One resource AASL publishes is the and science.
Toolkit for Promoting School Library Programs: Messages,
Students in Houston ISD inconsistently receive the academic
ideas, and strategies for communicating the value of school
and nonacademic benefits that come with participation in
library programs and school librarians in the 21st century.
fine arts programs and experiences. Academic benefits
include increased achievement in reading, math, language,
FINE ARTS
concentration, motivation, reasoning abilities, and problem-
Students in Houston ISD also have inconsistent access to solving skills. In addition to academic outcomes, students
fine arts opportunities. can experience enhanced self-worth, increased empathy,
improved leadership skills, and reductions in risky behaviors. ensure that its library staffing, collection, and associated
The National Endowment for the Arts also reports that at- budget are consistent with state standards across campuses.
risk students with equitable access to the arts “tend to have Based on the assessment, the district should set library service
better academic results, better workforce opportunities, and priorities, estimate the budget impact of those priorities, and
more civic engagement.” include this information in its budget cycle.
New York City Public Schools provides districtwide, The district should assess fine arts access and develop a
accessible systems for educators throughout the city to access process to connect all campuses with district fine arts
fine arts opportunities and partnerships. District staff resources, artist partnerships, and additional opportunities.
developed tracking tools, metrics, and accessible reports to
Based on comprehensive assessments of deficits in available
improve equitable student access to fine arts.
resources and services, the district should set priorities,
Houston ISD should provide consistent access to high- estimate the budget impact of those priorities, and include
quality counseling programs, library services, and fine arts them in the district budgeting process.
opportunities throughout the district.
This recommendation could be implemented with
The district should evaluate existing resources and services, existing resources.
and use district improvement planning processes to align
allocation of resources and delivery of services with a focus ENGLISH LEARNER SERVICES (REC. 14)
on consistent, equitable student access. Houston ISD does not support its English learner (EL)
student population effectively.
The district should ensure that sufficient counselors are
available for campuses that need them, particularly in high The Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 2, Chapter 89,
schools, to fulfill the responsibilities that are described in Subchapter BB, Section 89.1203, defines an EL as “a student
district guidelines and counselor job descriptions. who is in the process of acquiring English and has another
language as the primary language.” The goal of bilingual
The district should develop guidelines for campuses regarding education and special language programs are to provide ELs
the number of qualified counselors that campuses should have with instructional support that will enable them to participate
to meet student needs. Initially, the district should attempt to fully in their educational experience in campuses and in their
meet the national average of one counselor per 450 students communities. During school year 2018–19, Houston ISD
and have a goal of one counselor for every 250 to 300 students identified 66,452 students as ELs, which represented 31.7
in high-poverty-area, low-performing high schools. percent of the total student population.
Houston ISD should consider partnering with local school The Multilingual Programs Department, within the Office of
counseling graduate programs to host graduate counseling Special Populations, offers administrative leadership and
student interns completing their practicum requirements. support for Bilingual and ESL Education and special
This partnering also could serve to establish a recruiting tool language programs for students identified as ELs. ELs may
for school counseling candidates. include immigrant, migrant, and refugee students. The
district has four bilingual education programs: dual language,
The district should develop a counseling services checklist,
transitional bilingual, ESL, and cultural heritage. During
which can be used to track provision of counseling services
school year 2018–19, 51 campuses provided dual-language
even in the absence of a designated school counselor.
programs. Houston ISD’s elementary school students are
Houston ISD also should require high schools to complete
offered Spanish Transitional Bilingual and Dual Language
all checklist activities with their students and ensure that
programs, a Vietnamese Bilingual Cultural Heritage
related outcomes are attached to each student’s data file.
program, Mandarin Chinese Immersion, Arabic Immersion,
The district should use AASL’s toolkit to promote library French Immersion, and ESL programs for speakers of other
programs to stakeholders, including principals, site-based languages. Secondary campuses offer ESL/Sheltered English
decision-making committees, students, families, and the and Sheltered Content programs for EL students in grades
community. Houston ISD should conduct a comprehensive six to 12. Some secondary bilingual programs are offered at
assessment of the district’s library services related to staff dual language campuses. The district also has several
levels, the library budget, and the age of its collection to campuses that provide additional placement options and
supports for ELs, such as middle and high school campuses The district’s departmental reorganizations and fragmented
for newcomer students and refugee programs. structure constrain the capacity of Houston ISD to engage in
long-term planning. An annual plan for the Multilingual
According to onsite interviews, Houston ISD campuses Programs Department was included in the school year
receive support from the district in an informal process that 2018–19 district improvement plan. However, the plan
some staff described as ad hoc. Campuses can request lacked a clear, multi-year vision or framework, and
support, and a teacher development specialist (TDS) and department staff did not refer to this plan when interviewed
manager will assess needs and develop a short-term plan. about long-term planning. District administrators indicated
District staff described staffing levels as minimal and that the district lacked succession planning, manuals, and
insufficient to effectively provide, monitor, and evaluate guidance for EL services.
EL services.
Without a consistent long-term plan, staff also described
Houston ISD’s website states that Multilingual Programs experiencing shifting frameworks and approaches to EL
Department staff “provide high-quality, research-based service delivery. At times, the district has focused almost
professional development opportunities in the area of exclusively on dual-language models, with fewer resources
instruction that is aligned to the TEKS and the English allocated to other models, such as transitional bilingual.
Language Proficiency Standards. The trainings provided are
designed to help teachers effectively transition students from During onsite interviews, district and campus staff stated
a Bilingual/ESL classroom to a general education, all-English that Houston ISD’s EL systems and supports are fragmented
instructional program. Specific professional development is organizationally, in flux, and have notable capacity gaps in
provided on sheltered instruction strategies, building staffing and expertise.
academic vocabulary, and writing strategies. These trainings
The majority of district staff tasked with EL support work
are aligned with the criteria students must meet to exit a
within the Multilingual Programs Department. However,
bilingual program.” The site lists the following professional
Houston ISD does not organize all district-level EL staff
development sessions:
within the same department and does not have a formal
• building academic vocabulary for kindergarten to process for regular meetings among related service providers.
grade two; According to onsite interviews, this structure makes
coordination and communication among EL staff difficult.
• building academic vocabulary for grades three to five; For example, dual language TDS are affiliated with the
Elementary and Secondary Curriculum Departments,
• writing development for grades one to five;
whereas bilingual TDS are affiliated with the Multilingual
• “ESL: Putting the Pieces Together”; Programs Department, which limits collaboration among
related service providers. District and campus staff also
• Esperanza; and indicated that, in the absence of strong interdepartmental
communication, work sometimes is duplicated, such as staff
• Neuhaus.
from different departments supporting the same teacher or
During school year 2018–19, the district focused professional campus. Staff stated that they often feel that all positions
development for teachers working with EL students on who work with ELs do not have a shared direction and
sheltered English instruction. District staff indicated the targeted utilization of district resources.
district’s intention was to equip core content teachers and
Staff also described situations in which the staff serving ELs
bilingual teachers with the tools to work successfully with their
did not have the expertise to implement instructional strategies
EL students. However, attendance at the trainings was not
appropriate for these students. District staff expressed concern
mandatory for campus staff and teachers reported that it
that some campus principals have significant deficits related to
lacked sufficient differentiation for teachers of all experience
knowledge about strategies for supporting language
levels. Campus staff also expressed a need for more in-depth
development and that some principals also lacked
professional development and opportunities for professional
understanding of how to meet the academic needs of ELs.
collaboration. The organizational and curricular fragmentation,
staffing shortfalls, and gaps in expertise constrain the capacity At the district and campus levels, staff described EL staff
of Houston ISD to meet the needs of ELs. shortages and notable variation of expertise related to ELs.
FIGURE 2–8
HOUSTON ISD STUDENTS AND TEACHERS IN BILINGUAL/ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE (ESL) EDUCATION
BILINGUAL/ESL EDUCATION PERCENTAGE BILINGUAL/ESL EDUCATION PERCENTAGE
YEAR PROGRAM STUDENTS OF TOTAL STUDENTS TEACHERS OF TOTAL TEACHERS
2015–16 63,853 29.7% 373.8 3.2%
2016–17 68,688 31.9% 385.4 3.3%
2017–18 69,271 32.4% 390.2 3.3%
Source: Texas Education Agency, Texas Academic Performance Report, school years 2015–16 to 2017–18.
District staff described a shortage of bilingual teachers Proficiency System (TELPAS) report, 15,580 of Houston
resulting in a high volume of requests for bilingual exceptions. ISD’s EL students have been enrolled in U.S. schools for five
These requests are submitted to the Commissioner of years or more. Additionally, some Spanish-native ELs are
Education when campuses are unable to provide bilingual placed in classrooms with teachers who provide Vietnamese
certified teachers to implement the required bilingual language support.
programs. The Commissioner can grant an exception to the
bilingual education program and approve the district using Figure 2–8 shows the number of bilingual/ESL students
an alternative program. During school year 2018–19, and staff at Houston ISD from school years 2015–16 to
Houston ISD received bilingual program exceptions for 268 2017–18. The percentage of bilingual/ESL students in
teachers, and ESL program waivers for 298 teachers. The Houston ISD has increased during each of the previous
most extreme cases of staffing shortfalls resulted in TDS staff three school years, although the percentage of these teachers
moving back to the classroom to provide instruction. Staff has remained steady. Houston ISD’s percentage of bilingual/
described these emergency situations as an obstacle to ESL students is greater than the state average, although
effective EL services. Houston ISD’s staff percentages are significantly less than
the state average.
Staff also described high turnover among staff in the
Figure 2–9 shows Houston ISD’s expenditures for bilingual
Multilingual Programs Department. Organizational
education. Although Houston ISD’s bilingual program
charts provided by the district list large numbers of
expenditures per student and as a percentage of total
vacancies for staff supporting ELs, including TDS staff
expenditures are significantly higher than state averages, the
and curriculum specialists.
district has not effectively leveraged spending to improve EL
The district does not appear to have systems to monitor student performance outcomes.
effectively that principals follow all procedures and
ELs in Houston ISD have shown persistent achievement and
guidelines regarding spending and services. District-level
graduation gaps from their English-speaking peers.
staff stated that they may be able to observe issues or provide
guidance to campuses, but that principals do not report to Figure 2–10 shows school years 2015–16 to 2017–18
them and that district staff do not have the authority to performance results for Houston ISD’s EL students on the
mandate compliance. State of Texas Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR).
Compared to Houston ISD students overall, EL student
District staff also expressed concerns about the district’s
performance on the STAAR is significantly lower. Houston
ability to monitor the placement of ELs in classrooms that
ISD’s EL students perform similarly to EL students in the
best meet their needs and to monitor that EL students take
region and state.
appropriate year-end assessments. Staff indicated that EL
students may not receive placements appropriate to their Figure 2–11 shows the greater dropout rate of Houston
level of ESL instruction, and that there are concerns that ISD’s EL students compared to other subgroups and to the
students may remain in EL status for inappropriate lengths state. Houston ISD’s EL students dropped out at a rate of
of time. According to the Research and Accountability more than twice the overall district average and greater than
Department’s school year 2018–19 Texas English Language the state’s average EL student dropout rate of 17.3 percent.
FIGURE 2–9
HOUSTON ISD AND STATE BILINGUAL EXPENDITURES
SCHOOL YEARS 2016–17 AND 2017–18
EXPENDITURES 2016–17 2017–18
Houston ISD Total Bilingual Expenditures $42,892,416 $47,913,107
Houston ISD Bilingual Percentage of Total Expenditures 3.1% 3.2%
Houston ISD Bilingual Expenditures per Student $199 $224
State Bilingual Percentage of Total Expenditures 1.8% 1.6%
State Bilingual Expenditure per Student $124 $116
Source: Texas Education Agency, Public Education Information Management System financial data, school years 2016–17 and 2017–18.
FIGURE 2–10
PERCENTAGE OF HOUSTON ISD ENGLISH LEARNER STUDENTS WHO MET ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS ON THE STATE OF
TEXAS ASSESSMENTS OF ACADEMIC READINESSS (STAAR), ALL SUBJECTS, ALL GRADES
PERCENTAGE DISTRICT PERCENTAGE DISTRICT PERCENTAGE REGION 4 PERCENTAGE STATE
YEAR (1) EL STUDENTS ALL STUDENTS EL STUDENTS (2) EL STUDENTS
2015–16 (3) 53% 69% 55% 55%
2016–17 (4) 24% 40% 23% 23%
2017–18 25% 42% 24% 26%
Notes:
(1) The decrease in the percentage of English Learner (EL) students that met basic assessment standards on the State of Texas
Assessments of Academic Readiness (STAAR) test is a result of the Texas Education Agency’s (TEA) revision of the student assessment
system. During school year 2015–16, students received numerical grades for STAAR tests, and these grades were grouped into three
categories of Advanced, Satisfactory, or Unsatisfactory. TEA defined these categories by a scoring standard. Starting in school year
2016–17, TEA revised the scoring standards to place student scores into four categories of Masters Grade Level, Meets Grade Level,
Approaches Grade Level, and Does Not Meet Grade Level.
(2) Region 4=Regional Education Service Center IV.
(3) School year 2015–16 data is reported as percentage at Level II Satisfactory standard or greater.
(4) School year 2015–16 data is reported as percentage at Level II Satisfactory standard or greater.
Source: Texas Education Agency, Texas Academic Performance Report, school years 2015–16 to 2017–18.
FIGURE 2–11
HOUSTON ISD AND STATE FOUR-YEAR DROPOUT RATES
GROUP HOUSTON ISD RATE STATE AVERAGE RATE
African American 13.8% 8.7%
Hispanic 12.6% 7.2%
White 13.0% 3.2%
American Indian 20.6% 8.1%
Asian 4.0% 1.7%
Pacific Islander 10.0% 5.9%
Two or More Races 7.6% 3.9%
Special Education 17.9% 9.6%
English Learners 30.3% 17.3%
Total 12.6% 5.9%
The English attainment of Houston ISD’s EL students is less • vision and goals – campuses had clear and visible goals;
than the state average. According to Houston ISD’s Research school leadership set expectations for the students
and Accountability Department’s school year 2018–19 and the teaching staff; teachers, administrators, and
report on TELPAS results, the district’s EL students scoring parents were involved in establishing the vision and
Advanced High on TELPAS remained at 13.0 percent, the goals for the program;
same as in school year 2017–18, and less than the state
• school climate – all administration and teaching staff
average of 16.0 percent. During school year 2017–18, 6.6
felt responsibility for establishing and maintaining a
percent of Houston ISD’s EL students achieved language
safe school atmosphere;
proficiency and exited from EL status successfully, a decrease
from the school year 2016–17 rate of 8.6 percent. Among • linkages – teachers and campus administrators did
Houston ISD’s EL students in grades one to 12, 38.0 percent not feel isolated from central administration staff,
improved scores in language proficiency from school years and the roles and responsibilities of central office staff
2017–18 to 2018–19, slightly greater than the state average and campus staff were clear;
of 35.0 percent.
• school organization and accountability – bilingual
The Office for Improving Second Language Achievement, education programs were integral components of
a research program at Texas A&M Corpus Christi, the campuses’ curriculum, and faculty and staff held
provides various resources for teachers and administrators themselves accountable for the success of all students;
administering ESL and bilingual programs. Its 2006
• professional development – staff considered
publication Best Practices for English Language Learners
planning and grade-level meetings as important
profiles programs, policies, and instructional practices ways of conducting their professional development;
of schools in Texas that have demonstrated success with teachers that traveled for professional development
ELs based on state and national assessments. The report gave presentations and workshops for other teachers
examines how programs, practices, and policies on staff;
contributed to the academic success of ELs participating
• parental involvement – parents were strong advocates
in bilingual education and dual language programs in
of the bilingual education program and were
selected districts.
welcomed as partners with the school; local businesses
During 2001 and 2002, the Intercultural Development granted parents flex time to enable them to participate
Research Association conducted a national study to in school activities held during the school day;
identify the characteristics that contribute to high
• staff accountability and student assessment – the
academic performance in bilingual education programs.
campuses studied used multiple assessments;
The study examined 10 school districts and described
administrators set clear and rigorous standards and
indicators of successful bilingual education programs. The
achievement levels; and schools used assessments in
study included the following indicators: leadership; vision
the native language when appropriate;
and goals; school climate; linkages between central
administration and campus-level staff; school organization • staff selection and recognition – campuses selected
and accountability; professional development; parent teachers for their bilingual education programs based
involvement; staff accountability and student assessment; on academic background, experience in bilingual
staff selection and recognition; and community education, proficiency in the target languages,
involvement. The study included the following findings enthusiasm, commitment, and openness to change
in successful districts, according to each of the and innovation; campuses recognized teachers for
characteristics studied: students’ successes; and
• leadership – each campus had principals that were • community involvement – community
committed to the success of their bilingual education representatives shared campus facilities, and campuses
program, had open and frequent communication built relationships with businesses and community
with staff, and were aware of the rationale for the representatives; senior citizens and retired individuals
bilingual education program; participated in activities with the students.
Houston ISD should implement a process for continuous based supports and scaffolds such as writing
evaluation of the structure, staffing, instructional delivery, templates or graphic organizers;
and resources of the district’s supports for its EL students.
• providing interventions for ELs struggling with
Highly skilled teachers are critical to the academic success of language or literacy development using small group
all students, but even more so for students who face the instruction that targets needs identified through
challenges associated with English language acquisition. The high-quality assessment practices, and
district should identify the following challenges:
• using peer learning opportunities, such as peer
• documenting the qualifications of teachers who tutoring or peer response groups in which a small
provide content instruction and English language group of students discuss and share responsibility for
instruction to ELs within Houston ISD to determine completing a task.
the qualification shortcomings of greatest concern;
• determining if staff who are responsible for hiring existing resources.
ELs have sufficient expertise in EL instruction to
make informed hiring decisions; consider centralizing SCHEDULING (REC. 15)
hiring practices to ensure that hiring managers have
sufficient understanding of EL needs; and Houston ISD lacks an effective process to ensure consistent
development of master schedules.
• surveying teachers of ELs to determine where they
perceive their own instructional challenges to A master schedule consists of the classes offered at a campus,
better tailor professional development focused on with all of their associated terms, meeting times, teachers,
instruction for ELs. and rooms. Master schedules allow administrators to
schedule teachers, analyze student academic needs, assign
The Research and Accountability Department and teachers to rooms and classes, and assure that students have
Multilingual Program Department also should analyze access to academic opportunities and supports.
projections for population growth among ELs. This analysis
should consider grade levels, language background, and According to Canady and Rettig’s article “The Power of
geographic distribution within Houston ISD, including the Innovative Scheduling,” a well-crafted master schedule can
use of mapping software to produce data visualizations. “result in a more effective use of time, space and resources;
These analyses should inform long-term staffing plans and improve instructional climate; help solve problems related to
curricular material development and purchase. Such activities delivery of instruction; and assist in establishing desired
cannot be accomplished at the individual campus level. They programs and instructional practices.” An effective master
require a districtwide perspective to facilitate strategic schedule can be a powerful enabler of transformation,
planning, optimize economies of scale, and promote the use maximizing the efficient use of time and resources during the
of instructional materials aligned to student needs. school day.
The district should focus professional development activities At the elementary level, the master scheduling process
on the following instructional practices that have primarily involves scheduling special areas, such as art, music,
demonstrated positive effects on EL outcomes: and physical education; student interventions; special
education services; and teacher preparation periods. The
• teaching academic vocabulary, including content-
master schedule can also clearly iterate instructional minute
area-specific and general academic vocabulary;
alignment across grade levels and subjects. It is important to
• integrating strategies that promote English ensuring that students have access to EL and special education
proficiency into content-area instruction, such as supports as required by their individualized education
strategies and tools that make content taught in programs or statute and that all students are receiving the
English comprehensible to ELs and opportunities for required amount of instructional time in each subject area.
ELs to discuss academic content in English;
At the secondary level, master scheduling is a complex process
• providing structured opportunities for ELs to that dictates whether every student that needs a course for
develop written language skills, using language- graduation has access to it. The master scheduling process
assesses available teachers, what course sections can be offered, The district’s written guidelines for scheduling lack clear
required teacher certifications for course credit, and graduation monitoring steps and dates. Without strong oversight of the
requirements. Master schedules determine teacher workload scheduling process, individual campus leadership teams may
and establish structures for teacher collaboration. deviate from the district-suggested process. If requirements for
scheduling deadlines are not enforced, some campus leadership
Ideally, the leadership teams develop master schedules during teams may not distribute master schedules in a timely manner.
the spring semester and distribute final versions to the faculty If master schedules are not finalized with sufficient time before
and staff during the summer. The team developing schedules the start of the school year, staff may not be able to review
can include principals, assistant principals, counselors, individual student schedules for accuracy and alignment with
registrars, and other leadership staff. academic need. School counselors typically are responsible for
reviewing student schedules; however, campus principals at
After each campus develops a finalized master schedule,
non-Achieve 180 campuses are not required to staff counselors,
campus staff can then verify that individual student course
which further complicates schedule reviews. During onsite
schedules are correct and meet student needs. As a component
interviews, district staff said that there is no enforced deadline
of scheduling, principals verify the accuracy of student data,
for campuses to develop a master schedule, which could allow
as coded in the Public Education Information Management
campuses to change master schedules throughout the year or
System. Some campuses staff additional positions, such as
to not finalize a master schedule.
registrars or clerks, who input student data; however, the
campus principal ensures the accuracy of student data. SSOs are tasked with supporting and monitoring principals;
however, Houston ISD staff indicated that some SSOs have
Houston ISD principals and campus leadership teams
never received training in master scheduling and may have
typically approach the development of the master schedule as
limited capacity to support the master scheduling processes
a series of tasks, rather than a strategic, systemic process.
at their assigned campuses.
Although the district provides some trainings and documents Ineffective master schedules can result in inefficient use of
to guide campus leaders in the master scheduling process, the time and resources throughout the school day, and a lost
resources are not strategic, robust, or comprehensive. District opportunity to enable academic transformations on
staff provide principals with two annual scheduling trainings campuses in the district. Deficits in training and oversight
and one required online course on the district’s student for Houston ISD’s master schedules may result in
information system. However, the scheduled trainings inequitable or inefficient teacher workloads, decreased
provided are not mandatory, and the district lacks a system opportunities for educator collaboration, and ineffective
for ensuring that trainings effectively prepare campus scheduling of interventions and special education services.
principals and leadership teams. During onsite interviews, Master schedules can help prevent the scheduling of EL
district staff indicated that Houston ISD needs to improve in students in the wrong classes by ensuring the availability of
developing master schedules that align to student need. adequate spaces and teacher assignments.
Two district publications, Planning and Developing a Campus Without strong monitoring of the master schedule and the
Master Schedule and School Guidelines for school year 2018– accuracy of individual student schedules, students could
19, outline scheduling guidance for principals. The School enroll in incorrect or duplicative courses, or could fail to
Guidelines state that “the principal is responsible for attain the necessary credits for graduation. This issue could
supervision of the creation and maintenance of the master be compounded for students with complex coursework and
schedule for the campus, including creating classes and academic needs, such as EL and special education students.
allocating teachers to classes. Administrative decisions
concerning the school calendar and bell schedules must be Failure to ensure that students have appropriate access to
made prior to scheduling classes with a time, teacher, and opportunities to meet graduation requirements can be a
room, and assigning students to classes. Schedules or class contributing factor to students dropping out of school,
assignments should be available for students no later than the particularly for students who are academically off-track.
first day of school.” However, the district’s guidelines are According to the Texas Academic Performance Reports, from
vague, lack detailed instructions for secondary campuses, school years 2011–12 to 2016–17, the four-year Houston
and do not link to additional scheduling resources. ISD dropout rates increased across most student subgroups.
Without a strong master scheduling process, Houston ISD is effectiveness, to share best practices and allow staff to explore
less able to offer optimal student-teacher ratios, streamline common scheduling problems with their peers.
noncore offerings and staff to align with graduation pathways,
support equitable access to course offerings for all students,
existing resources.
or maximize financial efficiency.
The University of California, Berkeley, College and Career WRAPAROUND SERVICES (REC. 16)
Academy Support Network (CCASN) advises establishing a Houston ISD’s implementation of its wraparound services
district system of support for master scheduling, including initiative lacks effective coordination, planning, procedures,
“real efforts to create a community of practice around master and evaluation.
scheduling and regularly scheduled collaborative dialogues Wraparound Services is a board-sanctioned program that
involving both district and campus staff to understand and informs students and their families about resources and
address master scheduling needs and to co-create master organizations that provide medical, mental, legal, or other
schedule solutions.” nonacademic resources to improve their well-being. Each
The CCASN approach envisions master scheduling as a participating campus has a wraparound resource specialist
collaborative, team process that includes the development of that seeks out the resources that students need so that they
guiding principles and priorities for ensuring equity, a focus can focus on their academic progress.
on student learning and stakeholder engagement. The Houston ISD board adopted policy FFC (LOCAL) in
November 2017, establishing a philosophy for wraparound
Houston ISD should implement systemic approaches to
services and directing the superintendent to implement a
master scheduling, including improved training and oversight.
framework for wraparound services in Houston ISD
The district should establish and monitor districtwide campuses. It states that the board “believes in the power of
deadlines for completion of master schedules. The district’s every community and is determined to support every school
efforts should include CAO staff conducting a randomized with a comprehensive districtwide plan to connect the
audit of student course enrollment and schedules to monitor nonacademic supports needed to improve the well-being of
effective practice and provide feedback to principals and staff. all students.” The policy further states that these nonacademic
supports, also referred to as wraparound services or
The district should ensure that master schedules support community schools, address “critical issues such as mental
student access to interventions that are flexible and responsive health and physical needs, food insecurity, lack of stable
to student needs, and that the master schedule allows time housing, violence, incarceration of a parent, legal and crisis
for adult conversations for planning and collaboration. support, and many other challenges that can have adverse
Office of Special Populations staff should assess master effects on a student’s readiness to learn.”
schedules to ensure they meet individual student needs.
The policy further directs the superintendent to “develop a
District staff should review existing training for principals regulation that provides a framework—including a
and campus leadership teams to ensure training addresses definition, processes, and goals—for community-based
how to meet the needs of both students and educators in the wraparound services and to codify the district’s responsibilities
scheduling process. regarding support and implementation of wraparound
services” including “methods to identify nonacademic needs
The chief strategy and innovation officer should establish of students and schools, to increase access to effective services
requirements for staff charged with registering students, to meet students’ needs, and to set up robust governance
scheduling courses, and validating course data, and develop a structures.” The policy also directs the superintendent to
tracking mechanism to ensure that roles are filled with staff “establish a team to facilitate implementation of the
meeting those qualifications. wraparound services framework and support community-
driven sustainability.”
The district also should establish a scheduling community for
all new principals, inviting others in need of additional The district’s wraparound services initiative, also called Every
support. The district should provide quarterly virtual Community Every School, was implemented in school year
meetings, led by SSOs with demonstrated scheduling 2017–18 and managed by the wraparound services director.
FIGURE 2–12
HOUSTON ISD WRAPAROUND SERVICES MODEL
TIER SERVICES
Tier 3: Intensive Provision of intensive, systematic support for individual students (e.g., wraparound services)
Tier 2: Targeted Provision of services to specific groups of students that are at risk for additional difficulties
Tier 1: Universal Schoolwide prevention and health promotion programs
All support services include:
• integrated student supports;
• expanded learning time and opportunities;
• family and community engagement; and
• collaborative leadership and practice.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review, March 2019; Houston ISD, school year 2018–19.
Figure 2–12 shows the district’s model for wraparound specialists logged approximately 90,000 student check-ins or
services, which includes three tiers of supports. observations, 21,500 instances of connecting students with
service providers, and 8,500 instances of providing direct
During school year 2017–18, Houston ISD identified a
resources. According to the Houston Chronicle’s review of
need to provide wraparound services to students and
software data and interviews with district staff, individual
planned to pilot the program at a small number of campuses.
specialists inconsistently use the software to log their
Rather than continuing with the pilot, the district decided
interactions and the supports provided, with specialist entries
to implement the program in 60 campuses during school
in a school year ranging from fewer than 250 to thousands.
year 2017–18.
The wraparound services director supervises 12 directly Hiring for wraparound resource specialists is managed at
reporting positions, including administrative staff and the district level. However, adequate staffing for existing
managers. Wraparound services managers supervise 120 wraparound services programs is not fully in place, in part
wraparound resource specialists who work directly in because budget requests reportedly have not aligned
campuses. Duties of wraparound resource specialists include with program installation. During onsite interviews,
asset mapping in the community, scheduling philanthropic district staff reported that budgetary approval came after
meetings, conducting needs assessments, coordinating with school year 2018–19 had begun, causing a delay in hiring
principals, and connecting students and families with for positions. Staff indicated that the timeline for budgetary
resources in the community. approvals also was expected to be a challenge to effective
hiring for school year 2019–20. The Wraparound Services
Wraparound resource specialists provide supporting resources Department also experienced significant turnover among
for students and families at their assigned campus. These wraparound resource specialists between the first and
resources include building relationships with students; second years of implementation.
working with local apartment complexes to decrease the
number of family evictions; bringing in counselors from According to onsite interviews, some campus principals
local organizations to work with students on anger do not prioritize or support the district’s wraparound
management; pairing students with local mentors; and services initiative consistently. As a result, specialists have
offering students free bus passes, winter coats, and other been assigned to support campuses in a capacity outside of
essential supplies. their intended role. For example, staff reported that
campus leaders task wraparound resource specialists with
Houston ISD uses a locally developed software program to general administrative tasks such as cafeteria or
track common student needs and the work performed by playground monitoring.
campus wraparound resource specialists. The Houston
Chronicle newspaper reviewed data from the district’s Houston ISD’s implementation of wraparound services
wraparound services software program. The review found involved minimal coordination with other service providers
that, during school year 2018–19, wraparound resource on campuses, such as social workers or counselors. Some
campus staff indicated that they are unaware of the duties of including standardized reporting requirements for all
the wraparound resource specialists, or how they might be wraparound resource specialists.
able to collaborate to build partnerships.
District staff also should develop a long-term plan for
The district also does not have a clear, rigorous process to comprehensive wraparound services, and the board should
evaluate the effectiveness of the wraparound services ensure that implementation follows an established,
initiative. When interviewed, district staff were not able to documented, strategic timeline. The district should ensure
provide any documented performance metrics used to that implementation includes building effective processes
evaluate the initiative. and structures, increasing buy in, growing strong external
partnerships, and collecting data to evaluate services.
Wraparound services provide necessary supports for students
to succeed academically and socially. However, failure to The district also should develop a rigorous program
plan, implement, and evaluate the initiative effectively could evaluation plan for wraparound services. Program
result in financial inefficiencies and services that may not be evaluation should include input from all stakeholders,
optimal for students. Failure to coordinate wraparound and all findings should be presented transparently. The
services effectively with other campus support roles, such as district should determine comprehensive data to collect
social workers and counselors, could lead to lost time and and track, using effective district resources as a model.
inefficient use of resources. The district should align wraparound services with larger
district improvement planning initiatives, to ensure an
Child Trends, a national education research nonprofit
integrated, effective approach to providing learning
organization, issued a 2017 report on wraparound services
supports to all students.
and described the following key components for effective
implementation in school districts: The district could implement this recommendation with
existing resources.
• needs assessments;
• coordination of supports; IN-DISTRICT CHARTER CONTRACT MONITORING (REC. 17)

Houston ISD lacks adequate structures, contract language,
• integration within campuses; and performance measures to monitor the effectiveness of
• community partnerships; and in-district charter campuses.
• data collection and tracking. Charter schools are publicly funded, open-enrollment
schools that are exempt from some state laws and regulations
City Connects in Boston, a highly regarded wraparound that govern traditional public schools. Charter schools
services initiative, established strong requirements for its staff must adhere to the terms of a contract, or “charter,” that
equivalent to wraparound resource specialists. City Connects enumerates the school’s mission, academic goals, fiscal
sets the ratio of coordinators to students at 400 to 1 and guidelines, and accountability requirements. In Texas,
requires staff to have a master’s degree in social work or charter schools are overseen by local school district
school counseling. authorizers or the state authorizing office. The entity that
authorizes the charter school has the power to close a school
The Coalition for Community Schools, an alliance of
that does not meet the terms of its contract. An in-district
national, state, and local youth development, community
charter school is a school that has been awarded a contract
planning, family support, health, and other organizations,
by a school district, not the state.
including the National Education Association, also provides
resources and guidelines for effective wraparound services. In an effort to increase school choice and equitable access to
education districtwide, Houston ISD awards contracts to
Houston ISD should develop, implement, and evaluate a
charter operators to organize and operate several in-district
strategic plan for a long-term, comprehensive system of the
charter campuses. Houston ISD contracts with eight
district’s wraparound services initiatives.
charter operators for 13 in-district charter campuses. Two
The district’s wraparound services director, in partnership charter operators, Energized for Excellence Academy, Inc.,
with a committee of stakeholders, should develop and and Energized for STEM Academy, Inc., operate multiple
publish revised district implementation procedures, charter campuses.
FIGURE 2–13
HOUSTON ISD IN-DISTRICT CHARTER CAMPUSES GRADES SERVED, RATINGS, AND ENROLLMENT
CAMPUS GRADES ACCOUNTABILITY RATING ENROLLMENT
Energized for Excellence Academy, Inc.
Early Childhood Campus Prekindergarten to kindergarten B 667
Elementary School Kindergarten to grade 5 B 1,682
Intermediate School Grades 6 to 8 B 522
Energized for STEM Academy, Inc.
Southeast High School Grades 9 to 12 B 315
Southeast Middle School Grades 6 to 8 F 333
Southwest High School Grades 9 to 12 B 200
Southwest Middle School Grades 6 to 8 A 218
Inspired for Excellence Academy, Inc.
Intermediate School Grades 5 to 8 D 227
Mount Carmel Academy
Mount Carmel Academy Grades 9 to 12 B 340
Connections Academy of Texas, LLC. (1)
Texas Connections Academy Grades 3 to 12 C 5,696
Texas Southern University (TSU) (2)
TSU Charter Lab School Prekindergarten to grade 2 B 100
Leaders in Education, Inc.
Young Learners Prekindergarten A 1,344
Young Scholars Academy for Excellence, Inc.
Young Scholars Academy for Excellence Prekindergarten to grade 8 D 129
Total 11,773
Notes:
(1) Connections Academy of Texas, LLC, formerly was known as Texas Connections Academy at Texas, LLC.
(2) TSU Charter Lab School is paired with Houston ISD for accountability purposes and receives the same rating as the overall district rating.
Source: Texas Education Agency, 2019 Accountability Listing and Student Enrollment, Public Education Information Management System,
Standard Reports, school year 2018–19.
Figure 2–13 shows Houston ISD’s in-district charter board. In April 2019, the board voted 5–4 to authorize
campuses, grades served, accountability rating, and student charter contract renewals for school year 2019–20.
enrollment for school year 2018–19. Four in-district charters
Houston ISD has limited structures for in-district charter
received accountability ratings lower than Houston ISD’s
oversight and does not have an overall performance
overall B rating. In-district charters’ accountability ratings
management plan to monitor program effectiveness. As
varied greatly, with some receiving A ratings, and others
autonomous entities, in district-charters are not formally
receiving D and F ratings.
monitored for quality services to students, and there are no
Houston ISD’s in-district charters have the flexibility to publicly available criteria for charter authorization or
develop their own curricula; however, they typically follow reauthorization.
the same testing schedule as the district. Teachers and
The district assigns several positions to serve as contacts to
principals at charter campuses do not have to be certified.
the in-district charter campuses. These include the charter
The district negotiated three-year contracts for each in- school business manager, and the SSOs and area
district charter campus, subject to annual renewals by the superintendents assigned to each in-district charter campus.
The charter school business manager primarily supports in- Research and Accountability website. However, the district
district charter campuses with operational support, such as does not have public reports and performance evaluations
human resources and purchasing issues. The charter school specifically dedicated to the educational, operational, or
business manager said that the position is not tasked with financial performance of its in-district charters. There are no
monitoring in-district charter campus budgets, and is not public reports of audits of in-district charter effectiveness on
responsible for academic oversight or monitoring of contractual the Internal Audit website. The district does have a plan to
performance measures. District-level staff and charter review in-district charter campuses’ principal, teacher, and
administrators expressed some confusion and misunderstanding student retention rates.
about the role of the charter school business manager and
oversight of the charter contracts. District-level staff stated that Houston ISD does not maintain a database or
financial monitoring of budgets and appraisal of the overall information on in-district charter campus staff because
quality of educational programs at in-district charter campuses they are not Houston ISD staff. However, the district
was the responsibility of the charter school business manager. reportedly plans to develop a tracking system for contract
However, the charter school business manager said that the staff. Houston ISD also does not have a publicly available
position was not tasked with financial or educational oversight. vision statement related to provision of quality in-district
charter campus options.
As at all Houston ISD campuses, an SSO supervises each in-
district charter principal. While SSOs provide similar The district’s lack of structures for oversight of in-district
support and oversight to charter campuses as they do for charter campuses may have contributed to inconsistent
traditional campuses, they indicated no knowledge of the academic achievement. The district’s limited financial
charter contracts. Additionally, the district has not established oversight of in-district charters leaves it vulnerable to the
additional guidelines related to monitoring and oversight for consequences that result from the closure of campuses that
SSOs assigned to in-district charters. The position does not are not fiscally sustainable. During school year 2017–18,
have documented procedures to ensure continuity of Victory Preparatory Academy, an in-district charter, closed
oversight when the district has turnover. During onsite unexpectedly due to financial issues, forcing the district to
interviews, SSOs reported confidence in their ability to find last-minute placements for affected students.
monitor in-district charters. However, they rely on charter Ineffective academic oversight may have contributed to
operators to provide access and data and do not conduct poor yearly progress for EL students in in-district charters.
unannounced site visits or random audits of records or Figure 2–14 shows the school year 2018–19 TELPAS
information. SSOs also were uncertain regarding whether results for Houston ISD’s in-district charter campuses.
district expectations for principals also applied to charter Houston ISD’s in-district charter campuses had an average
campus principals. Each charter campus is assigned a of 72.4 percent of EL students that did not improve on the
different SSO and a different area superintendent. yearly progress measure for the school year 2018–19
The positions assigned tasks related to in-district charter TELPAS, which was significantly higher than the overall
campuses do not have sufficient communication to provide district average of 62.0 percent. Although two of the charter
effective, coordinated oversight of the charters. They do not campuses included in the district’s TELPAS reports had
meet regularly to discuss management of the charters, and do lower rates of EL students that did not improve, other in-
not have clearly defined roles and responsibilities. district charters had rates up to 92.0 percent of EL students
that did not make a single year’s progress in language
District and charter staff said that oversight of in-district proficiency during school year 2018–19.
charters has increased. They cited increased expectations of
student achievement data collection and the assignment of The National Association of Charter School Authorizers
SSOs for support and academic leadership. However, the (NACSA) provides principles and standards for charter
district’s organizational structure isolates the charter school school authorizers, including the following key standards:
business manager’s oversight from SSO oversight, and does • maintain high standards for schools;
not have a clear position responsible for contract monitoring.
• uphold school autonomy; and
The district provides performance reports for all district
campuses, including in-district charter campuses, on the • protect student and public interests.
FIGURE 2–14
TEXAS ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY ASSESSMENT SYSTEM RESULTS FOR HOUSTON ISD IN-DISTRICT CHARTER
CAMPUSES
PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS DEMONSTRATING NO GAIN
CAMPUS ON YEARLY PROGRESS MEASURE
Energized for Excellence Academy Elementary School 58.0%
Energized for Excellence Academy Intermediate School 70.0%
Energized for STEM Academy Southeast High School 55.0%
Energized for STEM Academy Southeast Middle School 92.0%
Energized for STEM Academy Southwest High School 79.0%
Energized for STEM Academy Southwest Middle School 77.0%
Inspired for Excellence Academy Intermediate School 69.0%
Mount Carmel Academy 85.0%
Texas Connections Academy 67.0%
In-district Charter Average 72.4%
Houston ISD Average 62.0%
Note: No data were reported for three charter campuses.
Source: Houston ISD, Research and Accountability Department, 2019 Texas English Language Proficiency Assessment System Results,
school year 2018–19.
NACSA publishes 12 essential practices for charter school • limited employment specifications; and
authorizers. Figure 2–15 shows a comparison between
NACSA’s best practices and Houston ISD’s practices. • lack of clear specifications about breach of contract,
termination, and dissolution.
A review of Houston ISD’s charter contracts demonstrated
the following weaknesses in contractual language: Insufficient monitoring of in-district contracts results in risks
for Houston ISD students and taxpayers. Without a financial
• lack of individual site contracts; monitoring process, the district may be unprepared for the
• governing law section does not mention the charter’s unexpected closure of campuses belonging to charters that
governing board, which has authority for policy and lack financial solvency and organizational stability. This
operational decisions; closure displaces students and increases the district’s burden
of ensuring that students receive high-quality education.
• limited program description; Ineffective contract language and management may put the
• vague performance standards; district at risk of financial loss.
• lack of clear academic, financial, and Houston ISD should increase academic and financial
operational metrics; oversight of in-district charter campuses.
• no requirement for performance audits and The district should task staff with contract-based oversight of
evaluations; few guidelines on school operations; in-district charters, revise language for subsequent charter
renewals, implement a transparent process for reviewing and
• enrollment section does not address student transfers
authorizing contract renewals, and publish evaluation reports
and exits;
for all stakeholders.
• facilities mentioned throughout, not in one section,
The superintendent should draft procedures that clearly
and with no policy for alterations, inspections, and
define the roles and responsibilities of district positions
use of facilities;
involved with in-district charter campus oversight. These
• few explicit guidelines on school finance; positions include the charter school business manager, the
FIGURE 2–15
BEST PRACTICES FOR CHARTER SCHOOL AUTHORIZERS
ESSENTIAL PRACTICE FOR CHARTER SCHOOL AUTHORIZERS HOUSTON ISD PRACTICE
Have a published and available mission for quality authorizing. In-district charter campuses developed individual missions,
but no statement of Houston ISD vision for quality charter schools
was available.
Have staff assigned to authorizing within the organization Charter school business manager serves all in-district campuses.
or by contract. School support officers (SSO) and area leadership vary by
assignment and year. It is unclear who is responsible for reviewing
and authorizing contracts.
Sign a performance contract with each school. Houston ISD contracts with charters, but it is unclear how
performance management is addressed in the contracting stage.
Have established, documented criteria for the evaluation of These criteria are not publicly available.
charter applications.
Publish application timelines and materials. Does not occur.
Interview all qualified charter applicants. This process is not described publicly.
Use expert panels that include external members to review This process is not described publicly.
charter applications.
Grant initial charter terms of five years only. This process is not described publicly.
Require and/or examine annual, independent financial audits of These audits do take place.
its charter schools
Have established renewal criteria. These criteria are not publicly available.
Have established revocation criteria. These criteria are not publicly available.
Provide an annual report to each school on its performance. This report is not provided.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, March 2019; National Association of Charter School
Authorizers, 2019.
SSO, and the area superintendent. These procedures should The district should consider developing individual site
delineate the duties of each position with respect to contract contracts, as NACSA strongly encourages authorizers to
monitoring, and should provide guidelines for execute an individual contract with each school it authorizes,
communication and coordinated oversight. even when a single board governs multiple schools. This
The district should align the contract format to the NACSA expectation need not and should not result in burdensome
model charter contract. NACSA recommends that a quality negotiations or costly legal fees. By using a uniform and
authorizer carries out the following actions: streamlined template for all of its schools, an authorizer can
develop a strong in-district charter campus contract for each
• execute a contract with a legally incorporated
of its campuses.
governing board independent of the authorizer;
• grant charter contracts for an initial term of five The district should also expand the contract’s governing law
operating years or longer only with periodic high- section. Specifically, NACSA recommends including sections
stakes reviews every five years; on bylaws, composition, affiliation, conflicts of interest, and
• define material terms of the contract; non-commingling of funds.
• ensure mutual understanding and acceptance of the The district should restructure the contract’s program
terms of the contract by the school’s governing board description. NACSA recommends that the education
before authorizing or granting the charter; and
program section include the design elements, content
• enable and require contract amendments for occasional standards, curriculum, graduation requirements for high
material changes to a school’s plans, but not require schools, staff qualifications, staff trainings, student
amending the contract for nonmaterial modifications. assessment, and serving ELs and students with disabilities.
The district should revise charter contracts to include termination, and dissolution. The district should consider
additional school performance standards and requirements adding more specific information about termination by
for an annual performance review of the charters’ academic, authorizer, other remedies, termination by the school, and
operational, and financial performance. dissolution and disposition of school’s assets upon
termination or dissolution.
District staff also should update the subsequent contracts to
include additional guidelines on school operations. This The district should review principal, educator, and student
section could include public school status that specifies local, retention rates as part of the in-district charter campus
state, and federal law and regulations that apply to charters; performance contract. The district should require in-district
nonsectarian status; open meeting and public records rules; charter campuses to complete an annual report outlining
nondiscrimination; and the authorizer’s right to review. effectiveness in student performance, retention of students
and staff, teacher and leader certification, fiscal responsibility,
District staff should develop charter contracts with a and other indicators of school health. District staff should
restructured enrollment section, providing clear policy prepare an annual one-page section in-district charter
related to student transfers and exits. The district should campus quality report for public review. These resources are
consider developing one school facilities section that includes important for parents and provide a public indication that
policies for alterations, inspections and use of facilities. the district is monitoring in-district charter campus activities.
District staff should consider adding a specific section on Since the time of the review, the district has amended charter
financial management. NACSA recommends specifying the agreements for school year 2019–20 to include new language
following sections: addressing the lack of individual program descriptions; lack
• commonly accepted accounting practices and the of clear academic expectations; lack of clear financial
capacity to implement them; expectations; and lack of clear expectations about breach of
contract, terminations, and dissolution. The new language
• a checking account; also addressed the requirements of the Texas Public
Information Act. The district also audited the closing of
• adequate payroll procedures;
Victory Preparatory Academy.
• an organizational chart;
• procedures for the development and review of monthly existing resources.
and quarterly financial reports that specifically identify
the position that will be responsible for preparing such ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
financial reports in the following fiscal year;
During fieldwork, the review team observed additional issues
• internal control procedures for cash receipts, cash regarding the district’s programs and services to students,
disbursements, and purchases; and staff, and the community. These observations are presented
for consideration as the district implements the report’s other
• maintenance of asset registers and financial procedures findings and recommendations.
for grants in accordance with applicable state and
federal law. • The district’s Research and Accountability
Department produces a high volume of well-
In addition, the district should consider specific mention of researched evaluation reports for educational
independent financial audits in accordance with governmental programs. The assistant superintendent of research
accounting standards, and quarterly financial reports. and accountability solicits input from stakeholders
across academic departments when developing an
District staff also should consider expanding the employment
annual program evaluation plan. The department
section to make specific reference to employee–agency
leverages a partnership with Rice University’s
relationships, subcontracts, retirement plans, teacher members
Houston Education Research Consortium to provide
in professional organizations, and background checks.
additional staffing and expertise for evaluating
The district’s charter contract also should be revised to services and operations within Houston ISD.
include additional specifications on breach of contract, Departmental staff meet with relevant leadership
at the conclusion of the evaluation, document their chapter of this report recommends that the district
responses, and publish the reports for stakeholders increase budget oversight for principals and develop
through channels including the district’s website a process to link campus budgets with district and
and email distribution lists. However, the district school improvement planning.
lacks clear standards for follow-up action and
documentation upon receipt of an evaluation report, FISCAL IMPACT
does not have a schedule of program evaluation that Some of the recommendations provided in this report are
mandates regular evaluation of all major student based on state or federal laws, rules, or regulations, and
education programs, has not developed an associated should be promptly addressed. Other recommendations are
staffing plan, and might not be leveraging all based on comparisons to state or industry standards, or
available resources for dissemination of completed accepted best practices, and the district should review to
evaluation reports. determine the level of priority, appropriate timeline, and
• Houston ISD implemented a new structure for method of implementation.
its approach to response to intervention during The Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance Review
school year 2017–18 by appointing campus-based Team did not assume a fiscal impact for the recommendations
Intervention Assistance Team (IAT) liaisons at in this chapter. Any savings or costs will depend on how the
all campuses. These liaisons work directly with district chooses to address these findings.
Houston ISD’s IAT managers to serve students
with tiered instruction. However, the district has
not yet established the conditions and supports for
effective, consistent implementation of response to
intervention across all campuses.
• Houston ISD serves more than 12,400 early

childhood students ages three to five in
prekindergarten, early childhood centers, and
in-district charters at local daycare facilities. The
district does not effectively evaluate early childhood
programs for alignment with national standards.
It uses a product-dependent curriculum, provides
limited instructional resources, and lacks program
evaluation for all ages and placements of early
childhood students.
• Within Houston ISD’s decentralized system,

campus principals are the primary campus budget
authority and are responsible for complex budgetary
decisions. These decisions include staffing; use
of local, state, and federal funds; purchases of
instructional resources and materials; and campus
professional development. Houston ISD provides
principals with trainings, written guidelines, budget
analyst support, and a mentorship program for
new principals; however, these district supports
may insufficiently prepare principals for effective
financial decision making. The district should
evaluate existing supports to identify additional
opportunities to build campus budget capacity
among principals. The Financial Management
3. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
For school year 2018–19, Houston Independent School Houston ISD lacks a process to enhance the enterprise
District (ISD) adopted a budget of approximately $2.0 software system in a timely manner to address
billion. With $2.08 billion in adopted budgeted expenditures, operational efficiencies across the district.
the district approved its deficit budget with a plan to spend
Houston ISD lacks effective controls to process staff
more than it receives in revenue. The budget deficit is funded
from the district’s fund balance. terminations in the human resources and payroll
system, which results in overpayments.
ACCOMPLISHMENTS Houston ISD’s Alternative Certification Program has
Houston ISD requires all staff to be paid by direct operated at an annual loss for the past three years, and
deposit, which is an effective and efficient system that the trend appears to be continuing.
provides timely processing of payroll for district staff.
Limited communication among departments in the
Houston ISD has centralized all activity funds and
CFO’s Office has resulted in operational separations,
has implemented an internal audit program to review
resulting in a lack of coordination and decreasing
systematically the activity funds that are at greatest risk.
opportunities to promote efficiencies.
Houston ISD’s Medicaid Finance and Consulting
Services Department provides Medicaid claiming
RECOMMENDATIONS
fund services to 101 school districts throughout Texas
and operates at a profit, which provides additional Recommendation 18: Implement a strategic
funding for the district’s general fund. planning and budget model that ties the district’s
departmental budgets to specific, measurable goals
FINDINGS outlined by the administration.
Houston ISD lacks a strategic planning process to align Recommendation 19: Tie campus budgets
the district’s departmental budgets with its goals. to school improvement plan goals and hold
Houston ISD lacks a process that ties campus-level principals accountable for achieving the results on
budget expenditures to the individual goals of school their campuses when the budgets are approved.
improvement plans. Recommendation 20: Ensure that the CFO’s Office
Houston ISD lacks oversight and segregation of provides fiscal oversight and accountability in
duties for the fiscal administration of bond projects. monitoring construction projects, provides input
during the planning stages, and advises the board
Houston ISD’s Office of the chief financial officer
as project overruns and savings are identified.
(CFO) does not provide timely financial reporting
that enables the board to perform budget monitoring Recommendation 21: Prepare updated financial
throughout the year. statements comparing actual amounts to
Houston ISD conducts limited capital budgeting budgeted amounts and share the information with
during the normal budget cycle apart from major, the board monthly, highlighting major budget
bond-funded construction projects. variances and including budget amendments that
require board approval.
Houston ISD’s board has not determined an optimal
threshold for reserves in the district’s general fund, Recommendation 22: Track and prepare an ongoing
internal service funds, and enterprise funds. list of capital needs and develop a capital needs
budget for presentation to the board annually.
Houston ISD does not pay invoices on time
consistently, which increases the risk of paying Recommendation 23: Establish a board policy
interest on overdue invoices. that mandates a required level of unrestricted
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
fund balance for the general fund, internal service training. State law requires all school districts to have an
funds, and enterprise funds. external auditor review the district’s compliance with
established standards and practices. The audit provides an
Recommendation 24: Promote accountability
annual financial and compliance report, an examination of the
and decrease the number of invoices paid late by
expenditure of federal funds, and a report to management on
deducting from departmental and campus budgets
internal accounting controls.
late payment charges billed to the district by vendors.
Houston ISD’s chief financial officer oversees the district’s
Recommendation 25: Implement the modules
financial management. For school year 2018–19, the CFO’s
approved by the board for the district’s enterprise
Office budget was approximately $13.7 million, excluding the
software system and establish an implementation
enterprise fund budget for Medicaid Finance Consulting
and prioritization committee to help guide system
Services of $8.4 million. The CFO also serves as the financial
upgrades and address identified operational
adviser to the superintendent and the Houston ISD Board of
inefficiencies districtwide.
Education. The CFO’s Office manages the following functions:
Recommendation 26: Strengthen the process for
• budget and distribute district resources;
staff terminations in the human resources and
payroll system to eliminate overpayments, and • maximize revenues;
complete the corrective action plans recommended
• maintain public trust and confidence by providing
by external and internal auditors.
complete, timely, and accurate financial information;
Recommendation 27: Increase the annual revenue
• safeguard assets by maintaining and continuously
of the alternative certification program to meet
improving internal controls;
operating expenses, or eliminate the program and
seek partnerships with other certifying organizations • implement consistent application of sound
to meet Houston ISD’s ongoing needs. management practices and controls; and
Recommendation 28: Resume regular weekly staff • understand and respond to internal and external
meetings with department managers to exchange customers’ business needs.
information, inform staff, and seek opportunities to
The CFO’s Office includes 302 staff distributed among the
increase efficiencies and collaboration across teams.
following departments:
BACKGROUND • Controller’s Office – 72;
An independent school district’s financial management • Budget /Financial Planning Department – 47;
function administers a district’s financial resources and plans
for its priorities. Administration may include budget • Benefits Department – 25;
preparation, accounting and payroll, administrative • Medicaid Finance Consulting Services (Enterprise
technology, and auditing. Planning may include aligning a Fund) – 49;
district’s budget with its district and campus priorities,
allocating resources, and developing a specified set of • Business Logistics and Purchasing Department –
districtwide goals. 106; and
Budget preparation and administration are critical to overall • Tax and Finance Management Attorney – 3.
district operations. Financial management includes budget
Figure 3–1 shows the organization for the CFO’s Office and
development and adoption, oversight of expenditure of funds,
the departments in the district reporting to the CFO.
and involvement of campus and community stakeholders in
the budget process. Managing accounting and payroll includes The CFO’s Office also oversees the Medicaid Finance and
developing internal controls and safeguards, reporting account Consulting Services (MFCS) Department, but it operates as
balances, and scheduling disbursements to maximize funds. a separate Enterprise Fund. An enterprise fund provides
Management of this area includes segregation of duties, use of goods or services for a fee. The MFCS budget was
school administration software systems, and providing staff approximately $8.4 million for school year 2018–19.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
FIGURE 3–1
HOUSTON ISD CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER’S OFFICE
Chief Financial Officer
Senior Executive
Administrative Assistant
Medicaid Finance Controller Benefits General

General Manager Manager
Tax and Finance Budget/Financial Business Logistics
Manager Attorney Planning Officer and Purchasing Officer
Houston ISD also has an Office of Internal Audit led by the FIGURE 3–2
chief audit executive, who reports directly to the board. The HOUSTON ISD GENERAL FUND BALANCES
Office of Internal Audit consists of 17 staff including the
chief audit executive. (IN MILLIONS)
CATEGORY 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18
The role of the Office of Internal Audit is defined by the
Beginning Fund Balance $646.2 $738.2 $701.8
Internal Audit Activity Charter, which is established by the
Ending Fund Balance $738.2 $701.8 $612.7
Audit Committee of the Houston ISD board as part of its
oversight responsibilities. The Office of Internal Audit Increase/(Decrease) $92.1 ($36.4) ($89.2)
evaluates risks and related internal controls throughout the Percentage change 14.3% (4.9%) (12.7%)
from previous year
district. That responsibility is implemented through the
following steps: Note: Some amounts may not add due to rounding.
Source: Texas Education Agency, Public Education Information
Management System Financial Data, school years 2015–16 to
• confirming that the internal controls, as established 2017–18.
and represented by management, are adequate in
relation to related risks;
Figure 3–2 shows Houston ISD’s fund balances for school
• confirming through compliance testing and other years 2015–16 to 2017–18. A fund balance is the amount
procedures that the process operates effectively and of district assets in excess of liabilities. These assets could
efficiently, as intended; and include investments, delinquent taxes, accounts receivable,
and inventories. The fund balance has decreased by
• reporting the results of audit work performed and
approximately $126.0 million from school years 2015–16
offering recommendations for improving the internal
to 2017–18. TEA recommends a minimum unrestricted
control process.
fund balance of approximately two and one-half months of
In addition, the department conducts investigative audits operating expenditures. Houston ISD’s fund balance met
as necessary to assist management in the deterrence and this standard for school years 2015–16 to 2017–18.
detection of fraud and fraud risks. The frequency and
The Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance Review
scope of auditing the internal control process is determined
Team visited the district in February 2019. At the time of
by the chief audit executive as approved by the board’s
the visit, the state’s funding structure required Houston
Audit Committee.
ISD to make a recapture payment pursuant to the Texas
Houston ISD also is required to perform an annual audit of Education Code, Chapter 41. Recapture is an element of
the district’s financial statements by an independent the state’s school finance system that is intended to equalize
external auditor and file a copy of the audit report with the educational funding by redistributing revenue from
Texas Education Agency (TEA). The district’s school year property-wealthy districts to property-poor districts.
2017–18 financial audit was conducted by Weaver and Houston ISD became subject to recapture during school
Tidwell, LLP. year 2016–17.
FIGURE 3–3
HOUSTON ISD GENERAL FUND FINANCIAL DATA, SCHOOL YEARS 2015–16 TO 2018–19
CATEGORY 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19 (1)
Revenue
Local Tax $1,529,263,318 $1,512,470,194 $1,505,922,055 $1,728,092,547
Other Local and Intermediate $16,992,241 $20,030,151 $28,656,369 $21,074,717
State $272,213,563 $159,777,753 $243,073,835 $215,146,388
Federal $6,084,051 $6,988,840 $8,381,410 $13,031,351
Total Revenue $1,824,553,173 $1,699,266,938 $1,786,033,669 $1,977,345,003
Operating Expenditures (2)

11 Instruction $1,004,946,452 $975,234,695 $1,013,285,075 $889,510,266
12 Library and Media Services $5,551,882 $7,611,038 $9,110,780 $6,431,199
13 Curriculum and Staff Development $31,464,690 $21,056,499 $26,994,866 $15,904,206
21 Instructional Leadership $20,501,219 $22,268,668 $20,236,431 $12,146,830
23 School Leadership $135,825,044 $130,282,922 $148,075,733 $128,708,219
31 Guidance and Counseling Services $41,099,892 $40,441,387 $47,412,822 $39,808,046
32 Social Work Services $2,219,249 $1,990,433 $1,699,272 $7,503,623
33 Health Services $16,689,304 $17,145,888 $18,653,686 $15,779,777
34 Transportation $49,921,447 $56,334,727 $62,299,305 $47,720,599
35 Food $28,775 $0 $0 $0
36 Extracurricular $15,530,793 $15,739,181 $19,241,937 $16,327,359
41 General Administration $33,100,182 $40,586,800 $37,676,235 $545,903,457
51 Plant Maintenance and Operations $161,105,910 $174,979,381 $221,676,748 $151,497,246
52 Security and Monitoring $24,164,168 $23,661,897 $24,805,023 $20,715,910
53 Data Processing Services $70,517,543 $63,590,473 $62,248,490 $137,100,411
61 Community Services $2,196,933 $2,107,848 $2,292,234 $457,695
Total Operating Expenditures $1,614,863,483 $1,593,031,837 $1,715,708,637 $2,035,514,843
Notes:
(1) Data for school year 2018–19 are budgeted.
(2) Category numbers are the numerations used by the Texas Education Agency to classify expenditures.
Source: Texas Education Agency, Public Education Information Management System Financial Data, school years 2015–16 to 2017–18 actual
data and 2018–19 budgeted data.
The review team assessed Houston ISD’s operations based on Figure 3–3 shows Houston ISD’s actual financial data for
the school finance system in effect during the onsite visit. school years 2015–16 to 2017–18 and budgeted financial data
However, House Bill 3, Eighty-sixth Legislature, 2019, made for school year 2018–19 for the general fund.
significant changes to the Foundation School Program that
affect the amount of state aid that the district receives and its As shown in Figure 3–3, the largest expenditure categories for
recapture payment obligations. Pursuant to House Bill 3, each of these years are instruction and plant maintenance and
Houston ISD will not make recapture payments for school year operations. School leadership, data processing services,
2019–20, and will pay an estimated $45.4 million for school transportation, and guidance and counseling services also were
year 2020–21. The district also will receive increased state and significant expenditure categories. For school year 2018–19,
local revenue for the next two school years compared to what it general administration expenses increased to $545.9 million
would have received before the law’s enactment. These total from $37.7 million during school year 2017–18. The district
increases amount to an estimated $97.5 million for school year told the review team that it reported general administration
2019–20, and $124.8 million for school year 2020–21. expenses erroneously to the Public Education Information
FIGURE 3–4
HOUSTON ISD TAX RATE COMPARED TO PEER DISTRICTS
RATE HOUSTON ISD AUSTIN ISD DALLAS ISD CYPRESS–FAIRBANKS ISD
2015–16
Maintenance and Operations (M&O) $1.03 $1.08 $1.04 $1.04
Interest and Sinking (I&S) $0.17 $0.12 $0.24 $0.40
Total Tax Rate $1.20 $1.20 $1.28 $1.44
2016–17
M&O $1.03 $1.08 $1.04 $1.04
I&S $0.18 $0.11 $0.24 $0.40
Total Tax Rate $1.21 $1.19 $1.28 $1.44
2017–18
M&O $1.04 $1.08 $1.04 $1.04
I&S $0.17 $0.11 $0.24 $0.40
Total Tax Rate $1.21 $1.19 $1.28 $1.44
Source: Texas Education Agency, Public Education Information Management System Financial Data, school years 2016–17 to 2017–18.
Management System. Food Services is an enterprise fund and maximum allocation possible for direct instructional purposes.
is not included in the general fund budget. The Smart Score rating measures academic progress and
spending at Texas’ school districts and campuses. These ratings,
Peer districts are districts similar in size and other characteristics
which range from one star (low) to five stars (high), indicate a
to Houston ISD that the review team uses for comparison
district’s success in combining cost-effective spending with the
purposes. The review team selected three school districts,
achievement of measurable student academic progress. Smart
Austin ISD, Dallas ISD, and Cypress–Fairbanks ISD as peer
Score rates academic and spending ratings as low, average, or
districts for Houston ISD. Figure 3–4 shows that Houston
high. The district and campus Smart Score calculations use
ISD had a higher total tax rate than one of its peer districts for
school years 2016–17 and 2017–18 and a lower total tax rate three-year averages to calculate more stable and consistent
than two of its peers for the three-year period. measures with less year-to-year volatility. The 2019 Smart Score
rating results use data from school years 2015–16 to 2017–18.
School districts in Texas receive two financial accountability
ratings, the School Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas Figure 3–5 shows Houston ISD’s FIRST and Smart Score
(FIRST) and Smart Score. FIRST is Texas’ school financial ratings compared to peer districts. Houston ISD and all three
accountability rating system intended to hold public schools peer districts scored a FIRST rating of A/Superior for school
accountable for the quality of their financial management year 2017–18. Houston ISD has scored A/Superior for each of
practices, and for the improvement of those practices. The goal the last five years, except school year 2014–15, when the top
of FIRST is to encourage school districts to provide the rating for FIRST was Pass. During school year 2018–19,
FIGURE 3–5
HOUSTON ISD FIRST AND SMART SCORE RATINGS COMPARED TO PEER DISTRICTS
DISTRICT FIRST RATING SMART SCORE SMART SCORE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE SMART SCORE SPENDING
Houston ISD A/Superior 4 Average academic progress Very low spending
Austin ISD A/Superior 3 High academic progress High spending
Dallas ISD A/Superior 3 High academic progress High spending
Cypress–Fairbanks ISD A/Superior 5 Very High academic progress Very low spending
Note: FIRST=Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas.
Sources: Texas Education Agency, Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas, school year 2017–18; Texans for Positive Economic Policy,
2019 Smart Scores.
FIGURE 3–6
HOUSTON ISD STAFF SURVEY RESULTS
FEBRUARY 2019
Site-based budgeting is used effectively.
Funds are allocated fairly.
Campus administrators are well-trained in fiscal management techniques.
The district’s financial reports are easy to read and understand.
The district’s financial reports are readily available to parents and the community.
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%

Agree Disagree Not available or do not know
Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; February 2019.
Houston ISD received a 4.0 Smart Score, with an academic Activity funds are established to direct and account for funds
performance rating of average academic progress and a very used to support school-related student activities. The amount of
low spending rate. Houston ISD’s school year 2018–19 Smart activity funds processed in fiscal year 2018 at Houston ISD was
Score rating is higher than two of its peer districts. approximately $40.0 million. During calendar year 2015, the
A survey conducted by the review team before the onsite district centralized all activity funds so that all deposits and
visit indicated that district staff disagree overall that the disbursements are processed through the central business office
financial management of the district is efficient and effective. enterprise system. The centralized system requires that all funds
Figure 3–6 shows the results of the district staff survey. are deposited to an account controlled by the district, rather
than accounts established by campuses or organizations, which
DETAILED ACCOMPLISHMENTS decreases the risk of malfeasance and ensures uniform processing
of activity funds. In addition, the Office of Internal Audit
DIRECT DEPOSIT performs regular audits of the activity funds that are at greatest
Houston ISD requires all staff to be paid by direct deposit, risk and makes recommendations for improving oversight and
which is an effective and efficient system that provides timely increasing internal controls to safeguard the funds.
processing of payroll for district staff.
The district distributes payroll to all staff through direct deposit MEDICAID FINANCE AND CONSULTING SERVICES
or pay cards. A staff website facilitates a fast, convenient, and PROFITABILITY
easy way for staff to view and print pay statements. According Houston ISD’s Medicaid Finance and Consulting Services
to NACHA (formerly the National Automated Clearing Department provides Medicaid claiming fund services to
House Association), savings per check for a district using direct 101 school districts throughout Texas and operates at a
deposit can range from $2.87 to $3.15. These savings are profit, which provides additional funding for the district’s
significant considering the number of staff. general fund.
CENTRALIZATION OF ACTIVITY FUNDS The district established the Medicaid Finance and Consulting
Houston ISD has centralized all activity funds and has Services (MFCS) Department to provide professional
implemented an internal audit program to review systematically consulting and decision support services to other school
the activity funds that are at greatest risk. districts to maximize their Medicaid revenue and provide
School Health and Related Services (SHARS) training that The superintendent reviews the compiled budgets for the
meets Medicaid regulatory compliance. district before Budgeting and Financial Planning Department
staff present them to the school board in early June as a
MFCS charges districts from 3.0 percent to 5.0 percent of
recommended budget. The superintendent’s leadership team
the amount claimed and received, depending on the level of
reviews budget increase requests and recommends overall
service provided. The department has staff dedicated to
prioritization of programs and activities. The school board
working with school districts, and staff that work only on
analyzes the documentation and conducts public hearings
Houston ISD claims. The MFCS Department’s positive
and workshops to get input from the community on district
work includes the following examples:
spending plans. After final revision and amendment, the
• department staff have more than 20 years of board formally adopts the budget in late June.
experience in SHARS billing;
During calendar year 2010, Houston ISD was involved in a
• during the past 10 years, the district has sustained a strategic planning process that identified the following five
client retention rate of 70.0 percent; core initiatives to transform the district:
• the department offers lower fees to all Texas districts (1) effective teacher in every classroom;
through a competitive fee structure; (2) effective principal in every school;
• the web-based SHARS billing system, eSHARS, is (3) rigorous instructional standards and supports;
user-friendly and decreases processing time for all
aspects of servicing and billing; and (4) data-driven accountability; and
(5) culture of trust through action.
• as of February 2019, 101 school districts are being served.
These initiatives appear in the district improvement plans (DIP)
For the fiscal year ending June 30, 2018, the operational
for school years 2011–12 and 2012–13, but not in the school
results of the MFCS Department included a profit of
year 2013–14 DIP. The district has made no further updates to
approximately $1.3 million. These results represent a 51.0
the strategic initiatives website since school year 2012–13.
percent profit after all operating expenditures, including
payroll, have been considered. The profits derived from the In October 2016, the Budgeting and Financial Planning
MFCS Department represent additional resources that the Department staff recommended to the superintendent and
district has been able to transfer to the general fund to administration officials a more strategic approach to
support district operations and programs. budgeting for the school year 2017–18 budget cycle, during
which Houston ISD became subject to recapture through
DETAILED FINDINGS the school finance system.
STRATEGIC BUDGETING (REC. 18) Figure 3–7 shows the budget planning process presented to the
Houston ISD lacks a strategic planning process to align the district administration for consideration. The process begins in
district’s departmental budgets with its goals. October with a planning and prioritization phase that would
provide district leaders time to plan for the effects of recapture
Although campus budgets are determined by student
and link the future budget to the district’s priorities.
enrollment counts, department budgets are developed
primarily by using the previous year’s budgeted amounts. The According to interviews with district staff, the administration
Budgeting and Financial Planning Department prepares a determined that the process would be too time-consuming and
budget book annually, with input from the district’s department require too many resources to implement. Administration
chiefs. The budget book outlines the district’s budget guidelines continued the district’s existing approach, which bases the new
and details its budget development process. Department chiefs budget on the previous year’s budget. Following the presentation,
are the executive leadership positions in the administration for limited planning took place to align district and departmental
their area of responsibility. During school year 2018–19, goals with limited financial resources and prepare the district for
Houston ISD had 14 department chiefs that developed the effects of recapture. The current budget process of basing the
departmental budgets. The chief operating officer, chief new budget on the previous year’s budget does not identify
academic officer, and chief technology officer manage the stated priorities for each department or tie funding levels for
departments with the largest operating budgets. each department to documented goals for the coming year.
FIGURE 3–7
HOUSTON ISD BUDGET PLANNING CHART
PHASE 2: PHASE 3:
PHASE 1: ANALYZE CURRENT ALIGN AND PAY FOR PHASE 4: PHASE 5:
PLAN AND PRIORITIZE PERFORMANCE PRIORITIES (DECEMBER BUILD BUDGET IMPLEMENT PLAN AND
CATEGORY (OCTOBER) (NOVEMBER) TO JANUARY) (FEBRUARY TO JUNE) MEASURE (ONGOING)
Goals • organize • analyze current • align people and • balance budget • build internal
committees; performance; technology to tradeoffs; and capacity; and
• set strategy; • define initiatives; priorities; • adopt annual • plan for continuous
• priority definition; and • identify top savings budget improvement
and • estimate cost of options;
• start engaging priorities • engage the board
stakeholders following this
phase
Participants • superintendent and • superintendent and • superintendent and • superintendent and • steering committee;
cabinet; and cabinet; cabinet; and cabinet; • working team;
• department heads • department heads; • budgeting • individual • research and
• budgeting departments; analysis;
(finance); and • schools; and • procurement; and
• research and • budgeting team • other – TBD
analysis
Purpose • identify the major • review and analyze • define initiatives by • build school • monitor
and services and current learning aligning wish list to and department performance;
Outcomes service levels or performance; priorities; budgets; • enforce
programs provided • root cause • prioritize spending • validation and accountability –
by departments; analysis; and based on fiscal reconsideration; appraisals?; and
and constraints; and
• analysis of costs • RAH approval • other – TBD
• set priorities associated with • priority (March); and
operational communication • final budget
services adoption (June)
Meetings • introduction to • analyze student • developed ranked TBD, per budgeting TBD
and process in cabinet; performance; list of investment
Activities • compile list of • analyze PRAT priorities;
programs and results; and • develop ranked
services provided • analyze costs list of programs
in the district; and associated with and activities for
• identify list of operational reduction; and
priorities programs (top 5 • stakeholder
spenders) collaboration
Tools Priorities and

Programs template
Deliverables TBD TBD
Risks TBD TBD
Note: TBD=to be determined; RAH=Resource Allocation Handbook; PRAT=Program Resource Allocation Totals.
Figure 3–8 shows Houston ISD’s student enrollment and June when the board formally adopts the budget for the next
general fund budget for school years 2016–17 to 2018–19. school year.
Enrollment decreased by 5,636 students and the general
Figure 3–10 shows information presented at the February
fund budget increased by 27.7 percent.
1, 2018, budget workshop outlining the district’s budget
Figure 3–9 shows the timeline of activities in the fiscal year strategy during the past few years. The strategy primarily is
2019 budget book associated with the process of preparing reactive and focuses on the district’s challenges rather than
the budget. The process begins in November and ends in its goals.
FIGURE 3–8
HOUSTON ISD ENROLLMENT AND GENERAL FUND OPERATING BUDGET
(IN MILLIONS)
CATEGORY 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19 2018–19 CHANGE FROM 2016–17 PERCENTAGE CHANGE
Enrollment 215,408 213,528 209,772 ($5,636) (2.6%)
General Fund Operating Budget (1) $1,593 $1,716 $2,035 $442 27.7%
Note: (1) Amounts shown are actual amounts for school years 2016–17 and 2017–18 and budgeted amounts for school year 2018–19.
Amounts are rounded to millions. Excludes debt service and capital outlay.
FIGURE 3–9
HOUSTON ISD BUDGET DEVELOPMENT TIMELINE
FISCAL YEAR 2019
[42]
Department budget requests Department budget requests reviewed
submitted to Budget Office. by superintendent's cabinet.
Budget workshop with Board of
Cabinet submits changes to Education and public.
Cabinet department budgets, based
review of on program review. Superintendent receives school year
Budget Office programs
Schools and departments develop compiles budget 2017–18 revised budget based on
management plans. and results. Board of Education adopts Board of Education and community
requests.
per-unit allocation. feedback.
Enrollment Public hearing to
projections Campus budgets discuss proposed tax
completed. submitted. rate and school year
2018–19 budget.
November 2017 January 2018 February 2018 March 2018 April 2018 May 2018 June 2018
Harris County Appraisal Notice of
Preliminary Budget workshop proposed tax rate
and discussion of District provides certified
financial published.
estimate of appraised values. Board of Education
forecast. financial outlook
with Board of Superintendent presents approves school year
Education. preliminary budget to Board of 2018–19 recommended
Education and community. budget.
FIGURE 3–10
HOUSTON ISD BUDGET STRATEGY, FEBRUARY 2018
STEP DESCRIPTION
Determine shortfall $208.0 million = available funding - budget needs and priorities
Lessen impact on campuses • 44.0% schools reduction
• 56.0% department reduction
Ensure reductions proportional to overall share of district budget Example: Business Operations
• 29.0% share of department budget available to cut
• 29.0% share of department reduction
Source: Houston ISD Budget Book presentation, February 2018.
None of the budget planning guidelines in the school superintendent informed the department chiefs regarding
year 2018–19 budget book address how increases or the amount of budget decreases required for their departments
decreases in funding advance departmental plans, nor are for school year 2018–19. The department chiefs then were
any of the districtwide goals mentioned or associated with tasked with deciding how best to allocate the decreases within
financial resources. their departments.
According to interviews with the superintendent and the Figure 3–11 shows the departmental budget request
Budgeting and Financial Planning Department, the spreadsheet that the CFO sends to every department chief.
FIGURE 3–11
HOUSTON ISD DEPARTMENTAL BUDGET TEMPLATE
FEBRUARY 2019
Choose Chief Chief Financial Officer
2018–2019 Budget Request Reduction Summary
2018–2019 Position Actions
Cost of Position Opens (automatically populates if data entered on tab 3)
Credit for Position Closes (automatically populates if data entered on tab 4)
Total 2018–2019 Position Changes
2018–2019 Non-Salary Budgets
2017–2018 Original Budget Non-Salary +/- Permanent Transfers
2018–2019 Non-Salary Budget Entered
Non-Salary Budget Variance
2018–2019 Reduction Amount (enter amount provided by your Chief)
2018–2019 Reduction Balance
The CFO uses the previous year’s budget and proposed to 2018–19. The net change in staffing positions is the addition
decreases for the current year to develop the template. of 8.8 FTE positions from school years 2016–17 to 2018–19.
Figure 3–12 shows the general fund budgets by chief for During onsite interviews, district staff said that Houston
school years 2016–17 to 2018–19, including the changes ISD is planning to implement additional staff cuts for school
from school years 2017–18 to 2018–19 and from 2016–17 year 2019–20.
to 2018–19 for comparison. Although the district has
reorganized departments, renamed divisions, and reorganized Figure 3–14 shows the Houston ISD general fund budget
staff positions considerably within the general fund budget, by category from school years 2016–17 to 2018–19. Not
the net effect of these changes from school years 2016–17 to considering recapture, the general fund budget has increased
2018–19 is an increase of $164.7 million for the period, more than $60.0 million during the three-year period. This
Approximately $102.0 million of this amount shown in the increase occurred despite the district’s net budget decreases
districtwide services category was an increase in the amount of $52.9 million from school years 2016–17 to 2017–18.
of the recapture payment to the state during that period. This amount represents an increase in the general fund
budget of 3.34 percent for the period after removing the
The areas with budget decreases include the chief effects of the increase in recapture payments. Enrollment
communications officer, chief human resources officer, chief decreased during this period by 5,636 students, or 2.6
of staff, chief technology officer, general counsel, and schools. percent, from 215,408 to 209,772.
The decreases are, in some cases, the result of transfers among
the budget categories. For example, the Achieve 180 budget As part of the school year 2018–19 budget development
of approximately $10.0 million was moved from schools to process, Planning and Budgeting Department staff developed
the chief academic officer’s budget. The funds still are a three-year projected budget from fiscal years 2020 to 2022,
provided to the schools and the change is a transfer among assuming no salary increases and no change in the number of
budgets. The $4.6 million decrease shown for schools does positions during this period, and that enrollment would
not mean that schools are receiving less funds, but that the remain unchanged, despite enrollment decreases during the
funds are allocated and budgeted differently. previous three fiscal years.
Figure 3–13 shows the staffing changes by district chief Figure 3–15 shows the district’s budget projections from
from school years 2016–17 to 2018–19. The number of fiscal years 2020 to 2022 and the adopted budget for fiscal
full-time-equivalent (FTE) positions in the district year 2019. The fund balance also is affected. Considering the
decreased by approximately 138.0 from school years 2017–18 assumptions of no salary increases and unchanged enrollment,
FIGURE 3–12
HOUSTON ISD GENERAL FUND BUDGET BY CHIEF
2018–19 CHANGE PERCENTAGE
CHIEF 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19 FROM 2016–17 CHANGE
Chief Academic Officer (1) $59,116,213 $72,704,093 $79,859,390 $20,743,177 35.1%
Chief Audit Executive (2) $1,379,159 $1,415,337 $1,617,404 $238,245 17.3%
Chief Communications Officer $2,644,064 $3,142,854 $2,006,158 ($637,906) (24.1%)
Chief Development Officer $1,110,584 $1,135,807 $1,299,055 $188,471 17.0%
Chief Financial Officer $13,403,531 $15,189,707 $14,231,902 $828,371 6.2%
Chief Government Relations and $488,949 $491,527 $583,566 $94,617 19.4%
Strategy Office
Chief Human Resources Officer $12,340,631 $12,278,076 $10,759,229 ($1,581,402) (12.8%)
Chief of Staff $1,359,637 $1,231,453 $1,023,296 ($336,341) (24.7%)
Chief Operating Officer (3) $113,055,076 $156,576,773 $142,851,121 $29,796,045 26.4%
Chief Strategy and Innovation Officer (4) $14,821,322 $14,773,117 $17,473,574 $2,652,252 17.9%
Chief Technology Officer $57,636,242 $65,315,020 $57,019,918 ($616,324) (1.1%)
Deputy Superintendent (5) $0 $9,651,245 $142,348 $142,348 100%
Districtwide Services (6) $438,839,933 $562,465,068 $556,580,393 $117,740,460 26.8%
General Counsel $5,810,087 $5,544,166 $5,350,216 ($459,871) (7.9%)
Schools $1,156,127,867 $1,173,886,716 $1,151,508,670 ($4,619,197) (0.4%)
Superintendent (7) $524,003 $493,837 $1,039,384 $515,381 98.4%
Total $1,878,657,298 $2,096,294,796 $2,043,345,624 $164,688,326 8.8%
Notes:
(1) A campus closed during school year 2018–19, resulting in a decrease of $3.3 million; Achieve 180 incentives were moved from campus
budgets, an increase of $10.0 million; the dyslexia program was implemented, an increase of $6.0 million; Reach and Advanced Virtual
Academy closed and moved to a department structure, a decrease of approximately $125,000; Special Education costs were added, an
increase of $2.0 million; and wraparound specialists were added, an increase of $2.0 million.
(2) The budget for external support contracts for the Houston ISD Board of Education, Audit Committee, audit plan from Districtwide Services
was moved into the chief audit executive budget, an increase of $400,000.
(3) Custodial salaries previously were charged to campus budgets; these salaries now are charged to the custodial budget to facilitate
transferring staff across the district as needed, an increase of $31.0 million; salary increases during calendar years 2017 and 2018,
attendance incentive, and additional overall bus driver payroll costs resulted in an increase of $12.0 million.
(4) The Jordan Career Technology Education (CTE) hub previously was a regular campus and a CTE hub; now it is a CTE centralized hub,
resulting in a decrease of approximately $2.0 million.
(5) This position has been moved to the area offices, a decrease of $9.5 million.
(6) State recapture resulted in an increase of $102.0 million; increases in tax increment financing zones and moved targeted assistance
holding and per-unit allocation settle-up funds to Districtwide Services resulted in a decrease of $4.9 million; net changes in debt transfers
resulted in an increase of $7.0 million.
(7) The superintendent budget added 1.0 extra position for interim superintendent, which will be closed when a permanent superintendent
is chosen, resulting in an increase of $550,000. According to the budget/financial planning director, this position was added for internal
budgeting purposes and should have been excluded from the budget.
the projections indicate that the fund balance will decrease projected years, Houston ISD must prioritize goals, tie them
by nearly $160.0 million during the period. to funding sources, and hold departments and administrators
accountable for outcomes.
The district risks its financial success as it continues to prepare
incremental budgets based on previous spending patterns During onsite interviews, the superintendent said the
despite decreasing enrollment and adopting deficit budgets. strategy to address recapture and the budget deficit was to
Based on an average projected decrease in the fund balance of increase student enrollment through the following actions:
$50.0 million per year, the district risks having no general (1) allocating an advertising budget to highlight Houston
fund reserves within 10 years. With less available funding in ISD’s positive results and seek to improve the district’s
FIGURE 3–13
HOUSTON ISD STAFFING CHANGES BY CHIEF
CHIEF 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19 2018–19 CHANGE FROM 2016–17
Chief Academic Officer 550.2 643.3 737.3 187.1
Chief Audit Executive 14.0 12.0 12.0 (2.0)
Chief Communications Officer 28.4 29.3 21.8 (6.6)
Chief Development Officer 16.0 19.5 17.5 1.5
Chief Financial Officer 208.8 219.6 191.0 (17.8)
Chief Governmental Relations and Strategy Office 1.0 3.0 3.0 2.0
Chief Human Resources Officer 137.4 139.3 118.6 (18.8)
Chief of Staff 10.0 10.0 10.0 0.0
Chief Operating Officer 2,052.2 2,090.7 1,944.5 (107.7)
Chief Strategy and Innovation 137.0 129.5 124.0 (13.0)
Chief Technology Information Officer 237.8 239.8 223.8 (14.0)
Deputy Superintendent 2.0 2.0 0.0 (2.0)
General Counsel 18.0 21.0 17.0 (1.0)
Superintendent 2.0 3.0 3.0 1.0
Total 3,414.8 3,462.0 3,423.5 8.8
FIGURE 3–14
BUDGETED GENERAL FUND AMOUNTS
PERCENTAGE PERCENTAGE PERCENTAGE
FUNCTION 2016–17 OF BUDGET 2017–18 OF BUDGET 2018–19 OF BUDGET
Payroll and Benefits $1,290,357,960 68.7% $1,352,289,472 64.5% $1,313,217,802 64.3%
Contracted Services $368,274,910 19.6% $481,804,111 23.0% $474,291,467 23.2%
Supplies and Materials $59,579,881 3.2% $63,988,022 3.1% $56,649,958 2.8%
Other Operating $101,738,459 5.4% $124,348,951 5.9% $120,071,651 5.9%
Capital Outlay $14,095,416 0.8% $19,988,689 1.0% $14,836,734 0.7%
Debt Services $14,560,939 0.8% $14,553,719 0.7% $17,916,239 0.9%
Other uses $30,049,734 1.6% $39,321,832 1.9% $46,361,773 2.3%
Total $1,878,657,299 $2,096,294,796 $2,043,345,624
public image; (2) hosting open houses; (3) increasing grant the DIP is to guide the district and campus staff to improve
funding for academic programs; and (4) exploring areas in performance for all student groups to meet state academic
which the district can consolidate services and gain accountability standards. Many district staff identified the
increased efficiencies. DIP as the district’s strategic plan; however, the DIP addresses
district operations peripherally. For school year 2018–19,
The Texas Education Code, Section 11.252, requires each
Houston ISD’s DIP stated the following priorities:
school district to have a district improvement plan that is
developed, evaluated, and revised annually by the • promote student health, safety and well-being –focus
superintendent with the assistance of the district-level on expanding the Every Community, Every School
planning and decision-making committee. The purpose of initiative to serve more students, connecting them with
FIGURE 3–15
HOUSTON ISD ADOPTED BUDGET AND PROJECTIONS
FISCAL YEARS 2019 TO 2022
CATEGORY 2018–2019 ADOPTED 2019–2020 PROJECTED 2020–2021 PROJECTED 2021–2022 PROJECTED

Revenues
Property taxes $1,728,092,547.0 $1,767,344,397.0 $1,802,281,285.0 $1,837,916,911.0
Earnings on investments $9,000,000.0 $7,000,000.0 $7,000,000.0 $7,000,000.0
Miscellaneous local sources $12,074,717.0 $12,074,717.0 $12,074,717.0 $12,074,717.0
State sources $215,146,388.0 $166,713,129.0 $198,365,458.0 $162,731,998.0
Federal sources $13,031,351.0 $13,031,351.0 $13,031,351.0 $13,031,351.0
Total revenues $1,977,345,003.0 $1,966,163,594.0 $2,032,752,811.0 $2,032,754,977.0
Expenditures
Current
Instruction $1,000,417,027.0 $1,000,417,027.0 $1,000,417,027.0 $1,000,417,027.0
Instructional resources and media $9,691,146.0 $9,691,146.0 $9,691,146.0 $9,691,146.0
services
Curriculum development and $22,966,777.0 $22,966,777.0 $22,966,777.0 $22,966,777.0
instructional staff development
Instructional leadership $29,448,219.0 $29,448,219.0 $29,448,219.0 $29,448,219.0
School leadership $137,909,124.0 $137,909,124.0 $137,909,124.0 $137,909,124.0
Guidance, counseling, and evaluation $46,214,725.0 $46,214,725.0 $46,214,725.0 $46,214,725.0
services
Social work services $1,816,958.0 $1,816,958.0 $1,816,958.0 $1,816,958.0
Health services $18,638,980.0 $18,638,980.0 $18,638,980.0 $18,638,980.0
Student (pupil) transportation $57,081,236.0 $57,081,236.0 $57,081,236.0 $57,081,236.0
Extracurricular activities $16,157,960.0 $16,157,960.0 $16,157,960.0 $16,157,960.0
General administration $35,679,582.0 $35,679,582.0 $35,679,582.0 $35,679,582.0
Facilities maintenance and operations $184,556,245.0 $184,556,245.0 $184,556,245.0 $184,556,245.0
Security and monitoring services $22,017,162.0 $22,017,162.0 $22,017,162.0 $22,017,162.0
Data processing services $47,156,793.0 $47,156,793.0 $47,156,793.0 $47,156,793.0
Community services $2,044,672.0 $2,044,672.0 $2,043,495.0 $2,043,495.0
Juvenile justice alternative education $893,650.0 $893,650.0 $893,650.0 $893,650.0
programs
Payments to tax increment fund $59,031,258.0 $61,219,581.0 $62,759,523.0 $64,759,524.0
Contracted Instructional Services $272,407,268.0 $291,506,777.0 $323,938,725.0 $356,775,368.0
Between Public Schools (Chapter 41
Payment)
Tax appraisal and collection $14,940,330.0 $14,940,330.0 $15,763,818.0 $14,940,330.0
Debt service
Principal $15,539,739.0 $15,539,739.0 $15,539,739.0 $15,539,739.0
Interest and fiscal charges $2,375,000.0 $2,375,000.0 $2,375,000.0 $2,375,000.0
Total expenditures $1,996,983,851.0 $2,018,271,683.0 $2,053,065,884.0 $2,087,079,040.0
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over ($19,638,848.0) ($52,108,089.0) ($20,313,072.0) ($54,324,063.0)
(under) expenditures
Other Financing Sources (Uses)

Transfers in $30,400,000.0 $25,000,000.0 $20,000,000.0 $20,000,000.0
Transfers out ($46,361,773.0) ($45,173,141.0) ($35,030,888.0) ($16,596,263.0)
Total other financing sources (uses) ($15,961,773.0) ($20,173,141.0) ($15,030,888.0) $3,403,737.0

HOUSTON ISD ADOPTED BUDGET AND PROJECTIONS
CATEGORY 2018–2019 ADOPTED 2019–2020 PROJECTED 2020–2021 PROJECTED 2021–2022 PROJECTED
Net change in fund balances (after ($35,600,621.0) ($72,281,231.0) ($35,343,960.0) ($50,920,326.0)
unspent funds)
Fund balances, beginning $612,678,670.0 $577,078,049.0 $504,796,819.0 $469,452,858.0
Fund balances, ending $577,078,049.0 $504,796,819.0 $469,452,858.0 $418,532,532.0
resources and wraparound services, such as food, mental Additionally, Houston ISD has not been consistent in how
health, stable housing, and physical health needs; Public Education Information Management System
(PEIMS) data is reported to the Texas Education Agency for
• expand educational opportunities –increase the district’s budgeted general administration expenses,
prekindergarten student enrollment significantly defined in PEIMS as Functions 41 and 92. Figure 3–16
across the district, increase access to innovative shows Houston ISD’s actual general administration expenses
instruction, and expand fine arts programs; compared to peer districts from school years 2015–16 to
2017–18 and budgeted general administration expenses for
• transform academic outcomes –foster literacy and
school year 2018–19. Houston ISD’s reported budgeted
improve how the district serves its special education
general administration expenses for school year 2018–19
leaders; continue to focus on the data that identify
increased from 2.20 percent to 26.82 percent from the
gaps among student groups on the State of Texas
previous year and represent a significant deviation from the
Assessments of Academic Readiness;
reported amounts during previous years and in comparison
• cultivate Team HISD talent – implement a to peers. The increase in the general administration expense
comprehensive strategy to develop leaders and become represents a change in the way Houston ISD has reported the
the district of choice in the Houston area; and PEIMS information to TEA and does not necessarily
represent a decrease in funds dedicated to spending on
• increase organizational efficiency – implement instruction. For school year 2018–19, the budgeted general
initiatives that improve financial and business administration expenses increased to nearly $545.9 million
transparency, including the Houston Education from $37.7 million during school year 2017–18. According
Advocacy Representatives, a group of leaders that serves to staff, the increase in budgeted general administration
as an advocacy group. The district has established an expenses was previously reported to PEIMS by the district.
online legislative hub that educates the community on
how to become involved in the law-making process. Houston ISD received the Government Finance Officers
Association (GFOA) Distinguished Budget Presentation
None of the priorities in the DIP tie funding strategies to Award for its fiscal year 2015–16 budget. This award
specific goals. The funding strategies discussed are limited represents a standard for budgeting and planning that
and relate to federal funding. government organizations should attempt to achieve.
FIGURE 3–16
HOUSTON ISD REPORTED PUBLIC EDUCATION INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM DATA, FUNCTIONS 41 AND 92
PERCENTAGE PERCENTAGE PERCENTAGE PERCENTAGE
OF GENERAL OF GENERAL OF GENERAL CYPRESS– OF GENERAL
YEAR HOUSTON ISD FUND AUSTIN ISD FUND DALLAS ISD FUND FAIRBANKS ISD FUND
2015–16 $33,100,182 2.05% $17,836,078 2.50% $48,717,178 3.50% $14,964,701 1.83%
2016–17 $40,586,800 2.55% $20,820,943 2.77% $48,379,352 3.54% $15,628,958 1.83%
2017–18 $37,676,235 2.20% $22,570,787 2.98% $43,406,828 3.25% $16,222,364 1.86%
2018–19 (1) $545,903,457 26.82% $23,099,294 3.05% $49,966,341 3.54% $17,180,577 1.88%
Note: Amounts shown for school year 2018–19 are budgeted.
Source: Texas Education Agency, Public Education Information Management System Financial Data, school years 2015–16 to 2017–18 actual
data and school year 2018–19 budgeted data.
FIGURE 3–17
GOVERNMENT FINANCE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION PHILOSOPHY OF PRIORITY-DRIVEN BUDGETING
CALENDAR YEAR 2011
The underlying philosophy of priority-driven budgeting is about how a government entity should invest resources to meet its stated
objectives. It helps us to better articulate why the services we offer exist, what price we pay for them, and, consequently, what value
they offer citizens. The principles associated with this philosophy of budgeting are:
Prioritize Services.
Priority-driven budgeting evaluates the relative importance of individual programs and services rather than entire departments. It is
distinguished by prioritizing the services a government provides, one versus another.
Do the Important Things Well. Cut Back on the Rest.
In a time of revenue decline, a traditional budget process often attempts to continue funding all the same programs it funded last year,
albeit at a reduced level (e.g. across-the-board budget cuts). Priority-driven budgeting identifies the services that offer the highest
value and continues to provide funding for them, while reducing service levels, divesting, or potentially eliminating lower value services.
Question Past Patterns of Spending.
An incremental budget process doesn’t seriously question the spending decisions made in years past. Priority-driven budgeting puts all
the money on the table to encourage more creative conversations about services.
Spend Within the Organization’s Means.
Priority-driven budgeting starts with the revenue available to the government, rather than last year’s expenditures, as the basis for
decision making.
Know the True Cost of Doing Business.
Focusing on the full costs of programs ensures that funding decisions are based on the true cost of providing a service.
Provide Transparency of Community Priorities.
When budget decisions are based on a well-defined set of community priorities, the government’s aims are not left open to
interpretation.
Provide Transparency of Service Impact.
In traditional budgets, it is often not entirely clear how funded services make a real difference in the lives of citizens. Under priority-
driven budgeting, the focus is on the results the service produces for achieving community priorities.
Demand Accountability for Results.
Traditional budgets focus on accountability for staying within spending limits. Beyond this, priority-driven budgeting demands
accountability for results that were the basis for a service’s budget allocation.
Source: Government Finance Officers Association, Anatomy of a Priority-Driven Budget, 2011.
Recipients of the award must demonstrate the ability to set leadership. Houston ISD should dedicate all funds to the
strategic goals and to tie the budgeting process to the priorities that are necessary to educate students and provide
priorities of the organization. According to staff in the for the operational needs of such a large and complex district.
district’s Budgeting and Planning Department, the district Exposing areas of waste, closing obsolete programs, and
does not plan to apply for the award again until the budget insisting on accountability for results must be considered
process can meet the criteria. These criteria include annually when determining where to spend limited funds.
requirements to show evidence of planning for short-term
Houston ISD should implement a strategic planning and
and long-term periods.
budget model that ties the district’s departmental budgets to
Figure 3–17 shows the principal steps in the GFOA’s Philosophy specific, measurable goals outlined by the administration.
of Priority-driven Budgeting process that outlines how to set
District administrators should implement bottom-up
priorities and make choices about how to accomplish initiatives.
budgeting rather than top-down budgeting. Departmental
Strategic and effective planning and budgeting takes time, budgets and resources should be directed specifically toward
commitment, and effort by the administration and the goals that have been identified as priorities for each
department. When budget cuts are necessary, it is important Area superintendents and SSOs review the budgets with the
for department leaders to establish goals that are in line with principals to determine whether the principal’s budget plan is
their budget limitations and prioritize expenditures toward consistent with the school improvement plan (SIP). An SIP is
meeting the identified goals. District leaders should justify an annual planning document required by the Texas Education
every budget expenditure, not just new spending, and should Code, Section 11.253, requires that campuses outline their
require multiple layers of management to become actively goals for the year and the steps they will take to achieve their
involved in the budget process. priorities. Houston ISD campus principals are authorized to
use the funds that are allocated to their campuses according to
Additionally, the district should implement a budgeting
their priorities, which may not align with the stated goals in
process that includes the following actions:
the SIPs or with the expectations of the SSOs and area
• set goals and priorities for each department; superintendents. Houston ISD student enrollment has
decreased since school year 2016–17, and this trend is expected
• implement initiatives that tie funding to the goals set to continue. With enrollment decreasing, it is important that
by each department; campuses expend their budgets in the most efficient manner to
• include each district leadership member and help them achieve their goals.
department chief in the budgeting process;
Area superintendents and SSOs are not authorized to
explaining the need to set priorities and link
disapprove expenditures made by campus principals. The
outcomes to funding;
only exception is that principals must request approval for
• define stakeholders and outline the process for spending related to travel and training from the area
communication and collaboration across teams to superintendents. Because no formal, documented process
achieve initiatives; ties campus budget expenditures to stated goals, no process
holds campus principals accountable for failing to meet
• hold quarterly meetings with department heads budget-related goals.
to determine if goals are being met or if corrective
actions need to take place; and During the school year, the Budgeting and Financial
Planning Department provides area superintendents and
• review the submission of PEIMS data to TEA to
SSOs with a weekly budget-to-actual spreadsheet. The SSOs
ensure that amounts are being assigned to the proper
advise each principal regarding spending categories that are
function codes and investigate any significant changes
greater or less than budgeted amounts. This meeting does
from previous years.
not always prevent principals from overspending budget
The district could implement this recommendation with allocations, but principals have an incentive to operate within
existing resources. their budgets because the amount of the deficit is deducted
from the next year’s budget. Some principals do not operate
CAMPUS FISCAL ACCOUNTABILITY (REC. 19) within budget, however, and when a principal leaves a
campus with a deficit, the district nullifies the amount for
Houston ISD lacks a process that ties campus-level the incoming principal.
budget expenditures to the individual goals of school
improvement plans. By contrast, little financial monitoring is required by the
district for charter campuses. According to onsite interviews,
Campus budgets are based on the per-unit allocation (PUA) charter campuses submit their budgets annually as required
method. PUA formulas are based on annual enrollment in their contracts. Unlike other campuses, charter campus
projections for each campus, or actual enrollments in the budgets are based on a formula in their contracts instead of
prior year for some federal funds. Principals, school support the PUA formulas. Charter campus contracts do not require
officers (SSO), and area superintendents review the annual the submission of monthly financial reports to the district.
enrollment projections. Principals then prepare their Charter campuses are required only to provide copies of their
preliminary budgets based on the enrollment projections. annual audited financial statements.
The district estimated that from 80.0 percent to 85.0 percent
of campus budgets are allocated for staff costs, with the As recently as 2018, charter campuses have closed during
remainder for operations costs. the school year due to insolvency. SSOs reported to the
FIGURE 3–18
EXPENDITURES PER PUPIL FOR HOUSTON ISD AND PEER DISTRICTS
YEAR HOUSTON ISD AUSTIN ISD CYPRESS–FAIRBANKS ISD DALLAS ISD
2014–15 $5,567 $6,566 $5,688 $6,141
2015–16 $5,927 $6,614 $5,892 $6,820
2016–17 $5,718 $6,862 $6,084 $6,723
2017–18 $6,109 $7,067 $6,120 $6,803
2018–19 $5,643 $7,297 $6,445 $7,235

Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Texas Education Agency, Public Education Information Management
System data, school years 2014–15 to 2018–19.
review team that the district is revising charter campus input from the board during a February budget workshop.
contracts to include stronger accountability provisions for The board sets its budget calendar at this initial meeting,
academics and funding. scheduling an April meeting to consider staffing and
compensation, and June meetings on the general budget.
The PUA formula at the current per-unit amounts does not Budgets are formula-driven, based upon the number of
fund Houston ISD campuses at the same level as those in students expected at each campus. The district considers
peer school districts. Figure 3–18 shows per-pupil campus funds to be discretionary and allocates them to the
expenditures in functions 11, 12, 13, 21, 23, 31, 32, 33, campus to address the SIP priorities and school needs.
36, and 95, which are the PEIMS codes related to Schools may request additional funding, which the board
instructional spending on students, for Houston ISD and reviews based on district goals and available funding.
peer districts from school years 2014–15 to 2018–19. In
school year 2018–19, Houston ISD had a PEIMS reporting District policy requires that GPISD establish district and
error related to how the district classified general campus advisory committees each September. These advisory
administration expenses that had previously been classified committees develop campus and district plans each spring,
as instructional expenses. The reporting error has resulted producing executive summaries in April and May. The board
in a decrease in per-pupil budgeted instructional approves all district and campus goals in June. District and
expenditures for school year 2018–19 from the previous campus staff request resources needed to accomplish these
school year, but does not necessarily represent a decrease in plans in the budget documents.
actual per-pupil expenditures on instruction. To drive its budget and decision-making processes, GPISD
integrates its site-based decision making process with long-
Houston ISD’s per-pupil expenditures have alternately
term enrollment and facility planning. Campus-level
increased and decreased each year during this period
committees develop SIPs tailored to each school.
compared with peer districts whose expenditures have
increased each year. Houston ISD’s $5,643 per-pupil Each improvement plan includes an assessment of past
expenditure for school year 2018–19 is approximately progress, current status, and an action plan. The action plan
$1,349 less than the $6,992 average for the three peer identifies specific tasks or objectives with start and end dates,
districts. Considering decreasing enrollment and the assigns responsibility for each task and objective, and
corresponding decrease in PUA allocations, it is essential that determines indicators of success. It specifies funding levels
Houston ISD leverage all funds available to meet campus and sources for tasks or objectives that require financial
goals and to hold campus administrators responsible for resources. The plan lists all funding sources for a given task or
reaching those goals. objective, including sources from outside the district such as
funds or support donated by a business partnership.
Galena Park ISD (GPISD) begins its annual budget process
in January with board presentations focused on the Measuring performance and holding departments and
administration’s major budget initiatives for the year. The campuses accountable requires a level of monitoring that is
administration modifies these initiatives after it receives not present in Houston ISD.
Houston ISD should tie campus budgets to school improvement final contracting decisions, authorization of payments, and
plan goals and hold principals accountable for achieving the transfer of funds among project expenditure categories. This
results on their campuses when the budgets are approved. process results in risk for the district and creates a system
without adequate segregation of duties and appropriate fiscal
Clarifying the authority of the area superintendents and SSOs
oversight of construction-related bond funds.
and charging them with ensuring that campus budget
expenditures align with SIP goals will increase accountability The CFO provides limited oversight of bond funded projects.
of principals. Establishing clearly measurable operational and The role of the CFO is to inform the board about the most
educational goals and reporting on their progress will require a effective and efficient use of district resources. However, the
centralized effort that must be overseen by the area CFO is not involved directly in the contracting decisions
superintendents and SSOs. Further, when campuses do not made by the Construction Services Department and does
meet their goals, the principals, SSOs, and area superintendents not advise the board regarding the fiscal appropriateness of
should craft individualized corrective action plans designed to decisions relating to bond projects. The senior manager,
overcome challenges and promote campus success. bond fund accounting, reports being responsible for keeping
project records, transferring funds as directed by the
The district should consider the following steps:
Construction Services Department, and ensuring that
• develop a set of specific, measurable goals for each contractors are paid in a timely manner. Although the senior
campus and link each SIP to specified funding sources manager, bond fund accounting, reports to the CFO, limited
to accomplish the goals; oversight and approval are required for changes made by the
Construction Services Department.
• clarify the authority of the area superintendents,
SSOs, and principals in the decision-making process, In 2012, Houston ISD voters approved a $1.89 billion bond to
which includes specifying who prepares and approves replace and repair 40 campuses across the district, provide
the budget, the role of the SSO in approving the SIP, technology upgrades, replace regional field houses and
and ensuring that campus budgets are linked to the improvements to other athletic facilities, renovate middle school
SIP to meet campus goals; restrooms, and perform safety and security improvements.
• authorize area superintendents and SSOs to approve Figure 3–19 shows the amounts dedicated to each area of
purchases greater than a specified dollar amount that the 2012 bond.
do not align with campus goals detailed in the SIP,
During calendar year 2015, the Construction Services
and any staff changes during the school year; and
Department estimated that projects financed through the
• require SSOs to monitor and review charter campus 2012 bond would have a $212.0 million shortfall as a result
financial records at least quarterly. of increased construction costs and labor shortages. The
Construction Services Department cited construction cost
The district could implement this recommendation with increases as the reason that an additional $212.0 million was
existing resources. needed to complete the original projects. When the issue
came before the board, there was no project cost analysis
FISCAL OVERSIGHT OF CONSTRUCTION SERVICES detailing variances from budgeted amounts to inform the
(REC. 20) board on the specific reasons for the increased costs.
Houston ISD lacks oversight and segregation of duties for In December 2015, the board approved the issuance of
the fiscal administration of bond projects. maintenance tax notes to finance the additional costs to
complete the bond projects. School districts issue
Bond projects are envisioned, implemented, and fiscally
maintenance tax notes to finance maintenance, repair,
administered within the Construction Services Department,
renovation, or replacement of existing school facilities, but
which reports to the chief operating officer (COO), not the
not new school buildings or additions. In June 2018, the
CFO. The COO’s office supervises all the decision-making
district issued $200.0 million of maintenance tax notes to
and fiscal authority for bond expenditures.
fund the additional needs related to the bond projects. The
After the board has authorized contract negotiations for bond additional $12.0 million in projected needs are expected to
projects, the Construction Services Department manages the be funded by the capital projects reserve fund.
At the April 20, 2017 board meeting, the COO asked for FIGURE 3–19
authorization to use $99.1 million in cost savings from the HOUSTON ISD 2012 BOND BUDGET
NOVEMBER 2012
2012 bond program to fund additional construction projects,
PROJECT PROPOSED BUDGET
address safety and security needs, and develop a contingency
fund for emergency needs. According to the COO, the High Schools $1,362,436,000
savings from the bond program projects resulted from using Middle Schools $73,950,000
alternate project delivery methods, changes in the local Kindergarten to Grade 8 Programs $121,345,000
construction market, and stronger scope-to-budget Elementary Schools $79,534,000
alignment of projects by Houston ISD staff. The CFO did All Schools Total $1,637,265,000
not testify on this proposal or offer any written opinion as to
District Athletic Improvements $44,675,000
how the surplus funds should be used, including whether the
Districtwide Land Acquisition $55,767,000
district might consider using them to decrease the amount to
borrow with maintenance tax notes. The board approved the Middle School Restroom Renovations $35,000,000
COO’s reallocation of $99.1 million in identified savings Districtwide Safety and Security $17,293,000
toward other proposed projects shown in Figure 3–20. Districtwide Technology $100,000,000
Districtwide Total $252,735,000
Houston ISD expects to transfer approximately $16.0
million from the general fund during school year 2018–19 to Bond Total $1,890,000,000
pay debt service on the maintenance tax notes. This transfer Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
adds to the district’s financial burden considering current Team; Houston ISD, 2012 Bond Budget, February 2019.
budget constraints. The district has recapture costs that have

increased to an anticipated $272.0 million for school year FIGURE 3–20
2018–19. However, district leaders decided to decrease HOUSTON ISD 2012 BOND PROJECT REALLOCATION
APRIL 2017
operating budgets, stop or curtail capital budgeting, and
eliminate staff rather than economize on construction costs PROJECT AMOUNT
and use available capital renovation funds to prevent New Schools $51,836,000
increased costs to the general fund. Renovated Schools $20,388,278
Districtwide Projects $12,058,745
Without proper oversight of construction services
expenditures, there is no check on whether the district is Construction Contingency $14,799,423
spending construction funds in the most effective and Total $99,082,446

efficient manner. Furthermore, when construction-related Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
cost savings or increases occur, district administrators may be Team; Houston ISD 2012 Board Approved Bond Reallocation;
February 2019.
unaware of factors that may affect the use of district funds
and how to best plan for such contingencies. Authorizing the
Construction Services Department to manage and dispense of fiscal year- 2018, the capital renovations fund had
funds with no external fiscal oversight does not ensure that approximately $814 million in fund balance, of which an
the district is safeguarding district assets or managing its estimated $79 million was unassigned.
construction activities to provide maximum benefit in the
During calendar year 2016, the district contracted with a
use of bond funds.
multinational accounting organization to conduct a
Houston ISD uses its capital renovation fund to account for performance audit focused on the 2012 bond program. As
the costs associated with renovations, expansions, upgrades, stated in the contract, the Houston ISD board asked the
and the rebuilding of district facilities. Figure 3–21 shows that accounting firm to evaluate independently the underlying
the capital renovations fund had a balance of approximately factors that drove the program’s need for additional funding.
$981.9 million at the end of fiscal year 2017, of which $60.3 In August 2016, the accounting firm released its Making the
million was unassigned (i.e., not encumbered or designated for Grade report, which stated that multiple factors influenced the
specific projects or building programs). These funds were growth in project budgets. The report cited increased
available for construction-related projects and could have been construction activity and the resulting market conditions that
used prior to the issuance of maintenance tax notes. At the end increased cost estimations. The performance audit concluded
FIGURE 3–21
HOUSTON ISD CAPITAL RENOVATIONS FUND
FUNDING SOURCE 2015 2016 2017 2018
Fund balance $757,887,174 $957,840,344 $981,894,115 $814,435,687
Restricted for rebuild construction program $648,942,505 $876,943,939 $921,555,203 $734,975,292
Unassigned amount $108,944,669 $80,896,405 $60,338,912 $79,460,395
Source: Houston ISD, Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports for 2015, 2016, 2017, and 2018.
that Houston ISD is lacking core controls for delivering such As recommended by the accounting firm contractor, a detailed
a large and complex bond program. set of policies and procedures would require the Construction
In addition to escalating construction costs, the following Services Department, Purchasing Services Department, and
factors were noted in the report as increasing costs: the CFO to collaborate on some or all of the Construction
Services Department’s decisions. The district should develop a
• incomplete project assumptions and differing conditions; financial procedures manual that documents the process by
• weak or nonexistent policies and procedures regarding which the contracts and invoices will be monitored. The
budget development; procedures manual should delineate the roles of the CFO, the
bond fund accountant, and the Construction Services
• lack of conceptual planning;
Department. The CFO should establish regular weekly
• misaligned programmatic specifications and project meetings with the construction management officer, COO,
advisory teams’ expectations; and and bond fund accountant to discuss projects’ status, any
• inconsistent construction bid evaluations. possible savings or overruns, and how to deploy any identified
savings most efficiently.
Regarding current practices, the report found the
following factors: Additionally, the CFO should conduct a thorough project cost
variance analysis to better understand the district’s capital projects
• Houston ISD’s policies and procedures for capital
cost overruns. Costs may have changed since the district conducted
projects are not developed sufficiently;
its most recent cost analysis during calendar year 2015.
• the construction services program lacks an effective
and efficient organizational structure; The district could implement this recommendation with
existing resources.
• the construction services program does not provide
sufficient oversight into subcontractor bidding FINANCIAL REPORTING AND BUDGET MONITORING
activities, nor is it placing pricing risk on the (REC. 21)
construction-manager-at-risk contractor; and
Houston ISD’s Office of the CFO does not provide timely
• the program does not conduct sufficient project
financial reporting that enables the board to perform
cost estimating, variance analyses, contingency
budget monitoring throughout the year.
management, or reporting activities.
Based on staff interviews, the review team could not determine The board adopts a budget each June for the next fiscal year.
that the district has taken definitive steps to address the Each February and June, the board receives two financial
practices and lack of policies noted in the report. Without reports from the CFO’s Office, which include budget updates
proper financial oversight, the district has not been able to and amendments. Figure 3–22 shows the adopted budgets
achieve the desired building and construction goals that it with amendments from school years 2015–16 to 2017–18.
hoped to accomplish with the 2012 bond funds. The financial reports that provide the basis for Figure 3–22
Houston ISD should ensure that the CFO’s Office provides show budget amendments proposed by the administration
fiscal oversight and accountability in monitoring construction and presented to the board for approval. The board does not
projects, provides input during the planning stages, and advises receive timely financial performance information during the
the board as project overruns and savings are identified. year that enables it to conduct proper financial oversight.
FIGURE 3–22
HOUSTON ISD ADOPTED BUDGETS WITH AMENDMENTS
BUDGET ITEM 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18
Original Adopted Expenditure Budget $1,832,252,183 $1,848,607,564 $2,056,972,964
Amendments to Expenditures
• Carryover ($114,263,388) ($99,708,484) ($102,693,056)
• Midyear amendments ($31,562,627) ($26,547,024) ($72,550,082)
• Year-end amendments ($14,090,131) ($56,616,957) $36,384,767
Total amendments to expenditures ($159,916,146) ($182,872,465) ($138,858,371)
Amendments to revenues and other sources and uses
• Midyear amendments ($26,130,503) $4,330,124 ($76,411,544)
• Year-end amendments ($25,440,526) ($14,966,555) $61,875,787
Other changes ($8,640,127) ($1) $0
Final amended budget surplus (deficit) ($220,127,302) ($193,508,897) ($153,394,128)
Total amendments to expenditures as a percentage of adopted budget 12.0% 10.0% 7.0%
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and year-end
budget amendments for fiscal years 2015–16, 2016–17, and 2017–18.
The only opportunity for trustees to compare budgeted contribute to reporting inaccuracies. District budget practices
amounts to actual financial information is after the end of result in significant amendments during the year and large
the fiscal year, June 30, when the district’s Comprehensive budget variances at the year’s end. Presenting amendments to
Annual Financial Report (CAFR) is released. The CAFR the board for ratification twice a year, as stipulated in Board
shows the financial performance of a school district during a Policy CE (LOCAL), places the district at higher risk for
specific time period and its current financial position. exceeding a functional category before board approval.
Exceeding budget expenditures without board approval
During school year 2017–18, the district exceeded its violates the Texas Education Code, Section 44.006. Without
budgeted general fund expenditures. Figure 3–23 shows updated reporting, there is no method in place to show that
Houston ISD’s budget for school year 2017–18, during the budget is properly monitored by the board throughout
which the district’s actual expenditures exceeded its budgeted the year.
amounts in the following areas: instructional resources and
media services, school leadership; guidance counseling and Effective districts provide the following updated
evaluation services; Student transportation; security and financial information to the board monthly for
monitoring services; and interest and fiscal charges. consideration and approval:
Other large school districts in Texas have significantly fewer • revenues and expenditures compared to budget;
expenditure changes from the original adopted budget to the
• budget amendments;
final amended budget. Figure 3–24 shows Houston ISD
budget changes as a percentage of the adopted budget from • cash flow projections;
school years 2014–15 to 2017–18 compared to the peer
• tax collections report; and
districts. Houston ISD’s percentage change in the adopted
budget was greater than all peer districts, and more than • cash and investment balances.
double the changes for all peers except one.
The revenue and expenditure report is generated using the
Not sharing timely financial information with leadership can district’s financial accounting software. The report presents
result in a lack of accountability for the district’s financial detailed information for the revenue received in each of the
performance. If the budget is not monitored properly, district’s funds including budgeted revenue, revenue received
excessive spending or posting errors may go unnoticed and during the month, revenue received for the year, budgeted
FIGURE 3–23
HOUSTON ISD BUDGET
BUDGETED AMOUNTS VARIANCE WITH FINAL
CATEGORY ORIGINAL FINAL ACTUAL BUDGET BETTER/(WORSE)
Revenues
Property taxes $1,708,235,681 $1,680,857,671 $1,710,326,173 $29,468,502
Earnings on investments $1,465,000 $9,000,000 $10,408,645 $1,408,645
Miscellaneous local sources $9,661,901 $42,301,118 $18,246,935 ($24,054,183)
State sources $185,036,762 $213,704,798 $243,073,835 $29,369,037
Federal sources $6,250,624 $6,250,624 $8,381,410 $2,130,786
Total revenues $1,910,649,968 $1,952,114,211 $1,990,436,998 $38,322,787
Expenditures
Current
Instruction $1,047,496,903 $1,063,201,574 $1,054,217,502 $8,984,072
Instructional resources and media services $8,667,581 $8,592,287 $9,246,603 ($654,316)
Curriculum and Instructional staff development $25,866,339 $27,491,552 $27,141,888 $349,664
Instructional leadership $26,153,164 $22,918,703 $20,307,711 $2,610,992
School leadership $136,724,969 $139,409,168 $148,888,990 ($9,479,822)
Guidance, counseling and evaluation services $43,221,764 $46,667,936 $47,489,488 ($821,552)
Social work services $2,108,642 $2,181,823 $1,699,752 $482,071
Health services $20,007,781 $20,137,844 $18,657,747 $1,480,097
Student transportation $60,145,096 $73,140,236 $69,146,802 $3,993,434
Co-curricular/extracurricular activities $15,478,434 $18,925,779 $19,493,953 ($568,174)
General administration $38,283,958 $48,576,149 $37,861,920 $10,714,229
Plant maintenance and operations $190,480,921 $265,976,001 $226,626,540 $39,349,461
Security and monitoring services $22,573,332 $23,852,464 $25,073,050 ($1,220,586)
Data processing services $61,474,987 $118,455,765 $64,835,876 $53,619,889
Community services $2,018,360 $2,318,332 $2,294,499 $23,833
Juvenile justice alternative education programs $893,650 $893,650 $792,000 $101,650
Tax increment reinvestment zone $56,907,676 $56,741,810 $56,170,397 $571,413
Chapter 41/Purchase of weighted average $268,986,857 $204,673,796 $204,404,117 $269,679
daily attendance
Tax appraisal and collection $14,940,330 $15,424,592 $$13,814,336 $1,610,256
Principal $13,534,841 $14,223,826 $14,216,599 $7,227
Interest and fiscal charges $1,007,379 $480,124 $498,626 ($18,502)
Capital outlay
Facilities acquisition and construction – $21,547,924 $21,463,684 $84,240
Total expenditures $2,056,972,964 $2,195,831,335 $2,084,342,080 $111,489,255
Excess (deficiency) of revenues over
($146,322,996) ($243,717,124) ($93,905,082) $149,812,042
(under) expenditures
Other Financing Sources (Uses)
Transfers in $30,400,000 $30,400,000 $29,274,879 ($1,125,121)
Transfers out ($39,321,832) ($95,321,832) ($88,500,216) $6,821,616
Capital lease proceeds – – $23,481,683 $23,481,683
Insurance proceeds and sale of capital assets – – $40,478,727 $40,478,727
Total other financing sources (uses) ($8,921,832) ($64,921,832) $4,735,073 $69,656,905
Net change in fund balances ($155,244,828) ($308,638,956) ($89,170,009) $219,468,947
Fund balances – beginning $701,848,679 $701,848,679 $701,848,679 –
Fund balances – ending $546,603,851 $393,209,723 $612,678,670 $219,468,947
Source: Houston ISD, school year 2017–18 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
FIGURE 3–24
HOUSTON ISD BUDGET CHANGES AS A PERCENTAGE OF ADOPTED BUDGET COMPARED TO PEER DISTRICTS
Austin ISD
Fort Worth ISD
Cypress–Fairbanks ISD
Dallas ISD
Houston ISD
-10.0% -5.0% 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0%

4-year Average 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, February 2019; Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports for Houston
ISD and peer districts, school years 2014–15 to 2017–18.
revenue not yet received, and percentage of budget received. PLANNING AND BUDGETING FOR CAPITAL ASSETS
The report also presents detailed expenditure information for (REC. 22)
all funds that includes expenditure budget, encumbrances, Houston ISD conducts limited capital budgeting during the
expenditures for the year, the month’s expenditures, the normal budget cycle apart from major, bond-funded
budget remaining, and the percent of budget expended. This construction projects.
expenditure information is presented at the fund, function,
detailed object, organization, and program levels. Capital budgeting is the process of tracking and ranking
potential large expenses, or capital expenditures, that are
Houston ISD should prepare updated financial statements significant in amount and contribute to the ongoing nature
comparing actual amounts to budgeted amounts and share of the district. A few examples of capital expenditures made
the information with the board monthly, highlighting major by school districts include:
budget variances and including budget amendments that
require board approval. • constructing additions to buildings;
• repairing and maintaining existing equipment;
The district should take the following steps:
• develop a working group that reviews budget issues • purchasing buses and vehicles;
and studies the district’s finances; task the group with • repairing or replacing air conditioning systems; and
reviewing performance data to guide the district in
making sound, collaborative decisions about its • replacing food service equipment used in cafeterias.
financial future; and During onsite interviews, Houston ISD staff said that the
• amend Board Policy CE (LOCAL) to increase the district historically has funded most capital repairs from the
frequency of financial performance reporting and general fund, with the exception of building and renovation
the presentation of budget amendments for board projects funded by bond proceeds. Recapture has decreased
approval before funds are committed. the general fund monies available to fund capital projects.
No fiscal impact is assumed for this recommendation. The According to the Budget and Planning Department, campuses
district should evaluate the staffing level necessary to and departments are not asked to submit capital budget needs
implement the recommendation and to determine a fiscal due to the lack of funding available for such purposes.
impact, if any. Additionally, the CFO does not brief the board about the
district’s unfunded capital needs. During onsite interviews, the FIGURE 3–25
COO said that staff in some departments track capital asset HOUSTON ISD FACILITY ASSESSMENT SUMMARY OF FIELD
ELEMENTARY, CALENDAR YEAR 2018
needs, but do not budget for them, and that there is an
Facility Condition Index 53.4%
increasing need for the funding of capital asset repairs and
replacement in the district. ENROLLMENT
760
Based on a review of budget workshop presentations to the
board from school years 2016–17 to 2018–19, none of the
chiefs presented topics that related to capital budgeting needs
in the district.
Additionally, district staff report that major capital expenditures

are typically not made until there is an equipment failure and 453
replacement is essential. Many capital outlays that are approved by
the COO’s office are for emergency purchases when systems fail.
Enrollment Enrollment Forecast
The budgeted funding available during school year 2018–19 FACILITY NEEDS
for capital projects consisted of the following amounts:
$10,935,330.0
• $15.0 million in pay-as-you-go funding; and $9,745,579.4
• $5.0 million in tax increment reinvestment zone funds
that the CFO identified for capital projects.
As part of the PUA allocation, the financial resources allocated $5,841,465.9

to campuses based on enrollment projections, there is a $10
per student amount added for capital expenditures. In
addition, campuses can use a portion of federal funds pursuant
to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title I, for
related capital purchases. Title I expenditures are available only
for equipment used on campuses.
The district has begun inventorying facility needs. During Current Needs Total Needs Replacement Cost
calendar year 2018, the district hired a company to conduct a Source: Houston ISD, facility assessment summary of Field
facilities assessment report reviewing all its campuses and Elementary School, 2018.
buildings. Based on the assessment and interviews with the

COO, Houston ISD requires approximately $4.3 billion to approximately $6.1 million in capital needs for fiscal year
address facility needs. These projects include buildings and 2019 and approximately $1.5 million in capital needs for
their major components, such as roofs; heating, ventilation, fiscal years 2020 and 2021.
and air conditioning systems and equipment; flooring; and
The review team’s onsite visit identified the following other
security systems. The report outlines facility needs by campus
examples of capital budget needs:
and facility with graphs, pictures and projected cost estimates
by building component. The section for each facility begins • the Houston ISD Police Department reported
with summary information that details the facility replacement needing $1.9 million for police vehicles;
cost, current needs, and total needs. Figure 3–25 shows facility • Houston ISD administrators reported significant
needs information for Field Elementary School, which technology funding needs. Requested schedules of
indicates that the campus has approximately $5.8 million in replacement costs were not available;
current needs and $9.7 million in total facility related needs.
• the district owns 10,000 laptop computers and
Figure 3–26 shows the summary of projected capital needs 22,000 tablet computers, which have replacement
by year for Field Elementary School. This summary, prepared cycles of four years. The district reported that no
during the facilities assessment, shows that the campus has funding has been identified for replacements; and
FIGURE 3–26
HOUSTON ISD SUMMARY OF PROJECTED CAPITAL NEEDS AT FIELD ELEMENTARY
FISCAL YEAR 2019
SYSTEM 2019 2020 2021
Average Daily Attendance (ADA) $26,344
Site Access – ADA Compliance $26,344
Architectural $2,793,273 $458,639
Standard Foundations $1,549,666
Floor Structure $0
Exterior Windows $813,575
Painting $352,549
Floor Finishes $143,325
Ceiling Finishes $315,314
Landscaping $77,483
Kitchen $1,448,938
Walk-in Cooler/Freezer $81,357
Ovens, Ranges, and Steamers $58,112
Production Equipment $42,616
Serving Lines $81,357
Kitchen Hood $96,854
Ware Wash $58,112
Kitchen Reconfiguration $290,562
Kitchen Flooring $290,562
Kitchen Walls $290,562
Kitchen Ceilings $158,841
Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing $1,921,586 $81,900 $1,030,161
Group Bathroom Plumbing Fixtures $81,900
Domestic Water $329,304
Chiller $757,471
Dedicated Outside Air System $213,079
Fire Sprinkler $290,562
Unit Ventilators $272,690
Emergency Generator $116,225
Egress Lighting $135,596
Fire Alarm $348,675
Building Water Service $244,072
Sanitary Sewer $244,072
Auditorium Systems and Equipment $0
Total $6,190,141 $540,539 $1,030,161
Source: Houston ISD, facility assessment summary of Field Elementary School, 2018.
• the district does not maintain districtwide information value, accumulated depreciation, current book value, and
regarding replacement cycles for instruments, percentage depreciation remaining. The summary indicates
uniforms, and equipment for fine arts programs. that a majority of Houston ISD’s capital assets are at less than
Typically, capital assets as a group have a depreciation of 50.0 percent of their usefulness. However, because the
approximately 50.0 percent of the original cost. Figure 3–27 district is not budgeting the cost for the repair and
shows a summary of large capital asset groups from Houston replacement of these capital assets, budgeted expenses for the
ISD’s fixed asset inventory. The data shows the acquisition current year and future liabilities may be understated.
FIGURE 3–27
HOUSTON ISD CAPITAL ASSET ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
FEBRUARY 2019
ACCUMULATED PERCENTAGE
ASSET ACQUISITION VALUE DEPRECIATION BOOK VALUE REMAINING
Computers $47,900,996 ($42,109,707) $5,791,289 12.0%
Network Electronics $38,097,301 ($26,341,919) $11,755,381 31.0%
Network and Computer Cabling $47,278,395 ($42,374,015) $4,904,380 10.0%
Security Equipment $6,959,319 ($1,314,717) $5,644,603 81.0%
Maintenance and Custodial Equipment $4,668,604 ($2,557,348) $2,111,256 45.0%
Kitchen Equipment $3,793,877 ($2,382,359) $1,411,519 37.0%
All Other Equipment $12,263,791 ($7,619,869) $4,643,923 38.0%
Total $160,962,284 ($124,699,934) $36,262,350 23.0%
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, Fixed Asset Inventory; February 2019.
A well-planned capital budget enhances transparency and stakeholder communication. Knowledge of facility
accountability to citizens. Failure to budget for capital capacity needs combined with financial policies and
needs risks not accounting for costs that the district revenue comparisons facilitates the development of
knows it will incur. The Government Finance Officers a more fiscally prudent plan. A master plans should
Association recognizes the importance of master plans balance stakeholder vision and the district’s financial
to the capital planning process and recommends the capacity to reach the desired goals, which can be ac-
following considerations: complished by considering financial implications
during the development phase; and
(1) Master plans should provide a vision for capital proj-
ect plans and investments. The vision should be sup- (4) Financial factors should be considered during the
ported by realistic planning documents, solid finan- development of master plans. The master planning
cial policies targeted for the implementation of stated process should be an in-depth analysis, incorporat-
goals, and trends of the district’s accomplishments ing the financial responsibilities shared by planners
and progress toward these goals. Such plans forecast and finance officials. When integrating plans with fi-
the district’s outlook and align demand generators, nancial policies, consider costs and revenue streams.
capital improvement programs, and funding policies; Possible revenue streams include bond programs,
(2) Align capital project investment decisions to long- pay-as-you-go alternatives, grants, impact fees, and
range master plans. Potential projects may include public–private partnership alternatives. Review the
department requests, plans for facility construction revenue-generating potential within the plan as-
and renovations, long-term capital replacement pro- sumptions to identify the capability to finance need-
grams, citizen requests, and neighborhood plans and ed capital projects. Balance the plan’s vision across
projects for which grant funds are available. These financial capacity to meet the stated goals, or at a
projects should be reviewed for consistency with minimum, clearly identify the financial implications
the district’s master plan. The capital improvement of a vision that may conflict with the district’s fi-
plan should prioritize needs to implement the im- nancial policies and capacity. Planning documents
provements identified in the master plan. The level should incorporate scenario testing during develop-
of funding in the capital improvement plan defines ment and the district should, at a minimum, un-
the financial capacity to reach the desired goals in derstand the plan cost drivers, alternative scenario
the master plan; outcomes from needs and revenue generation, and
options for meeting the desired goals.
(3) The finance officer should participate in the early
planning process. Master plans can project long- Houston ISD’s lack of a process for the ongoing evaluation of
range service demands, facility capacity needs, and its capital asset needs, deferred maintenance, and capital
replacement needs risks accruing large, unanticipated financial general fund balance from school years 2019–20 to 2021–
costs. Emergency purchases typically do not enable adequate 22. The general fund balance is projected to decrease by 43.3
planning during procurement. In addition, they ultimately percent from school years 2015–16 to 2021–22. The general
cost the district more and may result in a disruption of fund balance as a percentage of expenditures is projected to
operations. The district’s substantial deferred maintenance and decrease by more than half during the same period.
capital investment needs threaten to drain future resources
The general fund includes the following five categories:
that will not be available for educational programs.
nonspendable, restricted, committed, assigned, and
Houston ISD should track and prepare an ongoing list of unassigned. GFOA recommends that government entities
capital needs and develop a capital needs budget for maintain in their general funds an unassigned fund balance
presentation to the board annually. of at least two months of regular general fund operating
revenues or regular general fund operating expenditures.
District leadership should discuss carefully and consider
capital replacement budget needs during each budget Figure 3–29 shows Houston ISD’s general fund balance
adoption cycle, regardless of whether funding is available. categories from school years 2014–15 to 2017–18. The
The district should consider the following steps: unassigned fund balance in the district’s general fund
was less than the recommended level of two months
• commit fund balance or future bond program
operating expenses at the end of school year 2014–15, but
allocations for capital replacement needs to represent
it has met the GFOA-recommended levels during the three
the financial obligation that the district will incur;
subsequent years.
• integrate the capital budget process into annual and long-
Most of school districts fund balance requirements are
range budget planning so that the overall budget process
outlined in Board Policy CE (LOCAL), but Houston ISD
recognizes and provides for the capital budget needs;
policy does not establish a required level of unassigned fund
• prepare cost-benefit analyses to determine the costs of balance to be maintained in the general fund.
repairs versus replacement for major areas of capital
Houston ISD has operated with a budget deficit in its
expenditures, such as buses, service vehicles, and
general fund for the past three school years. If this trend
buildings, and use this information to evaluate the
continues, the district risks depleting its general fund
urgency for future bond funding;
balance eventually, which would prompt a financial crisis.
• identify current capital needs for functions including Figure 3–30 shows changes in Houston ISD’s general fund
safety, accessibility, and energy improvements; and balance from school years 2015–16 to 2017–18, and
projected changes from school years 2019–20 to 2021–22.
• implement a process for ongoing monitoring of If the general fund balance continues to decrease by more
capital assets and update identified needs. than $50.0 million annually after school year 2021–22,
The district could implement this recommendation with projections suggest that Houston ISD could have a deficit
existing resources. fund balance by school year 2029–30.
Proprietary funds are used to account for operations that are

FUND BALANCE POLICIES (REC. 23)
financed similarly to business activities in the private sector.
Houston ISD’s board has not determined an optimal Houston ISD maintains two types of proprietary funds,
threshold for reserves in the district’s general fund, internal enterprise funds and internal service funds.
service funds, and enterprise funds.
Enterprise funds are used to support business-type activities
The district’s general operating fund balance is decreasing, that provide services to external and internal users. These
and the school year 2018–19 budget anticipates a deficit. activities include the employee cafeteria (MarketPlace),
General operating fund balance has decreased significantly Houston ISD’s catering service, business development, and
since school year 2016–17, and budget deficits are projected the Medicaid Finance Consulting Services Department.
through school year 2021–22.
Internal service funds are used to support activities that
Figure 3–28 shows Houston ISD’s general fund balance provide services for the district’s internal programs and
from school years 2015–16 to 2018–19 and the projected activities. These include employee health insurance,
FIGURE 3–28
HOUSTON ISD ACTUAL AND PROJECTED CHANGES IN GENERAL FUND BALANCE
BUDGET 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19 2019–20 2020–21 2021–22
CATEGORY ACTUAL ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGETED PROJECTED PROJECTED PROJECTED
Total Revenue, $1,824,553,174 $1,792,347,640 $1,990,436,998 $1,977,345,003 $1,966,163,594 $2,032,752,811 $2,032,754,977
General Fund
Total ($1,745,118,145)($1,807,057,796)($2,084,342,080)($1,996,983,851)($2,018,271,683)($2,053,065,884)($2,087,079,040)
Expenditures,
General Fund
Transfers In $30,400,000 $30,400,000 $29,274,879 $30,400,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $20,000,000
Transfers Out ($26,395,083) ($52,649,042) ($88,500,216) ($46,361,773) ($45,173,141) ($35,030,888) ($16,596,263)
Capital Leases $8,640,097 $562,012 $23,481,683 $0 $0 $0 $0
Insurance $0 $0 $40,478,727 $0 $0 $0 $0
Proceeds on
Sale of Capital
Assets
Net Change in $92,080,043 ($36,397,186) ($89,170,009) ($35,600,621) ($72,281,230) ($35,343,961) ($50,920,326)
Fund Balance
Beginning $646,165,822 $738,245,865 $701,848,679 $612,678,670 $577,078,049 $504,796,819 $469,452,858
Fund Balance
Ending Fund $738,245,865 $701,848,679 $612,678,670 $577,078,049 $504,796,819 $469,452,858 $418,532,858
Balance
Percentage 14.3% (4.9%) (12.7%) (5.8%) (12.5%) (7.0%) (10.8%)
Change
2015–16 to (43.3%)
2021–22
Projected
Change
Percentage of 42.3% 38.8% 29.4% 28.9% 25.0% 22.9% 20.1%
Expenditures
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, February 2019; Houston ISD, Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports
and 2018–19 Budget Book.
FIGURE 3–29
HOUSTON ISD ENDING FUND BALANCE DETAILS
CATEGORY 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18
Nonspendable $11,234,622 $10,166,319 $10,115,337 $11,394,093
Restricted $5,686,179 $0 $0 $0
Committed $89,706,733 $91,482,865 $102,364,840 $46,364,840
Assigned $256,992,372 $250,970,779 $222,413,318 $165,504,792
Unassigned $282,545,916 $385,625,902 $366,955,184 $389,415,008
Total Fund Balance $646,165,822 $738,245,865 $701,848,679 $612,678,733
Estimated Two Months’ Operating Expenses $290,853,024 $301,176,299 $347,390,347 $332,830,642
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, February 2019; Houston ISD, 2018–19 Budget Book.
worker’s compensation, print shop, the district’s In most school districts, internal service funds and
alternative certification program, athletics, special enterprise funds have total net assets, which represent the
education shared services, and University Interscholastic amount of funds available for the continued operations of
League activities. the service that the fund provides. However, neither
FIGURE 3–30
HOUSTON ISD CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
(IN MILLIONS)
$800.0 20.0%
$700.0 15.0%
$600.0
10.0%
$500.0
5.0%
$400.0
0.0%
$300.0
(5.0%)
$200.0
$100.0 (10.0%)
$0.0 (15.0%)
2015–16 Actual 2016–17 Actual 2017–18 Actual 2018–19 Budgeted 2019–20 Projected 2020–21 Projected 2021–22 Projected
Ending Fund Balance Percentage Change
Note: Amounts shown for school years 2015–16 to 2017–18 are actual data; amounts shown for school year 2018–19 are budgeted; and
amounts shown for school years 2019–20 to 2021–22 are projected.
Houston ISD’s internal service funds nor its enterprise range from -45.8 percent for the alternative certification
funds have a policy specifying a balance that should be program fund during school year 2017–18 to a projected
retained to meet operating needs. 438.9 percent for the workers’ compensation fund during
school year 2018–19.
The internal service funds and enterprise funds are generally
expected to be self-sufficient, which means that funds paid in Although funds may accumulate more than three months in
by the district or the users should offset the costs associated operating revenues, or 25.0 percent, ending balances of 50.0
with providing the good or service. Although the enterprise percent or more of revenues appear to be excessive.
funds are established to be profitable, the internal service
funds are not expected to make a profit. However, in each Enterprise funds operate in accordance with different
case, maintaining an optimum level of reserve funds enables accounting rules and guidelines; however, the need for
the following program benefits: adequate reserves is the same. The Medicaid Finance and
• maintain and replace machinery, equipment, and Consulting Services Department is an enterprise fund to
technology (capital purchases), and address major claim School Health and Related Services (SHARS)
breakdowns, as needed; reimbursement for Houston ISD and to provide SHARS
support and consulting services for other Texas school
• make periodic upgrades to technology and equipment districts. Each year, the district transfers to the general fund
to improve services; and the amount collected as SHARS reimbursements attributed
to Houston ISD and a portion of the profits from the
• facilitate cyclical cash-flow demands.
consulting work performed for other districts. Figure 3–32
Figure 3–31 shows the actual revenues and expenses of shows finances for Houston ISD’s Medicaid Finance
Houston ISD’s internal service funds from school year Consulting Services fund from school years 2014–15 to
2014–15 to school year 2017–18, and budgeted 2018–19. The district transferred $30.0 million to the
amounts for school year 2018–19. The total net asset general fund each year from school years 2014–15 to
ending balances as a percentage of total revenue by year 2016–17, and $28.0 million for school year 2017–18.
FIGURE 3–31
HOUSTON ISD INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL POSITION
FUND 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19
Health
Operating Revenues $112,777,592 $119,906,687 $135,361,586 $158,976,813 $162,077,000
Operating Expenses $135,430,067 $142,445,752 $143,396,713 $145,035,579 $164,182,021
Nonoperating Revenues $332,535 $212,976 $84,871 $130,690 $202,000
Change in Net Assets ($22,319,940) ($22,326,089) ($7,950,256) $14,071,924 ($1,903,021)
Total Net Asset, Ending $47,637,203 $25,311,114 $17,360,858 $31,432,782 $29,529,761
Net Assets as a Percentage of Revenue 42.2% 21.1% 12.8% 19.8% 18.2%
Workers’ Compensation
Change in Net Assets $2,972,707 $3,016,679 $1,968,946 $1,131,823 ($1,655,314)
Print Shop
Nonoperating Revenues $2 $629 $33,850 $126,725 $32,921
Change in Net Assets ($112,705) $745,685 ($70,207) ($197,199) $0
Adjustments for Copier Services $0 $0 $1,129,776 $0 $0
Total Net Asset, Ending $331,939 $1,077,624 $2,137,193 $1,939,994 $1,939,994
Alternative Certification
Operating Revenues $1,124,422 $1,161,391 $937,148 $705,497 $1,167,875
Nonoperating Revenues $308 $1,614 $2,537 $0 $600
Change in Net Assets $50,927 ($205,096) ($540,487) ($325,279) $0
Total Net Asset, Ending $747,920 $542,824 $2,337 ($322,942) ($322,942)
Net Assets as a Percentage of Revenue 66.5% 46.7% 0.3% (45.8%) (27.7%)
University Interscholastic League
Nonoperating Revenues $320 $1,502 $1,710 $5,510 $1,360
Change in Net Assets ($72,500) $34,254 ($63,321) $25,695 $41,737
Total Net Asset, Ending $365,427 $399,681 $336,360 $362,055 $403,792
Athletics
Nonoperating Revenues/(Expenses) $2,184 $11,520 ($283,957) $27,079 $17,436

HOUSTON ISD INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL POSITION
FUND 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19
Athletics (continued)
Transfers In $483,934 $0 $0 $0 $0
Change in Net Assets $647,443 ($277,440) ($418,146) ($585,975) $346,559
Shared Services
Change in Net Assets $551,012 ($1,048,386) $498,305 $110,445 $$0
Total Revenues, All Funds $144,558,765 $149,972,549 $167,106,647 $191,511,804 $194,686,904
Total Net Assets, All Funds $84,064,314 $64,003,921 $58,558,531 $72,789,965 $69,619,926
Total Net Assets as a Percentage 58.2% 42.7% 35.0% 38.0% 35.8%
of Total Revenue
FIGURE 3–32
HOUSTON ISD MEDICAID FINANCE CONSULTING SERVICES FUND FINANCES
CATEGORY 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19
Operating Revenues
Consulting Services $3,345,480 $2,366,643 $3,212,201 $2,639,068 $861,149
Total Operating Revenues $3,345,480 $2,366,643 $3,212,201 $2,639,068 $861,149
Operating Expenses
Total Operating Expenses $4,287,529 $6,992,294 $6,630,716 $6,904,213 $3,743,057
Nonoperating Revenues
Earnings on Investments $40,839 $104,915 $177,177 $260,884 $42,949
School Health Services (SHARS) $27,164,887 $26,915,256 $27,444,421 $36,237,575 $6,877,600
Total Nonoperating Revenue $27,205,726 $27,020,171 $27,621,598 $36,498,459 $6,920,548
Income (Loss) Before Transfers $26,263,677 $22,394,520 $24,203,083 $32,233,314 $4,081,589

Transfers Out ($30,000,000) ($30,000,000) ($30,000,000) ($28,000,000)
Change in Net Assets ($3,736,323) ($7,605,480) ($5,796,917) $4,233,314
Total Net Assets Beginning $43,418,351 $39,682,028 $32,076,548 $26,279,631

Total Net Assets Ending $39,682,028 $32,076,548 $26,279,631 $30,512,945
Total Operating and Nonoperating Revenues $30,551,206 $29,386,814 $30,833,799 $39,137,527
Total Net Assets as a Percentage of Total Revenue 129.9% 109.2% 85.2% 78.0%
Note: Amounts shown for school year 2018–19 are as of December 31, 2018.
Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD Medicaid Finance Summary of Finances; February 2019.
During years when the district transferred more than the for each fund at 35.0 percent, the district could transfer at
total of operating and non-operating revenues, the transfer least $6.6 million in onetime funds from the internal service
served to reduce the total ending net assets. Effective funds to the general fund ($194,686,904 projected school
districts establish an optimum amount of reserves based on year 2018–19 internal service fund revenue x 35.0 percent =
a percent of revenue to allow the district to maintain an optimal reserves of $68,140,416; $74,745,222 projected
amount of funds in each account according to optimal reserves - $68,140,416 = $6,604,806).
operating reserves.
LATE PAYMENT OF INVOICES (REC. 24)
TEA references the GFOA’s fund balance guidelines for rules
Houston ISD does not pay invoices on time consistently,
regarding general operating fund balance. The policy states,
which increases the risk of paying interest on overdue invoices.
“GFOA recommends that governments establish a formal
policy on the level of unrestricted fund balance that should Based on the invoice data provided by Houston ISD, the
be maintained in the general fund for [generally accepted district took 44 days on average to pay invoices during school
accounting principles] and budgetary purposes. Such a year 2017–18. Figure 3–33 shows the number of days
guideline should be set by the appropriate policy body and required to pay the district’s invoices from school years
articulate a framework and process for how the government 2015–16 to 2017–18. During this period, the average
would increase or decrease the level of unrestricted fund number of days required to pay invoices has increased by
balance over a specific time period. In particular, governments nine days.
should provide broad guidance in the policy for how
resources will be directed to replenish fund balance should According to district staff, the district has no process to
the balance fall below the level prescribed.” monitor the age of pending invoices in the systems,
applications, and products (SAP) data processing system for
Additional amounts greater than each fund’s optimal amount activity fund invoices. Houston ISD uses this system to
of reserves, specified in TEA policy, can be transferred manage the finance, purchasing, and operations functions
annually to the general fund and used to conduct other across the district. Activity fund invoices are not entered into
operations prioritized by the district. the system until the clerks at the campus level uploads them
to SAP. Additionally, staff noted that the district infrequently
Because enterprise funds are business-type operations,
pays interest to vendors, and only to those who invoice the
effective districts encourage the enterprise funds to maximize
district for interest charges.
revenues, as do their business counterparts. During the
budget process, ideas for increasing revenues by investing in According to the Texas Government Code, Chapter 2251,
capital upgrades, technology, and promotional activities are Subchapter B, governmental entities are required to pay
viewed as opportunities for growth that may provide interest to vendors on overdue invoices. Houston ISD’s
additional operating funds to the general fund. Board Policy CHF (LEGAL) states that a contractual
payment owed by the district is overdue on the later of the
Houston ISD should establish a board policy that mandates
following dates: (1) the forty-fifth day after the date on which
a required level of unrestricted fund balance for the general
the district received the goods; (2) the date on which the
fund, internal service funds, and enterprise funds.
contractor completed the performance of services; or (3) the
The CFO and department staff should analyze each fund to date on which the district received the invoice for the goods
determine the optimal amount of reserves to maintain given or services. For Houston ISD, whose board meets monthly,
the unique operating characteristics and goals related to each interest begins to accrue on the forty-sixth day.
fund, and recommend to the board on the appropriate
Houston ISD’s Board Policy CHF (LEGAL) further states:
amount of reserves to hold in each fund.
The district shall compute and pay interest at the time
The CFO and board should reference GFOA guidelines in
the payment is made on the principal. Interest
developing and implementing a local fund balance policy
payments shall accompany payment of the net amount
that meets the district’s current and future needs.
due for the goods or service. The district may not
The fiscal impact of this recommendation will be determined require a vendor to petition, invoice, bill, or wait
by the fund balance policies that are adopted by the board for additional days to receive the interest due. The district
each fund. If the board sets the average amount of reserves may not require a vendor or subcontractor to agree to
waive the vendor’s or subcontractor’s right to interest FIGURE 3–33

as a condition of the contract. HOUSTON ISD’S AVERAGE NUMBER OF DAYS TO PAY
INVOICES, SCHOOL YEARS 2015–16 TO 2017–18
These provisions do not apply to payments made by the YEAR DAYS
district or a vendor in the following situations: 2015–16 35.1
• a dispute occurs between the parties involved, 2016–17 43.2
including the district, vendor, contractor, 2017–18 44.1

subcontractor, or supplier concerning the goods Note: This analysis does not consider negative invoices (credits),
invoices without payment dates, or invoices for which the invoice
delivered or the service performed that causes the date was later than the payment date. Analysis includes only
payment to be late; invoices with 0.0 days to pay and greater.
• the terms of a federal contract, grant, regulation, or Team; Houston ISD; February 2019.
statute prevent the district from making a timely

payment with federal funds; or • provide a list of late payments to the CFO monthly
showing the amount of interest paid to vendors as
• the invoice is not mailed to the person to whom it
applicable; and
is addressed in strict accordance with instructions on
the purchase order. • charge the late interest payment to the responsible
department or campus to discourage the tardy input
Based on interviews with the accounts payable staff, the
of invoices.
increase in the late payment of invoices results from
centralizing the activity fund transactions. Accounts Payable The district could implement this recommendation with
has no record that there has been a transaction until the existing resources.
campus bookkeeper enters the invoice into the SAP system.
Campus bookkeepers that are behind on entering invoices SAP ENHANCEMENTS (REC. 25)
can cause late payments to vendors. Houston ISD lacks a process to enhance the enterprise software
system in a timely manner to address operational efficiencies
Houston ISD should promote accountability and decrease across the district.
the number of invoices paid late by deducting from
departmental and campus budgets late payment charges During calendar year 1998, the district launched several
billed to the district by vendors. modules of SAP, the enterprise software system that the district
uses to manage its business operations. Due to the limitations
This change may take time for the district to implement if of the account code structure used, the evolving reporting
SAP modifications are required to meet statutory requirements of TEA, and the need to improve business
requirements. This delay may require the district to consider processes, the district decided to reengineer and reimplement
manual steps to track the age of invoices and to alert Accounts the SAP system beginning in January 2016. This
Payable that payments must be made by a certain time in reimplementation also included improvements in business
order to avoid interest charges. processes for the Construction and Facilities Services,
The district should consider the following steps to decrease Nutrition Services, Transportation Management and Fleet
the number of days required to pay invoices: Operations, and Warehouse Management departments.
The following timeline shows the actions taken by the board:

• educate the departments and campus bookkeepers
on statute regarding school districts and interest • November 2013 – the board approved an assessment
payments to vendors; to adequately define the scope and cost of the overall
SAP project;
• modify the SAP system to track when an invoice is
received and entered into the system; • May 2014 – the board approved the design phase of
the financial system project; and
• develop a list of pending invoices sorted by receiving
dates, to determine the invoices that are or could be • April 2015 – the board approved the final phase,
subject to interest payments; including implementation, launch, and ongoing
support of the project. The board approved a budget of • each department’s budget manager recompiles the
$64.0 million for the plan. spreadsheets and returns them to the Budgeting and
Financial Planning Department; and
The project started in February 2014 with an analysis phase
that included the design of a new account code structure, and • the Budgeting and Financial Planning Department
an initial road map of functionality that the district planned to uploads the files into SAP.
implement in 2015, 2016, and 2017. The use of spreadsheets in a district with the size and complexity
The goal of the project was to implement improved business of Houston ISD is inefficient and time-consuming. The CFO
processes to accommodate Houston ISD’s current and future and the Budgeting and Financial Planning Department officer
requirements, and to re-implement the SAP system. The have identified this practice as a priority concern. The board
district’s new SAP environment became active in July 2016. By approved an implementation services contract for the SAP
January 2017, the system included financial statement Budget module in April 2019.
accounts (accounts payable, accounts receivable, and general The review team identified additional enhancements to the
ledger), management accounting, project systems, plant SAP system that the district is not performing, but which
maintenance, production planning, funds management, could present an opportunity to improve performance and
materials management, warehouse management, and supplier efficiencies in other areas, including:
relationship management.
• The Nutrition Services Department uses a separate
A major part of the upgrade was to replace the district’s human system to record data required for federal free and
resource management and payroll software with SAP software reduced-price school meal programs. This system
in order to provide integration between the human resources generates orders for delivery to campuses from vendors.
and finance systems while making both systems easier to use. The order number does not match the format of the
purchase order (PO) number required by SAP. As a
According to interviews with technology staff, the district still
result, as many as 80.0 percent of all Nutrition Services
needs to implement modules for SAP Mobility, Supplier
Department invoices require manual procedures to
Resource Management, and SAP Budget.
process for payment. The disconnection between this
SAP Mobility enables the automation of a manual work order system and SAP results in delays as Accounts Payable
process by more efficiently prioritizing and assigning work staff must retrieve the PO number from SAP; and
orders with mobile devices and by tracking the activities related • SAP does not have a mechanism that can track
to the completion of a work order more accurately. The purchasing card violations. Departments and campuses
mobility module enables users to schedule and plan the use these cards to purchase goods and services, and the
completion of work orders. Additionally, the module provides Purchasing Services Department monitors their use.
the ability to track and improve customer satisfaction ratings. Staff in the Purchasing Services Department must
The Facilities Services team will utilize this module. track identified violations manually to ensure that they
SAP Supplier Relationship Management supports electronic- are corrected. If SAP had features to track purchasing
based procurement. It can help streamline operations, enforce card violations, it would be easier for staff to identify
compliance with contracts and purchasing policies, and repeat offenders and to process reimbursements due
improve overall management of the purchasing process. from staff that made unauthorized expenditures.
The district has implemented several of the planned upgrades
The SAP Budget module automates the current budget
to SAP. However, delays in implementing the remaining
development process, most of which relies on spreadsheets.
modules is affecting the district’s ability to effectively and
The current budgeting process includes the following steps:
efficiently perform necessary financial functions, particularly
• a spreadsheet is generated for each campus and in light of staffing cuts.
department, which involves exporting thousands of
Having no user-based prioritization system in place to guide
lines of data from SAP;
the work of the SAP programmers and consultants could
• budget templates for each department chief are sent result in performing enhancements that have little or no
to the budget managers, who often divide the files for direct effect on the workflow, while other critical user needs
distribution to separate departments within the group; are not being addressed.
Houston ISD should implement the modules approved by the FIGURE 3–34
board for the district’s enterprise software system and establish HOUSTON ISD STAFF OVERPAYMENTS
an implementation and prioritization committee to help guide
OVERPAYMENT STAFF AMOUNT
system upgrades and address identified operational
Total overpayments repaid by staff 1,123 $1,665,875
inefficiencies districtwide.
Total overpayments not repaid by staff 8,417 $24,336,161
The implementation and prioritization committee should
Total overpayments expensed 9,540 $26,002,037
include Information Technology Department staff, Accounts
Payable and Accounts Receivable staff, Payroll staff, and other Note: Wages of rehired staff cannot be garnished for repayment
according to Texas Payday Law, but the district can implement a
users across the district to regularly review and prioritize repayment plan as long as it gives proper notice and obtains the
requests for enhancements and fixes to the SAP system. staff’s written consent.
Team; Houston ISD Payroll Excel Schedules, February 2019.
Additionally, the Information Technology Department should
evaluate its ability to implement the necessary SAP
enhancements and determine whether an outside vendor is ISD general counsel is reviewing the matter in order to make
needed. If external experts are needed to fully implement the a recommendation to either forgive the debt or pursue the
modules, the implementation and prioritization committee amounts owed through collection efforts.
should review the requests before the CFO submits them to
At the time of the onsite review, payroll staff said that the
the board to ensure that the proposed scope of work includes
district had expensed overpayments in the financial
any peripheral issues identified in secondary requests for
statements as of June 2018. Figure 3–34 shows the
enhancements.
number of staff and amounts that were included as a payroll
The district could implement this recommendation with expense in school year 2017–18 but that related to school
existing resources. year 2016–17.
After implementing the new human resources and payroll

OVERPAYMENTS TO ACTIVE AND INACTIVE STAFF
system, the district did not attempt to collect the
(REC. 26)
overpayments, which subsequently were deemed to be
Houston ISD lacks effective controls to process staff
uncollectible during fiscal year 2017. The overpayments were
terminations in the human resources and payroll system,
expensed during fiscal year 2018, resulting in a misstatement
which results in overpayments.
of the 2017 financial statements. The external auditor
Overpayments result from advance payments made to staff reported the following effects:
who have left the district before their contracts have ended, or
The June 30, 2017, financial statements include
from the Payroll Department not being notified when staff are
misstatements for the overstatement of the balance of
no longer employed by the district.
teacher’s payroll receivable of approximately $26 million
The Office of Internal Audit issued a report in December and therefore the beginning balance of fund balance/net
2018, which determined that the main cause for the position in the June 30, 2018, financial statements is
overpayments stems from how the district calculates pay for overstated by the same amount. The error in timing of
staff who worked less than 12 months, (e.g., teachers and recognition of the payroll expense results in misstatement
food service staff). These staff received advance pay for time of the change in fund balance/net position in the fiscal
not earned of approximately one and one-half pay periods year 2018–19 financial statements, due to the
before their contract start dates for the school year. The recognition of the payroll expense in fiscal year 2018
district recovered the advance payments through payroll that should have been recognized in the prior year.
deductions during the contracted period. The process of
Furthermore, failure to identify uncollectible accounts
paying staff in advance changed in July 2016 when the
timely could result in future misstatements of the
district implemented a new human resources and payroll
district’s financial statements.
system. However, the amounts that had been advanced in
July and August 2016 before the transition to the new system The Office of Internal Audit determined that a secondary
were not collected. According to the CFO, the board has not reason some staff were overpaid was because campuses and
formally forgiven the staff overpayments and the Houston departments did not timely submit termination notices to
the Human Resources Department. Additionally, when the FIGURE 3–35

overpayments did occur, the causes were not documented or HOUSTON ISD BALANCES DUE FROM CURRENT STAFF
investigated to identify the departments or campuses
YEAR BALANCE DUE
responsible for consistent delays in informing the Human
Resources Department of staff terminations. Therefore, there 2016–17 $561,392
has been no accountability for the costs expended 2017–18 $219,742
unnecessarily by the district. 2018–19 $78,516
The Office of Internal Audit recommended that the chief Note: Amount shown for school year 2018–19 is as of December
31, 2018.
human resources officer and the CFO review and strengthen Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Review Team; Houston
the process for terminated staff. Payroll reports reflecting staff ISD, February 2019.
being overpaid each pay period should be forwarded to
campuses, departments, and senior management for review
staff in the payroll system and implement controls to
and corrective action. The district also implemented time-
prevent overpayments;
reporting requirements for terminated staff, but this has not
stopped overpayments from occurring as the process for • the chief human resources officer should inform
terminating staff is not always followed. department managers when an overpayment occurs
so that corrective action can be taken and future
As noted in the audit finding, the implementation of the new
overpayments can be eliminated;
SAP system in 2016, has decreased, but not stopped the
occurrence of overpayments. • the controller should hire a collection agency or assign
dedicated staff in an effort to collect funds due; and
Figure 3–35 shows the current status of active staff
overpayments as tracked by the Payroll Department from • the controller should record overpayment balances due
school year 2016–17 to December 2018. in SAP official accounts receivable records to prevent
understatement in financial reporting.
The overpayment balances owed to the district have not been
recorded in the SAP system as official accounts receivable. The fiscal impact assumes that Houston ISD collects all
Only one staff overpayment from 2009 was transferred from accounts receivable from active staff for a onetime gain of
the old legacy system and is an active accounts receivable. $859,650. The fiscal impact does not assume additional gains
During onsite interviews, staff said that balances entered into from overpayments after December 2018.
the SAP system by Payroll Department staff automatically
move into the receivables category and contribute to the ALTERNATIVE CERTIFICATION PROGRAM (REC. 27)
balances reflected in the audited financial statements. The
review team requested a reconciliation report to verify that Houston ISD’s Alternative Certification Program (ACP) has
these overpayments are in the accounts receivable balance, but operated at an annual loss for the past three years, and the
the district did not provide it. Subsequent to the onsite review, trend appears to be continuing.
the district provided the reconciliation report showing the The ACP recruits and trains individuals with a bachelor’s
accounts receivable balances for the staff overpayments. degree in a subject other than education to become certified
Houston ISD should strengthen the process for staff teachers. Individuals who want to pursue alternative
terminations in the human resources and payroll system to certification must pass a test administered by TEA to be
eliminate overpayments, and complete the corrective action considered. After applying online and interviewing with ACP
plans recommended by external and internal auditors. program staff, candidates who are accepted attend orientation
and pay the entry fee. Once in the program, candidates begin
The district should take the following steps: interviewing with campus principals. Placement in a campus is
at the discretion of the campus principal, but 100.0 percent of
• the controller should reconcile accounts
the candidates who completed the ACP have been hired and
receivable quarterly;
placed in campuses. Individuals who complete ACP training
• the chief human resources officer and the CFO are certified teachers that pay Houston ISD $5,000 through
should review the current process for terminating payroll deductions for the training they receive.
FIGURE 3–36
HOUSTON ISD ALTERNATIVE CERTIFICATION PROGRAM FINANCIAL SUMMARY
CATEGORY 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19 (1)
Operating Revenues
Total Operating Revenues $1,124,422 $1,161,391 $937,148 $705,497 $1,167,875
Operating Expenses
Operating Income (Loss) $50,619 ($206,710) ($543,024) ($325,279) ($600)
Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses)
Earnings on Investments $308 $1,614 $2,537 $0 $600
Total Nonoperating Revenue $308 $1,614 $2,537 $0 $600
Income (Loss) Before Transfers $50,927 ($205,096) ($540,487) ($325,279) $0
Change in Net Assets $50,927 ($205,096) ($540,487) ($325,279) $0
Total Net Assets, Beginning $696,993 $747,920 $542,824 $2,337 ($322,942)
Total Net Assets, Ending $747,920 $542,824 $2,337 ($322,942) ($322,942)

Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD; February 2019.
The fees collected from the program from school years 2015–16 have continued to increase while revenues have not
to 2017–18 have not been sufficient to cover the expenses of kept pace;
operating the program. In addition, market competition has
• ACP staff should analyze the number of annual
affected program participation, and the ACP now has a
ACP participants needed to operate the program at
$300,000 deficit. Figure 3–36 shows Houston ISD’s ACP
a net profit;
financial summary for school years 2014–15 to 2018–19. Since
school year 2015–16, the program has been operating at a net • ACP staff should explore opportunities to increase
loss of between $200,000 to more than $500,000 per year. the exposure of the program in the community to
The continued operation of the decreasing ACP program is attract additional participants; and
straining district resources. During onsite interviews, staff said • the ACP should consider partnering with other local
that the district has made cuts in an attempt to reduce ACPs to provide placement services within Houston
expenditures or match them to revenues. However, 2018–19 ISD’s campuses.
budgeted expenses are expected to increase from the previous
year, and the increase in budgeted revenues is not consistent The fiscal impact assumes that the district eliminates the
with the decreases during the previous three-year period. The Alternative Certification Program, for an annual savings of
ACP program manager said that the district does not want to $1,168,475, which equals the program’s school year 2018–
raise fees for fear of losing candidates to one of the many 19 budget. The fiscal impact does not assume further losses
competing alternative certification programs in the area, which for the program. Since the time of the review, the district
could exacerbate the loss of revenues. reported that as of June 30, 2019, the Alternative Certification
Program had a net income of $198,404.
Houston ISD should increase the annual revenue of the
alternative certification program to meet operating expenses, or MANAGEMENT COMMUNICATION (REC. 28)
eliminate the program and seek partnerships with other
Limited communication among departments in the CFO’s Office
certifying organizations to meet Houston ISD’s ongoing needs.
has resulted in operational separations, resulting in a lack of
The district could take the following steps: coordination and decreasing opportunities to promote efficiencies.
• the Office of Internal Audit could conduct an audit of The CFO’s Office includes 255 staff in the Controller’s
the ACP to determine why expenses for the program Office, the Budgeting and Financial Planning
Department, the Benefits Department, the Medicaid coordination between departments prevents efficiencies from
Finance Consulting Services Department, the Business being realized.
Logistics and Purchasing Department, and the Tax and
The CFO’s Office should resume regular weekly staff
Financial Management Attorney.
meetings with department managers to exchange
During onsite interviews, staff said that the CFO does not information, inform staff, and seek opportunities to increase
hold regular staff meetings with the managers and directors efficiencies and collaboration across teams.
who oversee the departments that report to him. The CFO
Resuming regular staff meetings could address some of the
said that he meets almost daily with the department directors
concerns that the divisions are separated and that decisions
that report to him individually and shares information
are made without all participants understanding how those
among the departments.
decisions could affect other departments or the CFO’s
This method enables him to maintain constant contact with Office. Holding weekly or twice monthly meetings with
staff; however, it does not facilitate the exchange of information directors and managers that report directly to the CFO
among the managers and directors in the CFO’s Office. could help to improve communication among the groups
and improve decision making by considering the
During onsite interviews, staff said that the previous CFO perspectives of each constituent.
held weekly meetings in which department directors had an
opportunity to share and discuss issues that affected the The district could implement this recommendation with
departments or district as a whole. These meetings no longer existing resources.
take place.
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATION
The following examples of limited communication among During field work, the review team observed additional
departments were reported: issues regarding the district’s programs and services to
• the Budget and Planning Department is not always students, staff, and the community. These observations are
consulted when other departments make decisions presented for consideration as the district implements the
that affect budget priorities. For example, the Budget report’s other findings and recommendations.
and Planning Officer was not consulted about the The district should examine the role of the Ethics and
most recent bond/maintenance note issue; Compliance Office, and the role of the fraud-and-abuse
reporting hotline. The Ethics and Compliance Office has
• some directors said they often were unaware of
moved several times between the Internal Audit and General
developments or issues occurring in other departments
Counsel departments. At the time of the onsite visit, the
that had affected their departments;
district had no staff filling the three budgeted positions, and
• communication between the CFO and the Medicaid the work was divided among the attorneys in the General
Finance Consulting Services Department officer Counsel’s Office. Previously, the Ethics and Compliance
occurs rarely; and Office investigated calls made to the district’s hotline
established for staff to report instances of fraud and abuse
• managers and directors that report to the CFO and other improprieties. At the time of the onsite visit, the
were unable to discuss issues or processes that affect Internal Audit Department managed the hot line. The
multiple departments effectively because each director existence of the hotline may not be known to all staff, and it
could provide information only about his or her own is not available to the public.
department’s activities.
Faced with budget and staff cuts, the Business and Operations
Division must seek innovative ways to achieve each
department’s objectives with fewer resources. However, there
is no coordinated effort between the departments to identify
areas for improvement or how to increase efficiencies or
effectiveness. Staff said they often saw opportunities for
improvement, but that limited communication and
FISCAL IMPACT
The Legislative Budget Board’s (LBB) School Performance Review Team identified a fiscal impact for the following recommendations:

3. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
23. Establish a board $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,604,806
policy that mandates
a required level of
unrestricted fund
balance for the
general fund, internal
service funds, and
enterprise funds.
26. Strengthen the $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $859,650
process for staff
terminations in the
human resources
and payroll system
to eliminate
overpayments,
and complete the
corrective action
plans recommended
by external and
internal auditors.
27. Increase the $1,168,475 1,168,475 $1,168,475 $1,168,475 $1,168,475 $5,842,375 $0
annual revenue
of the alternative
certification
program to meet
operating expenses,
or eliminate the
program and seek
partnerships with
other certifying
organizations to
meet Houston ISD’s
ongoing needs.
Total $1,168,475 $1,168,475 $1,168,475 $1,168,475 $1,168,475 $5,842,375 $7,464,456
4. ASSET AND RISK MANAGEMENT
Management of the Houston Independent School District’s BACKGROUND

(ISD) cash and investments is the responsibility of the chief An independent school district’s asset and risk management
financial officer (CFO), the controller, and the treasurer. The function controls costs by ensuring adequate protection
Board of Education has designated these positions as the against significant losses with the lowest possible insurance
district’s investment officers. Pursuant to the Texas Public premiums. This protection includes the identification of risks
Funds Investment Act, these positions develop and maintain a and methods to minimize their impact. Risks can include
portfolio of nearly $1.5 billion in investments for Houston investments, liabilities, capital assets, and insurance.
ISD that provide safety from risk, liquidity to support cash
requirements, and a yield providing a reasonable rate of return. Managing assets and risks is dependent on the organizational
structure of the district. Larger districts typically have staff
ACCOMPLISHMENT dedicated to asset and risk management. Managing investments
Houston ISD has refunded bonds and maximized includes identifying those with maximum interest-earning
the benefits of tax increment reinvestment zones to potential while safeguarding funds and ensuring liquidity to
achieve savings on debt obligations and optimize the meet fluctuating cash-flow demands. Forecasting and
use of capital funds. managing revenue includes efficient tax collections to enable a
district to meet its cash-flow needs, earn the highest possible
FINDINGS interest, and estimate state and federal funding. Capital asset
Houston ISD lacks effective cash management management should identify a district’s property (e.g.,
oversight of the district’s investment portfolio. buildings, vehicles, equipment, etc.) and protect it from theft
and obsolescence. Insurance programs include health coverage
Houston ISD lacks a central accounts receivable for staff, workers’ compensation, and district liability.
system or process that tracks and accumulates all
receivable balances across the district. Houston ISD’s Treasury Department reports to the controller
and operates with a treasurer and five staff. Figure 4–1 shows
Houston ISD has not developed an effective process the organization of the Treasury Department.
to address increasing property insurance premiums.
The Treasury Department performs the following activities:
Houston ISD has not evaluated self-insured funds to
determine whether the programs are operating efficiently. • receipting and depositing cash and checks;
• printing disbursement checks for accounts payable

RECOMMENDATIONS and transferring the information to the bank;
Recommendation 29: Enhance controls of cash
and investment management processes. FIGURE 4–1
HOUSTON ISD TREASURY DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
Recommendation 30: Monitor all receivables
to record, reconcile, and report in the district’s
financial statements in a timely manner. Treasurer
Recommendation 31: Analyze property insurance

Senior Treasury Analyst
needs based on construction projects and
increasing property values, and present a plan to
the board to control increasing premium costs. Accountant – 2 Accounting Clerk II
Recommendation 32: Analyze the self-funded
insurance funds compared to coverage offered by Accounting Clerk III
an independent insurance provider and present
the findings to the board. Team; Houston ISD, February 2019.
ASSET AND RISK MANAGEMENT HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
• monitoring the balances of checking accounts for all often offer competitive rates of return. The Treasury
the business functions; Department primarily invests in such pools and does not use
an investment adviser.
• executing electronic payments and transfers among
bank accounts; The Quarterly Investment Report documents the results of
Houston ISD’s investment activities, which include a variety
• monitoring investment rates; and
of cash deposit accounts, investment pools, and agency
• reporting daily regarding the accounts’ cash activity securities. This report, presented quarterly to the board,
and status. contains graphical and written descriptions of portfolio
balances, yield analysis, maturity schedules, and account
Houston ISD Board Policy (LOCAL), as stated in the
activity for all business areas.
Treasury Department’s Policy and Procedure manual,
outlines the district’s combined cash management and Figure 4–2 shows Houston ISD’s portfolio totals as of
investment policy, which applies to all financial assets within December 31, 2018.
the district’s authority. These assets include the general fund,
special revenue fund, food service fund, capital projects fund, The Risk Management Division primarily performs the
debt service fund, trust and agency fund, enterprise funds, district’s risk management within the Business Logistics and
internal service funds, and activity funds. Risk Management Department, which reports to the CFO.
The policy includes the following objectives: Figure 4–3 shows the organization of the Business Logistics
and Risk Management Department.
• assure the safety of district funds;
The Risk Management Department manages the
• maintain sufficient liquidity to provide adequate and following functions:
timely working funds;
• districtwide insurance coverage and claims, including
• maintain the public trust as custodians and managers the self-funded automobile insurance program, but
responsible for the investing of funds, subject to state not health or workers’ compensation coverage;
and federal laws; and
• environmental consulting, including air quality, and
• optimize yield as expressed through rate of return and provides mold and asbestos consulting services; and
interest earnings.
• safety and emergency management, including safety
The policy includes the following additional objectives: drills, trainings, inspections and other campus safety
• diversify investments in maturity, instruments, and and compliances issues, and assists the Houston ISD
issuers; and Police Department with active shooter drills.
• avoid investments for speculation. The Benefits Department, which also reports to the CFO,
manages two self-funded insurance programs including
As of February 2019, the district maintains 39 open bank employee health coverage and workers’ compensation.
accounts that the Treasury Department reviews daily and Figure 4–4 shows the organizational structure of the
reconciles monthly. The Legislative Budget Board’s School Benefits Department.
Performance Review Team visited the district in February
2019. During the review team’s onsite interviews, district The Fixed Asset Accounting Group in the Controller’s Office
staff said that the department is establishing a functional tracks all capital assets and all electronic and technology
structure that will manage all cash through the general fund. equipment. In addition, the group is responsible for reporting
As part of this transition, the district plans to close fixed assets and their depreciation in the district’s
approximately half of these bank accounts and their comprehensive annual financial reports.
associated checking accounts by the second quarter of 2019.
Fixed assets or capital assets are tangible items that have a
A government investment pool or local government useful life expectancy of at least two years. Fixed assets are
investment pool is a state or local government resource controllable, are not consumed as a result of use, and have a
offered to public entities to invest public funds. These pools unit cost of at least $5,000. The value of the asset depreciates
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT ASSET AND RISK MANAGEMENT
FIGURE 4–2
HOUSTON ISD QUARTERLY INVESTMENT REPORT
DECEMBER 31, 2018
MUNICIPAL LONE STAR
BOND AGENCY INVESTMENT TEXPOOL TEXSTAR CERTIFICATES TOTAL
CATEGORY INVESTMENTS INVESTMENTS POOL INVESTMENTS INVESTMENTS OF DEPOSIT PORTFOLIO
General Fund $9,039,244 $39,596,531 $76,255,859 $103,516,791 $57,068,278 $100,240,000 $385,716,703
Capital Projects $0 $11,999,655 $295,262,321 $215,699,152 $254,249,926 $0 $777,211,054
Fund
Debt Service $0 $0 $2,132,478 $88,404,240 $0 $0 $90,536,718
Fund
Food Service $0 $0 $7,156,326 $32,524,132 $0 $0 $39,680,458
Fund
Marketplace $0 $0 $652,452 $0 $0 $0 $652,452
Health $0 $0 $12,597,736 $5,321,836 $0 $0 $17,919,572
Insurance
Workers’ $0 $0 $30,081,671 $8,658,440 $0 $0 $38,740,111
Compensation
Internal Service $0 $0 $0 $4,067,707 $0 $0 $4,067,707
Fund
Medicaid $0 $0 $17,297,476 $42,752 $0 $0 $17,340,228
Print Shop $0 $0 $0 $5,140,919 $0 $0 $5,140,919
Special $0 $0 $8,778,283 $50,327,341 $0 $0 $59,105,624
Revenue Fund
Trust and $0 $0 $63,361 $5,093,807 $0 $0 $5,157,168
Agency Funds
Activity Funds $0 $0 $23,718,267 $594,187 $0 $0 $24,312,454
Public Facility $0 $5,923,299 $0 $0 $13,156,526 $0 $19,079,825
Corporation (1)
Total $9,039,244 $57,519,485 $473,996,230 $519,391,304 $324,474,730 $100,240,000 $1,484,660,993
Investments
Note: (1) The Public Facility Corporation has issued Lease Revenue Bonds for building two high schools in 1998, a food warehouse facility in
2006, four elementary schools in 2010, and three instructional facilities in 2015.
Source: Houston ISD, Quarterly Investment Report, December 31, 2018.
over its useful life. Fixed assets are tracked for each campus The district achieved savings after refunding several of its
through the fixed asset ledger for capital assets within the bonds issued from 2007 to 2017. Bond refunding involves
district’s enterprise software system. The district uses a retiring an outstanding bond by using the proceeds from the
separate software system to inventory and track technology- issuance of a new bond. The new bond typically is issued at a
related equipment. lower rate of return than the retired bond, resulting in a
decrease in the amount of interest paid by the issuer. Figure
Campus and department administrators or their assignees 4–5 shows Houston ISD’s refunding actions for bonds issued
tag the fixed assets at the time of purchase; manage the from 2007 to 2017. The resulting cash-flow savings of
maintenance, transfer, and disposal of assets throughout the $312.0 million results in decreased interest costs and fund
year; and conduct the annual inventory. availability for future debt payments and capital projects.
DETAILED ACCOMPLISHMENT The district also has maximized the benefits of tax increment
reinvestment zones (TIRZ) to build new campuses and invest
REFUNDING OF BONDS in the development of blighted or underdeveloped areas within
Houston ISD has refunded bonds and maximized district boundaries. A TIRZ enables the financing of public
the benefits of tax increment reinvestment zones to improvements in such an area through the use of additional
achieve savings on debt obligations and optimize the use property tax revenues, referred to as increments, that result
of capital funds. from these investments. Houston ISD participates in 13
FIGURE 4–3
HOUSTON ISD BUSINESS LOGISTICS AND RISK MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT, SCHOOL YEAR 2018–19
Business Logistics and Purchasing Officer
Business Solutions, General Manager
Risk Management, Senior Manager

Administrative
Assistant II
Environmental Safety and Emergency Insurance Manager

Consulting Manager Management Manager
Business Analyst – 3
Environmental
Consultant Team Lead Risk Management Field Safety
Trainer – 2 Team Lead
Indoor Air Quality
Inspector Field Safety Field Safety
Team Lead Inspector
Field Safety
Inspector – 5
FIGURE 4–4
HOUSTON ISD BENEFITS DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION, SCHOOL YEAR 2018–19
Benefits General Manager
Senior Administrative Assistant
Senior Benefits Senior Benefits Senior Manager

Manager, Medical Manager, Administration Benefits Support
Program
Senior Claim Compensation Senior

Administrator Unemployment Retirement
Administrator Counselor
Workers' Senior Benefits
Compensation Support
Senior Benefits Senior Administrator
Manager
Analyst – 2 Benefits
Counselor
Benefits Benefits
Analyst Counselor Workers' Senior Administrative
Compensation Benefits Assistant I
Specialist – 3 Representative
Assault Leave Benefits
Administrator Representative
FIGURE 4–5
HOUSTON ISD BOND REFUNDING ACTIONS, FEBRUARY 2019
CASH-FLOW NET PRESENT NET PRESENT VALUE
DATE SERIES PAR VALUE ISSUED SAVINGS VALUE SAVINGS SAVINGS PERCENTAGE
3/22/2007 Limited Tax School Refunding $279,865,000 $19,275,801 $11,564,875 4.1%
Bonds, Series 2007
4/15/2009 Limited Tax Refunding Bonds, $14,160,000 $1,666,000 $1,594,371 11.3%
Series 2009
5/15/2012 (1) Variable Rate Limited Tax $182,080,000 $0 $0 0.0%
Refunding Bonds, Series 2012
Series 2013A
Series 2013C
Series 2014B
7/13/2015 Maintenance Tax Refunding $40,360,000 $4,834,811 $4,575,440 11.3%
Bonds, Series 2015
4/12/2016 Limited Tax School and Refunding $264,315,000 $77,513,524 $52,502,998 17.5%
Bonds, Series 2016A
Bonds, Series 2016B
Bonds, Series 2017
6/29/2017 Lease Revenue Refunding Bonds, $21,550,000 $3,524,898 $2,974,804 12.3%
Series 2017
Total $1,683,485,000 $312,025,158 $226,357,975
Note: (1) Variable rate refunding was a technical refunding due to changes in term and rate modes and was not intended to generate savings.
TIRZs established by the City of Houston. At least two high • construction of North Houston Early College
schools, Westside High School and Cesar Chavez High School, High School.
have been built with TIRZ funding. The following other
projects also were completed with TIRZ funding: Houston ISD benefits from bond refunding and TIRZ
participation in the following ways:
• rebuilding Kolter, Scarborough, Mitchell, and
Braeburn elementary schools; • bond refunding generates substantial interest cost
savings for the district;
• completion of bus dropoff and parking lot projects
for Burbank Elementary School, Burbank Middle • TIRZ participation generates funding for capital
School, and Windsor Village Elementary School; projects without requiring a bond program or
• construction of Energy Institute and North Forest additional debt;
high schools;
• TIRZ financing enables the development of
• renovation of Codwell Elementary School; unproductive, underdeveloped, or blighted areas
• roofing restoration for Attucks Middle School, within district boundaries into viable, higher-value
Stevens Elementary, Shadydale Elementary, and properties; and
Anderson Elementary;
• improvements such as roads, streets, bridges, drainage
• parking garage built for Lamar High School and the and detention facilities, parks, plazas, and open spaces
High School for the Performing and Visual Arts; and enhance district property.
DETAILED FINDINGS FIGURE 4–6

HOUSTON ISD INVESTMENTS BY FUND TYPE
CASH MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT (REC. 29) DECEMBER 2018
Houston ISD lacks effective cash management oversight of Federal Home Loan
the district’s investment portfolio. Mortgage Corporation
(2.2%)
The board designated the CFO, controller, and treasurer as TexPool
district investment officers. However, the treasurer is the only Investment Pool TexSTAR
administrator actively managing the district’s investments, (35.0%) Investments
(21.9%)
and the CFO and controller primarily authorize the Federal Farm
treasurer’s decisions. This arrangement provides limited Credit Bank Certificates of
checks and balances for the activities of the staff in charge of (1.7%) Deposit
(6.8%)
an investment portfolio of nearly $1.5 billion, which places
the district at increased risk of malfeasance by the treasurer. Lone Star Municipal Bond
Investment Pool Investments
The district keeps a limited amount of cash, less than $1.0 (31.9%) (0.6%)
million, in checking accounts. Treasury Department staff
Note: Federal Home Loan Bank and Treasury Bonds amounts
transfer funds to pools multiple times per day to earn interest. round to 0.0 percent.
The district does not consult with a financial adviser and uses Source: Houston ISD, Quarterly Investment Report, December
31, 2018.
pools for most investments.
Figure 4–6 shows information from the treasurer’s Quarterly staff outside of the Treasury Department are informed of the
Investment Report presented to the board. It shows the district’s district’s cash-flow needs and cash position. The district lacks
combination of investments as of December 31, 2018. a tool for forecasting cash levels that staff responsible for
financial oversight can use to match available funds with
According to the Quarterly Investment Report dated
anticipated needs. This lack of oversight increases the
December 31, 2016, 74.0 percent of funds in Houston ISD’s
possibility that unexpected events could result in nonpayment
investment portfolio were invested in pools such as TexPool,
of obligations.
TexStar, and Lone Star Pool. In the report dated December
31, 2017, 83.0 percent of the district’s investment funds The review team noted examples of a single staff or
were in pools. This amount increased to 89.0 percent in the department performing cash management duties that should
December 31, 2018 quarterly report. be distributed among multiple staff or departments in the
interests of financial accountability and transparency. For
School districts commonly use investment pools to earn
example, no staff outside of the Treasury Department has the
interest on funds. Many districts that do not have investment
authority to process wire transfers, which the district uses
officers or advisers rely exclusively on pools to generate
regularly to transfer funds among accounts to receive the
interest income on their investments. However, effective
highest possible rate of interest return. Treasury Department
districts consider all investment opportunities and actively
staff authorize and oversee the entire process, with no external
manage their investment portfolios to generate the highest
monitoring or verification.
rate of return on funds.
An August 2018 internal audit report documents another
During fiscal year 2016, the treasurer discontinued cash-flow
example, which involved the general ledger account
forecasting as part of the quarterly report to the board. Cash-
reconciliation process. The staff that reconciled the account
flow forecasting is a projection of the district’s future financial
also prepared and approved the general ledger entries for
position based on anticipated payments and receivables.
Treasury Department-related transactions, including
These forecasts are used to determine the availability of funds
investments. The Office of Internal Audit concluded that this
for meeting financial obligations. During onsite interviews,
process should be overseen by staff that are independent of
district staff said that the benefit of these forecasts is not
the transactions.
worth the amount of time it required to prepare them.
Instead, the treasurer includes a simplified cash position The report also noted that the district has no independent,
report in the quarterly report to the board. Consequently, no periodic review of users’ access to the cash management and
investment systems. The district uses these systems daily to and products (SAP), and others send amounts they have
transfer funds among banking and investment accounts. The invoiced to the General Accounting Department to upload.
cash management and investment systems are critical third- Often, timing lapses occur between when an account
party, web-based systems that should be protected from receivable is generated and when it is invoiced and entered
unauthorized users or those with inappropriate access levels. In into SAP. It is not clear how the district accumulates and
response to the audit finding, district staff said that quarterly reconciles all the receivable balances generated across
reviews of the cash management and investment systems departments for the annual financial reporting process.
would be implemented and documented. However, the district
was unable to provide these reports to the review team. The following examples show the fragmented nature of
accounts receivable across the district:
Proper oversight of the treasury function assures the safety of
district funds. Oversight also helps a district to maintain • charter school contracts authorize charters to make
sufficient liquidity in accounts, maintain public trust, lease payments for buildings to Houston ISD at the
optimize interest earnings, and decrease overall risk. end of the school year;
Houston ISD should enhance controls of cash and investment • Internal Service Funds, including food service-
management processes. catering and the district’s print shop, sell to external
customers and upload the related receivable amounts
To ensure proper oversight of the cash management and to the SAP system;
investment functions, Houston ISD should implement the
following procedures: • out-of-district tuition is collected for some students at
a rate of $10,000 per year; this information is tracked
• involve the CFO and controller in investment by the General Accounting Department;
decisions, with documentation of their input in
signed investment transaction orders; • the Transportation Department bills campuses for
field trip bus rentals by completing an invoice and
• present quarterly cash-flow reports to the CFO sending it to the General Accounting Department
and the board along with the quarterly investment one month or more after the rentals occurred;
reports; and
• one staff position owes the district for payroll
• include staff outside of the Treasury Department, overpayments, and a receivable balance has been
such as the assistant controller, in an oversight recorded to record the payments received;
function to provide additional safeguards for wire
transfer transactions. • the Payroll Department has staff overpayments that
are tracked but are not recorded as receivables or sent
No fiscal impact is assumed for this recommendation. The to the General Accounting Department; and
district should evaluate the staffing level necessary to
implement the recommendation and to determine a fiscal • the Treasury Department collects cash and applies
impact, if any. payments to various receivable accounts. The
department often holds checks for a week or longer
ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE TRACKING (REC. 30) onsite until staff determine to which account the
payment should be applied.
Houston ISD lacks a central accounts receivable system or
process that tracks and accumulates all receivable balances The review team requested but did not receive a list of the
across the district. receivable balances that were reconciled and included in the
comprehensive annual financial reports for the last three
Accounts receivable are funds owed to an organization in
fiscal years.
exchange for goods sold or services rendered. Several
departments and activities generate accounts receivable for In the audited financial statements for June 30, 2018, a
Houston ISD, which results in a fragmented system that material misstatement was noted for the district’s failure to
does not enable the district to determine the amount of record approximately $20.0 million of School Health and
receivables owed at any given time. Certain departments Related Services (SHARS) revenue and a related receivable
upload their receivables into the district’s systems applications amount. SHARS revenue is generated by the district’s
Medicaid Finance Consulting Services Department. Material The district uses the following process to obtain
misstatements can indicate a weakness in or lack of internal insurance coverage:
controls. Additional material misstatements may continue to
occur if the district does not complete proper review and • the board approves a four-year contract with an
reconciliation of receivable data in a timely manner. insurance broker;
The management response to the material misstatement was • the broker obtains the marketing and pricing
that staff would analyze and reconcile accounts receivable information for all policies;
balances quarterly. The review team requested copies of the • district staff review the bids, negotiates pricing, and
quarterly reconciliation statements, but the district was selects the companies;
unable to provide them.
• the board approves the negotiation and purchase of
Houston ISD should monitor all receivables to record,
insurance for the coming year; and
reconcile, and report in the district’s financial statements in a
timely manner. • the district bids and renews policies annually.
To address the deficiencies in accounting for the receivable Based on onsite interviews, district staff are not involved
balances across the district, Houston ISD should implement in negotiations with the insurance carriers and rely on the
the following steps: broker’s recommendations to determine which policies
the district should purchase. The district has no policies
• complete an assessment of which departments
or procedures to inform or guide staff in the process for
maintain receivable balances for revenues and
purchasing insurance. The CFO’s involvement is to
reimbursements that they generate;
present the broker’s recommendations to the board for
• document procedures for how each department approval. Subsequent to the onsite fieldwork, district staff
records receivables, the timeframe for reconciling indicated that a licensed broker is required to negotiate
receivable accounts, and where these accounts appear directly with the insurance companies and that the Risk
in the financial statements; and Management Department negotiates the pricing with and
through the approved broker. Staff also indicated that
• require the CFO to review the quarterly receivable
Houston ISD has an annual bid schedule established to
reports to ensure that receivables are recorded and
either rebid or renew each type of insurance and that a
reconciled in a timely and accurate manner.
committee is formed to evaluate all bids and make a final
The district could implement this recommendation with recommendation to the board.
existing resources.
Property insurance premiums are based on Houston ISD’s
RISING PROPERTY INSURANCE COSTS (REC. 31) total insured values at risk and a rate of 0.2259 per
$100.0 of insured value, including taxes and fees. The
Houston ISD has not developed an effective process to current statement of values for assets covered by insurance
address increasing property insurance premiums. totals approximately $5.1 billion and is expected to
Houston ISD’s property insurance premiums during school increase as construction and renovations continue. As the
year 2018–19 increased significantly from the previous year. The value of Houston ISD’s portfolio increases, the premiums
district has a comprehensive group of property-related insurance also will increase.
policies that cover buildings and equipment. However, from Materials presented at a March 2019 board meeting included
school years 2017–18 to 2019–20, the premiums for property the following statement:
insurance for Houston ISD are projected to increase by more
than 50.7 percent. According to staff, a portion of the increase Houston ISD carries a portfolio of all risk property
is due to claims related to Hurricane Harvey’s effects when insurance policies based on a manuscript form to
the storm made landfall in the Houston area in August 2017. protect Houston ISD’s schools, support service
However, a majority of the increase in insurance premiums facilities, and contents valued at approximately $5.1
relates to new construction, increased property values, and billion spread over an area of 312.0 square miles. The
campuses that will open in upcoming years. current portfolio of policies includes limits of $250.0
FIGURE 4–7
HOUSTON ISD PROPERTY INSURANCE PREMIUMS
(IN MILLIONS)
PERCENTAGE CHANGE
CATEGORY 2017–18 2018–19 2019–20 FROM 2017–18
Total Premiums $7.1 $9.2 $10.7 50.7%
Total Limits Per Occurrence $250.0 $250.0 $250.0 0.0%
Value of District Buildings and Content $4,800.0 $4,900.0 $5,100.0 6.3%
Premium Rate Calculation 0.1615 per $100 0.1818 per $100 0.2259 per $100 39.9%
Note: Amounts for school year 2019–20 are projected.
Source: Houston ISD, Property Insurance Reports, school years 2017–18 to 2019–20.
million per occurrence, with separate sublimits for To mitigate the costs of increasing property insurance
named-storm wind, flood, and earthquake. The 2018– premiums, effective school districts develop strategies that
2019 deductibles are $5.0 million per occurrence for consider their current and future property insurance needs.
wind, hail, and/or flood losses due to a named storm; Districts determine their needs based on the anticipated
and $500,000 per occurrence for losses due to wind, construction of new schools and buildings, and the strategies
hail, flood, and earthquake. The 2019–2020 incorporate all available information relating to facilities and
deductibles are to be determined and will include increasing property values. To achieve savings on insurance
additional coverage for high-risk areas. A deductible premiums, districts often consult external advisers to prepare
buy-back policy will be put in place to reduce the per- specifications and evaluate the bids. Through the bidding
occurrence deductible from $5.0 million to $2.5 process and the adviser’s evaluation of policies, districts
million for wind, hail, and/or flood losses due to a may achieve a decrease in total premiums ranging from 5.0
named storm. percent to 10.0 percent.
Figure 4–7 shows the amount of premiums paid for Houston ISD should analyze property insurance needs
insurance coverage from school years 2017–18 to 2018–19, based on construction projects and increasing property
and the projected premiums for school year 2019–20. values, and present a plan to the board to control increasing
Property insurance premiums for Houston ISD are premium costs.
projected to increase by more than 50.7 percent during the The district should take the following steps to optimize
three-year period. property insurance premiums:
District staff stated that the $3.6 million increase in premiums • the CFO and department staff should participate in
from school years 2017–18 to 2019–20 relate primarily to the bidding and negotiation of property insurance,
increased building and construction, increasing property and the insurance broker should remain the source of
values, and increased premiums due to damages from market and pricing data;
Hurricane Harvey.
• the CFO should present to the board the proposed
Determining the most effective course of action for short- coverages, options for controlling costs, and coverage
term and long-term planning requires first determining the recommendations for the coming year; and
underlying cause of the large percentage increase in total
• the CFO should inform the board regarding increases
property premiums. Although the district seeks bids for
in premiums so that the board can consider planning
insurance coverage annually, it has not developed a strategy
and budgeting details in developing appropriate
that considers property insurance premium costs related to
strategies to mitigate costs.
the ongoing construction of buildings and facilities.
Subsequent to the onsite fieldwork, staff indicated that the The fiscal impact assumes the development of strategies to
Risk Management Department works with the Construction decrease insurance premium costs by 5.0 percent, with the savings
Services Department to update insurance coverage needs per year based on the projected school year 2019–20 insurance
based on new construction, repairs and building additions. premiums, or $538,071 annually ($10,761,427 x 0.05).
EFFECTIVENESS OF SELF-INSURED PROGRAMS (REC. 32) considered a service for staff. Figure 4–10 shows Houston
ISD’s workers’ compensation statement of revenues, expenses,
Houston ISD has not evaluated self-insured funds to and changes in fund net assets from school years 2014–15 to
determine whether the programs are operating efficiently. 2018–19. After showing four years of positive operating
The district self-funds health insurance, workers’ compensation, income from school years 2014–15 to 2017–18, the program
and automobile insurance programs. Self-funding, also known is projected to incur a net operating loss of $1.9 million for
as self-insured insurance, is a plan in which the employer takes school year 2018–19. This budgeted loss results from the
on the financial risk of providing coverage and benefits to staff. district’s efforts to decrease the contribution amounts to the
In self-funding insurance, organizations pay for expenses as fund because the fund balance is projected to be approximately
they are incurred. This model differs from traditional insurance $32.3 million in total net assets.
coverage in which an employer pays a predetermined premium
Figure 4–11 shows the workers’ compensation claims for
to an insurance carrier, a policy known as a fully insured plan.
Houston ISD from school years 2015–16 to 2017–18.
Houston ISD’s employee group health insurance and workers’
Claims have remained relatively stable at approximately
compensation programs are internal service funds. Districts
2,100 claims per year from school years 2015–16 to 2017–
use internal service funds to account for services provided that
18; however, the total dollar amount of claims paid has
are not expected to produce a profit.
decreased slightly during the same period.
The Benefits Department, which reports directly to the CFO,
Houston ISD also is self-insured for automobile liability
manages the district’s health insurance. Revenues from staff and
exposures. When a district bus driver or staff is at fault for
district contributions fund the health and workers’ compensation
damages, the liability insurance pays for the injured party’s
programs. Figure 4–8 shows the costs associated with funding
medical expenses and repair bills. However, the district must
the health insurance program from school years 2014–15 to
cover the full cost for the repair and replacement of Houston
2018–19; costs increased each year. The district projected an
ISD vehicles.
operating loss of $2.1 million for school year 2018–19.
According to staff, the district decided to underfund Figure 4–12 shows Houston ISD’s automobile liability
contributions to the health insurance program for school claims and amounts paid from school years 2015–16
year 2018–19 due to the fund surplus of approximately to 2017–18 and claims for school year 2018–19 as of
$31.0 million at the end of fiscal year 2018. February 2019.
During school year 2016–17, staff contribution rates to The district is unable to determine the total costs to Houston
the health insurance fund increased from 7.0 percent ISD of self-funding the automobile insurance program because
to 9.5 percent. The district contribution increased it tracks amounts paid on liability claims only, not the costs of
$10.0 million during each of school years 2017–18 repairs to district vehicles when staff or bus drivers are at fault.
and 2018–19. The district’s financial procedures manual provides guidance
on the process for reporting accidents and the driver’s
Figure 4–9 shows Houston ISD’s health insurance responsibility when using district-owned vehicles. However,
contributions from school years 2016–17 to 2018–19. the manual does not describe the process for repairing district-
District contributions to fund the health insurance program owned vehicles when the Houston ISD driver is at fault.
have increased steadily from $90.5 million during school
year 2016–17 to a projected $115.3 million during school Houston ISD should analyze the self-funded insurance funds
year 2018–19. compared to coverage offered by an independent insurance
provider and present the findings to the board.
Subsequent to the onsite fieldwork, Houston ISD staff
indicated that the district issued a request for proposals for To evaluate each self-funded insurance program, the CFO
group health insurance in 2017 for the 2018 plan year and and Risk Management Department staff should perform the
again in 2019 for the 2020 plan year to gauge market following actions:
conditions for insurance coverage.
• analyze claims data for the self-insured programs
Workers’ compensation is a self-funded program that Houston during a specified timeframe to compare actual
ISD has structured as an internal service fund because it is costs incurred in each fund to the related insurance
FIGURE 4–8
HOUSTON ISD HEALTH INSURANCE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE ASSETS
SCHOOL YEARS 2014–15 TO BUDGETED 2018–19
CATEGORY 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19
Operating Revenues
Charges to Employees’ Other Funds $112,007,387 $119,186,998 $129,300,850 $149,653,307 $154,133,000

Miscellaneous $770,205 $719,689 $6,060,736 $9,323,506 $7,944,000
Total Operating Revenues $112,777,592 $119,906,687 $135,361,586 $158,976,813 $162,077,000
Operating Expenses
Payroll Costs $2,331,968 $1,101,412 $843,421 $1,023,119 $1,527,274

Purchased and Contracted Services $65,402 $6,470 $126,979 $4,185,104 $4,381,344
Supplies and Materials $17,801 $7,968 $9,861 $3,677 $12,000
Other Operating Expenses $13,781 $2,876 $4,111 $5,692 $20,400
Claims and Judgements $133,001,115 $141,327,026 $142,412,341 $139,817,987 $158,241,003
Operating Income (Loss) ($22,652,475) ($22,539,065) ($8,035,127) $13,941,234 ($2,105,021)

Total Nonoperating Revenue $332,535 $212,976 $84,871 $130,690 $202,000
Income (loss) Before Transfers ($22,319,940) ($22,326,089) ($7,950,256) $14,071,924 ($1,903,021)
Transfer Out $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Change in Net Assets ($22,319,940) ($22,326,089) ($7,950,256) $14,071,924 ($1,903,021)
Total Net Assets, Beginning $69,957,143 $47,637,203 $25,311,114 $17,360,858 $31,432,782
Total Net Assets, Ending $47,637,203 $25,311,114 $17,360,858 $31,432,782 $29,529,761
Note: Amounts shown are actual for school years 2014–15 to 2017–18 and budgeted amounts for school year 2018–19.
FIGURE 4–9
HOUSTON ISD HEALTH INSURANCE CONTRIBUTIONS
2016–17 PERCENTAGE 2017–18 PERCENTAGE 2018–19 PERCENTAGE
CONTRIBUTION ACTUAL CONTRIBUTED ACTUAL CONTRIBUTED BUDGETED CONTRIBUTED
Employer Contribution $90,514,243 70.0% $110,749,402 74.0% $115,310,000 75.0%
Employee Contribution $38,786,606 30.0% $38,903,904 26.0% $38,823,000 25.0%
Total Contribution $129,300,849 $149,653,306 $154,133,000
premium costs associated with bidding coverage to • based on historic costs, determine whether it is
outside insurance carriers; more effective to purchase automobile insurance
• for each category of insurance bid, require a broker to coverage for all district vehicles or whether the
present a minimum of three options showing varying board should establish a separate fund to self-insure
deductibles along with rationale for the recommended the district for damage claims that will cover the
plan based on an assessment of the district’s potential true cost for repairing and replacing district vehicles
gap coverage that could be needed in an average year; in a timely manner;
FIGURE 4–10
HOUSTON ISD WORKERS’ COMPENSATION STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES, AND CHANGES IN FUND NET ASSETS
CATEGORY 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19
Operating Revenues
Charges to Employees Other Funds $11,700,767 $9,419,981 $7,309,970 $8,551,430 $6,964,649

Miscellaneous $332,309 $564,704 $860,011 $475,066 $391,000
Total Operating Revenues $12,033,076 $9,984,685 $8,169,981 $9,026,496 $7,355,649
Operating Expenses
Payroll Costs $1,244,269 $1,321,003 $872,783 $1,762,975 $1,383,347

Purchased and Contracted Services $1,912,964 $518,202 $11,939 $10,797 $10,500
Supplies and Materials $4,861 $8,371 $2,120 $2,654 $18,960
Other Operating Expenses $430,913 $462,119 $32,599 $29,473 $518,840
Claims and Judgements $5,624,861 $4,854,683 $5,570,913 $6,631,703 $7,367,552
Depreciation $1,165 $1,165 $1,068 $913 $7,764
Operating Income (Loss) $2,814,043 $2,819,142 $1,678,559 $587,981 ($1,951,314)

Total Nonoperating Revenue $158,664 $197,537 $290,387 $543,842 $296,000
Income (loss) Before Transfers $2,972,707 $3,016,679 $1,968,946 $1,131,823 ($1,655,314)
Transfer In $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Change in Net Assets $2,972,707 $3,016,679 $1,968,946 $1,131,823 ($1,655,314)
Total Net Assets, Beginning $24,850,945 $27,823,652 $30,840,331 $32,809,277 $33,941,100
Total Net Assets, Ending $27,823,652 $30,840,331 $32,809,277 $33,941,100 $32,285,786
• conduct an annual analysis of the claims in each fund FIGURE 4–11

to ensure that the amount set aside is sufficient to HOUSTON ISD WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CLAIMS
meet the district’s associated needs; and
CATEGORY 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18
• present the results to the board for consideration Total Claims 2,150 2,091 2,133
and final approval of the option that provides an $4.9 $4.3 $4.3
Total Incurred (in millions)
affordable and sustainable healthcare program for
Houston ISD staff. Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
Team; Houston ISD, February 2019.
existing resources.
FIGURE 4–12
HOUSTON ISD AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY CLAIMS
SCHOOL YEARS 2015–16 TO 2018–19 AS OF FEBRUARY 2019
CATEGORY 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19 (1)

Open Claims 16 32 27 83
Closed Claims 688 629 532 115
Total Claims 704 661 559 198
Total Paid $1,977,771 $1,512,103 $711,530 $298,273
Note: Amounts for school year 2018–19 show claims as of February 2019.
During the onsite visit, the review team observed additional
issues regarding the district’s programs and services to students,
staff, and the community. These observations are presented for
consideration as the district implements the report’s other
findings and recommendations.
• Although departments cooperate on some issues, better
coordination would mitigate risk more effectively. The
district should consider implementing an improvement
effort for the risk management process that charges all
responsible groups with jointly mapping the processes
involved in risk management functions, identifying
cross-functional activities, and seeking ways to improve
communication and mitigate risks.
• The district’s Self-insurance Recovery Fund (SIRF) was
established to pay the deductibles on insurance claims, to
assist campuses and departments with unexpected losses
at less than the amount of the insurance deductibles but
greater than their budgets can afford, and to provide a
ready source of funds for a major property loss so that
the district can take necessary actions immediately to
resume operations. Typically, SIRF funds the difference
between the cost of damages and the insurance
deductible of $250,000. Elementary schools must pay
the first $1,000 of damages from their budgets; middle
schools, high schools, and other facilities pay the first
$5,000. The self-funded Automobile Liability Insurance
Fund (ALIF) pays claims relating to bus and automobile
accidents when the district is at fault. Because SIRF and
ALIF serve the needs of departments and campuses, the
CFO should consider configuring these funds as internal
service funds with their own budgets and tracking their
amounts through the general fund. Accounting for the
funds in this manner will facilitate the tracking of costs
for each fund and improve their efficient management
and accountability.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance Review Team has identified a fiscal impact for the following recommendation:

4. ASSET AND RISK MANAGEMENT
31. Analyze property insurance $538,071 $538,071 $538,071 $538,071 $538,071 $2,690,355 $0
needs based on construction
projects and increasing property
values, and present a plan to
the board to control increasing
premium costs.
Total $538,071 $538,071 $538,071 $538,071 $538,071 $2,690,355 $0
5. PURCHASING AND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT
An independent school district’s purchasing function Recommendation 35: Develop and implement
provides quality materials, supplies, and equipment in a efficient auditing guidelines and financial controls
timely, cost-effective manner. Purchasing includes for purchasing card processing to safeguard
identification and purchase of supplies, equipment, and district assets and ensure that all transactions
services needed by the district, and the storage and follow district procedures.
distribution of goods. The Purchasing Services
Recommendation 36: Develop clear, consistent,
Department and the Logistics Department perform
and uniform procedures for contract development,
procurement functions for the Houston Independent
management, and review at the district level, including
School District (ISD).
training for all staff with contract responsibility.
During school year 2017–18, professional and contracted
Recommendation 37: Revise travel procedures for
services accounted for $305.3 million in all funds, or 9.0
more efficient travel processing.
percent, of Houston ISD’s total expenditures. Contracts with
an annual value of less than $50,000 are approved by the Recommendation 38: Review the efficiency of each
district’s controller, and those valued at $50,000 or more are warehouse function and implement processes to
approved by the chief financial officer. make the most productive use of warehouse services.
FINDINGS BACKGROUND
Houston ISD’s procurement procedures are inefficient
and lack central oversight and effective controls. School districts in Texas are required to follow state and
federal laws and procedures applicable to purchasing. The
Houston ISD lacks a comprehensive vendor purpose of competitive bidding requirements in the Texas
evaluation, selection and approval process. Education Code, Section 44.031, is to stimulate competition,
prevent favoritism, and secure the best goods and services
Houston ISD’s use of purchasing cards lacks clear
needed for district operations at the lowest possible price.
management, auditing guidelines, and financial controls
The Texas Education Agency (TEA) developed a
Houston ISD lacks a process to manage and comprehensive purchasing module in the Financial
administer contracts effectively. Accountability System Resource Guide, which is available as a
resource for district purchasing.
Houston ISD’s staff and board travel process is
inefficient, which risks overspending. Houston ISD’s Board Policy CH (LOCAL) authorizes the
superintendent, or a delegate, to determine the purchasing
Houston ISD’s warehouse operations are inefficient,
method and make purchases of less than $100,000 in the
and are not structured to provide the best value to
aggregate. These purchases must adhere to Houston ISD
the district.
Board Policy CH (LEGAL), which stipulates that the district
is responsible only for purchases made in accordance with
RECOMMENDATIONS the adopted budget, state law, board policy, and district
Recommendation 33: Develop procurement purchasing procedures.
processes for greater productivity and
The chief financial officer (CFO) oversees the Purchasing
efficiency, ensure that purchases are tracked,
Services Department and the Logistics Department, which
and increase communication and training to
manages warehouse and textbook operations. During school
purchasing end users.
year 2018–19, the Purchasing Services and Logistics
Recommendation 34: Evaluate vendor management departments had a total of 106 staff. Of those staff, 97 were
procedures to ensure that practices are transparent and funded through the district’s general fund, and nine were
equitable, and provide the best value for the district. funded through capital projects. The combined budget of the
PURCHASING AND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
FIGURE 5–1
HOUSTON ISD PURCHASING SERVICES DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
Business Logistics and Purchasing

Officer
Purchasing Services
General Manager
Category Manager Category Manager Senior Category Senior Category

Manager Manager
Category Category
Specialist – 4 Specialist – 4
Category Travel Account/Budget
Specialist – 6 Representative Clerk
Purchasing ProCard General Clerk

Specialist Representative –3
–3
Category Purchasing
Specialist – 6 Analyst – 2
Business Purchasing
System Specialist
Analyst
Purchasing Services and the Logistics departments during shopping system within the district’s data-processing systems
school year 2018–19 was approximately $7.0 million, and applications and products (SAP) Supplier Relationship
salaries were the largest component. Figure 5–1 shows the Management, which manages purchasing and other business
organization of the Purchasing Services Department. functions. Districts and campuses enter the goods and services
they wish to purchase through an existing contract or from an
Houston ISD has three warehouses located at its Facilities
approved vendor into an electronic shopping cart, which takes
Services and Fleet Operations Administration site. The
the place of paper requisitions. After initiating the shopping
textbook warehouse is the central storage for all district
process, an electronic routing and approval process leads to a
textbooks. Warehouse operations stores goods such as office
match of purchase order, goods receipt, and vendor invoice.
supplies, classroom supplies, janitorial products, and dry food
service inventory. The furniture warehouse stores surplus and The Purchasing Services Department manages the use of purch-
nonusable furniture and equipment. Figure 5–2 shows the asing cards by department and campus staff for certain purchases.
organization of Houston ISD’s warehouse operations in the Additionally, the department processes travel arrangements and
Logistics Department. payments for district staff, students, and chaperones.
Each department and campus has multiple purchasers who Some procurement and contract management functions are
submit purchase order requests for goods and services to the managed in other departments. In November 2012, Houston
Purchasing Services Department. The department maintains ISD issued $1.9 billion in construction bonds, of which $1.6
the vendor master file, which contains information on vendors billion was used to build 40 campuses and $252.0 million for
who have received Houston ISD board approval to provide other projects, such as renovations, technology upgrades, and
specific commodities to the district. Instead of completing improvements. Figure 5–3 shows the organization of the
paper requisitions, district staff making purchases through an Bond Program Office in the Construction Services Department
existing contract or from approved vendors use an electronic for positions that have procurement responsibility.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT PURCHASING AND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT
FIGURE 5–2
HOUSTON ISD LOGISTICS DEPARTMENT WAREHOUSES OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION
Business Logistics and Purchasing

Officer
Logistics Senior Manager,

Warehouse
Inventory Control Furniture Services Business Warehouser

Manager Manager Analyst
General Clerk – 6
Warehouse Warehouser
Team Lead –6
Warehouse General Clerk – 2 Textbook Plant

Operations Operations Operator
Distribution Manager Manager
Truck Driver – 8 General Clerk Warehouser–

–4 Driver
Warehouser – 11 Warehouser – 4
FIGURE 5–3
HOUSTON ISD PROCUREMENT POSITIONS IN THE CONSTRUCTION SERVICES DEPARTMENT BOND PROGRAM OFFICE
Chief Operating Officer
Officer, Construction Services
General Manager
of Business Solutions
Logistics Furniture, Fixtures, Senior Manager Senior Manager

Manager and Equipment Manager of Business Solutions of Quality Assurance
Team Leader
Construction Buyer – 2 Document Accountant – 2
Service Control
Representative Administrator
Vendor Vendor Buyer
Representative – 3 Representative
Staff in the Houston ISD Controller’s Office also FIGURE 5–4

HOUSTON ISD CONTROLLER’S OFFICE PURCHASING AND
perform certain procurement and contract
CONTRACT MANAGEMENT POSITIONS
management functions. Figure 5–4 shows SCHOOL YEAR 2018–19
the organization of positions with purchasing
responsibility in the Controller’s Office.
Controller
The Accounts Payable Department in the
Controller’s Office issues direct payments in the Accounts Payable
form of checks for purchases and makes certain Manager
travel payments.
Accountant
The Texas Procurement and Support Services Team Lead
Cooperative Purchasing Program enables volume
purchasing power for local governments and assistance
Direct Payment Out-of-district/
organizations. Figure 5–5 shows the 20 cooperative In-district Travel
purchasing arrangements in which Houston ISD
participates and their description. Team; Houston ISD, March 2019.
FIGURE 5–5
HOUSTON ISD MEMORANDUMS OF UNDERSTANDING AND COOPERATIVE PURCHASING ARRANGEMENTS
ORGANIZATION ARRANGEMENT
Regional Education Service Regions 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, and 14 perform cooperative purchasing services for their members by soliciting
Centers: III (Region 3), IV open catalog bids in the following bid categories: (1) school and office supplies, instructional materials,
(Region 4), V (Region 5), VI and furniture; (2) computer hardware, software, supplies, and accessories; and (3) physical education
(Region 6), X, (Region 10), and athletic equipment and supplies.
XIV (Region 14)
BuyBoard Purchasing Membership in this cooperative increases the purchasing power of government entities and simplifies
Cooperative their purchasing experience by using a customized electronic purchasing system.
Texas Department of DIR is the state’s technology agency through which school districts can purchase products and
Information Resources (DIR) services at discounts without lengthy procurement processes.
The Cooperative Purchasing TCPN is associated with Education Service Center Region V. TCPN leverages purchasing power
Network (TCPN) by soliciting competitive proposals and awarding contracts for commonly purchased products and
services such as facilities, furniture, office supplies and equipment, security systems, technology, and
other goods and services.
National Association of Urban Through a memorandum of understanding with the district, NAUDL operates and manages debate
Debate Leagues (NAUDL) programs at 16 Houston ISD high schools according to the national best practices of the association’s
urban debate league model.
Harris County Department of A cooperative agreement enables HCDE and Houston ISD to participate in each other’s competitively
Education (HCDE) bid contracts.
Federal General Services A long-term contract issued by the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA) to a commercial
Administration and Schedule technology vendor. Award of a Schedule 70 contract signifies that the GSA has determined the
70 vendor’s pricing is fair and reasonable and the vendor is in compliance with all applicable laws and
regulations.
Houston-Galveston Area The HGAC cooperative purchasing program assists local governments through government-to-
Council (HGAC) government procurement service available nationally.
National IPA/U.S. OMNIA is a purchasing cooperative providing purchasing contracts and partnerships for state and
Communities (OMNIA) local government, kindergarten to grade 12 education, and colleges and universities.
Texas Multiple Award The Statewide Procurement Division at the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts establishes TXMAS
Schedule (TXMAS) contracts as a supplement to competitively awarded contracts by the federal government or other
governmental entities to service the procurement needs of authorized Texas governmental entities.

HOUSTON ISD MEMORANDUMS OF UNDERSTANDING AND COOPERATIVE PURCHASING ARRANGEMENTS
ORGANIZATION ARRANGEMENT
Pace Purchasing Cooperative PACE is administered by Education Service Center Region 20 and provides school districts and
Regions 13 and 20 (PACE) charter schools with opportunities for greater efficiency and economy in providing goods and services.
Interlocal Purchasing System/ TIPS/TAPS is a cooperative purchasing program established for use by schools, colleges, universities,
Texas-Arkansas Purchasing cities, counties, and other governmental entities.
System (TIPS/TAPS)
E&I Cooperative Services This nonprofit purchasing cooperative provides contracts and dedicated member resources to the
national education community, including kindergarten to grade 12 schools, community colleges, and
higher education.
National Cooperative NCPA is a national government purchasing cooperative with members in the public and nonprofit
Purchasing Alliance (NCPA) sectors.
Texas Association of School A cooperative agreement helps members facilitate compliance with state requirements, find qualified
Boards vendors, and realize potential economies.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Review Team, March 2019; Houston ISD Purchasing Department, March 2019.
DETAILED FINDINGS cart process. Category specialists both prepare contracts and
facilitate purchases in accordance with those contracts for the
PROCUREMENT PROCESS OPERATING PROCEDURES
functional areas they serve. Purchasing specialists assist
(REC. 33)
category specialists with processing shopping transactions.
Houston ISD’s procurement procedures are inefficient and
The department has purchasing specialist positions in two
lack central oversight and effective controls.
category groups.
The Purchasing Services Department lacks a process to
The process managing shopping carts is inefficient.
distribute shopping cart processing efficiently, does not
Department and campus staff use the electronic shopping
communicate department structure or train end users, has
cart system to request purchases. The district programmed
inefficient contract proposal processing systems, has a
the shopping cart system to assign an open shopping cart to
processing system that does not interface with the system
the category specialists in each functional area group. As a
used in the Bond Program Office in the Construction
result, regardless of the volume of workload in other groups,
Services Department, and might not be tracking aggregate
only the category specialists in that group receive the system
spending properly because of the use by certain staff of direct
notification. Shopping cart transactions often are delayed
payments instead of the shopping cart process.
because category specialists do not have access to the
Campuses and departments are required to follow the shopping carts of category specialists in other groups.
district’s procurement process when purchasing goods or Purchasing Services Department staff report that shopping
services. The Purchasing Services Department primarily transactions are expected to be processed within five to
performs the procurement function. Four category seven days, but many transactions require 10 days or more
managers oversee groups of category specialists that perform to complete.
all tasks associated with procuring goods and services for
A district requirement for vendor proposals results in a
specific functional areas. Figure 5–6 shows the distribution
burden for district staff and vendors. Houston ISD requires
of category specialists among these departments and
potential vendors to submit two physical copies of a proposal
functional areas.
in a sealed container. The district does not require vendors to
Category specialists perform all tasks related to creating provide a digital copy of their proposals, although some do.
contracts. These tasks include coordinating with departments Purchasing Services Department staff open the boxes
and campuses to develop solicitations, posting solicitations containing each bid and organize the proposals into binders.
on the district website, answering questions about Staff are required to enter the data from all proposals
solicitations, facilitating evaluation committees, and manually into spreadsheets, even if vendors have provided
implementing the awarded contracts through the shopping digital copies of proposals. After the proposals are evaluated,
FIGURE 5–6
HOUSTON ISD PURCHASING CATEGORY DISTRIBUTION BY MANAGER GROUP
MARCH 2019
GROUP A: GROUP B: GROUP C: GROUP D:
6 CATEGORY SPECIALISTS 4 CATEGORY SPECIALISTS 6 CATEGORY SPECIALISTS 4 CATEGORY SPECIALISTS
Academics Department Construction Services Athletics Department Information Technology
Department
Business Operations Facilities Services Benefits Department Fleet Operations Division
Career and Technical Warehouses Operations Nutrition Services Department Transportation Department
Education Department
College and Career Readiness Internal Audit Department Police Department Administrative Services
Department Department
External Funding Department Purchasing Services Risk Management Department
Family and Community Board of Education
Engagement
Finance Department Supplier Diversity Department
Fine Arts Curriculum Program
Government Services
Department
Health and Medical Services
Program
Home Instruction for Parents of
Preschool Youngsters Program
Human Resources Department
Legal Services Department
Library Services Program
Medicaid Finance and
Consulting Divisions
Department
Multilingual Department
Professional Development
Department
Research and Accountability
Department
School Choice Department
School Support Department
Special Education Department
Student Assessment
Department
Student Support Services
the district stores the physical copies of each proposal. These vendor, or that a vendor disqualified for this reason might
tasks are labor-intensive for staff. protest. Additionally, requiring potential vendors to submit
Transcribing data from paper proposals to electronic physical copies of proposals instead of electronic copies costs
spreadsheets risks transcription or typographical errors that vendors time and money. This cost may discourage capable
could affect a vendor’s evaluation. This process increases the vendors from bidding on district projects, which limits the
possibility that the district might not select the most qualified pool of vendors available to Houston ISD. This paper-
dependent process also requires the district to store hard district is not tracking aggregate spending accurately through
copies of proposals, which is an inefficient use of space. vendor contracts.
Another inefficiency relates to a duplicate proposal evaluation Houston ISD procedures state that all purchases should be
and scoring processes in two departments. After Purchasing processed through the Purchasing Services Department, with
Services Department staff have entered the proposal data several specific exceptions. The procedures also authorize a
into a spreadsheet, they provide vendor contact information category of other that is not specified.
to the Supplier Diversity Department. The Supplier Diversity
Department staff evaluate each vendor’s bid for compliance The use of direct payments instead of the electronic shopping
with department-identified goals for minority-owned and system and the operation of incompatible payment systems
women-owned business participation. The evaluator in in Purchasing Services and Construction Services make it
Supplier Diversity prepares and tabulates these scoring sheets difficult for the Purchasing Services Department to track
to generate a score electronically and then provides the score spending accurately in accordance with each district contract.
to the category specialist. The category specialist enters the This uncertainty regarding the amount of spending through
score into the department’s evaluation matrix template. certain contracts could place Houston ISD at risk of violating
board policy and statutory requirements for contracts valued
The Bond Program Office in the Construction Services at $50,000 or greater.
Department performs procurement transactions made in
accordance with the 2012 Bond Program. The Bond Program Cypress–Fairbanks Independent School District has a section
Office works with the Purchasing Services Department to on its website for Purchasing Solicitations through which
process bond project contracts but performs all procurement vendors can submit electronic bids for requests for proposal.
functions related to those contracts independently. Both current bid opportunities and awarded bids are posted
on the website for easy reference. The site also contains
The Bond Program Office uses Prolog construction information on relevant purchasing laws, Purchasing Services
management software to process all bond program-related Department procedures, the district’s purchasing manual,
transactions. This software does not integrate with district requirements for quotes and bids, and a tutorial on
OneSource, the SAP system used by the Purchasing Services electronic bidding for suppliers. Using electronic bidding is a
Department. Bond Program Office staff must reconcile more efficient use of procurement staff’s time, provides a
transactions between the systems, which is time-consuming central place for bidding, enables more suppliers to
and increases the difficulty of tracking construction project participate, and decreases the possibility of error by enabling
spending for aggregate vendor totals. the supplier to provide all relevant information themselves in
During onsite interviews, staff indicated that department the final format.
and campus staff are not trained adequately nor informed Houston ISD should develop procurement processes for
about the procurement process. For example, many staff greater productivity and efficiency, ensure that purchases are
reported not knowing that the Purchasing Services tracked, and increase communication and training to
Department is organized by functional areas. The district purchasing end users.
does not communicate Purchasing Services functional area
category assignments to staff, nor does this information The district should amend its procurement procedures and
appear on Houston ISD’s website. As a result, campuses and request for proposal instructions to authorize bids to be
departments must call the Purchasing Services Department submitted electronically in a format that can be processed
to determine which category manager or specialist to contact easily by procurement staff. Houston ISD should investigate
for assistance. the costs and benefits of an electronic procurement system
that enables electronic proposal submission, evaluation, and
Campus and department staff stated that they often request vendor registration. Utilizing an electronic procurement
checks for vendors directly from Accounts Payable instead of system will minimize manual contract processing by
using the electronic shopping system. Direct payments purchasing staff.
require staff to submit one form to the accounts payable
clerk, and the process requires one to two days, compared to To ensure that the Purchasing Services Department can track
weeks for the electronic system. When campuses and aggregate spending accurately in accordance with each
departments request direct payments, risk increases that the contract, the CFO should direct the controller to reject any
request for a direct payment other than for the specific items stated that the department has taken this approach rather
included in the Finance Procedures Manual. The department than explain the approval criteria to Houston ISD board
should eliminate the other category in its procedures. members that have been approached by vendors asking why
they had not been selected.
The CFO should work with the Bond Program Office in the
Construction Services Department to implement a payment The Purchasing Services Department awards a master service
system that integrates with the Purchasing Services agreement (MSA) contract to each board-approved vendor.
Department’s system. The district should implement a This contract specifies the goods and services that vendor can
training plan based on a survey of training needs for provide and the total amount the district can spend for those
purchasing end users, and should use effective methods to goods or services. The district’s procurement procedures do
inform district staff and potential suppliers about its not limit the number of vendors with which it can contract
purchasing procedures. for any good or service, and the Purchasing Services
Department has no procedures to guide staff in choosing
To better balance the procurement processing workload, the
among approved vendors.
district should modify its shopping system so that each category
specialist has access to the queues in all functional areas. If their budgets can afford the purchases, campuses and
departments are authorized to select any board-approved
Since the time of the review team’s onsite visit, district staff
vendor without soliciting quotes or bids.
report that the Purchasing Services Department lists
functional area contact information on the district intranet. Failure to require multiple quotes from approved vendors
Additionally, district staff report that they coordinate with places the district at risk of overpaying for goods and services.
the board to authorize electronic bid submissions in addition Although the MSAs confirm certain aspects of the price,
to paper submissions. such as an hourly rate or unit price, the total cost can differ
among approved vendors. By not comparing multiple quotes,
the district does not ensure the best value with each purchase.
existing resources.
Although the RFP evaluation committee members complete
VENDOR MANAGEMENT (REC. 34) a conflict-of-interest form, staff at the campus and department
Houston ISD lacks a comprehensive vendor evaluation, levels who choose among approved vendors do not have to
selection, and approval process. complete conflict-of-interest forms. This practice presents
the possibility that staff making vendor selection decisions
According to Houston ISD’s procurement procedures, the could favor one approved vendor over another based on a
district conducts a request for proposal (RFP) process when personal relationship or for financial gain.
seeking to procure goods or services through contracts that
are valued at $50,000 or more. An RFP is a process in which Some elements of the Houston ISD procurement process
an organization solicits a proposal from vendors through a risk noncompliance with federal and state law. The U.S.
bidding process to procure a commodity, service, or valuable Code of Federal Regulations, Section 200.319, states, “All
asset. Purchasing Services Department staff work with the procurement transactions must be conducted in a manner
requesting campus or department to develop an RFP. After providing full and open competition consistent with the
an RFP is posted on the district website and the proposals are standards of this section. … Some of the situations considered
received, the Purchasing Services Department forms an to be restrictive of competition include … any arbitrary
evaluation committee. Committee members are required to action in the procurement process.” The Texas Education
complete a conflict-of-interest form. The committee scores Code, Section 44.031, requires most school district contracts
each proposal and recommends that one or more vendors be valued at $50,000 or more to be issued using a method that
awarded contracts. Sometimes the evaluation committee provides the best value for the district.
recommends every vendor that submitted a complete
The Council of the Great City Schools published Best
proposal or just one vendor.
Practices in Urban Public School Procurement: Guidelines,
During the onsite fieldwork, staff reported that the Standards, and Lessons in October 2018. The report
Purchasing Services Department presents all vendors that recommends that, when multiple awards are appropriate, the
meet the terms of the RFP to the board for approval. They number of awardees should be determined by the requesting
campus or department before issuing the RFP, and that the the approval of purchases made with a purchasing card. Each
requestor should not expand the number of awardees after campus and department uses a different purchase
the scoring has been completed. When Cypress–Fairbanks authorization procedure. Some campuses and departments
ISD (CFISD) awards vendor contracts, it lists primary, require the cardholder to obtain permission from the fund
secondary, and tertiary vendors for a contract to assure that approver before the purchase. The district also has no board
all approved vendors are used. CFISD website also contains policy or department procedure that specifies the number of
a full list of reported disclosure statements from local cards issued to campuses and departments. Typically, each
government officers, including board members, the elementary school has three purchasing cards, each middle
superintendent, and district staff involved in any aspect of school has four, and each high school and department has
vendor recommendation or selection. By posting this five cards. Certain departments, including the Maintenance
information, CFISD provides transparency around vendor Department, have more.
contracting and strong assurances that the process is free of
conflicts of interest. According to district data from September 1, 2017, to August
31, 2018, staff made 118,994 purchasing card transactions
Houston ISD should evaluate vendor management and spent a total of $28.1 million during this period.
procedures to ensure that practices are transparent and
equitable, and provide the best value for the district. Authorized card holders receive monthly statements. Before
submitting the statement to the Purchasing Services
The district should require all staff that identify approved Department, the cardholder must approve and sign the
vendors to reveal possible conflicts of interest. The statement, allocate expenses to the appropriate account,
evaluation committee should identify the number of attach receipts, and obtain the approval and signature of the
vendors needed for a particular contract and include this fund approver. Three purchasing card representatives (PCR)
information in the RFP to provide transparency for in the Purchasing Services Department audit and allocate
prospective vendors when feasible. The district should purchasing card expenses for the district. PCRs check the
evaluate procurement procedures to require that end users statements, receipts, and authorizations monthly. PCRs also
request multiple quotes when identifying the approved check for account codes and ensure that funds are available.
vendors as a way to ensure effective use of district funds.
Department and campus staff should identify the vendor Users are instructed to use the purchasing cards only to buy
offering the lowest price and best value or provide from authorized vendors. However, cardholders could use
justification to the Purchasing Services Department for these purchasing cards at non-authorized vendors.
why a higher-priced vendor would better serve the district. Cardholders who use the cards at non-authorized vendors
receive warnings from the Purchasing Services Department.
PCRs also issue warnings to users who do not provide
existing resources.
receipts or that make card purchases in prohibited categories.
The Houston ISD purchasing cardholder contract and
PURCHASING CARD ADMINISTRATION (REC. 35)
agreement, signed by the cardholder and fund approver,
Houston ISD’s use of purchasing cards lacks clear
identifies the specific items that cannot be purchased with
management, auditing guidelines, and financial controls.
the card. After three warnings, the PCR deactivates the card
The district provides purchasing cards issued by J.P. Morgan and suspends the user from the purchasing card program.
Chase to staff for district-related business purchases. The user must attend corrective training to regain purchasing
According to the district’s Purchasing Manual, purchasing card privileges. The senior category manager of the PCR
cards enable authorized users to procure goods and services team determines when the cardholder can be reinstated in
that cost less than $1,000 per transaction and are limited to the purchasing card program. A user who commits a fourth
$7,500 per month. The Purchasing Services Department violation may be prohibited permanently from using a
trains eligible cardholders monthly. Card users also must sign district purchasing card.
a “Purchasing Card Cardholder contract Agreement,” which
No board policy or department procedure extracts
specifies the rules for using the card.
reimbursement from staff who make improper or disallowed
The district lacks a board policy or Purchasing Services purchases. PCRs and managers who audit purchases have no
Department procedure that specifies the requirements for automated method to track violations and depend on a
manual tracking system. After identifying a violation during The 2016 report also recommended implementing a
the audit process, the PCR contacts the cardholder to correct continuous monitoring program using computer-assisted
the error and to enter the correction into the procurement audit tools (CAAT) to conduct data analysis for optimal
system. Staff report that PCRs keep error files, but often do review of districtwide transactions, specifically for split
not have time to confirm whether the cardholder corrected transactions and unauthorized, prohibited, or inappropriate
the violation. transactions. Among transactions audited during calendar
year 2016, 68.0 percent were split transactions.
During calendar year 2016, Houston ISD’s Office of Unauthorized, prohibited, or inappropriate transactions are
Internal Audit audited the purchasing card program. It defined in the Purchasing Card User’s Manual, the cardholder
found that internal controls were not effective to ensure contract, and the Finance Procedures Manual. Six of the 110
that purchasing card purchases were reviewed, approved, transactions (5.0 percent) reviewed in 2016, totaling
and recorded properly and timely. A follow-up audit during $5,369, were found to be unauthorized, prohibited, or not
calendar year 2019 found that the district had not corrected for Houston ISD business purposes. The 2019 audit found
these issues. The 2016 audit report determined that the that the district had not implemented the recommended
automated system control for limiting individual CAAT review system.
transactions to $1,000 was effective, but that users were
circumventing that limit by splitting larger transactions. The district is auditing every purchasing card purchase,
Split transactions occur when two or more purchases are rather than randomizing audits as recommended by the
made from the same vendor within a short period. The audit report. During the onsite review, staff reported
2019 report confirmed that this practice continued. Both problems with the software to randomize the audits and
reports documented many unauthorized, prohibited, and that the district will be changing its purchasing card
inappropriate purchases. The 2016 internal audit also noted vendors. The total number of pending audits continues to
that fund approvers do not allocate purchases consistently grow because the number of incoming purchasing card
to the appropriate fund within the 10-day period. This transactions is greater than the number of audits completed.
inconsistency resulted in a $289,940 mass allocation of As PCRs receive new transactions to audit, older audits are
transactions at the end of the fiscal year, which senior moved further down the queue. According to staff, no
management approved as an exception. None of these district procedure specifies the order in which audits should
purchases were approved or reviewed as required by district be performed, and PCRs had decided on their own to work
procedures. Staff report that effective fiscal year ending from newest to oldest. Houston ISD pays the bank
June 30, 2018, the district is no longer mass allocating statement for purchasing cards monthly, regardless of
purchasing card transactions. whether the Purchasing Services Department has audited
all the associated transactions.
Houston ISD’s 2016 internal audit report recommended
enhanced communication and training on purchasing card Auditing every purchasing card transaction is time-
program procedures for cardholders, principals, department consuming. By not completing the audits in a timely manner,
heads, and fund approvers. Specifically, the report the district risks paying for improper or prohibited purchases.
recommended the need to allocate purchases to the It is inefficient to audit purchasing card transactions from the
appropriate budget or fund, review, and approve purchasing previous fiscal year because the district has no way to address
card transactions within 10 business days. The 2019 audit errors after the CFO’s Office has closed the fiscal year records.
found that the original recommendation was implemented Management of purchasing cards and the stated daily limits
partially. The report updated the recommendation to also are inconsistent and not defined clearly. The Purchasing
reinforce timely districtwide transaction allocations and Services Department can raise limits individually for a
approval procedures to minimize the amount of year-end requested purchase that exceeds the daily limit; however, the
mass allocations. The Purchasing Service Department department has no formal procedures to regulate this activity.
implemented an alternative plan of sending periodic email
messages regarding training, updates, and reminders to all Houston ISD does not have a calendar date by which staff
purchasing cardholders and fund approvers. PCR staff must stop using purchasing cards, nor does it deactivate
confirmed during the onsite visit that the Purchasing Services cards at a particular date. Staff report that campus and
Department is developing the email list for this purpose. departments have used purchasing cards until the last day
of the school year. The Purchasing Services Department Since the time of the review, the district reports that the
authorizes certain end of the year purchasing card Purchasing Services Department submits the names of
transactions in special and emergency situations with the purchasing card users and fund approvers who have repeatedly
department’s prior approval. When purchasing cards are violated purchasing card policies and grossly negligent
used late in the fiscal year, the purchases are carried forward transactions to the Office of Ethics and Compliance for further
into the next fiscal year and require special approval. investigation. However, the district did not provide the review
Additionally, staff said that too many year-end purchases team supporting documentation for this procedure.
are made in an effort to use remaining funds in a budget
The fiscal impact assumes, based on the internal audit
rather than for actual needs.
findings, that the district could save 5.0 percent of its
Without efficient management auditing guidelines and $28,097,855 school year 2017–18 purchasing card spending,
financial controls of purchasing cards, staff are not able to or $1,404,893.
process audits in a timely manner, increasing the risk for
fraudulent or unauthorized transactions to occur. CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION (REC. 36)
Houston ISD lacks a process to manage and administer
Houston ISD should develop and implement efficient
contracts effectively.
auditing guidelines and financial controls for purchasing
card processing to safeguard district assets and ensure that all Most Houston ISD contracts are required to follow the
transactions follow district procedures. contract development process outlined in the district’s
e-Contracts for Services (eC4S) procedure manual. Figure
Houston ISD should establish an auditing plan that uses
5–7 shows the steps that staff follow to develop a contract.
CAATs to review purchasing card transactions, including
The department staff involved at each stage can reject the
random purchases and high-dollar value transactions. A
contract draft, in which case the process must be redeveloped
formal audit plan aligned with the district’s internal audit
from the beginning.
recommendations helps the district operate more efficiently
and prevent a backlog of audits. The purchasing services This process is used for all contracts except for charter school
general manager should determine in which order PCRs contracts, professional services for special education
should process audits, work with the Information Technology contracts, and construction contracts that are part of the
Department to implement this process in the computer 2012 Bond Program. Administering and storing contracts in
system, and communicate the process to staff. departments other than the Purchasing Services Department
may lead to inefficiencies in processing, potential violations
Houston ISD also should implement an automated
in contracting, and overlooked opportunities for savings.
violation tracking system and work with the Legal
Houston ISD entered three-year contracts, from July 1,
Department to investigate using payroll withdrawals to
2018, to June 30, 2021, with 13 charter operators for in-
recover disallowed purchases from staff. The district
district charter schools, subject to annual renewals by the
should develop a board policy outlining the process for
board. The board most recently approved the renewals in
onetime purchasing card limit increases and standardize
April 2019. Charter school contracts are administered by the
the number of cards assigned to departments and campuses.
CFO and are not stored on the eC4S system.
The purchasing services general manager should develop
a procedure to implement the board policy and The director of compliance, instruction, and services in the
communicate this process to purchasing card users and Special Education Department negotiates, administers, and
fund approvers. stores copies of the paper contracts for professional services
for special education. The district’s general counsel is the
The district should standardize purchasing card procedures
only reviewer of these contracts, and they are not stored on
to require campuses and departments to obtain permission
the eC4S system.
from the funding authority and allocate the expense to the
appropriate account before the charge is made. The district For construction contracts that are part of the 2012 Bond
should implement a process for disabling purchasing cards at Program, the Purchasing Services Department coordinates
a predetermined fiscal year-end cutoff date for all with the Construction Services Department to develop,
nonemergency purchases. This practice will encourage present, and evaluate requests for quotations, and perform
planned purchases throughout the year. risk management and background checks during the pre-
FIGURE 5–7
HOUSTON ISD CONTRACT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
MARCH 2016
The Contract Request Form is initiated. The initiator enters all necessary components of the contract, such as the contract amount,
type, date of initiation, effective date, expiration date, project description, requesting department, staff who will approve the contract,
and appropriate budget item.
Campus or department approver receives the contract. Staff may return the contract with changes or approve the contract and proceed
to the third step.
Purchasing Services Department verifies the contract to ensure that the vendor has been approved for the items and dollar amount in
accordance with the contract. The contract is then placed on the board agenda for approval.
The Finance Department reviews the contract for budgetary compliance.
The Legal Services Department reviews the contract. Contracts of less than $100,000 can be reviewed by any Legal Services
Department staff; contracts of $100,000 or more must be reviewed by the general counsel.
The chief financial officer (CFO) approves contracts of $50,000 or more or the controller approves contracts of less than $50,000. The
contract approvals are now complete, and the contract returns to the Legal Services Department to be executed.
The contract is signed electronically by the vendor, then printed out and signed by either the CFO for contracts of $50,000 or more or
the controller for contracts of less than $50,000 and the Legal Services Department staff that reviewed the contract.
For contracts of less than $50,000, the contract with physical signatures is delivered to the Accounting Department and uploaded to
the electronic contract site. The physical copy is stored in the Accounting Department.
For contracts of $50,000 or more, the contract is signed by the superintendent, then the board. After the contract is signed, it is
delivered to the Accounting Department and uploaded to the electronic contract site. The physical copy is stored in the Records
Management area, a part of the Accounting Department.
Campuses and departments can initiate the shopping process to purchase goods and services in accordance with the contract.
Source: Houston ISD, e-Contracts for Services Manual, March 2016
contract period. After the board approves the contracts, the request or document vendor performance, nor does it have a
Purchasing Services Department is no longer involved in formal process for campuses and departments to provide
contract management and the Construction Services feedback regarding vendor performance. During onsite
Department takes over the execution and monitoring of the interviews, staff said often they were notified late in the
contracts. These contracts are stored on the Construction process when a contract expired, if at all. Figure 5–9 shows
Services Department construction management software the contract administration implementation and the review
system, not on the eC4S system. team’s assessment of the district’s process.
Houston ISD reports that, as of March 2019, the district had Despite using an electronic contract approval process, the
1,759 active contracts totaling $7.2 billion. Contract district does not capture all aspects of contract management
amounts were reported as the total value for the term of the that could prevent fraud and abuse by vendors and district
contract. Figure 5–8 shows the 10 campuses or departments staff. Contracts that do not follow the eC4S procedure are not
with the greatest number of contracts. Construction contracts available immediately for review or audit. Failure to monitor
in accordance with the 2012 Bond Project were reported by contracts for compliance and to conduct cost-benefit analyses
category such as Information Technology and Facility on renewal increases the district’s risk of overspending on
Services Administration, and by campus, such as Wheatley services and not receiving the best value for its investment.
High School. Charter school contracts were not included in
By not appropriately documenting and monitoring contract
the data provided by district for this review.
and vendor performance, the district might not have access
The district processes for administering and managing to legal remedies against breach of contract, unsatisfactory
awarded contracts are ineffective and inefficient. The performance by a vendor, or any other loss to the district
Purchasing Services Department has no procedures to resulting from a service contract or provider.
FIGURE 5–8
HOUSTON ISD CAMPUSES AND DEPARTMENTS WITH THE LARGEST NUMBER OF CONTRACTS AND CONTRACT VALUES
DEPARTMENT OR CAMPUS CONTRACTS VALUE (IN MILLIONS)
Procurement Department 119 $2.9
Human Resources Department 69 $55.0
Health and Medical Services Department 68 $.2
Information Technology/Project Management Office (1) 68 $248.3
Advanced Academics Department 61 $479.1
Special Education Department 58 $76.0
Wheatley High School (1) 57 $1.0
Facility Services Administration Department (1) 57 $497.8
Information Technology Infrastructure/Engineering Department (1) 47 $353.1
Chief Academic Officer (2) 44 $416.7
Notes:
(1) The category may include contracts in accordance with the district’s 2012 Construction Bond Project.
(2) Some vendor contracts are made directly with the chief academic officer position instead of with a campus or department.
FIGURE 5–9
HOUSTON ISD CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
CONTRACT CATEGORY HOUSTON ISD IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT
Developing contracts Purchasing Services Department facilitates Purchasing Services Department procedures
contract development through the use of the for this process are documented in the eC4S
eContract For Services (eC4S) program for all Manual.
contracts except professional services in the
Special Education Department, charter school
contracts and construction services bond
contracts.
Training for Purchasing Services Purchasing Services staff attend twice monthly No required contract management training
Department staff and end users training on general procurement topics. End is provided for Purchasing end users. A One
users call the Purchasing Services Department Source module offers online training on the
with questions as needed. eContracts for Services Manual.
Monitoring contract compliance Purchasing Services Department staff monitor Purchasing Services Department staff do not
expiration and renewal dates of contracts in monitor compliance with the contract terms and
their functional area. conditions.
Reporting of contract compliance Reporting of contract compliance is conducted No board policy or department procedure
by campus or department on an informal basis. requires documentation of contract compliance
by departments, campuses, or the Purchasing
Services Department staff.
Assessing vendor performance The district provides a link on its website to No board policy or department procedure
provide assessment of vendor performance. requires campuses or departments to assess
vendor performance.
Renewing contracts Purchasing Services Department staff monitors Purchasing Services Department staff have no
contracts for renewal dates and processes documented process to follow when renewing
renewals. a contract.
Only contracts stored on the eC4S system are

monitored for renewal.
Campuses and departments report that contract

expirations often are not communicated to them
by the Purchasing Services staff.

HOUSTON ISD CONTRACT ADMINISTRATION
CONTRACT CATEGORY HOUSTON ISD IMPLEMENTATION ASSESSMENT
Storing contracts Electronic versions of contracts are stored in Only contracts entered through the eC4S
the eC4S system. Paper copies of the contracts system are stored centrally. Professional service
are kept by Records Management department. contracts for Special Education are not entered
through the eC4S system, and are kept in the
office of the director of compliance, instruction,
and services of Special Education. Copies of
these contracts are not stored centrally. Charter
school contracts are stored in the CFO’s office.
Construction contracts in accordance with the
district’s 2012 Bond Program are stored on the
construction management system used by the
Construction Services Department.
Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, March 2019.
In accordance with the State of Texas Contract Management • provide written notification to the vendor if the issue
Guide, published by the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts persists and restate the issue and desired resolution;
in calendar year 2016, a key function of contract administration • include breach-of-contract notification with
is monitoring the contract vendor. This monitoring includes associated cancellation of the contract; and
ensuring that the vendor fulfills its legal obligations and
demonstrates adequate performance in all duties specified in • contact legal counsel if the issue is not resolved using
the contract. The Texas A&M University System Contract these steps.
Management Handbook, 2016, states that “contract monitoring Houston ISD should develop clear, consistent, and uniform
may be viewed as a preventative function, an opportunity to procedures for contract development, management, and
determine the contractor’s need for technical assistance, or a review at the district level, including training for all staff with
valuable source of information concerning the effectiveness contract responsibility.
and quality of services being performed.” The handbook
The district should establish a central repository for all active
recommends that an organization consider the following
contracts that is easily accessible to district leadership.
factors when determining what to monitor:
Purchasing Services Department staff should require formal
• how the organization will know it received what it is feedback from end users on vendor performance, as part of
paying for; the contracting process and use this feedback for new
contracts or renewals. Purchasing Services staff also should
• how the organization will know that the contractor is work with end users to monitor vendor compliance to the
complying with the terms of the contract; and contract. When a contract is eligible for renewal, Purchasing
• how the organization will know that the contract is Services staff should perform and document a cost-benefit
complete and determine closure. analysis for contract renewal and communicate with end
users during the renewal process.
The Texas Education Agency’s Financial Accountability System
Resource Guide states that a system for the evaluation of vendors After refining contract development and administration
and their performance is important to support an effective procedures, the district should implement a formal training
purchasing function. It also states that effective school districts program for all staff involved in the development and
attempt to develop an open and professional relationship with management of contracts. Training should include specific
vendors, but emphasizes the importance of using the following methods to communicate with end users about all stages of
best practices to document any issue that occurs: the contracting process. Purchasing Services Department
staff also should develop training for end users on relevant
• note the date with an accurate description of the issue; aspects of contract management.
• contact the vendor with specifics on how the issue The district could implement this recommendation with
needs to be corrected; existing resources.
TRAVEL PROCESS (REC. 37) For hotel expenses, Houston ISD staff may use the TR’s
Houston ISD’s staff and board travel process is inefficient, services or plan and pay for expenses themselves. Staff are
which risks overspending. reimbursed for lodging expenses at either the federal
government rate or $85 per day, whichever is greater. The TR
Travel processes are executed by the Purchasing Services may issue hotel payment prior to the trip by using a pre-paid
Department in conjunction with the Controller’s Office and lodging travel card that is loaded for the exact amount of the
the Board Services Department. The travel representative hotel stay. Staff are responsible for any charges beyond the
(TR) in the Purchasing Services Department performs most pre-paid amount. Staff return the card to the TR after the
out-of-district travel arrangements for staff. Accounts payable trip along with a hotel receipt. The lodging travel card may
clerks in the Controller’s Office process certain out-of-district be reloaded and reused for future trips. Staff estimate that
and in-district travel reimbursement for staff. The Board approximately 1,000 travel cards are available for prepaid
Services Department processes travel reimbursement for the lodging. Travel advances are not authorized by the district,
Houston ISD board members. The district reports that all except for recruiters in the Human Resources Department.
funds travel expenses for district staff totaled $4.4 million
Parking, local transportation charges, and meals are
during fiscal year 2017, $3.1 million during fiscal year 2018,
reimbursed by the Accounts Payable Department when
and $2.7 million during fiscal year 2019.
submitted with the appropriate receipts. Meals and expenses
Pursuant to board policies and procedures and the district’s are reimbursed according to the source of funding for the
Finance Procedures Manual, staff submit out-of-district travel. Figure 5–10 shows the different ways meal expenses
travel requests in advance to the administrator with budget during travel are reimbursed.
authority. The administrator submits approved travel request
The per diem amount is reduced by one-half for days of
to the TR, who makes travel arrangements and pays for the
travel that begin after noon or end before noon. Reimbursing
travel expenses. Staff also may make and pay for their own
staff for travel expenses using a per diem rate, rather than for
reservations for approved travel, in which case they submit
actual expenses, could result in Houston ISD overpaying for
travel receipts to Accounts Payable for reimbursement after
expenses and may cause errors in reimbursement by not
the trip. If the district is paying only for conference
using the appropriate reimbursement procedure for trips
registration, the staff does not need travel authorization and
funded from special revenue funds and those funded through
can request the registration be directly paid from the
general revenue funds.
Accounts Payable Department.
The district does not require staff with a vehicle allowance as
The Finance Procedures Manual states that if staff pay for
part of their compensation to use their personal vehicle or
their own airfare, the cost cannot exceed the amount the
their Houston ISD issued vehicle for travel. Authorizing staff
district would pay for a 21-day advance fare, except for
that have a vehicle allowance to rent a vehicle for travel could
emergency travel. Procedures do not require staff to
be an unnecessary expense that causes additional work for
document that they found the lowest fare. The TR books all
the TR.
air travel for non-Houston ISD staff travelers such as
chaperones and students because these individuals do not Houston ISD board members are exempt from following the
have access to the automated purchasing system. same travel rules as staff for lodging and meal rates, which
FIGURE 5–10
HOUSTON ISD TRAVEL MEAL REIMBURSAL SCHEDULE
APRIL 2015
REVENUE SOURCE LOCATION REIMBURSAL AMOUNT RECEIPTS REQUIRED
Special Revenue Funds In-state $36/day Yes
Special Revenue Funds Out of State Federal Government Per Diem Rate Yes
General Revenue Funds In-state The greater of Federal Rate or $36/day No
General Revenue Funds Out of State Federal Government Per Diem Rate No
Source: Houston ISD, April 2015.
creates a lack of transparency for the use of public funds. by 25.0 percent or more, the staff is responsible for obtaining
Each board member receives an annual budget of $5,000 for authorization for the overage. The requesting staff receives
travel to meetings, functions, and activities that they the ticket from the travel agency, for which the Accounts
determine are for a public purpose and necessary to conduct Payable Department pays the travel agency. Due to the high
district business. Board Policy BBG (LOCAL) lists 26 cost of processing payments, MDCS staff submit
entities whose meetings and other activities are approved for reimbursement requests only for travel amounts greater than
board member travel at district expense. Reimbursable $50, and no requests older than one year are accepted.
expenses include airfare, registration fees, mileage, meals, MDCS pays only for actual expenses, and staff must provide
telephone calls, and airport parking for the board member receipts for all reimbursable travel expenses.
only. Board members are required to furnish receipts for all
AISD also publishes a Travel Procedures Manual, which
expenses greater than $15 in each category. For in-county
states that the preferred method of making airline reservations
travel, board members are reimbursed for parking fees,
is through the district’s travel agent. The travel agent issues
mileage and meals up to $50. Board members submit a travel
the ticket to the staff and bills the district. The manual also
reimbursement form, travel log, and receipts to the Board
states that staff who received a regular travel stipend, such as
Services Department, which submits the request to the CFO.
a district vehicle, are not eligible for mileage reimbursement
The accounts payable clerk processes the board member’s
of in-district travel. For each school year, AISD requests that
approved reimbursement. The CFO prepares and presents a
campuses and departments submit the names of staff who
monthly report of each board member’s travel. Unused travel
will be traveling. AISD issues those staff travel cards to
funds revert to the district’s general fund undesignated fund
expedite future travel authorization. A travel card can also be
balance. Expenses in excess of the $5,000 travel budget are
issued on an as-needed basis to new travelers. The travel card
charged to the board member personally.
is used for air travel, ground transportation, lodging, meals,
During onsite interviews, staff reported that approximately and other approved travel related expenses of $130 or greater.
250 new travel transactions took place per month. The TR Staff charge travel expenses of less than $130 to their personal
checks every travel request for accuracy and manually credit cards for later reimbursement by the district.
reconciles all the travel expenses when bills are presented for
The Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts has developed the
payment. According to staff, approximately 75.0 percent of
State Travel Management Program (STMP), which helps
travel transactions created exceptions that needed to be
state agencies and school districts manage travel expenditures
reconciled, which could stem from the large number of cards
more efficiently by providing discounted travel services
issued for travel and pricing changes that occur in the time
through vendor contracts monitoring state travel activity.
lag between approval and booking the trip. The travel
The Statewide Procurement Division has negotiated travel
function relies heavily on manual processes, and the large
contracts for airlines, travel cards, hotels, rental cars, and
number of transactions carried out by the TR reduces the
travel agencies.
opportunity to find lower-priced fares. Staff arranging their
own travel also may be unaware of lower priced fares, which Houston ISD should revise travel procedures for more
wastes district resources. efficient travel processing.
Miami–Dade County Schools (MDCS) in Miami, Florida The district should conduct a cost-benefit analysis based on
and Austin Independent School District (AISD) have similar all its travel needs to determine the most efficient method of
travel policies that both encourage staff to use a pre-approved making arrangements for district travelers. The cost-benefit
travel agent. analysis should consider the use of a travel agent for the
district. By using the STMP travel agent to arrange and bill
MDCS publishes a Travel Procedures Manual that provides
for all travel, the district would be assured of receiving the
clear and concise rules. The district encourages staff to
lowest-priced travel fares.
purchase airline tickets through its official travel agency, but
staff can purchase tickets on their own if they provide two Houston ISD also should consider authorizing campuses
lists of available airfares from different sources. Staff are and departments to use existing, general use purchasing cards
reimbursed for the cost of tickets purchased. Staff using the on a pre-approval basis for district travel expenses. For better
travel agency submit an authorized estimated cost request to control of expenses, the district should pay only for actual
the agency. If the actual cost of the ticket exceeds the estimate expenses, not per diems, and require that staff provide
original receipts for every reimbursable expense, regardless of orders using an online catalog. Warehousers create a
funding source. Houston ISD also should discourage the requisition and pull items from shelves. Purchases are
practice of renting vehicles for travel by staff who have a grouped by routes and stacked on the loading dock for
travel allowance or the use of a district vehicle. The district delivery. Warehouse Operations has eight delivery routes to
should require board members to follow the same travel campuses and departments. The warehousers rotate stock,
requirements that apply to staff. keep track of inventory levels, and communicate to
managers which items need to be reordered. Warehouse
The fiscal impact assumes that, by booking through a travel
Operations also delivers interdistrict mail four times a week
agent, the district would eliminate the travel representative
through its delivery routes and delivers forms from the
position, resulting in an annual savings of $51,672 ($43,060
print shop to campuses and departments from the print
salary + $8,612 for 20.0 percent benefits).
shop located at the McCarty facility.
WAREHOUSE OPERATIONS (REC. 38) Campuses and departments do not have access to the real-
Houston ISD’s warehouse operations are inefficient, and are time status of their orders, and they call Warehouse
not structured to provide the best value to the district. Operations staff when they need information. Staff reports
that processes in Warehouse Operations are paper-intensive,
Houston ISD maintains three warehouses with different
with only the ordering of products performed electronically.
functions. Figure 5–2 shows the organization of Houston
Every other aspect of Warehouse Operations processes
ISD’s warehouse operations in the Logistics Department.
require staff to use manual, paper-based systems.
Warehouse Operations stores supplies that can be ordered
and delivered to departments and campuses. Textbook Campuses and departments are not required to purchase
Operations serves as receiving and storage for district items from Warehouse Operations. They may use the
textbooks, and Furniture Services contains excess furniture warehouse or any district-approved vendor to supply items,
and other assets. The warehouses are all located at the such as copier paper, that are available from either source.
Facilities Services and Fleet Operations Administration site Warehouse Operations does not apply carrying costs, such as
at 228 McCarty Drive. The logistics senior manager of labor, warehousing, or transportation, to the prices paid by
warehousing oversees all three, including their managers and campuses and departments, which makes the goods they
staff. The district employs 51 staff to operate the three purchase from external providers seem artificially expensive.
warehouses with a school year 2018–19 inventory value of If carrying costs were added to the purchase price of district
$907.1 million. warehouse goods, the cost to campuses and departments
could be higher than for goods purchased elsewhere.
WAREHOUSE OPERATIONS Campuses and departments are not required to compare
Warehouse Operations occupies approximately 99,700 square product prices when deciding between the warehouse and an
feet. The warehouse operations distribution manager oversees outside vendor, although some staff say they choose outside
a staff of 19, including eight truck drivers and 11 warehousers. vendors to receive faster delivery.
The cost of central warehouse staff salaries was $787,252 for Warehouse Operation’s lack of automation leads to
school year 2018–19. Inventory in Warehouse Operations was inefficiencies in ordering, processing, and fulfilling orders.
valued by district staff in June 2019 at $2.9 million. Manual processes incur higher labor costs, as the inventory
The warehouse stocks more than 1,000 items, including control manager, six general clerks, and a business analyst are
office, school, and maintenance supplies in addition to some required to perform regular inventory counts and process
dry goods stored for the Nutrition Services Department. tickets throughout the requisition and delivery cycle.
Most Nutrition Services Department products are drop
The New Mexico Manual of Procedures for Public School
shipped to campuses or the Food Support Facility. Campuses
Accounting and Budget states that a central warehouse
and departments also receive goods directly from suppliers
system enables a school district to take advantage of
through the purchasing process.
the economies of quantity buying and to fill requisitions
Warehouse Operations orders from vendors and prices for frequently used supplies promptly. Costs of receiving,
items for sale to campuses and departments at the cost storing, and delivering stock items and costs of stocking
purchased by the district. Campuses and departments place goods are included in the total cost of a warehouse
system. These costs are compared to the costs of direct when needed. Warehouse staff pick up out-of-adoption
purchasing to determine if a centralized warehouse is an textbooks from campuses, which the district sells to a
efficient use of resources. textbook recycling company.
TEXTBOOK OPERATIONS FURNITURE SERVICES

Textbook Operations stores and manages all textbooks for The Furniture Services warehouse temporarily stores the
Houston ISD in an 18,785 square foot warehouse located at district’s surplus assets pending reassignment or disposition.
the McCarty property, Building 2. The district also stores It maintains an assortment of items including classroom and
some out-of-adoption textbooks in the nearby Furniture office equipment, furniture, electronics, and paper goods.
Services warehouse. Surplus and unused textbooks are also stored in the Furniture
Services warehouse.
Textbook Operations receives and processes new textbook
orders and stores textbooks when not in use. The textbook The Furniture Services warehouse occupies approximately
operations manager oversees a staff of nine, including four 34,000 square feet. The furniture services manager oversees a
general clerks, four warehousers, and one warehouser/driver. staff of nine, including one warehouse team lead, two general
The cost of Textbook Operations staff salaries was $269,584 clerks, and six warehousers/drivers. The cost of furniture
for school year 2018–19. Inventory in Textbook Operations warehouse staff salaries was $458,813 for school year 2018–
is valued at $67.2 million as of June 2019. 19. Inventory in the Furniture Services warehouse is valued
at $672.0 million as of June 2019.
Textbook Operations staff take orders for instructional
materials from the Elementary Curriculum and Instruction Furniture Services moves assets from one campus to
Department and the Secondary Curriculum and Instruction another, and between the warehouse and campuses in both
Department. Textbook Operations staff order print materials directions. Campuses and departments request these moves
only. The Instructional Technology Department manages through an electronic work order system. The furniture
orders for instructional software. Textbook Operations staff services manager manually schedules staff to fill these
place annual and supplemental orders, and prepare work requests. The average time for pick-up and delivery has
orders for surplus books that are out of adoption. ranged from three to four weeks in past years, but the
estimated wait time increased to seven months during
The district uses Hayes Software for textbook management.
school year 2018–19, according to warehouse staff. Staff at
The software provides real-time information for books in
campuses reported waiting up to one year for Furniture
stock, including the campus, teacher, and student assigned
Services to pick up excess furniture and equipment.
the textbook. Upon receiving textbooks at the beginning of
the school year, campus textbook coordinators scan them The increase in the time it takes Furniture Services staff to
into the textbook management system and distribute them pick up campus assets has increased costs for the district.
to students. At the end of the school year, students return the According to Bond Program Office staff, the furniture
textbooks to the campus coordinator, who scans them into removal process took so long at some older campuses
the system for delivery to the textbook warehouse, where scheduled for demolition that the buildings were
staff manually check the books back into the system. During demolished containing furniture and other items that could
onsite interviews, textbook warehouse staff said they could have been recovered. Staff at campuses due to receive
not use scanning equipment due to poor internet access in replacement furniture gave similar accounts of older
the textbook warehouse. Using manual processes, such as furniture being hauled away with construction trash
hand counting, is an inefficient use of staff time and can lead because Furniture Services warehouse staff were unable to
to inaccurate results. respond in time. Such incidents are costly because Houston
ISD is unable to recuperate funds from furniture that is
The majority of work for Textbook Operations staff occurs at
thrown away or destroyed. Also, staff reported that
the beginning and end of the school year. They perform
contractors charged the district extra to demolish buildings
electronic textbook audits annually and physical textbook
that still contained furniture.
audits every three years, or at a principal’s request. Campuses
charge students for missing or damaged textbooks, and After Furniture Services warehouse staff pick up the assets
Textbook Operations staff prepare these bills for campuses from campuses and departments, they enter them into a
database using an office spreadsheet program to log in the Houston ISD should review the efficiency of each warehouse
fixed asset tag numbers of all assets valued at more than function and implement processes to make the most
$500. Assets valued at less than $500 do not have a fixed productive use of warehouse services.
asset tag, so staff log in the serial number of those assets. All
For Warehouse Operations, Houston ISD should analyze all
items, regardless of value, are entered into the database.
the costs of operating the central warehouse, including
Furniture Services staff determine what is reusable and what
salaries and other operating expenses, to establish the full
should be discarded. Technology Department staff review
cost of each item it offers. The central warehouse manager
technology assets to determine what can be sold and what
should coordinate with the Purchasing Services Department
can be discarded as trash. Items that can be reused are stored
category managers to compare the full cost of items offered
in the Furniture Services warehouse and are available to
by the warehouse to the price of items offered by external
campuses and departments, but Furniture Services provides
vendors, and analyze the common items that campuses and
no online listing or communication to district staff about
departments purchase from vendors instead of requesting
what is available. Campuses and departments can call during
from the warehouse. Once the most cost-efficient products
warehouse business hours, 7:00 am to 3:30 pm, to ask if what
are identified, Houston ISD should discontinue offering the
they need is in the warehouse. Furniture Services warehouse
products in the warehouse and direct campuses and
drivers deliver items selected by a department or campus.
departments to purchase those items directly from approved
Furniture Services conducts auctions intermittently through
vendors using standard procurement processes.
a contract with an online public auction company, which
leads to an overwhelming amount of assets that must be Houston ISD also should investigate the cost of automating
stored in the warehouse. the ordering, filling, delivery, and inventory of stock. By
using an automated system and ensuring that the warehouse
The Furniture Services warehouse does not charge the
stocks only competitively priced goods, Houston ISD would
requesting campus or department extra to transfer the
improve the efficiency of the central warehouse.
surplus item. Campuses and departments may pay overtime
to have surplus goods picked up from their campus. For the Textbook Operations warehouse, the district should
Although this transfer service helps campuses and explore purchasing a Radio Frequency Identification System
departments remove items more quickly, it increases costs with a scanning wand for textbook warehouse staff. This
for the district. equipment would facilitate warehouse processes and ensure
that inventory is accurate and immediately available.
Furniture Services provides inefficient services to campuses
Houston ISD also should ensure that the textbook warehouse
and departments. Tagging all assets, regardless of value, is not
has consistent and stable internet connectivity that enables
the best use of warehouse staff time and creates a backlog in
the textbook staff to use scanning equipment.
processing the intake of assets. Authorizing campuses and
departments to pay overtime and ensure quick pickup and For the Furniture Services warehouse, Houston ISD should
delivery of goods adds to the backlog and could result in develop a process to inform campuses and departments of
inequities among campuses. Furniture Services provides no the items available for immediate use. The method of
online catalog of assets for campuses and departments to communication should include pictures and descriptions of
browse, and the limited hours that the warehouse is open the items. The furniture warehouse should be open during
makes it difficult for them to visit and see what is available. Houston ISD’s regular business hours to enable more time
for campus and department staff time to visit. When a
Round Rock Independent School District (RRISD)
campus or department has selected assets for its use, the
maintains an online catalog of surplus items. Pictures and
warehouse staff should deliver the items to the requestor.
descriptions of the items are found on the district’s online
Repurpose Store and are available on a “first to request, first The furniture services manager should coordinate with the
to receive” basis. A campus principal or department director Purchasing Services Department to hold regularly scheduled
may request the items by emailing the warehouse. The surplus property online auctions in order to routinely dispose
Repurpose Store also has periodic sales onsite that are open of surplus items instead of continuing to store them. With
to the public and online auctions. A search of RRISD’s less items in the furniture warehouse, staff could be reassigned
online auction history showed more than 500 auctions to pick up and deliver requested items more efficiently, with
posted monthly. less delay, which would eliminate overtime. The furniture
services warehouse should consider only logging tagged assets

valued at more than $500.
The fiscal impact assumes that more cost-efficient warehouse

operations would reduce the number of staff needed to
operate the warehouses by an estimated 30.0 percent, or 15
staff (51 total staff x 30.0 percent). The total cost of salaries
and benefits for all warehouse staff is $1,818,779, which
averages to $35,662 per staff ($1,515,649 salary + $303,130
for 20 percent benefits = $1,818,779 ÷ 51 staff = $35,662).
Eliminating 15 staff would save $534,930 annually
($35,662 x 15).
The fiscal impact does not estimate gains from the sale of
additional surplus property, which might be offset by
the cost of disposing of unsaleable and unusable
warehouse inventory.
FISCAL IMPACT
Some of the recommendations provided in this report are based on state or federal laws, rules or regulations, and should be
The Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance Review Team has identified a fiscal impact for the following recommendations:

5. PURCHASING AND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT
35. Develop and implement $1,404,893 $1,404,893 $1,404,893 $1,404,893 $1,404,893 $7,024,465 $0
efficient auditing guidelines
and financial controls for
purchasing card processing
to safeguard district
assets and ensure that all
transactions follow district
procedures.
37. Revise travel procedures $51,672 $51,672 $51,672 $51,672 $51,672 $258,360 $0
for more efficient travel
processing.
38. Review the efficiency $534,930 $534,930 $534,930 $534,930 $534,930 $2,674,650 $0
of each warehouse
function and implement
processes to make the
most productive use of
warehouse services.
Total $1,991,495 $1,991,495 $1,991,495 $1,991,495 $1,991,495 $9,957,475 $0
6. HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
Houston Independent School District’s (ISD) Human Recommendation 43: Establish a districtwide
Resources Department oversees recruitment, compensation, timekeeping system.
compliance, certifications, personnel records, employee
Recommendation 44: Develop recruiting strategies
relations, and the district’s hiring and separation processes.
for campuses that have high turnover among staff,
During school year 2017–18, Houston ISD employed
and standardize procedures for hiring, integrating
26,247.2 full-time-equivalent (FTE) positions, including
new staff, and exit interviews districtwide.
11,833.6 teacher FTE positions.
Recommendation 45: Develop a process to
FINDINGS review and update job descriptions regularly,
Houston ISD’s Human Resources Department’s and mandate the use of job descriptions in the
organizational structure is inefficient. evaluation process.
Houston ISD pays below-market salaries and lacks

BACKGROUND
procedures to ensure consistent application of the
Human resource management includes compensation,
salary guides for all positions districtwide.
recruitment, hiring and retention, administrative planning
Houston ISD lacks procedures to ensure consistency and duties, records management, staff relations and
and quality control of overtime accountability. grievances, and staff evaluations. These functions are defined
by either compliance-based or strategic-based responsibilities.
Houston ISD campuses award ad hoc stipends
Compliance-based responsibilities include assuring that an
and extra-duty pay with limited oversight from
organization is following federal, state, and local labor laws
the Human Resources Department, resulting in
in areas such as benefits, compensation and hours worked,
inconsistent implementation across campuses.
records management, mandatory leave, discrimination,
Houston ISD does not have an efficient or effective medical privacy, safety, termination, and eligibility to work.
timekeeping system. Strategic-based responsibilities include recruiting and
retention, compensation, and staff relations.
Houston ISD does not have consistent and coherent
recruiting, hiring, and retention processes. Figure 6–1 shows Houston ISD’s Human Resources (HR)
Department organization. The chief human resources officer
Houston ISD’s written job descriptions are inaccurate,
reports to the superintendent and oversees five general
obsolete, and not included in the evaluation process. manager positions.
RECOMMENDATIONS The general manager of talent acquisition oversees the

Recommendation 39: Reorganize the Human district’s recruiting and retention functions. The general
Resources Department and adhere to best practices manager of compliance oversees the certification and
for an effective and equitable span of control. alternative certification teams. The general manager of
compensation oversees the compensation and the HR
Recommendation 40: Strengthen controls over business partner teams. The compensation team works with
promotion and pay and perform a limited-scope the budget team under the Chief Financial Officer to support
classification and compensation study. all activities related to positions, value, and salary, including
performance pay. The HR business partner team coordinates
Recommendation 41: Establish controls to
and provides high-level support covering workforce staffing
monitor overtime, reassess staffing levels in key
and planning and leave management for campuses. The
departments, and work to decrease overtime costs.
general manager of human capital accountability oversees a
Recommendation 42: Strengthen controls over ad team of investigators, the employee relations analyst, and the
hoc stipends and extra-duty pay. personnel records manager. The general manager of business
HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
FIGURE 6–1
HOUSTON ISD HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
Chief Human Resources Officer
Senior Executive
General Manager, General Manager, General Manager,

Talent Acquisition Compensation Business Services
General Manager, General Manager,
Compliance Human Capital Accountability
services oversees the HR business partners that work with the clerical positions. Elsewhere in this report, the Nutrition
Business Operations Division departments. Services and Facilities Use and Management chapters address
issues related to staffing inefficiencies.
Figure 6–2 shows Houston ISD’s actual payroll expenditures
as a percentage of all funds compared to its peer districts for Figure 6–4 shows the student-to-teacher ratios and student-
school year 2017–18. Peer districts are districts similar in size to-staff ratios for Houston ISD and its peer districts. Houston
and other characteristics to Houston ISD that the Legislative ISD has the greatest student–teacher ratio and student–staff
Budget Board’s School Performance Review Team uses for ratio compared to its peer districts. Both ratios for Houston
comparison purposes. Houston ISD’s payroll accounted for ISD also are greater than averages for districts in Regional
74.9 percent of its total expenditures, which is the lowest Education Service Center IV (Region 4) and in the state.
among peer districts.
DETAILED FINDINGS
Figure 6–3 shows the percentage of staff in five categories for
HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
Houston ISD compared to those of its peer districts. During
(REC. 39)
school year 2017–18, Houston ISD employed the smallest
Houston ISD’s Human Resources Department’s
percentage of both teachers and educational aides compared
organizational structure is inefficient.
to its peer districts. Houston ISD also employed the greatest
percentage of auxiliary staff compared to peers. Most of the Each of the HR Department’s general managers has a small
auxiliary staff are in the Nutrition Services, Transportation span of control. Span of control is the number of subordinates
and Facilities Services Departments, or on campuses in that a supervisor directly oversees.
FIGURE 6–2
HOUSTON ISD ACTUAL PAYROLL EXPENDITURES AS A PERCENTAGE OF ALL FUNDS COMPARED TO PEER DISTRICTS
CATEGORY HOUSTON ISD AUSTIN ISD CYPRESS–FAIRBANKS ISD DALLAS ISD
Total expenditures (in millions) $1,810.0 $760.9 $877.5 $1,375.4
Payroll expenditures (in millions) $1,355.3 $661.3 $788.4 $1,121.5
Payroll as a percentage of total expenditures 74.9% 86.9% 89.9% 81.5%
Total Staff FTE (1) positions 26,247.2 11,379.2 14,625.4 20,005.5
Total Teacher FTE positions 11,833.6 5,703.3 7,122.0 10,346.4
Student Enrollment 213,528 81,346 116,138 156,726
Note: (1) FTE=full-time-equivalent positions.
Sources: Texas Education Agency, Public Education Information Management System, Actual Financial Data, school year 2017–18, and Texas
Academic Performance Report, school year 2017–18.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
FIGURE 6–3
HOUSTON ISD PERCENTAGE OF STAFF TYPES COMPARED TO PEER DISTRICTS
STAFF HOUSTON ISD AUSTIN ISD CYPRESS–FAIRBANKS ISD DALLAS ISD
Teachers 45.1% 50.1% 48.7% 51.7%
Professional Support staff 10.6% 9.4% 9.8% 10.5%
Administrative staff 2.8% 3.3% 3.2% 5.6%
Educational aide 5.3% 8.5% 11.7% 9.7%
Auxiliary staff 36.2% 28.7% 26.6% 22.4%
Note: Percentages may not sum to 100.0 percent due to rounding.
FIGURE 6–4
HOUSTON ISD STUDENT–TEACHER AND STUDENT–STAFF RATIOS COMPARED TO PEER DISTRICTS
RATIO HOUSTON ISD AUSTIN ISD CYPRESS–FAIRBANKS ISD DALLAS ISD REGION 4 (1) STATE
Student–Teacher 18.0 14.3 16.3 15.1 16.0 15.1
Student–Staff 8.1 7.1 7.9 7.8 7.8 7.6
Note: (1) Region 4=Regional Education Service Center IV.
Houston ISD has experienced budgetary losses during the acquisition team from nine to six. Without adequate
past few years and plans additional decreases for fiscal year staff to recruit prospective applicants, the district will
2020. In response, the HR Department has decreased its continue to struggle with high teacher turnover.
staffing. However, the number of general managers in the
The number of clerical staff on the personnel records
department has remained at five, while staffing at lower
team that are responsible for visas has decreased. The
levels of seniority has decreased. As a result, the department
employee relations analyst absorbed this duty in
has an excessive number of managers but a shortage of staff
addition to processing grievances and providing
at other levels to perform important services in support of
support and professional development to principals and
campuses and district departments.
area superintendents. According to interviews, processing
For example, HR business partners serve as liaisons between visas requires 25.0 percent of the employee relations
the HR Department and principals and department hiring staff’s work day. Staff reported taking work home on
managers. HR business partners process candidates from the evenings and weekends to accommodate the
the prehire stage and coordinate with budgeting, additional duties.
compensation, certification, performance management,
The HR Department also duplicates some duties among its
and employee relations to hire the candidate. The partners
staff. The program manager for alternative certification
also assist with absence management and advise principals
developed the alternative certification program (ACP)
and department management regarding how to manage
courses and oversees the teacher development specialists
staff absences. Due to budget decreases, the department has
who support the ACP teachers. Staff reported that the
decreased HR business partner positions. According to
program manager also performs recruiting duties and is
interviews, partners formerly assisted 25 to 30 campuses
responsible for compliance. During fall 2018, the chief
each. At the time of the review team’s onsite field work,
human resources officer developed a senior manager of
each partner assisted approximately 40 campuses. Staff
alternative certification position. According to interviews,
reported that one of the primary complaints from campuses
the senior manager position oversees the program manager
is the time required to process new hires.
for alternative certification and performs many of the same
Similarly, due to budget decreases, the district decreased duties as the program manager, including recruiting and
the number of teacher candidate recruiters on the talent coaching teachers.
FIGURE 6–5
HOUSTON ISD HUMAN RESOURCES GENERAL MANAGER SPAN OF CONTROL
Chief Human Resources (HR) Officer
General Manager, General Manager, General Manager, General Manager, General Manager,
Talent Acquisition Compliance Compensation Human Capital Business Services
Accountability
Senior Human Manager, Manager,

Manager, Resources Investigators Personnel
Alternative Certification Records
Certification Officer
Associate Employee
Teacher Trainer Relations
(vacant) Senior Compensation Analyst
Compensation Analyst – 2
Analyst
Academic Leadership Manager, HR Business HR Business Partner,

Program Recruiter HR Business Partner, Operations and
Manager Partner – 2 Departments Training
Onboarding Senior HR Business Senior Manager
Specialist Recruiter – 2 Partner, HR Information
Nutrition Systems and
Services Operations
The Society for Human Resources Management (SHRM) • 1:3 of span of control for the general manager
cites the industry’s average span of control as seven direct of compliance;
reports per executive-level position. At the time of the
• 1:3 span of control for the general manager
onsite review, five positions reported directly to the chief
of compensation;
human resources officer, which is near the cited average.
SHRM states that the industry average number of positions • 1:3 span of control for the general manager of human
reporting directly to middle managers (i.e., general capital accountability; and
managers) is 12 positions. • 1:4 span of control for the general manager of
business services.
The number of directly reporting positions for each general
manager position in the Human Resources Department is Each of the general managers in the HR Department
less than the industry average. Figure 6–5 shows the positions manages less than the SHRM average of 12 positions.
each general manager oversees.
The Human Resources Department faces additional budget
As shown in Figure 6–5, the span of control for each general decreases for fiscal year 2020. Decreases of staff positions
manager position are as follows: below the general managers will decrease further the HR
Department’s capacity to function effectively. Decreasing the
• 1:7 span of control for the general manager of number of positions at the general manager and senior
talent acquisition; management levels would improve the department’s
FIGURE 6–6
RECOMMENDED HOUSTON ISD HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
FEBRUARY 2019
Chief Human Resources (HR) Officer
General Manager, General Manager, General Manager,

Talent Acquisition Compliance and Human Compensation and
Capital Accountability Business Services
Academic Leadership Manager, Programs HR Business Senior Manager

Manager,
Program Recruiter HR Business Manager Partner,
Compensation HR Information
Manager Partner – 2 Nutrition Systems and
Services Operations
Onboarding Senior Senior Compensation HR Business HR Business
Specialist Recruiter – 2 Compensation Analyst – 2 Partner, Partner,
Analyst Departments Operations
and Training
Human Manager, Manager,
Resources Investigators Personnel
Certification Records
Officer
Associate Employee
Teacher Trainer Relations
(vacant) Analyst
Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, February 2019.
efficiency and effectiveness. Duplicating duties among In the Financial Management chapter, the alternative
management positions without filling vacancies at other certification program has been recommended to be eliminated.
levels is not an efficient use of resources.
Figure 6–6 shows the recommended organization for the
Houston ISD should reorganize the Human Resources HR Department.
Department and adhere to best practices for an effective and The fiscal impact assumes that the district eliminates two
equitable span of control. general manager positions for an annual savings of $279,353
[$232,794 (average general manager salary x 2) + $46,559
The chief human resources officer should decrease the
(20.0 percent benefits x 2)].
number of general managers from five to three by
merging teams that have interrelated functions.
SALARIES (REC. 40)
Specifically, the chief of human resources should carry
out the following actions: Houston ISD pays below-market salaries and lacks procedures
to ensure consistent application of the salary guides for all
• merge the compliance and the human capital positions districtwide.
accountability teams to report to one general
manager; and The Human Resources Department’s compensation team
annually completes a salary survey from the Texas Association
• merge the compensation and the business services of School Boards (TASB). The survey compares the salaries
teams to report to one general manager to manage of district staff and campus-based staff, including teachers,
integrating new staff and to support campuses principals, and professional support staff, to the salaries of
and departments. comparable positions in districts that surround Houston
FIGURE 6–7
HOUSTON ISD SALARIES COMPARED TO REGIONAL AVERAGES
CALENDAR YEAR 2018
HOUSTON ISD AREA SCHOOL DISTRICTS
POSITION STAFF AVERAGE SALARY AVERAGE SALARY HOUSTON ISD
Teacher 12,034 $56,739 $58,733 Lower
Nurse 235 $57,646 $60,147 Lower
Librarian 65 $62,776 $64,427 Lower
Counselor, Elementary School 47 $64,951 $68,298 Lower
Counselor, Middle School 35 $65,367 $69,663 Lower
Counselor, High School 72 $69,250 $72,377 Lower
Social Worker 38 $46,357 $62,780 Lower
Licensed Specialist in School Psychology 22 $70,007 $69,218 Higher
Assistant Principals, Elementary School 75 $64,689 $73,483 Lower
Assistant Principals, Middle School 75 $71,782 $76,900 Lower
Assistant Principals, High School 103 $82,390 $84,188 Lower
Principal, Elementary School 167 $91,946 $100,317 Lower
Principal, Middle School 51 $106,092 $109,533 Lower
Principal, High School 39 $125,180 $137,690 Lower
Principal, Alternative Campus 10 $117,300 $107,046 Higher
Source: Texas Association of School Boards, Salary Comparison Data, 2018.
ISD. Figure 6–7 shows that, on average, Houston ISD pays Payroll Department leadership stated that two of the
teachers, professional support staff, assistant principals and department’s greatest challenges are being understaffed and
most principals less than area districts. At least for teachers, undercompensated. Similarly, Technology Department
these differences in salary are not attributable to differences leadership stated that staff retention is a major challenge for
in years of service. the department, which has several staff leave each week. Staff
reported that technology salaries are comparable to those in
Although the district completes the TASB survey every
surrounding school districts. However, Houston ISD salaries
year, the district has not performed a compensation and
are not competitive with those offered by large technology
classification study for all district positions. Compensation
companies in the Houston area. Staff reported that a
and classification studies examine whether districts are
compensation study is needed. However, district leadership
classifying all jobs appropriately and whether the districts’
have stated that contracting with a vendor to perform a
compensation structures align with the market. According
compensation and classification study and aligning salaries
to interviews, many noncampus-based positions have
with market rates would result in significant costs and are not
below-market pay, including police officers, technology
possible during a time when positions are being eliminated.
staff, maintenance technicians, and mechanics. Facilities
Services Department leadership staff stated that the According to district staff, the lack of market studies to
department struggles to hire skilled staff for specialized maintain competitive pay structures results in high turnover
positions, because the district’s salaries for these positions in many positions. The Council of the Great City Schools
are less than competitive positions. For example, some (CGCS) publishes performance measures and performance
positions that earn annual salaries of $56,000 in the private data related to business operations in urban public school
sector are capped at $36,000 in Houston ISD. In another districts. Its 2018 publication Managing for Results includes
example, Houston ISD had one locksmith to service the the high, median, and low values for performance metric
entire district at the time of the onsite field work. Staff data from districts reporting to CGCS, including Houston
reported that multiple locksmith candidates have rejected ISD. Districts in the upper quartile reported the highest
job offers because the salary was not competitive. values for a given metric, and districts in the lower quartile
FIGURE 6–8
HOUSTON ISD SEPARATION RATES COMPARED TO COUNCIL OF THE GREAT CITY SCHOOLS AVERAGES
EMPLOYEE SCHOOL-BASED NONSCHOOL
SEPARATION INSTRUCTIONAL SCHOOL-BASED NONEXEMPT NONEXEMPT NONSCHOOL
DISTRICT RATE (2) TEACHER SUPPORT STAFF EXEMPT STAFF (3) STAFF (4) STAFF (5) EXEMPT STAFF (6)
Upper Quartile 15.8% 15.4% 17.1% 13.1% 17.8% 14.6% 16.4%
Median 11.5% 10.9% 12.0% 8.9% 14.1% 11.4% 8.9%
Lower Quartile 9.7% 8.0% 9.9% 5.7% 10.7% 8.8% 6.9%
Houston ISD 21.2% 15.7% 38.1% 15.6% 23.9% 37.8% 15.8%
Notes:
(1) The Council of the Great City Schools report, Managing for Results, 2018, publishes data from school years 2013–14 to 2016–17.
(2) Separation rate is defined as the total number of employees that left the district (due to retirement, resignation, or termination) divided by
the total number of district employees (full-time-equivalent positions).
(3) School-based exempt staff refers to campus-level staff that are exempt from minimum wage and overtime pay requirements pursuant to
the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.
(4) School-based nonexempt staff refers to campus-level staff that are subject to minimum wage and overtime pay requirements pursuant to
the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.
(5) Nonschool nonexempt staff refers to district-level department staff that are exempt from minimum wage and overtime pay requirements
pursuant to the federal Fair Labor Standards Act.
(6) Nonschool exempt staff refers to district-level staff that are subject to minimum wage and overtime pay requirements pursuant to the
federal Fair Labor Standards Act.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, February 2019; Council of the Great City Schools, Managing for
Results, 2018.
reported the lowest values. Figure 6–8 shows the overall The district’s financial procedures manual states the
separation rates and separation rates by staff type of school following procedures:
districts reporting to the CGCS and the separation rates in
… work location supervisors are responsible for
Houston ISD.
notifying the Human Resources Business Partner when
Figure 6–8 shows that Houston ISD’s separation rate for all an employee has changed location or job title. Work
categories of staff except for nonschool exempt staff is higher location supervisors are to inform their HR Business
than the upper quartile rate reported to the CGCS. In Partner via email or Hire Memo, providing the following
addition to uncompetitive salary structures, district budget information:
decreases also might contribute to Houston ISD’s higher-
• employee name and ID number;
than-average separation rates.
• position code number which the employee will
According to interviews, Houston ISD’s budget cuts and staff; and
below-market salaries have resulted in inequities in pay and
job classifications because the district’s salary guides are not • effective date of the change.
applied appropriately. The district has a compensation
These procedures do not require supervisors to enumerate
manual with procedures for setting staff pay based on several
the job duties that staff will perform in the new position, and
salary schedules. The district has a master salary schedule,
the HR Department does not verify whether these duties
technology salary schedule, and associate teachers and part-
comply with the position’s job description.
time degreed teacher salary schedule. Staff reported that, to
raise staff salaries toward preventing them from leaving the The cost to address lagging compensation increases annually.
district, department managers promote staff to higher-paid In a school year 2017–18 salary recommendation presented
positions without changing their job duties. As a result, in to district leadership, the cost to adjust salaries by 1.0 percent
many instances staff that perform the same duties have to 3.0 percent to provide an across-the-board raise to most
different job titles and different salaries. The district has not staff was more than $17.9 million. The cost to align all
established a process for the HR Department to review or below-market position salaries with the average was slightly
approve promotions and raises. more than $19.1 million.
School districts spend 75.0 percent to 80.0 percent of gross • paid time off (including sick leave, personal leave, paid
revenues on staff salaries and benefits. How a school district holiday, vacation, and any other nonworked hours)
compensates staff can affect the district’s overall performance. does not count toward the 40.0-hour calculation.
School districts that perform classification and compensation
The district’s compensation manual provides general
studies are able to ensure that compensation is competitive to
guidance for overtime, stating, “Houston ISD has district
attract and retain highly qualified staff.
and department requirements for advanced approval of
Houston ISD should strengthen controls over promotion overtime hours; regardless of approvals, if a job has been
and pay and perform a limited-scope classification and determined to be nonexempt and a staff in that job works
compensation study. overtime, the staff must be compensated or receive
compensatory time. While paying for overtime is a legal
The chief human resources officer should perform the requirement, scheduling overtime is not an entitlement. Staff
following tasks: should not view overtime as a permanent part of base pay
• coordinate with the Purchasing Services Department and should understand that these earnings are flexible.” The
to issue a request for proposal for a limited-scope compensation manual also states that the earning of overtime
classification and compensation study to not exceed must be approved in advance by the supervisor or designee.
$24,000 ($150 per hour x 160.0 hours), select a Most campuses and departments approve and record
vendor, and negotiate a contract; overtime on manual timesheets. Each campus and
• present the compensation study report’s findings to department has staff assigned the duty of time recorder that
the superintendent and the Houston ISD Board of enters the timesheet information into the systems applications
Trustees; and products (SAP) data processing system.
• develop procedures for HR Department staff to The district has not established procedures to approve
review and approve promotions and salary actions. overtime beyond these general requirements, nor does the
district direct departments to limit overtime approved in
The fiscal impact assumes a onetime cost of $24,000 advance by supervisors. The district has not established a
to conduct a limited-scope classification and monitoring process to ensure that supervisors in departments
compensation study. and on campuses properly authorize overtime and that
timesheets submitted to payroll are accurate.
OVERTIME (REC. 41)
The district’s lack of controls over overtime has led to
Houston ISD lacks procedures to ensure consistency and overtime costs of 19.8 million in school year 2017-18. Staff
quality control of overtime accountability. from the Police and Facilities Services departments received
the highest percentages of the district’s overtime payments.
The district’s financial procedures manual states, “Non- The payments for these departments constituted 54.0 percent
Exempt is a Fair Labor Standards Act employment status that of the district’s total. Some of the overtime for school year
indicates that an employee must be paid for all hours worked 2017–18 may be associated with staff work hours related to
and must receive overtime compensation at a minimum rate the effects of Hurricane Harvey, which made landfall in the
of one and one-half times the regular hourly pay rate for all Houston area in August 2017. However, the overtime paid
time worked over the 40 work hours per week.” The manual during school year 2016–17 was $21.8 million, which was
provides the following requirements for overtime for $2.0 million higher than the school year 2017–18 total.
nonexempt staff:
Figure 6–9 shows the overtime pay and salaries for the top
• overtime must be approved in advance by the work 25 noncampus staff who received the greatest overtime
location supervisor; payments during school year 2017–18. The top 25 highest-
paid noncampus staff on average received overtime pay that
• overtime must be paid at a minimum hourly rate of
constituted 46.5 percent of their annual salary. One of the
time and a half;
highest paid staff shown in Figure 6–9 received overtime pay
• overtime is paid after 40.0 hours are worked in a that constituted 58.7 percent of the position’s annual salary.
week; and The staff that received the greatest overtime payment received
FIGURE 6–9
HOUSTON ISD TOP 25 NONCAMPUS STAFF THAT RECEIVED THE GREATEST OVERTIME PAYMENTS
TOTAL OVERTIME ANNUAL OVERTIME PERCENTAGE
STAFF (1) DEPARTMENT POSITION (2) PAYMENT SALARY OF SALARY
Staff A Facilities Services Maintenance TL $91,467 $159,140 57.5%
Staff B Facilities Services Grounds Maintenance TL $80,920 $137,934 58.7%
Staff C Facilities Services Maintenance TL $76,551 $141,563 54.1%
Staff D Police Police Officer 11M $69,932 $128,462 54.4%
Staff E Police Police Officer 12M $57,234 $120,248 47.6%
Staff F Police Police Officer 12M $52,352 $114,631 45.7%
Staff G Police Police Officer 12M $49,369 $113,473 43.5%
Staff H Police Police Officer 11M $47,892 $97,701 49.0%
Staff I Facilities Services Maintenance Repairer $45,358 $86,027 52.7%
Staff J Police Police Officer 12M $42,252 $105,946 39.9%
Staff K Police Police Officer 12M $42,014 $91,277 46.0%
Staff L Facilities Services Maintenance TL $42,000 $96,886 43.3%
Staff M Police Police Officer 12M $41,644 $105,136 39.6%
Staff N Facilities Services Maintenance TL $40,713 $105,415 38.6%
Staff O Police Police Officer 11M $40,339 $99,720 40.5%
Staff P Facilities Services Senior Plant Operator $40,278 $84,260 47.8%
Staff Q Police Police Officer 11M Alternate $40,088 $98,406 40.7%
Staff R Police Police Officer 11M $39,493 $91,820 43.0%
Staff S Police Police Officer 11M $38,763 $95,929 40.4%
Staff T Police Police Officer 12M $38,547 $83,062 46.4%
Staff U Police Police Sergeant $38,261 $106,074 36.1%
Staff V Police Police Officer $37,524 $82,141 45.7%
Staff W Facilities Services Senior Plant Operator $36,819 $70,363 52.3%
Staff X Police Police Officer 11M $36,732 $95,215 38.6%
Staff Y Plant Operations Senior Plant Operator $36,490 $74,110 49.2%
Total $1,203,030 $2,584,939 46.5%
Notes:
(1) Staff are identified by coded labels and not their names.
(2) TL=time-limited; 11M=11.0-month assignment; 12M=12.0-month assignment.
$91,467 in addition to the position’s annual salary during Due to the amount of overtime incurred, some district staff
school year 2017–18. expressed the belief that abuse of overtime is occurring and
that the district’s overtime procedures are not followed
Figure 6–10 shows the overtime pay and salaries of the top consistently. Staff described instances of suspicious overtime,
25 campus staff that received the greatest overtime payments such as a staff earning overtime on Christmas Day, when the
during school year 2017–18. These staff on average received district was closed. Staff reported instances of overpayments
overtime pay that was 31.6 percent of their annual salary, to staff who were promoted to exempt status, yet still are
and one staff received overtime pay that constituted 44.3 authorized for overtime in the payroll system. Staff also
percent of the position’s annual salary. reported examples of police officers that were paid overtime
FIGURE 6–10
HOUSTON ISD TOP 25 CAMPUS STAFF THAT RECEIVED THE GREATEST OVERTIME PAYMENTS
TOTAL OVERTIME ANNUAL OVERTIME PERCENTAGE
STAFF (1) DEPARTMENT POSITION (2) PAYMENT SALARY OF SALARY
Staff A Academics Administrative Assistant, ES 12M $30,354 $68,808 44.1%
Staff B Academics Administrative Assistant, HS $29,985 $76,781 39.1%
Staff C Academics Administrative Assistant, HS $27,563 $70,619 39.0%
Staff D Academics Administrative Assistant, ES 12M $26,711 $60,351 44.3%
Staff E Academics Administrative Assistant, MS 12M $21,431 $73,145 29.3%
Staff F Academics Administrative Assistant, MS 12M $20,533 $56,370 36.4%
Staff G Academics Administrative Assistant, HS $20,152 $78,322 25.7%
Staff H Academics Administrative Assistant, ES 12M $19,268 $53,964 35.7%
Staff I Academics Administrative Assistant, HS $18,896 $62,367 30.3%
Staff J Academics Administrative Assistant, ES 11M $18,318 $51,389 35.6%
Staff K Academics Administrative Assistant, ES 12M $18,309 $56,671 32.3%
Staff L Academics Administrative Assistant, ES 12M $17,873 $57,337 31.2%
Staff M Academics Administrative Assistant, MS 12M $16,083 $53,883 29.8%
Staff N Academics Administrative Assistant, ES 12M $15,622 $59,564 26.2%
Staff O Academics Administrative Assistant, MS 12M $15,168 $43,216 35.1%
Staff P Academics Administrative Assistant, ES 12M $15,164 $50,853 29.8%
Staff Q Academics Administrative Assistant, MS 12M $15,053 $57,682 26.1%
Staff R Academics Associate After School Program Specialist $14,493 $64,403 22.5%
Staff S Academics Administrative Assistant, HS $14,341 $59,599 24.1%
Staff T Academics Administrative Assistant, ES 12M $13,990 $52,239 26.8%
Staff U Academics Administrative Assistant, HS $13,966 $59,498 23.5%
Staff V Academics Administrative Assistant, MS 12M $13,863 $50,076 27.7%
Staff W Academics Administrative Assistant, MS 12M $13,793 $49,941 27.6%
Staff X Academics Administrative Assistant, ES 12M $13,484 $54,893 24.6%
Staff Y Academics Teaching Assistant 10M $12,908 $30,744 42.0%
Total $457,322 $1,452,715 31.5%
Notes:
(1) Staff are identified by coded labels and not their names.
(2) ES=elementary school; MS=middle school; HS=high school; 10M=10.0-month assignment; 11M=11.0-month assignment; 12M=12.0-
month assignment.
during their scheduled 8.0-hour work days because they were effective to eliminate a position that is paid $45,000 a year
sent to other campuses. only to pay an equal amount in overtime to existing staff
for fewer hours.
Another contributing factor to excessive overtime may be
budget decreases and staff shortages affecting many Failure to ensure that supervisors are authorizing overtime
departments. However, no evidence shows that departments properly, monitoring the overtime, and submitting
analyze the cost effectiveness of hiring new staff in lieu of accurate staff overtime timesheets to payroll will continue
paying overtime, and the district compensation manual inefficient, ineffective, and costly practices. Excessive
does not address this topic. For example, it is not cost overtime often is the result of poor organization and
inefficient management of work. The lack of proper • shift length – The method for distributing overtime
monitoring of overtime leads to potential excesses, repeated depends on the shift length. With 8.0-hour shifts,
occurrences, and budget overruns. Consistent overtime staff remain late or are brought in early to cover an
can lead to burnout and low productivity, high turnover open shift. Splitting the open shift is preferable to
rates, and loss of quality staff. Long hours can increase holding staff over for the entire shift and making staff
safety risks from staff fatigue and a lack of focus and work 16.0 hours straight; and
contribute to increased absenteeism.
• cross-training – Another tactic that can help with
To avoid problems that can occur when high levels of absences and temporary workload increases is cross-
overtime continue for extended periods, effective districts training. This practice expands the number of staff
regularly monitor overtime and absences. These districts available to support areas with temporary workload
analyze workload variations and track overtime hours by increases or absences. If highly specialized positions
staff, department, and districtwide. By projecting are staffed by a few qualified staff, training additional
expected trends in overtime, department leaders can staff to do those jobs can prevent slowdowns or help
evaluate the need to develop additional staff positions, when more output is needed.
develop new shift schedules, or employ temporary staff.
Houston ISD should establish controls to monitor overtime,
Some districts limit the number of hours staff can work
reassess staffing levels in key departments, and work to
during a week, month, or year. Others have procedures
decrease overtime costs. The superintendent should complete
that ensure a more even distribution of the overtime.
the following actions:
According to SHRM, an organization should examine the
following areas when reviewing its overtime distribution • direct chiefs and area superintendents to require
policies and procedures to protect against excessive overtime department managers and principals to limit the
for individual staff: amount of overtime worked to 10.0 percent of salary;
• mandatory overtime – How much of the overtime is • direct the chief of human resources to develop a
voluntary versus mandatory? A high proportion of procedure to review overtime of more than 10.0
forced overtime means staff cannot plan their lives percent of the salary for proper authorization and
away from work, which can lead to poor morale. necessity. The chief of human resources should
How much lead time is given when notifying staff document this procedure in the district’s compensation
about mandatory overtime? manual and disseminate it to managers, supervisors,
and principals that approve overtime;
• selection criteria – What criteria are used when
choosing who is offered the overtime work? Using • require department managers and principals to
seniority may seem fair, but it can cause resentment submit quarterly overtime reports to their respective
among junior staff. Would staff perceive other chiefs and school support officers that include total
reasonable criteria, such as attendance, training, or overtime and data on staff working overtime that
performance as more equitable? exceeds 10.0 percent of their salary; and
• abuse of policy – Does the policy for covering • direct chiefs to require department managers and
absences inadvertently encourage staff to manipulate principals to analyze overtime hours and perform a
their sick time and overtime? For example, one week cost-benefit analysis of developing additional staff
a staff calls in sick so that another staff is asked to positions instead of paying existing staff overtime.
provide coverage and receives overtime pay; then they
The fiscal impact assumes that Houston ISD implements
reverse roles the following week or month;
strategies to decrease overtime by 10.0 percent per year,
• pension incentives – Does the organization’s resulting in a savings each year based on the school year
retirement plan encourage staff to increase their 2017–18 total overtime of $19,803,852. The savings
earnings during the final two or three years of would be $1,980,385 during the first year, $1,782,347
employment? This practice may result in senior during the second year, $1,604,112 during the third year,
staff that are approaching retirement taking all the $1,443,701 during the fourth year, and $1,299,331 during
overtime they can get to boost their pensions; the fifth year.
EXCESS OTHER PAY (REC. 42) use of extra-duty pay. During school year 2017–18, the
Houston ISD campuses award ad hoc stipends and extra- district paid $13,823,972 in extra-duty pay. The
duty pay with limited oversight from the Human Resources compensation manual provides the hourly extra-duty pay
Department, resulting in inconsistent implementation rate for each type of position and provides general guidelines
across campuses. for what constitutes an extra duty. According to staff,
principals do not always follow the compensation manual
Houston ISD uses stipends to compensate teachers for duties guidelines, and some teachers receive extra-duty pay for
performed that are not related to their primary jobs, such as duties within the scope of their jobs, such as grading papers.
time worked before and after school and days worked outside No district department reviews extra-duty payments, and
of their normal schedules. The stipends are for specific the Payroll Department does not investigate extra-duty pay
academic and extracurricular duties outlined in the requests that appear suspicious. An audit of these types of
compensation manual, such as serving as a teacher mentor, payments is not part of the Office of Internal Audit’s
gifted and talented coordinator, athletics coach, or club calendar year 2019 audit plan.
sponsor. According to the district’s compensation manual,
the board approves the stipends and the minimum and District staff stated that principals have too much discretion
maximum amounts that the district can pay for each stipend. for how they award ad hoc stipends and extra-duty pay. The
The compensation manual outlines the eligibility district lacks a process to monitor the costs of ad hoc stipends
requirements, the process for approval, and the required and extra-duty pay. It also lacks procedures to verify that
documentation of extra time worked for each type of stipend. payments are authorized, accurate, and for work performed
Most stipends require approval from the principal and a in accordance with the compensation manual. The lack of
district department. For example, campuses must send all these verification processes can result in excess payments and
athletic stipend request forms to the Athletics Department budget overruns. The review team found no evidence of any
for eligibility determination, and the district’s Multilingual type of review confirming that these payments are consistent
Programs Department must approve all bilingual stipends. with the district’s compensation manual or board policies.
Houston ISD also uses ad hoc stipends to compensate staff Houston ISD should strengthen controls over ad hoc
for time worked outside of normal duty hours. Campuses stipends and extra-duty pay.
approve and submit these stipends to the HR compensation The chief human resources officer should perform the
team for processing. During school year 2017–18, the following actions:
campuses approved $3,183,492 in ad hoc stipends. Stipends
of this type are not standardized, and the duties performed, • draft procedures for department approval of all ad
stipend amounts, and payment frequency are determined at hoc stipends. The procedures should standardize the
the campus principal’s discretion. The only requirements for duties performed that are eligible for ad hoc stipends
ad hoc stipends included in the compensation manual are to ensure consistency and equity among campuses
that stipend duties should be beyond the staff’s normal job and describe documentation necessary for approval
duties. The district requires approval from the overseeing of stipends;
school support officer only for stipends greater than $7,000. • submit draft procedures to the superintendent for
District staff stated that the lack of standardization for ad hoc approval, and document the procedures in the
stipends results in inconsistent use of stipends across compensation manual; and
campuses. In addition, district staff stated that staff should • designate HR Department teams responsible for
have ad hoc stipends approved before the work is begun; reviewing and approving ad hoc stipends.
some stipends are awarded after the work has been completed.
Staff stated that exempt staff often are paid stipends because The chief internal auditor should include the review of
the district cannot pay them overtime. stipends and extra-duty pay as part of the district’s annual
audit plan.
The district also authorizes principals to pay teachers,
assistant principals, certified staff in noninstructional job The fiscal impact assumes an annual savings of $1,700,746
classifications, and speech therapists extra-duty pay at their [($3,183,492 + $13,823,972) x (0.10)] if the district
discretion. The Payroll Department does not monitor the decreases ad hoc stipends and extra-duty pay by 10.0 percent.
FIGURE 6–11
HOUSTON ISD MANUAL TIME SHEET FOR SALARIED CAMPUS STAFF
TIMEKEEPING (REC. 43) Nutrition Services, Facilities, and Construction Services

Houston ISD does not have an efficient or effective departments use Time Clock Plus. The district estimates that
timekeeping system. There are a variety of systems being used approximately 3,000 of the district’s staff record their time in
currently, ranging from manual systems to Time Clock Plus, this system. Some campuses use other systems, including
a sophisticated electronic time keeping system used by many Pyramid and Raptor. The district uses the Frontline system
districts across the country. Houston ISD has been evaluating to record time for substitute teachers.
the use of an electronic system districtwide, but it had not
The majority of departments and campuses maintain
decided whether to pursue the system, as of February 2019.
manual time sheets that administrative staff then enter into
Federal law requires employers to maintain time sheets for all the SAP system. The campus or department time recorder
staff, unless exempt pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act is responsible for verifying the daily time reported against
(FLSA). Houston ISD has approximately 6,150 salaried staff the required work hours. Manual time sheets, if completed
that are not exempt, and 6,075 hourly staff, totaling 12,225 properly, meet minimum FLSA requirements. FLSA
staff that are required to comply with FLSA timekeeping requires documentation of hours worked each day and total
requirements. Approximately 14,960 Houston ISD staff are hours for the week. However, Houston ISD manual time
exempt from FLSA timekeeping requirements. sheets do not represent hours worked by day or by week,
and the district would have to submit supplemental reports
The district’s financial management procedures state that it is
from the SAP payroll files to the U.S. Department of Labor
the work location supervisor’s responsibility to ensure the
as additional documentation.
validity of all attendance recorded into the payroll system.
For nonexempt staff, supervisors must track staff attendance Figure 6–11 shows an example of a manual time sheet for
daily. These records must be retained for seven years. The salaried campus staff, including teachers, other exempt staff,
procedures state that, regardless of the method used, the data and nonexempt paraprofessional staff.
integrity of all time recorded into the payroll system is the
For salaried staff, the time recorder enters time exceptions to
supervisor’s responsibility.
the regular work schedule into SAP, and the exceptions vary
Houston ISD has no districtwide timekeeping system, and depending on whether the staff is exempt or nonexempt. If a
departments and campuses have discretion to determine how nonexempt staff’s standard work week is 40.0 hours and the
to record time. As a result, various systems are used across the staff works 42.0 hours, the time recorder must enter 2.0
district. Forty-one campuses and the Transportation, hours of overtime.
FIGURE 6–12
HOUSTON ISD MANUAL TIME SHEET FOR HOURLY CAMPUS STAFF
The staff shown in the first row of the time sheet in Figure accommodate nonscheduled breaks, such as if a staff leaves
6–11 is nonexempt. Therefore, the time recorder would during the day for personal business and returns to work.
determine whether the start and stop times represented work
Houston ISD’s manual timesheets are similar to attendance
for a full 40.0 hours and, if not, the amount of time to enter
logs that document whether staff worked that day. Attendance
as an exception to the required work week.
logs are acceptable pursuant to FLSA requirements for
Figure 6–12 shows an example of a manual time sheet for scheduled staff. However, they do not meet the requirements
hourly campus staff, including tutors, part-time lecturers, for scheduled staff that did not work their required schedules
and other temporary staff. or for hourly staff.
For hourly staff, the time recorder must enter all hours into Regardless of the timekeeping system, district staff devote a
SAP. However, the district’s manual timesheets do not significant amount of time to entering records into SAP. The
include all the information related to hours worked. As electronic system in use at some campuses and departments
shown in Figure 6–12, the hourly staff time sheet shows start can upload data directly to SAP, but only the Nutrition
and stop times but not the total hours worked each day. To Services Department uses this feature. All other departments
calculate the hours worked for the staff shown in the time and campuses manually enter timesheet data into SAP.
sheet, the time recorder would observe that the staff worked
The district has little control of the amount of time worked
4.0 hours each day for five days and enter 20.0 hours into
by staff due to the lack of an adequate timekeeping system.
SAP. The complexity of this calculation would increase if the
The district manual time systems are less precise than
start and stop times and the hours per day varied. Time
electronic systems and cannot verify the actual times staff
recorders across the district must make hundreds of thousands
begin and end work. The current system also requires a
of these determinations during each year, and the risk of
significant amount of time for data entry. These factors
error is high. District staff reported instances of campus time
increase the risk that the district pays for time that staff did
recorders failing to enter overtime and extra duty into the
not work.
system, resulting in retroactive data entries and changes to
the payroll system that are inefficient and time-consuming. Figure 6–13 shows the amount of pay affected by hours
worked and, thus, affected by the controls surrounding
In addition, the hourly time sheet lacks sufficient information
timekeeping. Figure 6–13 shows that, of the district’s total
to provide assurance that staff report actual hours worked. In
$1.3 billion in staff pay for school year 2018–19, $120.5
the example in Figure 6–12, the recorded hours show that
million was based on hours worked and documented in the
the staff started and ended work at exactly the same time on
district’s various timekeeping systems.
those four days. Although this scenario may be possible, it is
unlikely. Furthermore, the time sheet does not account for In addition to the risk of fraud, waste, and abuse, the district
scheduled breaks, such as lunch time, and does not has an increased risk of noncompliance with the FLSA due to
FIGURE 6–13 RECRUITING, HIRING, AND RETENTION (REC. 44)

HOUSTON ISD PAY AFFECTED BY HOURS WORKED
SCHOOL YEAR 2018–19 Houston ISD does not have consistent and coherent
AMOUNT recruiting, hiring, and retention processes.
PAY CATEGORY (IN MILLIONS)
The district uses a job-posting computer application to recruit
Overtime and extra-duty pay, nonexempt staff $19.2
candidates for positions, post job vacancies, and screen
Extra-duty pay, exempt staff $21.8 applicants. If a campus or department needs to fill a vacancy,
Hourly staff $42.5 the principal or department head coordinates with the assigned
HR business partner to post the vacancy in the application.
Substitutes $12.2
Candidates apply online, and principals and department heads
Bus drivers $24.7 can use the system to review the submissions, set up interviews,
Total $120.5 and make offers. When a candidate accepts an offer, the district
removes the posting, and the HR business partner begins the
Note: Totals may not sum due to rounding.
staff integration process, which includes a background check
Team; Houston ISD, February 2019. and fingerprinting.
Review team interviews revealed several inefficiencies with

the nature of decentralized manual systems and the number the hiring process. The HR Department does not update
of staff involved in decision making, including time recorders the candidate pool in the job-posting application sufficiently
and principals or department heads. The district is weakening often to remove candidates that have accepted other
its monitoring of compliance with FLSA because it authorizes positions and no longer are available. In addition, the
this amount of control at the campus and department levels, system does not identify candidates that are ineligible for
preventing awareness and involvement by staff in the Payroll an interview because their certification is inappropriate for
and HR departments. the position they seek. Review team interviews suggest that
Automated time clock systems can decrease errors and background checks of candidates are not completed before
streamline operations. The staff clocks in and clocks out; the they begin work duties and are placed on the payroll. Staff
system calculates the elapsed time and accumulates the also described instances of payment to individuals who did
number of hours for the day and period. Campuses can not pass background checks. Although the HR Department
submit time sheets, and all supervisor approvals are submitted procedures state that staff cannot begin work until the
in the system electronically. The data provided by an background check is complete, some hiring managers do
automated timekeeping system facilitate closer monitoring not follow the district’s process. District staff reported that
of overtime and extra-duty pay. background checks are performed for all new hires that the
HR Department is aware of, however, there have been
Houston ISD should establish a districtwide instances in which principals have allowed candidates to
timekeeping system. begin work without notifying the HR Department.
The superintendent should evaluate and implement a Although the HR Department provides training to new
districtwide system that can integrate with SAP and the principals related to what types of interview questions are
electronic substitute teacher system where possible. The appropriate and what types of questions are against the law,
implementation should include the following elements: the district does not have written procedures with
standardized interview questions available for staff to use
• an analysis of all current timekeeping and work
when interviewing candidates and when conducting
rules; those payroll rules should be considered for
reference checks. It also does not train staff regularly in the
programming districtwide timekeeping; and
use of interview questions or checking references.
• appropriate training of the Payroll Department staff
The district also has opportunities to improve its teacher
and all district staff, from the most junior-level staff
recruiting. Houston ISD does not have a targeted recruitment
to supervisors.
plan to address high rates of teacher turnover. During the
The district could implement this recommendation with onsite field work, interviews, and review of available data, the
existing resources. review team determined that some campuses have had high
turnover rates for several years. In addition, the data show structured standard exit interview process leaves the HR
wide variations among campuses in teacher turnover rates. Department and the chief human resources officer without
Houston ISD has made progress in decreasing its teacher information that could inform the recruiting, hiring, and
turnover rate during a three-year period, decreasing turnover onboarding processes.
from 14.4 percent to 13.0 percent from school years 2014–
Houston ISD should develop recruiting strategies for
15 to 2017–18. However, some campuses still have turnover
campuses that have high turnover among staff, and
rates of 34.8 percent. The district’s school year 2017–18
standardize procedures for hiring, integrating new staff, and
Marketing and Recruitment Plan details efforts to recruit
exit interviews districtwide.
teacher candidates for targeted needs, including technology,
career and technology education, and science, technology, The chief human resources officer should perform the
engineering, and mathematics programs. However, this plan following tasks:
does not contain strategies tailored to meet the unique
staffing needs of certain campuses with chronic teacher • develop written procedures for interviews and
turnover issues. reference checks. Procedures for interviews should
include standard questions for all interviewers, and
Houston ISD does not have information regarding the questions specific to positions. For example, some of
number of district staff who continue to work as classroom the questions posed to candidates for instructional
teachers after completing an alternative certification program positions would differ from those posed to candidates
through the district or from an outside provider. The district for noninstructional positions;
also does not collect data to compare the retention rates of
• develop a specific plan to guide recruiters in
teachers certified through each program to determine which
addressing the needs of certain campuses. The chief
produce the most successful staff.
human resources officer should lead the recruitment
Houston ISD does not have a standard exit interview process, staff in developing a plan to guide the recruiters in
nor does the HR Department. Most staff who resign do not addressing the needs of identified campuses;
complete any exit survey.
• ensure that the HR Department maintains a timely
Without interview protocols for hiring managers, staff will candidate pool on the job-posting application that
continue to conduct unstructured interviews and reference matches properly certified candidates to suitable
checks that vary among campuses and departments. vacancies and removes former candidates that no
Without timely monitoring of the candidate pool on the longer are available for interviews;
job-posting application, interviewers will continue to waste • establish a database to measure retention rates for
staff time and effort during the interview process. The lack classroom service of district staff who have completed
of a process for principals to review personnel files of rehires alternative certification programs; and
and transfers prevents interviewers from obtaining
important information that should inform hiring decisions. • develop and implement a standard exit interview
Failure to ensure that all prehire candidates have completed process districtwide.
background checks before starting positions increases the
risk of the district hiring staff convicted of violent crimes or
existing resources.
crimes related to children.
The high turnover rates of teachers at certain campuses JOB DESCRIPTIONS AND EVALUATIONS (REC. 45)
mitigates academic achievement. Without a targeted
Houston ISD’s written job descriptions are inaccurate,
recruitment plan structured to the specific needs of each
obsolete, and not included in the evaluation process.
campus, neither the high turnover rates nor the quality of
candidates available to campuses will improve. Without the Houston ISD Board Policy DC (LOCAL) states, “The
availability of quantifiable, long-term data to evaluate the Superintendent or designee shall define the qualifications,
longevity of service by teachers who have completed duties, and responsibilities of all positions and shall ensure
alternative certification programs, the district cannot that job descriptions are current and accessible to staff
evaluate the effects of these programs. The lack of a and supervisors.”
According to interviews, departments work with the • establish a process and cycle to update and maintain
compensation analysts to develop job descriptions. all job descriptions consistently;
Analysts meet with departments requesting job
• establish a standard format for all job descriptions
descriptions and they review available job descriptions to
and initiate a quality control process to assure
determine if any are applicable to the vacancy the
consistency of job descriptions, including formatting
district wants to fill. Each job has a code and position
and details; and
number. Once a department develops a job description,
the department sends the job description to the job • establish a schedule for departments to review
posting application. The district does not have a process to and update all job descriptions and job titles, and
review and update job descriptions to include changes to remove job descriptions that no longer are in use.
position duties. As a result, staff report that many job Departments should submit documentation of their
descriptions in job postings are inaccurate and obsolete. reviews to the chief human resources officer.
When departments hire candidates for vacant positions,
the duties of the new hires sometimes do not match the After the district updates job descriptions, the Performance
duties described in the job descriptions. Management Office should integrate the updated versions
into each type of evaluation.
Staff reported that the district has not updated many
job descriptions for many years. A review of 11 selected The district could implement this recommendation with
job descriptions reveals multiple formats. Some existing resources.
descriptions are not dated, and most have not been
reviewed or updated since calendar year 2012. Some ADDITIONAL OBSERVATION
technology customer service representatives reported that During fieldwork, the review team observed additional issues
they had never seen their job descriptions, and all said that regarding the district’s programs and services to students,
their knowledge of their job duties is based on directions staff, and the community. These observations are presented
from each of their principals. for consideration as the district implements the report’s other
In addition, Houston ISD does not use job descriptions
consistently as part of the evaluation process. The HR Staff reported that inefficiencies related to processing
Department has a rubric for staff evaluations distributed by federal Family Medical Leave Act requests and return-to-
the Performance Management Office. For example, the work documentation result in delays. A cost-benefit
police officer evaluation form has one section that pertains analysis of self-managing this function compared to
to police work, and most of its content is geared toward maintaining a vendor to process leave may improve the
traditional campus staff. efficiency of leave processing.
Failure to maintain an accurate list of job titles and job

descriptions results in confusion, wastes time, and requires
constant revision to or writing of job descriptions. A good
job description provides a clear representation of the
position for potential candidates. The lack of updated job
descriptions deprives the district of useful tools for
measuring performance and a vital reference in the event of
disputes or disciplinary issues. Effective districts use job
descriptions to inform evaluation tools and ensure that they
apply to each type of job.
Houston ISD should develop a process to review and

update job descriptions regularly, and mandate the use of
job descriptions in the evaluation process.
The chief human resources officer should perform the

following tasks:
FISCAL IMPACT
The Legislative Budget Board’s (LBB) School Performance Review Team identified a fiscal impact for the following
recommendations:

6. HUMAN RESOURCES MANAGEMENT
39. Reorganize the Human $279,353 $279,353 $279,353 $279,353 $279,353 $1,396,765 $0
Resources Department
and adhere to best practices
for an effective and equitable
span of control.
40. Strengthen controls over $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 ($24,000)
promotion and pay and perform
a limited-scope classification
and compensation study.
41. Establish controls to monitor $1,980,385 $1,782,347 $1,604,112 $1,443,701 $1,299,331 $8,109,876 $0
overtime, reassess staffing
levels in key departments,
and work to decrease
overtime costs.
42. Strengthen controls over ad hoc $1,700,746 $1,700,746 $1,700,746 $1,700,746 $1,700,746 $8,503,730 $0
stipends and extra-duty pay.
Total $3,960,484 $3,762,446 $3,584,211 $3,423,800 $3,279,430 $18,010,371 ($24,000)
The LBB could not determine a fiscal impact for other recommendations.
The fiscal impact for implementing Recommendation 43 (timekeeping) depends on the system purchased. According to district
staff, implementing a districtwide timekeeping system may cost from $7.0 million to $10.0 million. The district may achieve
savings in labor and other costs from eliminating the processing of manual time sheets. In addition, an effective timekeeping
system may result in savings by decreasing overreported time.
7. FACILITIES USE AND MANAGEMENT
A school district’s facilities include campuses, buildings, Department, which results in a lack of staff training
grounds, athletic facilities, portable buildings, and and high energy costs.
supplement facilities (e.g., storage, warehouses). Facilities
Houston ISD does not manage its work order process
management includes planning for facilities use, construction
properly, which limits the information that campus-
of projects, and maintenance of infrastructure (e.g., electrical,
level staff have and fails to capture costs accurately.
plumbing, irrigation, heating, and cooling). An independent
school district’s facilities program provides safe and clean Houston ISD’s Maintenance Department does
learning environments. not engage in long-range planning and performs
Houston Independent School District (ISD) has eight early maintenance reactively.
childhood centers, 160 elementary school campuses, 38 Houston ISD does not have a process to monitor
middle school campuses, 37 high school campuses, and 37 and inventory supplies used for maintenance repairs,
combined or alternative campuses. Houston ISD has which risks inefficiency and property loss.
approximately 31.1 million square feet of facilities. These
buildings range in age from new to more than 100 years old. Houston ISD contracts for custodial services despite
employing district staff sufficient to perform these services.
FINDINGS
Houston ISD lacks appropriate methodology for RECOMMENDATIONS
developing campus utilization rates. Recommendation 46: Develop an accurate
facility utilization rate for each campus and
Houston ISD’s method for building new campuses results
ensure that campuses maintain industry-standard
in high architectural costs, long design times, and the
utilization rates.
districtwide use of inconsistent designs and materials.
Recommendation 47: Develop or maintain
Houston ISD does not plan efficiently for its long-
districtwide building prototypes for all
term facilities needs through enrollment projections
campus types.
and facilities assessments.
Recommendation 48: Develop a comprehensive
Houston ISD contracts with program management
long-range facility master plan that incorporates
firms and staffs construction project managers that
accurate information about facility replacement
perform duplicative work.
costs and enrollment projections.
Houston ISD separates the organizational structure
Recommendation 49: Eliminate program
and construction responsibilities across the
management contracts and charge existing district
Construction Services Department and the Facilities
staff with performing these responsibilities.
Services Department.
Recommendation 50: Evaluate all position
Houston ISD’s process for selecting furniture,
titles and job responsibilities within the
fixtures, and equipment for new facilities results in
Construction Services Department and Facilities
variations among campuses.
Services Department and ensure that titles and
Houston ISD’s operations and educational staff are responsibilities match the functions performed
not represented consistently during the design and by each position.
construction of facilities, resulting in quality-control
Recommendation 51: Develop a furniture, fixtures,
issues and potentially inefficient designs.
and equipment standard for elementary, middle,
Houston ISD lacks a defined structure or and high school campuses to provide consistency
comprehensive mission for its Energy Initiatives across district facilities.
FACILITIES USE AND MANAGEMENT HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
Recommendation 52: Revise the process for five elementary school campuses. During school year 2018–
the design and construction document reviews, 19, 13 new or renovated campuses were completed and
and mandate that specific departments have opened in accordance with this bond. In February 2019, 36
representation during the design and construction campuses either were completed or nearing completion, and
phases of projects. four campuses had continuing construction. At that time,
the district was using surplus funds to add additional features
Recommendation 53: Develop a clear reporting
to seven completed campuses.
structure for the Energy Initiatives Department
and an energy management plan. Houston ISD’s chief operating officer (COO) oversees all
departments within the Business Operations Division,
Recommendation 54: Assess the work order needs
including the Facilities Services and Construction Services
and evaluate the ability of a digital system to
departments. The construction services officer oversees
improve service quality provided by the Facilities
Houston ISD building and construction projects. The
Services Department.
facilities services officer oversees facilities finances, code
Recommendation 55: Develop long-term planning compliance, security maintenance, custodial services, and
strategies for the Maintenance Department, such other areas relating to district facilities. Figure 7–1 shows the
as a staffing allocation model and a preventive reporting structure in these two departments.
More than 1,000 Houston ISD custodial staff provide some
Recommendation 56: Implement a consistent of the custodial services for the district. The district also
inventory process of maintenance stock to ensure contracts with a vendor to perform some custodial tasks on
that technicians have the needed tools and campuses. The Maintenance Department has more than 400
materials to complete repairs and that materials staff that perform maintenance and help campuses contract
reported as used are being tracked and noted. with vendors for some repairs. Additionally, Houston ISD
has a Construction Services Department that oversees bond
Recommendation 57: Reassign the custodial construction and district-led construction. The Construction
vendor’s responsibilities to district custodial staff. Services Department is completing the projects authorized
by the 2012 bond program and is managing the construction
BACKGROUND of four elementary campuses to replace those damaged by
Managing facilities is dependent on a district’s organizational Hurricane Harvey, which made landfall in Houston in
structure. Larger districts typically have staff dedicated to August 2017.
support facilities management, and smaller districts may
have staff with dual roles. For example, the same staff member DETAILED FINDINGS
may be responsible for custodial and groundskeeping tasks.
CAMPUS UTILIZATION (REC. 46)
Facilities planning establishes district priorities, allocates
resources and funds, and identifies facility goals. Planning is Houston ISD lacks appropriate methodology for developing
based on student enrollment, campus and building capacity, campus utilization rates.
facilities condition, curriculum needs, and state regulations.
The district’s Research and Accountability Department
Management of construction and maintenance projects
employs a demographer that produces an annual report
should include contract management, cost control, and a
summarizing campuses’ enrollment, transfers, and
project schedule with defined milestones. Facilities
populations. The demographer also generates enrollment
maintenance requires a program for planned maintenance of
projections for the next school year. During onsite interviews,
facilities and equipment, and routine cleaning of facilities to
staff said that the district did not use these enrollment
ensure a safe environment for students and staff.
projections for school years 2017–18 and 2018–19. Staff also
In November 2012, Houston ISD voters approved a $1.89 reported that the district does not order enrollment
billion bond to fund the replacement or repair of 40 projections for more than one school year. Current
campuses. The bond funds new campuses for 21 high projections show the district’s enrollment remaining constant
schools, two middle schools, and three elementary schools. for the 2019–20 school year. Figure 7–2 shows the district’s
The bond also funds renovations at seven high school and annual enrollment from school years 2012–13 to 2019–20.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT FACILITIES USE AND MANAGEMENT
FIGURE 7–1
HOUSTON ISD FACILITIES AND CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ORGANIZATION
Chief Operations Officer
Facilities Construction Services

Services Officer Officer
Document Control General General Manager, General Manager General Manager

Administrator Manager, Facilities Finance of Business of Design
Facilities Support and Accountability Solutions
General Manager, Quality Assurance General Manager, General Manager
Maintenance Analyst Fleet Services and of Construction
Services and Facility Operations
Repairs
Note: The directly reporting relationship between the Facilities Services Officer and the Quality Assurance Analyst is temporary.
Campus capacity is the total number of students that can campus. A campus utilization rate of 100.0 percent indicates
occupy a campus safely while that campus meets educational that the campus is enrolled to its capacity.
standards for each student. Enrollment projections combined The district has two differing sets of campus capacity amounts,
with campus capacities enable school districts to prepare for one developed by the demographer and the other by the
incoming students by calculating campus utilization rates. Construction Services Department. The Construction Services
Districts calculate these rates by dividing the number of amounts show that campuses operate at an average rate of 72.0
students enrolled at each campus by the capacity of each percent utilization. The data also show that 32 campuses are
FIGURE 7–2
HOUSTON ISD ENROLLMENT
214,000
212,000
210,000
208,000
206,000
204,000
202,000
200,000
198,000
196,000
194,000
2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2018–19 2019–20
Enrollment
Note: Enrollment is projected for school year 2019–20.
FIGURE 7–3
HOUSTON ISD UTILIZATION RATES BY CAMPUS TYPE (1) (2)
CAMPUS NUMBER OF CAMPUSES ENROLLMENT FUNCTIONAL CAPACITY UTILIZATION PERCENTAGE

Elementary School 159 100,438 129,442 78.0%
Kindergarten to Grade 8 10 8,212 10,526 78.0%
Middle School 39 33,790 49,222 69.0%
High School 38 47,982 60,414 79.0%
Notes:
(1) Data shown does not include alternative or other campus types.
(2) Data shown is based on Houston ISD’s demographer’s calculations.
operating at greater than 100.0 percent utilization, only one of According to the district demographer, most of the campus
which was due to a temporary campus relocation. Conversely, capacities were determined before school year 2017–18.
49 campuses are operating at less than 50.0 percent utilization. Campus capacities are updated if the district informs the
The demographer’s capacity utilization rates showed that demographer of a change in temporary buildings or if the
Houston ISD campuses operate at 77.0 percent capacity on demographer can confirm a new capacity from copies of
average, excluding in-district charter school campuses. The floor plans. No process is in place that requires capacity
demographer’s utilization rates among campuses varied, numbers to be updated regularly. The Legislative Budget
ranging from 30.0 percent to 184.0 percent. Overall, 29 Board’s School Performance Review Team visited the district
campuses were operating at less than 50.0 percent capacity, in February 2019. At the time of the onsite visit, the
and 40 were operating at greater than 100.0 percent. demographer had plans with accurate dimensions for fewer
than half of the Houston ISD campuses.
These two sets of capacity numbers were not consistent
regarding enrollment figures. The two sets of capacity The district’s middle school campuses averaged the lowest
numbers differed for more than half of the campus capacity utilization rates. Elementary school campuses and programs
figures, and 97 of those figures differed by more than 10.0 for kindergarten to grade eight averaged almost the same
percentage points. Neither department explained the level of utilization as high school campuses. Figure 7–3
variation in capacity figures. shows campus utilization rates by campus type.
The demographer described the guidelines to determine During onsite field work, the review team observed that
capacity. The demographer first determines the number of underutilized campuses were not closing off sections to save
available classroom spaces at a campus. According to district the expenses of utilities, cleaning, and maintenance in unused
guidelines, each classroom must contain a minimum number parts of the facility. In addition, the review team observed
of square feet. A classroom for prekindergarten to grade one many temporary buildings on campuses that the district uses
must not be smaller than 800 square feet. Classrooms for for long-term storage. Many of these temporary buildings
grades two to 12 require at least 700 square feet. The were in poor condition and it is unlikely that the district could
guidelines also specify that the district must count as a return them to classroom usage. However, these buildings’
classroom any sufficiently large room, even if it is not square footage still counts toward potential classroom space.
currently in use as a classroom, unless the room has been
Effective, comprehensive planning for facility expansion,
designated as an administrative area. The demographer then
consolidation, or use is difficult because the district does not
multiplies each classroom space by district standards for the
project its enrollment beyond one year and does not update its
number of students per classroom, which varies by campus,
capacity amounts regularly. Conflicting information exists
for an initial capacity figure. The demographer then
which may cause different departments in the district to plan for
multiplies the figure by 85.0 percent. This calculation
differing events, resulting in an inefficient use of time and funds.
decreases the capacity amount and makes campuses appear
to be closer to capacity than they are, decreasing the The Association for Learning Environments (ALE) includes
likelihood that campuses would operate at full capacity. an enrollment projection among the five elements critical
to an effective long-range school facilities master plan. FIGURE 7–4

According to ALE, “Effective planning requires accurate INDUSTRY-STANDARD UTILIZATION RATES FOR SCHOOL
FACILITIES
enrollment projections at least five years into the future. APRIL 2019
Accurate projections require planners to examine district
CAMPUS AVERAGE UTILIZATION RATE
demographics and track any new construction activity in
Elementary School 95.0%
the district.” The review team commended Clear Creek
ISD in 2004 for completing a long-range enrollment Middle School 85.0%
projection that enabled the district to plan adequately for High School 85.0%
student growth.
An industry best practice for facility utilization suggests an Team, 2019.
average rate of 85.0 percent for middle school and high-

school campuses and 95.0 percent for elementary school • the age demographics of communities surround-
campuses. Campuses that serve older students need ing campuses;
additional room for specialized learning spaces such as
automotive shops or laboratories, which might not be in use • how the dispersion of campuses across the district
during every period of the school day. Figure 7–4 shows affect transportation time and costs;
industry-standard utilization rates. • the location of specialty programs;
On average, the utilization rates for Houston ISD campuses • the effects on communities from campus
are less than these best practice rates. By not fully utilizing its closures; and
campuses, the district risks paying for services and positions
that it may not need, including surplus custodial, • the potential adaptive uses for campuses selected
maintenance, and administrative staff. for closure.
Houston ISD should develop an accurate facility utilization Using the enrollment and capacity numbers determined by
rate for each campus and ensure that campuses maintain the Houston ISD Research and Accountability Department,
industry-standard utilization rates. the district has the capacity to serve 38,555 more students
than it currently does. Given this amount, current enrollment,
The district demographer should develop a long-range and the projected enrollment for school year 2019–20,
enrollment projection that extends at least five years. Houston ISD’s campuses are underutilized. Underutilization
Additionally, the demographer should develop and means that some campuses are operating at full cost with
implement a process to update the campus capacity fewer students enrolled than best practices recommend.
numbers so that the district can assess each campus
accurately. It may be necessary to visit each campus to The review team developed these figures utilizing the district’s
account for the usable learning space at each campus. The capacity figures, which the review team determined to be
district should develop an administrative assistant position inadequate. Before the district begins developing its own
to help the demographer gather these data. When the utilization calculations, it should determine accurate capacity
district has accurate capacity data, it should adopt a figures for each campus. These figures will change once the
utilization goal ranging from 85.0 percent to 95.0 percent, district has established accurate capacities.
depending on campus type, as a guide for long-range Figure 7–5 shows the district’s surplus capacity by
facility planning. campus type.
The district should form a campus closure and boundary Consolidation of campuses to align utilization rates with
advisory committee to determine a combination of campus industry-standard goals would require examination of surplus
closures and attendance boundary adjustments that align the capacity by campus type. Figure 7–6 shows the surplus
district with its facility utilization goals. The committee capacity by campus type, the average capacity of each type,
should include the district’s facility planners, the and the potential number of surplus campuses in the district.
demographer, and education and community stakeholders.
In developing its recommendations, the committee should By dividing the surplus capacity by the average size of each
consider the following factors: campus type, the review team has determined a potential
FIGURE 7–5
HOUSTON ISD SURPLUS CAPACITY BY NUMBER OF STUDENTS
CAMPUS UTILIZATION GOAL CAPACITY NEEDED CURRENT CAPACITY SURPLUS CAPACITY

Elementary School 95.0% 105,724 129,442 23,718
Kindergarten to Grade 8 90.0% 9,124 10,526 1,402
Middle School 85.0% 39,752 49,222 9,470
High School 85.0% 56,449 60,414 3,965
Total 211,049 249,604 38,555
Note: Capacity Needed amounts are based on school year 2018–19 enrollment, which is projected to remain constant for school year 2019–
20. This amount will change as enrollment needs change.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, July 2019.
number of surplus campuses that the district could close million per high school. Figure 7–7 shows the estimated
through a consolidation process. onetime savings if the district consolidates and closes 39
campuses when considering campus type.
The cost of maintaining a campus varies by district and by
campus, making specific cost-saving estimates for This savings is an estimate based on data provided by the
consolidations difficult. According to the National district that the review team has determined to be incomplete
Clearinghouse for Educational Facilities (NCEF), a district and outdated. The district should develop information that is
can make generalized estimates based on previous school more accurate, and the campus closure and boundary
closures. NCEF notes that the Milwaukee Public Schools advisory committee should consider new capacity figures and
district in Wisconsin closed several campuses. NCEF the dispersion of campuses across the district needed to
estimated that the district saved approximately $500,000 per minimize transportation time and costs, the location of
elementary school, $1.0 million per middle school, and $2.0 specialty programs, and the impact on communities from
FIGURE 7–6
HOUSTON ISD SURPLUS CAMPUSES
CAMPUS SURPLUS CAPACITY CAPACITY OF AVERAGE CAMPUS SURPLUS CAMPUSES
Elementary School 23,718 814 29
Kindergarten to Grade 8 1,402 1,053 1
Middle School 9,470 1,262 7
High School 3,965 1,590 2
Total 38,555 39
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, July 2019.
FIGURE 7–7
ESTIMATED HOUSTON ISD CAMPUS CONSOLIDATION SAVINGS
CALENDAR YEAR 2019
APPROXIMATE SAVINGS PER CAMPUS
CAMPUS (IN MILLIONS) CAMPUSES TO CONSOLIDATE TOTAL SAVINGS (IN MILLIONS)
Elementary School $0.5 29 $14.5
Kindergarten to Grade 8 $0.8 1 $0.8
Middle School $1.0 7 $7.0
High School $2.0 2 $4.0
Total 39 $26.3
Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, July 2019.
FIGURE 7–8
SAMPLE HOUSTON ISD EDUCATIONAL SPECIFICATIONS
CAMPUS FOOD SERVICES EDUCATIONAL SPECIFICATIONS
Condit Elementary School The Dining Commons is planned as a flexible room that can accommodate student dining, meetings, and
other events. The serving area will be designed as a food court. Movement among the various activities
(i.e., hand-washing queuing for serving and exiting will be planned for ease of movement).
Dowling Middle School (1) The Dining Commons is planned as a flexible room that can accommodate student dining, meetings, and
North Forest High School The Dining Commons is planned as a flexible room that can accommodate student dining, meetings, and
Note: (1) Houston ISD renamed Dowling Middle School to Lawson Middle School during school year 2016–17.
campus closures. After the district has considered all of these goals and overview programs and needs for staff or
factors, the district may not be able to consolidate campuses contracted design professionals to complete district
with perfect efficiency. The review team is assuming a 25.0 construction projects. The district has not relied on
percent decrease in savings due to these additional prototypes in the construction of campuses as a regular
considerations, which would decrease the potential savings practice; however, the district does express consistent goals
from $26.3 million to $19.7 million. for each campus area in the planning stages. Figure 7–8
shows sample educational specifications for a planned
The district should develop an administrative assistant
dining commons at three Houston ISD campuses, which
position to support the district demographer in gathering
demonstrates the common planning goals the district has
data to generate accurate capacity amounts and enrollment
for each campus. Although these specifications are
projections. The average annual salary and benefits for an
consistent across campus types, the review team did not
administrative assistant position I or II in the district’s
observe these consistencies in campus cafeterias.
administrative office totals $43,760.
Since the approval of the November 2012 bond initiative,
The fiscal impact assumes a onetime savings of $19.7 million
the Construction Services Department has been designing,
from campus closures and a $43,760 annual cost for the
constructing and renovating 40 campuses. Houston ISD
administrative assistant position.
customizes the space allocation for each project during the
design process and publishes a draft of the completed design
CAMPUS PROTOTYPES (REC. 47)
and final documentation of the educational specifications for
Houston ISD’s method for building new campuses results in
each project. According to district staff, Houston ISD has
high architectural costs, long design times, and the
hired 28 architectural firms throughout this process. Staff
districtwide use of inconsistent designs and materials.
indicated that each time the district begins work with a new
When designing and constructing new campuses, Houston architectural firm the district has to train the firm on the
ISD utilizes district-developed educational specifications district’s design process and procedures.
that contain standard descriptions of the needs of an
According to interviews and the design processes provided by
educational facility. These specifications communicate to the
the district, Houston ISD does not use prototypes for campus
architect and the public the educational program’s functions
design as a standard practice, including for the campuses
and physical requirements, but they are not actual designs,
constructed in accordance with the 2012 bond. After the
such as a building prototype. A building prototype provides
damage caused by Hurricane Harvey, the district urgently
a generic building design that shows the general layout and
needed to replace four elementary school campuses. The
materials that the district will use in construction.
general manager of design said that the district hired an
Houston ISD has developed educational specifications and architectural firm to design an elementary campus prototype
design guidelines that outline the district’s construction to expedite the rebuilding process.
The COO and the construction services officer stated that five-year period. Staff reported that the PAT delayed the
the district is interested in using prototypes in the future. The design time by two and one-half years due to disagreements
district is not actively developing or approving prototypes for about the campus design. Staff also stated that community
other campus types, however, the construction services groups had sued the district twice regarding disputes between
officer stated that the district had a positive experience with PATs and the district on the project’s direction.
recent prototypes for elementary schools. The general
Each space on a campus has certain design considerations for
manager of construction services expressed doubt that the
the design team. For example, the North Forest High School
use of a prototype had hastened the process of replacing the
educational specifications state that for building corridors
campuses because of delays caused by permitting issues. The
the “decision on whether to provide student lockers as well as
general manager of design expressed concern about
their size and location will be determined in conjunction
prototypes given local considerations such as a strong
with the PAT during the schematic design phase.” The same
resistance to the use of eminent domain in acquiring property.
statement appears in the Dowling Middle School educational
Throughout the design and construction process, the specifications document. These design documents allow
Construction Services Department works with Project PATs the ability to approve or disapprove of design elements.
Advisory Teams (PAT) for each project. PATs consist of eight
Houston ISD is experiencing long design times during
to 12 members, including principals, students, teachers,
construction projects in part because the district lacks
staff, parents, community representatives, an architect, and
complete prototypes for campuses undergoing construction.
Houston ISD facility planning, design, and construction
The district has a lengthy individualized design process
staff. The district intends PATs to gather input on the design
that incorporates substantial community outreach,
and construction of facilities from district stakeholders.
which repeatedly has slowed design processes and affected
According to the district’s Project Advisory Team Handbook,
the district’s ability to construct campus facilities. To
projects can require up to three years to complete. The
develop customized design plans for each project, the
district intended PATs to meet monthly at every stage of the
district has incurred substantial costs to employ multiple
project, but construction staff noted that PATs often decrease
architectural firms.
the frequency of meetings after the design phase is finished.
In its report Prototype School Designs: Can Prototypes be Used
PATs review the educational specifications and technical
Successfully?, the Council of Educational Facility Planners
standards for the project. According to the handbook, “The
International states that large counties in Florida and Virginia
standards that have been developed include a high degree of
found the use of prototypes to be cost-effective and time-
flexibility to support an array of educational programs,
efficient, and that their use “has reduced construction costs
school sizes, and grade configurations.” It further states,
and design fees, as well as change orders.”
“Houston ISD Facilities Planning staff will work with the
school staff and PAT to determine unique program Houston ISD should develop or maintain districtwide
requirements.” During the design process, PATs and Houston building prototypes for all campus types.
ISD staff share ideas for the design concept including
To implement this recommendation, the district should
building location, desired room adjacencies, and
evaluate and make necessary changes to the existing
configurations. PATs review and advise regarding program
prototype used in the rebuilding of elementary campuses
offerings at the new campus and can determine up to 10.0
damaged by Hurricane Harvey. The district should then
percent of a facility’s programmed floor area. In addition, the
convene a design guideline committee including Houston
handbook states, “Interior finish options will be offered by
ISD design and construction staff and community
the design professional for review and selection by the PAT.”
stakeholders to establish the key elements to be incorporated
Bond progress-tracking materials show long design schedules in new campus designs. The district then should contract
encountered during the planning and design phases. For with an architectural firm to design prototypes for a middle
example, Bellaire High School’s design process started during school campus and a high school campus. The district may
the third quarter of calendar year 2013, but construction did need to contract with architectural firms to reconcile site-
not begin until the third quarter of calendar year 2018. The based issues in the application of prototypes. The expense
project’s initial budget was $106.7 million, but a total of and need for these reconciliations would be specific to each
$34.8 million in adjustment increases accrued during that construction project.
The district should evaluate the use of PATs when FIGURE 7–9
implementing district-wide prototypes. Using prototypes FACILITY CONDITION INDEX RANGES
CALENDAR YEAR 2019
may not negate the usefulness of PATs. However, should the
INDEX RANGE
district keep PATs, they should consider limiting PAT
decision-making to an advisory role in the design process. Good 0.0%–5.0%
Fair 5.1%–10.0%
Poor 10.1%–30.0%
existing resources.
Critical 30.1% or more
LONG-RANGE FACILITY MASTER PLAN (REC. 48) Source: Mapcon Technologies, Inc., May 2019.
Houston ISD does not plan efficiently for its long-term

FIGURE 7–10
facilities needs through enrollment projections and FACILITY CONDITION INDEX FOR HOUSTON ISD
facilities assessments. CAMPUSES
When the review team requested Houston ISD’s facilities INDEX HOUSTON ISD CAMPUSES
master plan, the district provided a document that lists
Good 21
deferred maintenance—repairs delayed to save funds—in
Fair 22
five areas in the district. The document anticipates
expenditures totaling $4.7 billion from calendar years 2018 Poor 51
to 2028. The district provided other documents during the Critical 144
review that often are incorporated into long-range facilities Source: Houston ISD, 2019.
master plans, including a facilities condition index (FCI), a
2012 facilities capital program proposal summary of projects,
would preclude the district from using 1965 designs or
a presentation on district capital needs, and the two most
equipment in constructing any modern facility.
recent comprehensive facilities assessments.
Houston ISD’s FCI shows that 144 campuses are in critical
An FCI is a facilities management tool that compares the condition, 51 campuses are rated in poor condition, 22 in
relative condition of facilities. An FCI assessment compares fair condition, and 21 in good condition. The FCI includes
the repair costs required at a campus to its replacement costs, ratings for 238 of the 280 campuses in the district. Figure
as expressed on a scale that ranges from 0.0 percent to 30.0 7–10 shows Houston ISD campuses by FCI rating.
percent or more. The district would be more likely to replace
a campus with a very high repair cost and low replacement The district uses a facility condition assessment (FCA)
cost than a campus with a low repair cost and a high database called MOCA PLAN that compiles information
replacement cost. Figure 7–9 shows best practice condition often included in a facility master plan. Entries for each
grouping using an FCI assessment. campus include the building age, a 10-year renewal forecast,
the replacement value, and the FCI rating. The district
An architectural firm developed an FCI tool for Houston completed the last comprehensive assessment through the
ISD in preparation for the 2012 bond initiative. Staff stated FCA software during school year 2015–16, according to the
that the firm updates the original repair costs annually to general manager of design. The review team requested access
represent major replacements on campuses. For example, if a to the database, but the district shared screen shots of the
campus replaced its flooring, the updated FCI would user interface.
consider the campus’ new condition.
Facility master plans typically include enrollment projections
The firm and district staff reported that the district calculates to enable a district to plan facility usage. Houston ISD’s
the replacement cost as the current cost of replacing the demographer annually develops one-year enrollment
campus as it originally was built. For example, if the district projections. The district did not provide a longer range of
replaced a campus built in 1965, the FCI assumes the enrollment projections. The demographer stated that the
replacement cost would be the current cost of building a district asks for specific projections about overcrowded
campus designed and equipped like the original. District campuses or those that need large repairs to plan for
staff acknowledged that the need to build current schools expansion and new campuses.
The COO reported that the district is contracting with a maintenance. Good plans include short-term and
program management firm to develop a recommendation for long-term objectives, budgets, and timelines, all of
a possible bond election in calendar year 2020 to replace which demonstrate organizational commitment to
middle school campuses. proper facilities maintenance.
A long-range, comprehensive facilities master plan outlines The district does not have a comprehensive long-range
the status and future use of district facilities. It guides the facilities master plan. The information it has assembled to
development of capital improvements and supports planning guide its decisions about repairing and replacing campuses is
for bond elections. ALE notes that an effective long-range incomplete and has the potential to be misleading. The
facilities master plan incorporates the following elements: district’s FCI uses outdated amounts that minimize the costs
of building modern replacement campuses. These lower
• facility capacity – Districts establish the capacity of
replacement cost estimates skew the FCI ratings for campuses,
each school facility by setting standards that govern
making them appear stronger candidates for replacement
student–teacher ratios and the amount of square feet
than they are. The FCI also does not provide an accurate
required per student in a classroom. These standards
estimate of the funds needed to replace a campus when the
deal with the minimum size of core facilities (such
district is developing bond proposals. Projects funded by the
as classrooms, gyms, cafeterias, and libraries) so that
previous bond proposal exceeded the overall budget by
schools do not overload these facilities or overuse
approximately $200.0 million.
portable classrooms;
• facility inventory – An accurate facility inventory A long-range facility master plan enables the district to plan
is an essential tool in managing the use of school effectively for growth and other needs by incorporating
facilities. The inventory identifies the use and size several information points. This information includes
of each room, which enables planners to accurately demographic studies, facilities conditions, long-range
establish the capacity of each school. Modifications maintenance and technology plans, curriculum and
to schools are noted in the inventory so it can be instructional needs, changing safety and security needs, and
kept current; building code compliance.
• enrollment projections – Effective planning requires Longer-term enrollment projections are necessary for a
accurate enrollment projections at least five years into district to know where it needs expansion. By examining
the future. Accurate projections require planners to where residential construction is occurring and where
examine district demographics and track any new demographic changes are shifting, the district can anticipate
construction activity in the district; where to build additional or expanded campuses. Because
the district reactively projects longer-term enrollment when
• capital improvement program – Effective planning it discovers overcrowding on campuses, it is missing an
requires the district to anticipate its future needs and opportunity to plan proactively for growth across the district.
balance these against expected resources. A capital
improvement program charts future improvements Among Houston ISD’s peer districts, Texas school districts
to school facilities and identifies funding sources used for comparison, Dallas ISD recently hired an
for them. An effective planning process involves architectural firm and technology consultant to prepare a
the community at large, identifies district goals and comprehensive long-range facilities plan that considers these
objectives, and prioritizes projects based upon those factors. The facilities department in Cypress-Fairbanks ISD
goals and objectives; and also has developed a long-range facilities assessment tool that
incorporates these factors. Cypress–Fairbanks ISD annually
• facilities maintenance plan – School facility planning updates the data to ensure that upcoming bond programs
necessitates identifying links between facilities have all the information needed to predict the district’s
construction, renovation, and facilities maintenance. changing needs.
Capital outlay for school construction is generally
a more palatable proposition for taxpayers and Houston ISD should develop a comprehensive long-range
public officials when a school system demonstrates facility master plan that incorporates accurate information
that existing facilities receive appropriate care and about facility replacement costs and enrollment projections.
The district should utilize existing staff knowledge to stated the belief that the required collaboration and
develop a comprehensive long-range facility master cooperation at each project stage hindered the process.
plan that incorporates accurate information about Others said that architectural firms and program
facility replacement costs and enrollment projections. management firms perform some duplicative work on
The plan should address facility conditions, including projects. The sample contract for an architect provided by
the cost of a modern replacement campus. It should the district confirmed that program managers are required
include a study of classroom utilization and capacity to work with the architect to develop project scope
and long-range enrollment projections indicating documents, budget forecasts, and construction documents.
demographic increases and decreases. In developing the
During onsite interviews, staff said that the district has spent
plan, the district should consider expected changes to
more than $30.0 million in program management fees
facility needs, including curriculum and technology,
during the current bond program. The program management
safety and security developments, and the incorporation
firms currently working with Houston ISD receive a 3.0
of local, state, and federal requirements. The district should
percent fee to perform their services, which equates to
update the plan annually to ensure that it continually
approximately $56.7 million from $1.89 billion spent in
assesses its facility needs.
accordance with the 2012 bond program. For this reason,
The district could implement this recommendation with some construction managers perceive that pressure is only on
existing resources. them to keep costs low, because higher costs mean greater
fees for program managers.
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT FIRMS (REC. 49)
According to district contracts, program management firms
Houston ISD contracts with program management firms do not assume liability for work completed on projects.
and staffs construction project managers that perform Although these firms guide the district in selecting
duplicative work. architectural and engineering firms and other contractors,
Contracts between the district and program management their contracts state that they make no warranty or guarantee
firms to manage construction projects state that the firm of the quality of the work.
must prepare project management plans, project master The use of third-party program management firms to
schedules, and program cost models. The firm is required to manage bond programs is a reasonable option for
coordinate with the district in selecting architectural and small districts that cannot maintain permanent
engineering firms, setting up and leading construction team professional staffing. Houston ISD has a large
and design progress meetings, reviewing design documents, professional staff of 46.0 positions that includes a design
monitoring the construction and cost controls, and obtaining manager, construction managers, and an architect. District
required permits. The district has worked with as many as staff previously performed many of the services provided
seven firms and currently contracts with two firms to by the program management firms. By comparison,
complete the 2012 bond program. Cypress-Fairbanks ISD handled a $1.2 billion bond with
an in-house staff of 28.0 positions. Figure 7–12 shows the
Houston ISD’s Construction Services Department has 46.0
Cypress–Fairbanks ISD Facilities and Construction
positions, which include construction managers and
Department organization.
construction service representatives. Figure 7–11 shows the
department’s reporting structure. Duplication of project management duties among hired
firms and district construction managers results in
Staff in these positions handle many of the same tasks as
unnecessary costs to the district and a slower design and
the program management firms. During onsite
construction process. The district staffs construction manager
interviews, construction managers noted that their
positions that it considers responsible for each project, so
positions either previously had the responsibilities of the
there is no need to involve contracted firms in the decision-
program management firms or have the capability to
making process.
perform these responsibilities. They expressed frustration
that the district considers construction managers Houston ISD should eliminate program management
responsible for projects and simultaneously authorizes contracts and charge existing district staff with performing
program management firms to make decisions. Several these responsibilities.
FIGURE 7–11
HOUSTON ISD CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ORGANIZATION
Executive Administrative Assistant
General Manager General Manager General Manager

of Business Operations of Construction of Design
Senior Manager Senior Manager

of Construction of Construction
Senior
Construction Construction Manager of Construction Construction
Manager – 2 Service Construction Manager – 2 Service
Representative Representative
Construction Construction
Manager – 2 Service
Representative – 2
Logistics Senior Manager Senior Manager,

Manager of Business Special Projects
FF&E Solutions Senior Manager,
Manager Quality
Architect
Assurance
Construction Construction
Project Service
Buyer – 2 Vendor Team Leader – 2
Manager – 2 Representative
Representative
Vendor Construction Document General

Representative – 2 Service Control Clerk III
Representative Administrator
Buyer Receptionist
The district should review the current agreements to The district could implement this recommendation with
determine its options. If ending the relationship immediately existing resources.
is not an option, the district may need to phase out current
services by completing the remaining projects within the ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE (REC. 50)
2012 bond program. Houston ISD separates the organizational structure and
construction responsibilities across the Construction Services
The district should evaluate the job descriptions within the
Department and the Facilities Services Department.
Construction Services Department to ensure that all
responsibilities currently held by program management firms The district’s Construction Services Department is overseen
can be absorbed in the department. by the officer of construction services and reports to the
FIGURE 7–12
CYPRESS–FAIRBANKS ISD FACILITIES AND CONSTRUCTION DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
Assistant Superintendent
Facilities and Construction
Secretary
Director, Project Director, Construction Director, Design and Director,

Management Field Services Facilities Planning Technical Services
Project Project Warranty Project Building Design

Secretary Manager – 4 Manager Coordinator Program Secretary
–3 –7 Manager
Senior Project Special Project Building
Manager – 4 Manager Program
Coordinator – 2
Source: Cypress–Fairbanks ISD, June 2019.
COO. The general managers of business solutions, both the general manager of design and the general manager
construction, and design and an executive administrative of construction.
assistant each report directly to the officer of construction
services. The following five staff report directly to the general Staff also said that many of the position titles do not match
manager of business solutions: the logistics manager; the the duties of the assigned positions. Facilities Services
furniture, fixtures, and equipment (FF&E) manager; the Department staff also noted that the department manages
senior manager of business solutions; the senior manager of some construction projects instead of the Construction
quality assurance; and a senior administrative assistant. These Services Department.
positions oversee various business staff including vendor
The Construction Services Department has several position
representatives, buyers, and accountants.
titles that do not match the position’s duties. For example,
Construction Services Department staff noted some the general manager of design stated that construction
discrepancies in the reporting structure shown in Figure managers essentially are project managers that oversee
7–13, the organizational chart provided by the district. construction projects from design to completion.
According to the chart, the general manager of construction
The general manager of construction stated that construction
has five directly reporting positions, but the general manager
service representatives are knowledgeable assistants to the
told the review team that he has four reporting positions,
construction managers, some of whom eventually hold
three senior managers of construction and a senior
construction manager positions. Construction service
administrative assistant. These positions oversee multiple
representatives work internally and do not interact with
construction managers, construction service representatives,
vendors or customers. Construction service representatives
and administrative assistants.
work in the Business Solutions, Construction, and Design
Figure 7–13 also shows two staff reporting directly to the departments. This position appears throughout the
general manager of design; however, according to the district organizational chart, but construction service representatives
staff, the general manager of design has three reporting said that the position and its duties vary depending on the
positions, including the senior manager of special projects, role of the manager to which it reports. One construction
the district architect, and a senior administrative assistant. service representative reports to the logistics manager in the
The senior manager of special projects said that he reports to Business Solutions Department. The duties of this position
FIGURE 7–13
HOUSTON ISD CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
differ from those that report to the senior managers of construction managers and service representatives. The DCA
construction. Another construction service representative reports to the senior manager of business solutions, but the
who reports to the senior manager of special projects has position is vacant and staff are uncertain that the district will
different responsibilities. Although their duties vary, fill it.
construction service representatives interviewed had the
same job description. The senior manager of quality assurance estimates
construction project costs and manages accounting, but does
Construction service representatives noted that they help not oversee construction quality or evaluation. This senior
review closeout documents, which they send to the document manager works closely with the general manager of
control administrator (DCA) in the Business Solutions construction to perform these responsibilities but reports to
Department. However, some contractors working with the the general manager of business solutions. This manager
district bypass the construction service representatives’ review stated that the senior manager of quality assurance’s primary
and proceed directly to the DCA. The DCA contacts the responsibilities were estimating construction project costs
general contractor to report and track items with warranties and assisting in the FF&E process as needed.
on projects. Construction service representatives stated that
staff do not always follow this process. The DCA also The senior manager of special projects within the
monitors the closeout document process for each construction Construction Services Department stated that the Special
project. The organizational chart places the DCA position in Projects team manages problems in the district that
the Business Solutions Department, despite the position maintenance and custodial staff in the Facilities Services
needing to communicate and coordinate regularly with Department cannot manage. Examples include building
modifications, temporary building installations and moves, staff manage construction and large replacement projects,
and water filtration required to comply with the Americans despite the presence of a fully staffed and trained construction
with Disabilities Act. management team.
According to Facilities Services Department staff, the Austin ISD has a consistent organizational structure for its
department manages many major renovation jobs in the Construction Management Department, including titles
district, including air-conditioning system replacements, and that clearly indicate the role of each position. Figure 7–14
total and partial roof replacements. The Facilities Services shows the reporting structure for the Construction
Department manages these projects but may consult with Management Department in Austin ISD.
the Construction Services Department to select an architect
when necessary. The construction services officer confirmed Most school districts authorize their maintenance
that the Facilities Services Department manages some departments to oversee repair projects that the departments
construction and renovation projects, including air- can perform without architects or engineers. However, a
conditioning system replacement, but stated that, ideally, facility management best practice at a large school district is
Construction Services Department staff would be more for the construction department to manage major repair and
involved in this process. The district did not provide job replacement projects that require an architect or engineer to
descriptions for many positions in these departments. provide design services and a contractor to perform the
However, the descriptions provided did not indicate that construction work. Construction department staff typically
staff working in the Facilities Services Department were are knowledgeable in the daily management of architectural
required to have experience or training in construction and construction contracts and can ensure that the work is
management. During observations of the north and south meeting the district’s facility design standards.
maintenance facilities’, the review team and district staff Houston ISD should evaluate all position titles and job
discussed expected jobs. Facilities Services staff did not responsibilities within the Construction Services Department
indicate that positions within their departments had project and the Facilities Services Department and ensure that titles and
management or construction experience. In the south responsibilities match the functions performed by each position.
maintenance facility, the review team observed recently
purchased large air-conditioning systems, known as chillers. The district should revise these positions and functions for
Staff indicated that they had installed the chillers on a clarity in the roles, responsibilities, and reporting structures
campus, but that the district demolished the campus shortly within the Construction Services Department. Figure 7–15
afterward. The maintenance department now used the shows the recommended title changes.
chillers for parts in repairs. Staff did not explain the
The district should eliminate the senior manager of business
miscommunication between the departments.
solutions position. The district should develop a Warranty
Houston ISD’s Principals’ Guide for Facilities and Fleet Services Department within the Construction Services Department
2018–19 outlines the responsibilities of the Construction by modifying an existing construction manager position, and
Services and Facilities Services departments. The guide does then change the position title from construction manager to
not task Facilities Services staff with performing construction closeout/warranty manager. The position will report directly
tasks, but it includes a work-order classification labeled to the general manager of construction. The district should
project that includes “maintenance projects scheduled for also revise the job description accordingly.
completion during summer or winter break.”
The district should modify up to two construction services
The district lacks clarity in reporting structures to avoid the representatives to the new title of warranty coordinator and
duplication of work and to ensure a clear source of accountability have them report directly to the warranty manager, revising
and instruction. The responsibility for various construction- their job description accordingly to address warranty-related
related tasks in the district are located in inefficient organizational functions. Additionally the district should move the DCA
structures. The senior manager of quality assurance reports to position to report directly to the closeout/warranty manager.
the general manager of business solutions, despite performing This position will continue to manage the project closeout
most of the work within the general manager of construction’s documents and the general clerk III and receptionist
supervision. The warranty process continues through multiple positions will to report to the DCA to assist in the closeout
departments, and staff do not follow it consistently. Maintenance documents and warranty management for the department.
FIGURE 7–14
AUSTIN ISD CONSTRUCTION SERVICES ORGANIZATION
Executive Director
Executive Assistant
Director, Director,
Project Management Bond Planning and Controls
Executive Assistant
Senior Engineer Project Administrative
Architect Controls Assistant
Senior Campus
Architect Support Contract Computer-aided
Management Facilities
Specialist Management
Accountant IV (CAFM) Manager Communication
and
Architect – 3 Engineer – 3 Inspector – 3 Accounting Administrative
Technician – 2 Services
Supervisor
Architect – 3
Project Project CAFM Computer-aided Web Content
Manager Facilitator – 3 Specialist Design Specialist
Technician – 2
Source: Austin ISD, 2019.
FIGURE 7–15
RECOMMENDED NEW HOUSTON ISD CONSTRUCTION SERVICES DEPARTMENT TITLES
CALENDAR YEAR 2019
CURRENT POSITION NEW TITLE AND POSITION CURRENT POSITION NEW TITLE AND POSITION
Senior manager of construction Senior project manager Buyer FF&E buyer
Construction manager Project manager Logistics manager FF&E logistics manager
Construction service Project coordinator Vendor representative FF&E logistics coordinator

representative (reporting to the logistics
manager)
Senior manager of special Senior special project manager Construction service FF&E coordinator
projects representative (within Business
Solutions)
Construction manager Special project manager Furniture, fixtures, and FF&E procurement manager
(reporting to the senior equipment (FF&E) manager
manager of special projects)
Architect Senior manager of design Vendor representative FF&E coordinator

(reporting to the FF&E
manager)
Accounting team leader Project cost accountant
Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, August 2019.
FIGURE 7–16
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION SERVICES DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
CALENDAR YEAR 2019
Executive Administrative Assistant
General Manager General Manager General Manager

of Business Solutions of Construction of Design
Senior Manager
Senior Manager Senior Senior Manager of Design
of Project Cost Project of Special
Accounting Manager Projects Design
Senior Close Manager
Project Cost Project Out/Warranty
Accountant – 2 Manager Manager
Project Project Special Special
Manager – 2 Coordinator Projects Projects
Manager – 2 Coordinator
Project Project Warranty Document Control

Manager – 2 Coordinator Coordinator – 2 Administrator
FF&E FF&E
General Receptionist
Logistics Procurement
Clerk III
Manager Manager
FF&E FF&E
Coordinator Buyer – 3
FF&E Vendor
Logistics Coordinator
Coordinator – 2
The district should retitle the senior manager of quality Figure 7–16 shows the proposed reporting structure for the
assurance to the senior manager of forecasting and Construction Services Department.
accounting, and move the position to report directly to the
Officer of Construction Services. The fiscal impact assumes an annual savings of
$121,822 in salary and benefits due to the elimination
Finally, the district should modify an existing construction
of the senior manager of business solutions position.
manager position to the new title of design manager. This
Because this position is vacant, this estimate is based
position will report to the architect and will provide assistance
within the Design Department to assist with plan reviews, on the average salary and benefits of a senior manager
and ensure compliance with design standards and educational in the Construction Services Department, which is
specification. The district should revise the position’s job title comparable to what the district might have offered a
to include the new responsibilities for the position. senior manager of business solutions.
FIGURE 7–17
HOUSTON ISD FURNITURE SELECTION PROCESS
• The Construction Services Department, Business Solutions team’s furniture, fixtures, and equipment (FF&E) section, contacts the
vendor regarding availability for a project and assigns the scope of work
• First meeting – FF&E, architect, project manager, and vendors meet to discuss the deliverables, scope of work, floor plans,
renderings, and color boards
• Second meeting – FF&E, architect, vendors, and principal meet to inform vendors of the principal’s vision and to enable the principal
to ask questions
• Vendors meet subsequently with principal or a designated representative to begin furniture selection
• After the selection’s completion, vendors submit specifications to FF&E; FF&E reviews specifications to ensure that each vendor’s
scope of work is complete and within budget; FF&E compiles all specifications
• FF&E reviews all specifications with the principal, who approves them and confirms that the specifications match the campus staff’s
selections
• FF&E provides the approved specifications to the Business Solutions buyers to obtain quotes from vendors and begin procuring the
selections
FURNITURE, FIXTURES, AND EQUIPMENT STANDARD expensive or burdensome. Allowing principals to choose
(REC. 51) different desks, chairs, bookshelves, or electronic equipment
Houston ISD’s process for selecting furniture, fixtures, requires maintenance and custodial staff to stock different
and equipment for new facilities results in variations supplies to clean and repair equipment on the campuses.
among campuses. This can result in greater expenditures for parts and increased
labor hours for cleaning and repair. Construction service
When the district builds a campus, it provides new furniture,
representatives expressed concerns about the effect that a lack
fixtures, and equipment (FF&E). The Business Solutions
of a standardized process for FF&E has had on the district’s
team within the Construction Services Department manages
facilities staff. Maintenance technicians noted during focus
the FF&E selection process. Figure 7–17 shows the FF&E
groups that it is difficult to know what parts they need to
selection process.
carry to repair items around the district.
District construction staff stated that furniture selections
are at the discretion of the principal, who have latitude to Cypress–Fairbanks ISD established a best practice standard for
personalize their new campuses. The FF&E process has no FF&E on its campuses. It formed a districtwide steering
standardization, and the district has no process for committee tasked with developing a uniform standard for
narrowing the furniture and fixture options from which FF&E. The committee engaged architects that were involved in
principals can choose. Staff also stated that principals often designing new campuses to provide information on design
direct their complaints up the chain of command if campus trends in school facilities. It invited leading furniture vendors to
construction project managers advise against the principal’s display their recommended FF&E wares for review. The
choice, which typically results in the principals getting the committee also invited stakeholders from many campuses,
selections they want. including principals, administrative staff, teachers, and students
from several grade levels to evaluate the furniture. After reviewing
One argument for placing more weight on the the evaluation, the committee established FF&E standards for
recommendations of construction or facilities staff surfaced all elementary, middle, and high school campuses.
at a focus group meeting with construction staff. Although
the district’s goal in the furniture selection process is to realize Houston ISD should develop a furniture, fixtures, and
“the principal’s vision,” a principal that leaves the campus equipment standard for elementary, middle, and high school
after two or three years has set a tone for the next principal campuses to provide consistency across district facilities.
that might have a different perspective.
The district should establish a steering committee of
The lack of standardization in the FF&E selection process department representatives and other stakeholders,
results in inconsistencies among campuses that can be including members from maintenance, operations,
construction services and design, purchasing, campus in the design process for campuses. Some Maintenance
administration, curriculum and instruction, principals, Department managers stated that they are involved in the
teachers, and students. Members should develop committee construction process but not the design process. Senior
goals and parameters and develop a specific evaluation form level staff stated that in recent years there has been an
for FF&E products. Next, the committee should invite increase in the level of participation from operations staff in
vendors to stage an exposition to display recommended the design process.
FF&E products for evaluation. The committee should
Senior staff in the Maintenance Department said that the
develop evaluation teams composed of district stakeholders,
department inspects projects during construction in
including principals, administrators, maintenance and
coordination with the Construction Services Department.
custodial staff, and teachers and students from all grade
Construction Services staff stated that they invite maintenance
levels. The committee should review the evaluators’
staff to participate in some building inspections, giving them
feedback and then recommend FF&E standards, which
48 hours’ notice. The general manager of construction
should be reviewed and updated regularly.
acknowledged that maintenance staff frequently do not
The district could implement this recommendation with participate in the inspections. If maintenance staff do not
existing resources. appear at the scheduled time, the Construction Services
Department continues without them. Contractors with the
DESIGN INVOLVEMENT (REC. 52) district who participate in these inspections stated that the
district was increasing invitations to operations staff.
Houston ISD’s operations and educational staff are not
Contractors also noted that participation was increasing,
represented consistently during the design and construction
although it was not consistent across departments.
of facilities, resulting in quality-control issues and potentially
inefficient designs. During interviews, maintenance and custodial staff raised
building design issues that affect them. Maintenance staff
The Houston ISD Construction Services Department is
said that ordering parts not on hand slows down repairs. Staff
responsible for the design and construction of campuses
said that there are no district standards for specialty lighting,
funded by bond initiatives. The district contracts with
and custodians noted that it is difficult to replace bulbs or
program management firms to coordinate and oversee
clean fixtures when specialty lighting is in place. To minimize
construction projects. These firms work with the district to
risk custodians are prohibited from ascending beyond a
manage schedules and coordinate as needed with groups at
certain height without time-prohibitive protections, although
various points during the process.
architects often install specialty lighting above this threshold.
For recent construction projects, the district has met regularly
The inability of the district to keep key operations staff
with the program management and architectural firms under
involved throughout the construction project results in
contract. The program management firm regularly reviews
quality control issues and potentially inefficient designs.
the construction documents and designs to alert the district
Operations staff that are involved throughout the project
to potential inconsistencies with the intended design and
have the opportunity to express concerns early and to inspect
potential problems with the operations of the campus as
the project as it progresses to ensure the modification of
designed. It also holds design progress meetings with the
designs to address those concerns. Keeping specialized
district and the architectural firm twice a month during the
operations departments involved allows the district to ensure
design process. These meetings are opportunities for the
design documents comply with district guidelines.
district to involve operations staff, such as maintenance,
custodial, information technology, and nutrition services Cypress–Fairbanks ISD has developed processes to involve
staff, who will work in the completed campuses. However, all the key maintenance and support department staff during
district staff said that until recently only Construction the construction document plan reviews. The district also
Services Department staff attended these meetings. coordinates with educational and operational staff to review
design documents during the final design phases to ensure
Some maintenance staff said that the district lacks a process
that the design meets the needs of each department.
to involve their department in campus design and the early
stages of construction. Maintenance technicians and Houston ISD should revise the process for the design and
custodial staff in focus groups said that they are not involved construction document reviews, and mandate that specific
departments have representation during the design and Because of this unclear reporting structure, staff do not know
construction phases of projects. whom to ask when they need additional training. DDC
technicians said that lack of training is a consistent problem
The district should identify key positions to provide input
in the Energy Initiatives Department. According to staff, the
during design, construction document plan reviews, and the
district does not currently have an agreement with the vendor
construction phases from the following departments:
who provided the DDC systems and used to conduct
Maintenance, Custodial, Nutrition Services, Transportation,
training. DDC technicians estimated that only a few
Curriculum and Instruction, and campus and district
Houston ISD HVAC technicians are fully understand the
administration. The district should update the job
systems that they maintain and repair. Campus plant
descriptions of these key positions to require their attendance
operators also expressed concerns about the HVAC
for construction document plan reviews and their
technicians’ lack updated training.
involvement in construction inspections as needed. The
district should determine what impediments prevent invited The department’s quality assurance analyst finds and
staff from attending meetings and inspections and develop a eliminates inefficiencies in the energy systems. At the time of
system to mitigate these impediments. The district should review, Houston ISD had 20 campuses with web-based
establish a process to ensure representation by alternate staff DDC systems that allow for the personalized, automated
from all key departments if the designated position is unable control of lighting and air conditioning, including schedules,
to attend. timers, and alarms. This is a part of a pilot program to
determine the usefulness of these systems in reducing energy
usage. According to onsite interviews, only two pilot
existing resources.
campuses have not successfully reduced their energy usage
during the period under study. Staff also indicated the district
ENERGY INITIATIVES DEPARTMENT (REC. 53)
identified 100,000 kilowatts of energy savings for all other
Houston ISD lacks a defined structure or comprehensive pilot campuses. To maintain the DDC systems and to keep
mission for its Energy Initiatives Department, which results HVAC systems running, DDC technicians work with
in a lack of staff training and high energy costs. HVAC technicians and campus-level plant operators.
The district’s Energy Initiatives Department handles energy- The Texas Education Code, Section 44.902, requires each
related issues. It consists of a quality assurance analyst and school district to establish a long-range energy plan to reduce
direct digital control (DDC) technicians. The district also and maintain its annual electricity consumption by 5.0
has heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) percent. The plan must include strategies for achieving
technicians in the Facilities Services Department who work energy efficiency that pose no financial cost to the district or
closely with Energy Initiatives Department staff. The Energy result in net savings. It also must include the initial, short-
Initiatives Department used to have a senior manager and a term capital costs and lifetime costs and savings that could
general manager, but the district eliminated those positions result from implementation of each strategy.
before the review team’s field work.
An effective energy management plan includes strategies for
Energy Initiatives Department staff gave different answers using the minimum amount of energy while continuing to
about the current reporting structure. Some staff said that the provide a desired level of comfort to building occupants.
quality assurance analyst and the DDC technicians report These strategies should include the education of building
directly to the officer of facilities services, operations, and fleet. staff, enhancements to or automation of building controls,
However, DDC technicians stated a belief that they report to proper maintenance of existing equipment, and installation
the senior manager of maintenance. Staff confirmed that the of energy-efficient equipment as the district replaces systems.
DDC technicians report to the senior manager of maintenance
District staff stated that the Energy Initiatives
and clarified that only the quality assurance analyst reports to
Department does not have an energy management plan as
the officer of facilities services, operations, and fleet position.
required by statute.
Staff stated that this is a temporary reporting relationship
while the district restructures the Energy Initiatives The Principals’ Guide for Facilities and Fleet Services
Department. Previously, the Energy Initiatives Department 2018–19 outlines the following mission of the Energy
included a general and senior manager. Initiatives Department:
FIGURE 7–18
HOUSTON ISD UTILITY COSTS PER SQUARE FOOT
YEAR HOUSTON ISD LOWER QUARTILE MEDIAN UPPER QUARTILE

2014–15 $1.57 $1.17 $1.45 $1.58
2015–16 $1.13 $1.09 $1.28 $1.49
2016–17 $1.46 $1.13 $1.23 $1.57
Sources: Council of the Great City Schools, 2018; Houston ISD, school years 2014–15 to 2016–17.
The Energy Initiatives Department develops and team requested the data directly from the district, but the
implements smart energy procurement and energy district did not provide it.
efficiency projects for all campuses and administrative
areas (energy resources and training, retro- Since school year 2014–15, Houston ISD has contracted
commissioning, water conservation, electricity savings with a consultant to assess energy consumption and negotiate
steps, energy performance contracting, single steam a favorable electricity contract for the district. Its electricity
recycling community engagement and [Leadership in costs are still comparatively high, and Figure 7–19 shows a
Energy and Environmental Design] LEED green kilowatt-hour usage rate per square foot that is higher than in
building certifications). This group also oversees the other large districts. Staff attributed this to older, less-efficient
Direct Digital Control (DDC) system, which monitors facilities, and weather-related challenges.
automated building settings for Heating, Ventilation, Despite some success in decreasing energy costs, Houston
and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems and efficiency ISD is operating without a complete energy management
management of lighting. plan or a clear organizational structure governing energy
The guide also outlines the standard operating hours for management issues. Its energy costs have fluctuated
HVAC systems and lighting systems. The process it describes significantly during past several school years, while electricity
for obtaining after-hours HVAC or lighting support involves usage per square foot has increased. Staff at multiple levels
submitting a request on the Houston ISD website, except in report that DDC technicians lack adequate training, yet the
the event of an emergency, in which case the district provides technicians and others in the Energy Initiatives Department
a phone number. are not certain as to whom they report. The district cannot
appropriately evaluate or train energy staff without a clear
An analysis of Houston ISD’s energy usage by the Council reporting structure.
of the Great City Schools (CGCS), which aggregates data
from large school districts, reveals that the district is In its Guide to Strategic Energy Management Planning, the
operating at a higher energy cost than most other large North Carolina State Energy Office states that an energy
school districts. Figure 7–18 shows a significant decrease in management plan “identifies specific objectives or
utility costs during school year 2015–16, but the district performance goals, courses of action to be taken, and states
otherwise has operated in the upper quartile of energy costs how performance will be measured.” The Houston ISD
for large school districts. CGCS had not released data for Principals’ Guide does not specify energy goals for campuses,
school year 2017–18 at the time of the review. The review nor does it specify how the district will evaluate them.
FIGURE 7–19
HOUSTON ISD KILOWATT HOURS PER SQUARE FOOT

2014–15 16.7 8.5 10.4 12.3
2015–-16 16.4 7.5 10.0 12.2
2016–17 17.3 7.6 9.2 12.9
Source: Council of the Great City Schools, 2018; Houston ISD, school years 2014–15 to 2016–17.
According to the Guide to Strategic Energy Management WORK ORDER PROCESS (REC. 54)
Planning, “undocumented energy management actions Houston ISD does not manage its work order process
employed within a school system lack consistency of purpose properly, which limits the information that campus-level
and represent a set of short-term tactical actions as opposed staff have and fails to capture costs accurately.
to longer-term strategic action. Such tactical actions may
require fewer school system resources to implement but are District staff provided inconsistent descriptions regarding
more easily subject to termination or reversal in the daily the development of work orders. Work orders for maintenance
allocation of operational resources.” in Houston ISD are developed by the Customer Care Call
Center. The officer of facilities services, operations, and fleet
A written energy management plan should include specific stated that any district staff or community member can call
measurable goals or objectives to be achieved in some the Customer Care Call Center to request a work order. The
related time frame, a list of initiatives aimed at achieving general manager of maintenance stated that principals and
those objectives, a strategy for measuring effectiveness of plant operators are the only district staff authorized to request
those initiatives, and a plan for how the district will maintenance work. From June 2018 to February 2019, the
maintain those initiatives. Houston ISD should determine Customer Care Call Center received more than 130,000
the key performance indicators (KPI) it will use to develop calls, but not all led to submitted work orders.
measurable goals for the district. Common KPIs include
energy cost per student or utility cost per square foot, both When the call center receives a request for a work order,
of which the district can track or is already tracking. operators enter a description of the issue into the district’s
Houston ISD should use data from the CGCS to determine systems, applications, and products (SAP) software system.
reasonable benchmarks. The system tracks the craft necessary to complete the work
order, for example, plumbing, electrical, or HVAC. It also
Houston ISD should develop a clear reporting structure for
classifies work orders by routine or emergency priority. The
the Energy Initiatives Department and an energy
maintenance area planners scan the SAP system for new
management plan.
work orders, then review the request, indicate the number of
The district should develop a clear organizational structure staff needed, and route the work order to either the north or
within the Energy Initiatives Department. Staff should south maintenance center. Maintenance team leads assign
know to whom they directly report, who performs their each work order to a technician to complete the repair. If the
evaluations, and to whom they can speak about increased technician does not have the necessary supplies, the
training. Lack of clarity about the organizational structure technician will request the use of a district procurement card
prevents district staff from addressing issues they encounter to obtain supplies from an approved vendor. After completing
on the job and allows some to underperform without the work order, the technician documents the time spent
oversight. Once its management structure is clear, the making the repair and the type and approximate price of
district should develop an agreement with its DDC vendor supplies used, although the technician does not estimate the
to ensure the provision of ongoing system training to time spent acquiring supplies or the cost of supplies already
district staff. stocked in maintenance vehicles. Staff then record this
information in the Customer Care SAP system.
Additionally, staff should develop an energy management
plan that incorporates the energy goals of the district and Houston ISD’s maintenance work order process is inefficient.
how the district plans to meet them. During onsite interviews, staff said that campus-level plant
operators and call center operators often do not accurately
The fiscal impact assumes that the Energy Initiatives describe the necessary repair. Technicians may arrive on
Department implementing these industry standards could campus and determine that another craft needs to address
save 10.0 percent of the difference between Houston ISD’s the issue or that the issue requires supplies that the technician
spending and the median among CGCS districts. The lacks. Additionally, staff stated that plant operators often do
median utility cost per square foot among CGCS districts is not accurately identify whether a repair is an emergency or
$1.23, and Houston ISD pays $1.46, which equals a routine maintenance.
difference of $0.23. Houston ISD has 31.1 million square
feet of facilities. The annual savings is $714,696 ($0.23 x Plant operators also noted during interviews that maintenance
31,073,758 x 0.10). teams do not notify them when maintenance work has been
FIGURE 7–20
HOUSTON ISD WORK ORDERS
YEAR CLOSED WORK ORDERS OPEN WORK ORDERS TOTAL WORK ORDERS
2016–17 104,946 397 105,343
2017–18 93,692 1,523 95,215
June 2018 to February 2019 42,080 8,134 50,214
Total 240,718 10,054 250,772
completed or delayed. Principals and plant operators reported The review team observed some well-maintained campuses
frequent uncertainty about how to check on the progress of a and others that had numerous maintenance issues, including
work order. Customer Care staff said that the process for an elementary campus beset by serious maintenance problems
checking the status of a work order is to call the Customer that were unresolved after more than one year. For example,
Care line; but many campus staff report being unaware of a temporary building used as a classroom had a termite
this process. infestation that left visible remnants of termites on the desks
of the teacher and students. The classroom teacher and the
Houston ISD also lacks a process to monitor and improve
campus plant operator said that despite a work order, the
the average time spent completing work orders. For example,
termites had been there for several months. Another
during onsite campus observations, staff informed the review
elementary campus stated that, despite good communications
team that maintenance issues can remain unaddressed for
with the Maintenance Department, they had a problem with
long periods after campuses have submitted work orders. At
flooding and drainage on campus that remained for three
one elementary campus, the review team observed a collapsed
years after reporting it. Staff at one middle school campus
fence near a highway that has remained in disrepair for two
reported that even emergency work orders could take a day
years, according to staff, despite phone calls to the Customer
or two to be resolved. Staff at another said that an emergency
Care line. The review team analyzed work orders provided by
work order had been open for two or three weeks.
the district and confirmed many that had been open as long
as two years after initial creation. Figure 7–20 shows the The district has purchased the SAP Plant Maintenance
work order completion from school years 2016–17 to the Module that enables principals to view the work order
time of review. These histories show that it is common for statuses for their campuses, however, the Chief Information
work orders to be open for a year or longer. Officer stated that the district has not trained principals on
how to utilize this module. According to Customer Care
During onsite observations and interviews, the review team
staff, Houston ISD used to have a staff member that
observed numerous aspects of the campus facilities that
maintained a patch between SAP and another system, which
needed repair. Tours of kitchens revealed equipment
enabled campus-level staff to review work orders and their
needing maintenance that had already resulted in several
status online. When that staff member left during calendar
violations marked by health code inspectors. Of 35 kitchens
year 2016, the district lost this technical expertise, and
observed, three contained equipment that had been broken
campus-level staff can no longer check the work order status
for a significant period of time, despite active work orders.
except by calling the Customer Care line. Customer Care
During the observation, the district sent a technician to
staff said that Facilities Services Department planners send
repair a freezer that, according to a kitchen team lead, a
reports on open work orders to campus staff “with some
health inspector had placed under quarantine months
regularity,” but campus staff with whom the review team
before. Cafeteria team leads said that equipment frequently
interacted were unaware of such reports.
remains broken for months, and that maintenance staff
sometimes ask the cafeteria team lead to sign off on repairs Customer Care managers can produce campus-specific work
of equipment that is still broken. The review team analyzed order reports. For example, Customer Care managers
health code violations provided by the district and found provided two spreadsheets for Port Houston Elementary
60 violations caused by faulty equipment or facility School—one showing 97 work orders closed from July 1,
maintenance problems. 2018, to February 22, 2019, and the other showing an
additional 21 work orders still open as of February 22, 2019. To implement this recommendation, Houston ISD
Of the 21 open work orders, the average number of days should assemble a committee of stakeholders to determine
open was 89. common issues affecting the district’s work order process
and assess the utility of a digital work order system. The
The SAP system tracks cost components of work orders but
committee should include stakeholders from districtwide
does not track the total cost of ownership for each repair.
operations support, such as technicians from multiple crafts,
Staff said that the system was capable of this task, but that the
call center staff, and team leaders or management. It also
district was not using the system completely. Additionally,
should include campus staff, such as teachers, principals,
costs cannot be allocated to the campus level and do not
custodians, and nutrition services staff. The committee
include expenses such as the travel time from campuses to
should develop recommendations to improve the work
supply facilities. Staff said that work order costs capture
order process feasibly for the district and establish a
about 90.0 percent of the true cost.
schedule for releasing these recommendations in a timely
Senior Facilities Services Department staff noted that manner. The committee should present its findings to the
Houston ISD is planning to purchase and implement a board and to relevant leadership in the district.
digital system for work orders beginning in summer 2019. At
Since the time of the review, the Facilities Services
the time of the onsite review, this plan was in its early stages.
Department indicated that the department now utilizes a
The process for entering and closing work orders has several mobile work order system, replacing the previous paper-
negative consequences for the district. Campus staff are based work order process.
unable to digitally enter a work order request or digitally
track the progress of a work order, instead relying on a staff-
existing resources.
intensive telephone system. Maintenance staff often receive
erroneous descriptions of issues at facilities, leading to the MAINTENANCE PLANNING (REC. 55)
inefficient use of staff time when the wrong craft arrives to
Houston ISD’s Maintenance Department does not engage in
resolve an issue or a technician does not have the supplies
long-range planning and performs maintenance reactively.
necessary to address the repair. A digital questionnaire
might help call center staff to describe work order issues The district’s Facilities Services Department includes a
accurately. Additionally, staff using the work order system Maintenance Department staffed by a general manager of
are not accurately tracking work order costs, despite the maintenance, a senior manager of maintenance, north and
system being equipped to do so. Campus-level staff cannot south area managers, and an HVAC manager. Area managers
determine the length of time a work order has been open supervise maintenance team leads who supervise maintenance
and how many work orders precede it. Incomplete work technicians. The Maintenance Department has approximately
orders can lead to plant operators calling in new requests, 448 staff among several functional categories, including
often at the principal’s behest, which can result in electricians, painters, plumbers, and roofers.
duplicative, erroneous work orders that skew the data in the
Maintenance managerial staff told the review team that they
SAP system.
felt the department was understaffed, but that the district did
Peer districts of Houston ISD utilize online work order not have an allocation model to determine a staffing goal.
request systems that are available to all staff. Dallas ISD has The district’s 448 maintenance staff must cover the
an online system that enables teachers to place work orders 31,073,758 square feet of facility space, which translates to
for classroom repairs. It collects the name of the staff one full-time-equivalent (FTE) staff position per 69,361
submitting the order, the room number, a description of square feet. Figure 7–21 shows the staff by craft.
the issue, and the location in the classroom. Cypress–
Data indicate that the district has reduced staffing levels
Fairbanks ISD has an online work order system for routine
during the past three years. Concurrently, the district has
requests and a phone number for district staff to report
increased the square footage the department must maintain
emergency requests.
through the 2012 bond initiative. During onsite interviews,
Houston ISD should assess the work order needs and evaluate the COO stated that the Facility Services and Fleet
the ability of a digital system to improve service quality Operations Departments had not had budget increases for
provided by the Facilities Services Department. 10 years.
FIGURE 7–21
HOUSTON ISD MAINTENANCE STAFF
CRAFT STAFF CRAFT STAFF CRAFT STAFF
Asbestos 20 Glazier 4 Plasterer 2
Asphalt 9 Grounds 24 Roofer 4
Associate Repairer 4 Hazardous Materials Inspector 5 Sheet Metal Worker 4
Carpenter 3 Insulator 6 Heating, Ventilation, and Air 68
Conditioning
Cement Finisher 2 Locksmith 1 Telecoms 15
Compliance Representative 4 Maintenance Helper 8 Tile Setter 3
Direct Digital Control Specialist 9 Maintenance Planner 4 Tractor Operator 25
Electrician 31 Maintenance 134 Tree Pruner 5
Exterminator 2 Painter 20 Welder 1
Fencing Repairer 3 Pest Control 1
Fire Extinguisher Technician 2 Plumber 25
Source: Houston ISD, 2019.
Houston ISD periodically contracts maintenance tasks Each year Houston ISD had maintenance costs exceeding
to outside vendors. Staff gave mixed responses about those of most other districts.
the district’s process to determine whether to contract
Figure 7–24 shows Houston ISD’s annual costs of
maintenance or handle work orders internally. According
maintenance per work order, which are consistently above
to one staff, if a campus requests a work order that
the median during the period of study.
would cover something that is not necessary, the
Maintenance Department gives the campus assistance in The district is spending more per square foot for maintenance
contracting for the repair or service. No clear answer was than most other CGCS districts, and yet many work orders
given as to which work order requests were considered remain open for lengthy periods and the department reports
“necessary.” According to some senior staff, if a repair is that it is understaffed.
going to take more than two hours, the district calls a
contractor. Managerial staff indicated that contracting for The Maintenance Department is responsible for two broad
maintenance work is necessary at times as the Maintenance types of maintenance. Preventive maintenance is performed
Department is understaffed. regularly to help ensure that equipment continues working
as expected. Reactive maintenance occurs once equipment
The review team observed poorly maintained areas at a has broken, repairing the issue or replacing the equipment.
number of campuses. Figure 7–22 shows the review team’s During onsite interviews, maintenance staff said that the
observations of the maintenance of campus facilities. Most district has no comprehensive preventive maintenance
campuses observed had poorly maintained facilities. program. Maintenance staff also noted that managers instruct
them not to check equipment routinely during campus visits,
If the Maintenance Department does not have the funds to
but to respond only to issues covered by a work order. Staff
complete all needed repairs, managerial staff said that it
stated that the district operates a Maintenance Response
requests the funds from the principal of the requesting
Team (MRT) for structural issues at each campus. The MRT
campus. If the district denies the request, the Maintenance
spends two to three days at each campus twice a year to check
Department leaves the work order open until the next budget
for structural issues. The review team could only confirm
cycle. The district’s 2018 comprehensive annual financial
that this occurred with the structural craft, other crafts such
report noted that the district had $16.7 million encumbered
as plumbing and electrical did not have a similar program.
for maintenance from one fiscal year to the next. Figure
7–23 shows Houston ISD’s maintenance cost per square foot General maintenance staff said that the HVAC team conducts
compared to other school districts that report to CGCS. an ongoing preventive maintenance program. The district
FIGURE 7–22
LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD SCHOOL PERFORMANCE REVIEW TEAM CAMPUS MAINTENANCE OBSERVATIONS
FEBRUARY 2019
AREA CAMPUSES ASSESSED CONDITION OBSERVED
Floors are not in good condition. 34 22
Visible evidence of cracks or other opening in exterior walls. 34 16
Not all interior finishes are in good condition. 34 16
At least some furnishings, fixtures, or equipment appears to be 35 18
damaged or broken.
Building users can identify unresolved electrical problems. 33 16
There are visible electrical wiring or other service problems. 32 12
Not all sinks and toilets are in excellent repair. 34 19
Coils and fins are not cleaned regularly. 32 21
Portable buildings used as classrooms are not in excellent repair. 35 20
FIGURE 7–23
HOUSTON ISD MAINTENANCE COST PER SQUARE FOOT

2014–15 $1.56 $0.95 $1.24 $1.39
2015–16 $1.72 $0.95 $1.14 $1.44
2016–17 $1.62 $0.95 $1.18 $1.41
Source: Council of the Great City Schools, 2018.
FIGURE 7–24
HOUSTON ISD MAINTENANCE COST PER WORK ORDER
SCHOOL YEAR 2014–15 TO 2016–17

2014–15 $417 $306 $410 $485
2015–16 $489 $295 $407 $551
2016–17 $475 $326 $470 $562
Source: Council of Great City Schools, 2018.
provided a document that identified several preventive FTE position per 67,456 square feet. By this measure, Houston
maintenance duties for the team to carry out, such as filter ISD’s current staffing level of 1.0 FTE position per 69,204
replacements, cleaning coils, and inspecting belts and exhaust square feet is sufficient to maintain comprehensive stewardship.
fans, although HVAC team staff said that the team only
Houston ISD’s current maintenance staffing level should be
occasionally changes filters. sufficient for the department to respond to maintenance calls
APPA – Leadership in Educational Facilities established in a timely manner and to operate a “well-developed
preventive maintenance plan,” as described in APPA’s
maintenance standards to assist facilities in determining the level
comprehensive stewardship standard.
of staff needed to maintain timely and effective maintenance
services. According to the APPA maintenance standards Spring ISD has developed a comprehensive preventive
summarized in Figure 7–25, a district can maintain a facility at maintenance program that includes the following schedule,
a level of comprehensive stewardship with approximately 1.0 which is shown in Figure 7–26.
FIGURE 7–25
APPA – LEADERSHIP IN EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES MAINTENANCE STANDARDS, FEBRUARY 2019
LEVEL 1 – SHOWPIECE LEVEL 2 – COMPREHENSIVE LEVEL 3 – MANAGED LEVEL 4 – REACTIVE
STEWARDSHIP CARE MANAGEMENT
1.0 FTE POSITION PER
47,220 SQUARE FEET 1.0 FTE POSITION PER 1.0 FTE POSITION PER 1.0 FTE POSITION PER
DESCRIPTION (SQ FT) 67,456 SQ FT 94,439 SQ FT 118,049 SQ FT
Customer Service and Able to respond to Response to most service Services available only Services available
Response Time virtually any service, needs, typically in a week. by reducing maintenance, only by reducing
immediate response. response times of one maintenance, response
month or less. times of one year or less.
Customer Satisfaction Proud of facilities; have a Satisfied with facilities Able to perform mission Generally critical of
high level of trust for the related services, usually duties. Lack of pride in cost, responsiveness
facilities organization. complimentary of facilities physical environment. and quality of facilities
staff. services.
Maintenance Mix All preventive A well-developed Reactive maintenance Worn-out systems
maintenance is preventive maintenance high due to systems require staff react to
scheduled and performed plan. failing. High number of failures. Preventive
on time. Emergencies are emergencies. maintenance is
infrequent and handled inconsistent.
efficiently.
Aesthetics, Interior Finishes are “like new”. Clean and crisp finishes. Average finishes. Dingy finishes.
Aesthetics, Exterior Window, doors, trim, Watertight appearance of Minor leaks and Somewhat drafty and
exterior walls are like exterior cleaners. blemishes. leaky, rough-looking
new. exterior.
Aesthetics, Lighting Bright and clean, Bright and clean, Generally well lit and Numerous lights out,
attractive lighting. attractive lighting. clean. missing diffusers.
Service Efficiency Maintenance activities Maintenance activities Maintenance activities Service calls are typically
appear highly organized appear organized with appear to be somewhat not responded to in a
and focused. Service direction. Service and organized. Maintenance timely manner.
and maintenance maintenance calls are calls are sporadic without
calls are responded to responded to in a timely apparent cause.
immediately. manner.
Building Systems Breakdown maintenance Breakdown maintenance Building and systems Systems unreliable with
Reliability is rare and limited to is limited to system periodically or often fail. a constant need for
vandalism and abuse components short of repair.
repairs. mean times between
failures.
Note: FTE=full-time-equivalent position.
Source: APPA – Leadership in Educational Facilities, February 2019.
Houston ISD’s Maintenance Department is operating almost Houston ISD should develop long-term planning
solely reactively, which further stretches its resources and strategies for the Maintenance Department, such as
reduces its ability to function efficiently or effectively. Many a staffing allocation model and a preventive
areas in the district have not received routine maintenance maintenance program.
for a lengthy period. The expense of maintaining facilities by
checking equipment only when it breaks down also The district should assess the number of maintenance
contributes to the district’s cost of maintenance. Additionally, staff positions necessary to maintain a standard of
staff report that the department is understaffed but there is maintenance based on industry standards. The
no staffing allocation model to confirm this observation, and Maintenance Department should then determine
the review team’s analysis suggests that the department is appropriate staffing levels. This standard should be
adequately staffed. In addition, the department often usable by the district even as it changes in size. When
contracts work that staff could perform, without a consistent the district has determined appropriate staffing levels, it
process to determine when contracting is necessary. Despite will be able to determine when staffing levels are
cuts, the Maintenance Department has high costs when inadequate, when to develop new positions, or when work
compared to those of other large districts. should be contracted.
FIGURE 7–26
SPRING ISD PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PROGRAM SCHEDULE
PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE ACTIVITY ACTIVITY FREQUENCY
Clean air-conditioning (A/C) unit filters Bimonthly
Change A/C unit filters 3-week to 12-week intervals
Clean chiller condenser coils Every 2 years
Clean fan coil and air handler evaporator coils Annually
Clean ice machine condenser coils Every 4 months
Inspect and capacity test chillers Annually
Change chiller compressor oil and cores Every 2 years
Check chemical levels in closed loop chilled and hot water piping Monthly
Clean grease traps Every 3 months
Inspect and test boilers Annually
Check roofs, downspouts, and gutters Monthly, repair as needed – 20-year roof warranty
Inspect exterior lighting Semiannually
Inspect elementary play gym lighting Annually
Inspect and clean gym gas heaters Annually
Inspect playground equipment Monthly, repair as needed
Clean fire alarm system smoke detectors Semiannually
Inspect all interior and exterior bleachers Annually, repair as needed
Clean, tighten, and lubricate roll out bleachers Annually
Check exterior building and concrete caulking Annually – 8-year replacement
Stripe exterior parking lots Annually
Check condition of asphalt parking lots Annually – 12-year replacement
Check carpet 15-year replacement
Check vinyl composition tile floors 20-year replacement
Spray wash exterior soffits and building Every 2 years or as needed
Replace glass and Plexiglas As needed
Paint interior of facilities Every 5 years
Paint exterior of facilities Every 8 years
Perform general facility inspections Annually
Source: Spring ISD, 2019.
Houston ISD also should review its current maintenance regularly monitor to ensure that each department is reaching
programs and develop a preventive maintenance schedule for these goals.
each maintenance team. To accomplish this, the district
should review available documentation on best practices in The fiscal impact assumes that, by implementing industry
establishing preventive maintenance programs. The district standards, the Maintenance Department could save 10.0
also should review the local preventive maintenance plans of percent of the difference between Houston ISD’s spending and
other districts in similar geographic areas to ensure that it the median among CGCS districts. The median maintenance
takes into account relevant factors such as high humidity. cost per square foot among CGCS districts is $1.18, and
After the district has developed and established preventive Houston ISD pays $1.62, which equals a difference of $0.44.
maintenance plans, it should establish goals for the number Houston ISD has 31.1 million square feet of facilities. The
of preventive maintenance checks per department and annual savings is $1,367,245 ($0.44 x 31,073,758 x 0.10).
TRUCK STOCK INVENTORY (REC. 56) Houston ISD should implement a consistent inventory
process of maintenance stock to ensure that technicians have
Houston ISD does not have a process to monitor and
the needed tools and materials to complete repairs and that
inventory supplies used for maintenance repairs, which risks
materials reported as used are being tracked and noted.
inefficiency and property loss.
The Facilities Services Department should determine a
Maintenance technicians carry parts or truck stock supplies
position in the Maintenance Department to conduct the
in their district vehicles to complete maintenance requests.
inventory, such as a maintenance team lead or maintenance
During onsite interviews, maintenance staff said that the
area manager. These positions should conduct a physical
district previously relied heavily on truck stock for supplies,
inventory of the maintenance vehicles quarterly. The
but now they buy items as needed. Staff also said they
inventory should compare the stock on the vehicle to the
maintain only an informal internal inventory of truck stock
stock purchased by the technician or district and consider the
supplies and do not have a system to track supplies on trucks,
stock the technician has recorded using on the job. If possible,
nor do they conduct regular physical inventories. According
with existing software, staff should record inventories in the
to staff, there are also two maintenance centers that have
SAP software. The general manager of maintenance should
some stocked repair parts.
examine the record each quarter to determine that
The district divides maintenance staff into north and south maintenance staff have completed inventory and that vehicles
areas. The area manager for north maintenance stated that are carrying accurate counts of supplies, which would better
tools and truck stock inventory were in “good shape” and that prepare technicians to complete repairs and reduce the
he believed, but was not certain, that maintenance team leads possibility of maintenance supplies being taken for personal
performed inventory on truck stock supplies. The area manager use. Additionally, the district should establish a policy on
for south maintenance stated that he believed truck stock personal use of district tools by maintenance technicians.
supplies to be adequate, but added “we don’t have everything.”
He also said that there is to his knowledge no policy forbidding
existing resources.
the personal use of tools by technicians. The senior manager of
maintenance stated that some truck stock is available to
CUSTODIAL VENDOR (REC. 57)
technicians, but that it is “usually not enough to handle
assigned jobs.” He stated the opinion that the inventory of Houston ISD contracts for custodial services despite
tools was adequate and that the district did not allow the employing district staff sufficient to perform these services.
personal use of tools by staff. He also reported being unsure as
The district uses both a custodial management company
to who maintains an inventory or audit of truck stock.
(CMC), Metroclean, and district-employed custodians to
The review team observed the north and south maintenance clean Houston ISD facilities. The contract with the CMC
centers, which containing supply that technicians can use to began in December 2016, and has been subsequently
restock maintenance trucks, according to staff. Figure 7–27 renewed, according to district staff. However, Houston ISD
shows photos of both maintenance facilities. The review did not provide the renewal addendums to the review team.
team found very little repair stock on hand. With the The term of the contract provided to the review team ended
exception of an area containing window air conditioning in December 2017. According to the contract version
units in the south maintenance center, most areas were provided by the district, the district is paying approximately
disorganized and not inventoried. Staff at these sites said that $8.0 million annually to the vendor.
they normally purchase new items when making repairs
During the onsite review, district staff stated that the district
rather than attempting to find parts at those facilities.
utilizes both in-house staff and a CMC because it saves the
District maintenance technicians are operating with district funds previously spent on cleaning supplies. When
inadequate parts in their vehicles. The Maintenance the contract began, the CMC handled cleaning services for
Department does not inventory the stock it carries, leaving only a few campus cafeterias. Some campuses also receive
the possibility for repair stock to go missing or to waste. evening custodial services from the CMC. The district
Without a clear idea of what their vehicles carry, maintenance prioritizes newer campuses for CMC services, according to
technicians are more likely to purchase parts while making a district staff, who did not indicate why some campuses
repair, instead of arriving prepared to complete a work order. received additional services and not others.
FIGURE 7–27
HOUSTON ISD NORTH AND SOUTH MAINTENANCE FACILITIES
FEBRUARY 2019

HOUSTON ISD NORTH AND SOUTH MAINTENANCE FACILITIES
FEBRUARY 2019
The provided contract does not provide a cleanliness standard The district does not appear to hold the custodial vendor
the CMC is required to meet. The contract states that the CMC accountable for its contracted services. Focus groups with
will meet minimum acceptable cleaning performance standards, most custodial team leads and interviews with many plant
and it lists the following five cleanliness levels: orderly operators indicated that CMC staff do not have an
spotlessness, ordinary tidiness, casual inattention, moderate understanding of the cleanliness levels required at a campus.
dinginess, and unkempt neglect. However, the contract does not District custodial team leads said that the vendor’s custodians
state which of these levels the CMC is required to maintain. have poor training and often leave campuses inadequately
Figure 7–28 shows the five cleanliness levels listed in the clean, which district custodians have to remedy. One
contract, which correspond to the APPA – Leadership in custodial team lead frequently submits to a district supervisor
Educational Facilities’ Custodial Staffing Guidelines. photographs demonstrating the poor cleanliness of campuses
served by CMC staff. During campus visits and interviews
Houston ISD plant operators manage the facilities at each
with principals and plant operators at 35 campuses, the
campus and direct the tasks of custodians who clean them.
review team learned that there was general satisfaction with
Custodians report to custodial team leads, who communicate
district custodians, but frustration with the quality of work
with plant operators, handle administrative matters related
and responsiveness from the vendor’s staff.
to custodial employment, and address custodial issues that
arise at various campuses. During interviews, custodial team The review team evaluated campuses according to the
leads said that each oversees the custodial matters for 26 to five cleanliness levels shown in Figure 7–28, focusing on
30 campuses. 12 commonly used areas of each campus. These areas
FIGURE 7–28
APPA – LEADERSHIP IN EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES CLEANING STANDARDS AND CUSTODIAL STAFFING GUIDELINES
FEBRUARY 2019
LEVEL 1 – LEVEL 2 – LEVEL 3 – LEVEL 4 – LEVEL 5 –
ORDERLY SPOTLESSNESS ORDINARY TIDINESS CASUAL INATTENTION MODERATE DINGINESS UNKEMPT NEGLECT
Floors and base Floors and base Floors are swept or Floors are swept or Floors and carpets
moldings shine and/ moldings shine and/ vacuumed clean, but vacuumed clean, but are are dull, dirty, dingy,
or are bright and clean; or are bright and clean. upon close observation dull, dingy, and stained. scuffed, and/or matted. A
colors are fresh. There There is no buildup in there can be stains. A There is an obvious conspicuous buildup of
is no buildup in corners corners or along walls, buildup of dirt and/or buildup of dirt and/or old dirt and/or floor finish
or along walls. but there can be up to floor finish in corners floor finish in corners in corners and along
two days’ worth of dust, and along walls can be and along walls. walls. Base molding
dirt, stains, or streaks. seen. is dirty, stained, and
streaked. Gum, stains,
dirt, dust balls, and trash
are broadcast.
All vertical and All vertical and There are dull spots There is a dull path and/ All vertical and
horizontal surfaces horizontal surfaces and/or matted carpet in or obviously matted horizontal surfaces have
have a freshly are clean, but marks, walking lanes. There are carpet in the walking major accumulations
cleaned or polished dust, smudges, streaks or splashes on lanes. Base molding of dust, dirt, smudges,
appearance and have and fingerprints are base molding. is dull and dingy with and fingerprints, all of
no accumulation of dust, noticeable upon close streaks or splashes. which will be difficult
dirt, marks, streaks, observation. Lights all to remove. Lack of
smudges, or fingerprints. work and fixtures are attention is obvious.
clean.
Lights all work and Lamps all work and Lamps all work and All vertical and Light fixtures are dirty
fixtures are clean. fixtures are clean. fixtures are clean. horizontal surfaces have with dust balls and flies.
conspicuous dust, dirt, Many lamps (more than
smudges, fingerprints, 5.0 percent) are burned
and marks. out.
Washroom and shower Washroom and shower All vertical and Lamp fixtures are dirty Trash containers and
fixtures and tile gleam fixtures and tile gleam horizontal surfaces and some (up to 5.0 pencil sharpeners
and are odor-free. and are odor-free. have obvious dust, dirt, percent) lamps are overflow. They are
Supplies are adequate. Supplies are adequate. marks, smudges, and burned out. stained and marked.
fingerprints. Trash containers smell
sour.
Trash containers and Trash containers and Trash containers and Trash containers and
pencil sharpeners hold pencil sharpeners hold pencil sharpeners hold pencil sharpeners have
only daily waste, are only daily waste, are only daily waste, are old trash and shavings.
clean, and odor-free. clean, and odor-free. clean, and odor-free. They are stained
and marked. Trash
containers smell sour.
Source: APPA – Leadership in Educational Facilities Cleaning Standards, Custodial Staffing Guidelines, July 2019.
include locker rooms, staff and student restrooms, it is common for CMC staff to fail to report for duty on
gymnasiums, classrooms, foyers, laboratories, hallways, campuses without notice, which leaves the district to cover
dining areas, swimming pools, and outdoor spaces. At 35 with internal custodial staff after it notices the problem.
campuses, almost all 12 areas averaged ratings between
Houston ISD’s contract with the CMC does not clearly
ordinary tidiness and casual inattention. However, student
define a mechanism for the district to address sub-par
locker rooms averaged a rating of less than the standard for
custodial standards after the CMC performs its work. The
casual inattention. At least 10 of the observed 35 campuses
contract states, “the supplier [CMC] assumes full
had areas that earned a rating of moderate dinginess or
responsibility for the actions of its personnel … and shall
unkempt neglect.
remain solely responsible for their supervision.” District-
District custodial staff reported that CMC staff are frequently employed custodial team leads said that they were unsure of
absent, which hinders efforts to maintain an acceptable level the contract’s terms, and that the district has not told them
of cleanliness. Many district custodial team leads noted that how to address poor results from the vendor’s staff. District
FIGURE 7–29
HOUSTON ISD COVERAGE OF SQUARE FOOT PER CUSTODIAN COMPARED TO COUNCIL OF THE GREAT CITY SCHOOLS DATA
YEAR HOUSTON ISD CGCS LOWER QUARTILE CGCS MEDIAN CGCS UPPER QUARTILE
2013–14 20,181 23,417 25,964 30,374
2014–15 20,342 22,512 25,451 30,500
2015–16 19,626 23,822 26,442 30,307
2016–17 18,838 23,147 26,381 30,845
Source: Council of the Great City Schools (CGCS), Managing for Results, 2018.
staff said that they inform their supervisors when the CMC According to a facility inventory provided by Houston
fails to maintain campuses at a generally acceptable cleanliness ISD, the buildings in the district total 31,073,758 square
standard, but that the district did not inform them whether feet. The district employs 1,269 custodians, not including
staff had addressed the situation appropriately or whether the the vendor’s staff. The review team found that assuming
district had taken any further action. district staff clean the full 31.1 million square feet in the
district, the district custodians would clean 24,487 square
During onsite interviews, plant operators repeatedly said that feet per day. This amount would be less than the median
CMC staff were not necessary to appropriately clean their among the CGCS school districts, and below the district’s
campuses and reported being unsure as to why the district stated staffing formula.
had contracted with the custodial vendor. The district
structured the vendor contract to purchase cleaning supplies The district provided an analysis that estimates it would
from the CMC at an approximate annual cost of $1.5 spend an additional $7.2 million if it were to assume the
million. In addition, Houston ISD annually pays $6.9 CMC’s workload. However, the district’s estimate assumes
million to the CMC for labor costs. that the district will hire additional staff for these
responsibilities, when current workloads indicate that
APPA guidelines establish that to maintain a campus at the existing staff can assume this additional workload.
second level of cleanliness, ordinary tidiness, a custodian
should clean approximately 21,000 square feet per day. A Houston ISD should reassign the custodial vendor’s
guideline released in 2008 by the American School and responsibilities to district custodial staff. According to best
University Maintenance & Operations Cost Study specified practice guidelines, existing district staff would be sufficient
a larger ratio, stating that a district can maintain an acceptable to maintain its facilities above the level of casual inattention.
level of cleanliness while assigning 32,100 square feet per day In order to distribute appropriate workloads across its staff,
to each custodian. the district should reassess custodial assignments to ensure
that campuses formerly served by the CMC receive adequate
Although the district’s staffing formula in its Principals’ custodial services.
Guide states that it will staff one custodian per every
36,000 square feet, according to information provided by When the contract is complete, the district should
Houston ISD to the CGCS, the district assigned each direct the CMC duties to existing district custodial staff.
custodian 18,838 square feet of space to clean per day As a result, the district will no longer need a CMC
during school year 2016–17. This number excludes CMC vendor. The fiscal impact assumes that the district
staff and the square footage for which CMC staff is eliminates the Metroclean custodial services and supplies
responsible. This number is less than both the APPA and contract for an annual net savings of $6.5 million,
the American School and University Maintenance & including $8.0 million in savings for eliminating contracted
Operations Cost Study standards. custodial labor and supplies less $1.5 million for the cost
of custodial supplies that the district no longer will
Figure 7–29 shows Houston ISD’s rate of square footage per purchase from the vendor. These amounts are based on the
custodian compared to data from all CGCS school districts contract provided, which was expired. If the district
for school years 2013–14 to 2016–17. Based on this data, renegotiated the cost with the vendor in a more recent
Houston ISD’s rate is significantly less than the median. contract, these savings would differ.
During the onsite fieldwork, the review team observed
additional issues regarding the district’s programs and services
to students, staff, and the community. These observations are
report’s other findings and recommendations:
• During interviews, numerous Construction Services

Department staff noted that the district relies
predominantly on the construction management
at risk (CMAR) contract delivery method
when providing construction services. District
construction managers stated that they believed
that the district should use other methods, and that
CMAR usage has led to projects exceeding their
budgets because of a lack of detailed cost estimates.
The district should assess its construction contract
delivery process to determine the most effective use
for each delivery method.
• Houston ISD’s Construction Services Department

has a standard operating procedures manual
to provide resources for new staff. During
interviews, however, some construction services
representatives and construction project managers
stated that they were unaware of this manual. Staff
indicated that they learn procedures by observing
others in the department and by asking questions
when issues arise. The district should assess how
it communicates these procedures to staff and
determine how to appropriately train existing and
new staff on these procedures.
FISCAL IMPACT
Some of the recommendations provided in this report are based on state or federal laws, rules, or regulations, and they should
be promptly addressed. Other recommendations are based on comparisons to state or industry standards, or accepted best
practices, and the district should review to determine the level of priority, appropriate timeline, and method of implementation.
TOTAL
5-YEAR ONETIME
7. FACILITIES USE AND MANAGEMENT
46. Develop an accurate ($43,760) ($43,760) ($43,760) ($43,760) ($43,760) ($218,800) $19,725,000
facility utilization rate for
each campus and ensure
that campuses maintain
industry-standard
utilization rates.
50. Evaluate all position titles $121,822 $121,822 $121,822 $121,822 $121,822 $609,110 $0
and job responsibilities
within the Construction
Services Department
and Facilities Services
Department and
ensure that titles and
responsibilities match the
functions performed by
each position.
53. Develop a clear reporting $714,696 $714,696 $714,696 $714,696 $714,696 $3,573,480 $0
structure for the Energy
Initiatives Department
and an energy
management plan.
55. Develop long-term $1,367,245 $1,367,245 $1,367,245 $1,367,245 $1,367,245 $6,836,225 $0

planning strategies
for the Maintenance
Department, such as
a staffing allocation
model and a preventive
57. Reassign the custodial $6,545,748 $6,545,748 $6,545,748 $6,545,748 $6,545,748 $32,728,740 $0
vendor’s responsibilities
to district custodial staff.
Total $8,705,751 $8,705,751 $8,705,751 $8,705,751 $8,705,751 $43,528,755 $19,725,000
The Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance Review Team could not determine a fiscal impact for other recommendations.
The implementation of these recommendations may result in savings in several areas; however, the review team does not have
the data to indicate a specific fiscal impact. Recommendation 48 (facilities master plan) enables the district to take short-term
planning measures to see long-term potential savings.
Recommendation 49 (program management firms) would enable the district to save substantial sums in the future by removing
the duplication of effort involved in staffing construction management positions and hiring program management firms.
Recommendation 51 (furniture, fixtures, and equipment) would enable district operations staff to standardize maintenance
and custodial supplies. Recommendations 47 (building prototypes) and 52 (inconsistency in design) would provide more
efficient building spaces and processes based on the recommendations of the operational staff that will use the buildings, leading
to potential savings.
Recommendation 54 (work order system) could result in faster, cheaper repairs for the district by using a digital work order
system to improve the efficiency of Houston ISD’s work orders and Maintenance Department.
8. SAFETY AND SECURITY MANAGEMENT
Houston Independent School District (ISD) has two updating of key department documents regarding
departments in charge of safety and security management: resource sharing and communication.
the Police Department, overseen by the police chief, and the
Houston ISD lacks data-driven performance measures
Risk Management Department, which reports to the Chief
Financial Officer. The Police Department employs more and systems to evaluate its Police Department.
than 200 police officers, with more than 160 assigned to The Houston ISD Police Department’s procedures
campuses or on patrol. Additionally, the department employs for processing arrests are unsafe, and the processing
officers who work as trainers, dispatchers, and investigators. unit’s staffing level is inadequate.
Staff within the Risk Management Department are
responsible for addressing campus security and environmental Houston ISD’s discipline practices are not consistent
concerns, including fire inspections, intruder drills, and across all campuses.
asbestos abatement.
Houston ISD does not enforce state-mandated
During school year 2017–18, Houston ISD spent more than truancy intervention requirements.
$20.0 million for security and monitoring services. During
each of the two preceding school years, the district spent RECOMMENDATIONS
more than $25.0 million for security and monitoring Recommendation 58: Consolidate the safety
services. This amount includes the costs of the Police functions and form a districtwide safety and
Department, some security upgrades across campuses, and a security committee to address safety issues.
portion of the Risk Management Department’s budget. The
2012 bond included $17.3 million for safety and security Recommendation 59: Restructure the police
improvements. The district funded an additional $12.0 chief ’s reporting relationship so that the position
million for safety and security improvements from surplus reports only to the superintendent.
bond funds.
Recommendation 60: Charge specific positions with
reassessing, maintaining, and regularly updating
ACCOMPLISHMENT key district documents, such as memorandums of
Houston ISD has developed thorough and understanding and service expectations.
helpful procedures to improve its alternative Recommendation 61: Develop and institute data-
education programs. driven performance measures and information
sources for the Houston ISD Police Department.
FINDINGS
Recommendation 62: Make staffing,
Houston ISD divides its safety and security transportation, and facility changes to improve the
functions between the Police Department and the Houston ISD Police Department’s processing unit
Risk Management Department, which results in for efficiency and safety.
inefficiency, poor communication and planning, and
the omission of key safety and security responsibilities. Recommendation 63: Standardize campus
practices, communicate expectations, and
The Houston ISD Police Department has an unclear hold principals accountable for student
leadership structure, which has caused a breakdown discipline management.
in communication among district leadership that
Recommendation 64: Develop an enforcement
affects safety planning.
mechanism to ensure that campuses are utilizing
The Houston ISD Police Department does not have all required interventions before making truancy
procedures to ensure the development and regular case referrals.
SAFETY AND SECURITY MANAGEMENT HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
BACKGROUND campus, the climate of the campus, campus data security,

and emergency management plans. Houston ISD has
An independent school district’s safety and security function
developed a districtwide Emergency Operations Plan that
identifies physical and environmental vulnerabilities and
prescribes general procedures in the event of emergencies.
includes strategies to minimize risks to ensure a protected
These procedures encompass a range of safety topics from the
learning environment for students and staff. This protection
possibility of an allergic reaction and natural disasters to
includes a balanced approach of prevention, intervention,
intruders on campus.
enforcement, and recovery. Risks can include environmental
disasters, physical hazards, security threats, emergencies, and Houston ISD has more than 14,000 security cameras
human-caused crises. across all of its campuses and several security guards who patrol
district facilities. Each campus also has a fire alarm panel in
Managing safety and security initiatives is dependent on a
place. Campuses are accessible via card access or through an
district’s organizational structure. Larger districts typically
electronic access system. The district utilizes a visitor
have staff dedicated to safety and security, and smaller
management system, but did not provide formal districtwide
districts assign staff tasks as a secondary assignment. Safety
visitor management procedures. However, the Legislative
and security include ensuring the physical security of a school
Budget Board’s School Performance Review Team experienced
and its occupants. A comprehensive approach to planning
uniform procedures during onsite observations. Staff greet
for physical security considers school locking systems;
visitors, scan each visitor’s identification, and provide visitor
monitoring systems; equipment and asset protection;
badges. Staff then escort visitors to their destinations.
visibility of areas and grounds; police and school resource
officers; and emergency operations. Emergency and disaster- Houston ISD has three disciplinary alternative education
related procedures must include fire protection, programs (DAEP), including an elementary DAEP, Harper
environmental disasters, communication systems, crisis Alternative, and a secondary DAEP that began providing
management, and contingency planning. To identify physical services in August 2017. Students that the district expels
hazards, a school district must consider playground safety from campus or receive court orders due to probation
and overall building and grounds safety. Environmental conditions attend the Harris County Juvenile Justice
factors, such as indoor air quality, mold, asbestos, water Alternative Education Program (JJAEP), which serves
management, and waste management, also affect the safety Houston ISD and several other local districts.
of school facilities.
One of the stated objectives of public education in the Texas

DETAILED ACCOMPLISHMENT
Education Code is to “provide safe and disciplined ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAMS
environments conducive to learning.” To achieve this
Houston ISD has developed thorough and helpful procedures
objective, safety and security operations go hand-in-hand
to improve its alternative education programs. In particular,
with education, as districts are responsible for protecting
the district has implemented social and emotional learning
students, teachers, and school property while providing a
programming in its elementary DAEP and has decreased the
positive learning environment. Working together, district
number of discretionary referrals it makes to the Harris
leaders, campus principals, facility managers, transportation
County JJAEP.
supervisors, and safety and security staff identify risks and
develop plans to mitigate threats. The elementary DAEP campus is located in a separate, secure
building on the grounds of Eliot Elementary School. A
A safe and secure school environment as defined by the federal
typical placement in the elementary DAEP lasts 15 days.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title IV, Section
When the district assigns a student to the DAEP, staff
401, 21st Century Schools and the Safe and Drug-free Schools
complete interviews with personnel at the student’s home
and Communities Act, encompasses communication systems,
campus, the student, and the parents. Staff work with the
fire protection, playground safety, facility safety, environmental
student and parents to develop a behavior management plan,
regulations, and emergency operation planning.
using various behavior management tools to help the student
Every three years, in accordance with state law, Houston ISD complete it. These parties also work together on a student–
performs safety and security audits. These audits cover the parent agreement to promote the student’s behavior goals.
interior and exterior of facilities, the area surrounding the Figure 8–1 shows an example student–parent agreement.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT SAFETY AND SECURITY MANAGEMENT
FIGURE 8–1
HOUSTON ISD ELEMENTARY DISCIPLINARY ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAM STUDENT–PARENT AGREEMENT
When the student is ready to return to the home campus, pursuant to the Texas Education Code, Chapter 37. During
DAEP staff work with the student, parents, teacher, and school year 2017–18, Houston ISD had the third most
potentially other classmates to resolve lingering issues. DAEP expulsions to a JJAEP in the state. However, the district has
staff also follow up with each student six weeks after the implemented behavior management plans and utilized
returning to the home campus. campus and district supports before referring students
discretionarily to the JJAEP. Figure 8–2 shows Houston ISD
The district also utilizes the Harris County JJAEP to place expulsions to the Harris County JJAEP from school years
students who have committed more serious infractions, 2015–16 to 2017–18.
FIGURE 8–2
HOUSTON ISD EXPULSIONS TO HARRIS COUNTY JUVENILE JUSTICE ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION PROGRAM (JJAEP)
PERCENTAGE CHANGE
CATEGORY 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2015–16 TO 2017–18
Houston ISD Enrollment (1) 231,911 233,955 228,377 (1.5%)
Mandatory Expulsions to JJAEP 33 32 38 15.2%
Discretionary Expulsions to JJAEP 25 20 12 (52.0%)
Total Expulsions to JJAEP 58 52 50 (13.8%)
Note: (1) Data shows Public Education Information Management System annual discipline data, which differ from the enrollment data
submitted by Houston ISD.
Sources: Texas Education Agency, Public Education Information Management System, school years 2015–16 to 2017–18; Houston ISD, 2019.
The JJAEP school principal said that, although Houston first responders to all 911 calls within the Houston ISD
ISD is the largest district that refers students to the JJAEP, boundaries and provide traffic enforcement and other
Houston ISD students make up a disproportionately small support to campuses. The Police Department’s
number of enrolled JJAEP students. The JJAEP program’s communications unit is a dispatch center that handles calls.
Safe Schools Administrator stated that Houston ISD has During onsite interviews, the Houston ISD police chief
decreased discretionary referrals and developed students’ stated that staff perform active-shooter drills at campuses
behavioral management through district resources. The across the district.
School to Prison Pipeline report by Texas Appleseed has
shown that students expelled to the JJAEP for discretionary Some safety functions in Houston ISD reside in the Risk
offenses such as serious or persistent misbehavior often Management Department instead of the Police Department.
have worse outcomes than students referred to the program The Risk Management Department reports to the Chief
mandatorily for criminal offenses. Best practices indicate Financial Officer. The department’s safety and emergency
that districts should work with students on their home management team assesses campus safety and periodically
campuses as much as possible and provide them with skills performs intruder drills intended to alert the district to the
to improve their behavior. accessibility of campuses and the preparedness of staff in
following visitor management procedures. As part of these
DETAILED FINDINGS drills, a field safety inspector attempts to enter the campus
without following visitor guidelines, checks for unsecured
DIVIDED SAFETY FUNCTIONS (REC. 58) entrances, and documents whether campus staff that
Houston ISD divides its safety and security functions encounter the unannounced inspector take appropriate
between the Police Department and the Risk Management action. In addition, the safety and emergency management
Department, which results in inefficiency, poor team monitors emergency drills across the district and trains
communication and planning, and the omission of key safety campus staff to implement them. Figure 8–4 shows the
and security responsibilities. organizational structure of safety and security functions in
The Houston ISD Police Department includes campus and Houston ISD.
patrol officers, an investigations unit, a gang suppression
These two departments do not communicate or coordinate
unit, a crime analysis unit, a communications team, and a
effectively with each other. During the review team’s onsite
processing center. Figure 8–3 shows the organization for
interviews, Risk Management Department staff stated that
the department.
they have limited interaction with the Police Department,
Campus officers serve as first responders to criminal activity and they believe that the two departments operate without
that occurs on district campuses. According to the district, communicating. This separation results in ineffective safety
campus officer responsibilities include responding to in- and security implementation throughout the district. For
progress calls, parking and traffic enforcement, conducting example, the safety and emergency management team trains
safety awareness programs, emergency calls, court appearances campus staff regarding evacuation plans and campus
and testimony, and threat assessment. Patrol officers are the lockdown procedures without involving district police
FIGURE 8–3
HOUSTON ISD POLICE DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
Police Chief
Internal Affairs
Division Sergeant
Accreditation
and Special Business Office
Projects Manager Manager
Assistant Police Chief
South West North East Support Services

Operations Captain Operations Captain Captain
Campus Dispatch Investigations Crime Analysis School Plant

Officers Unit and Gang Unit and Safety Office Operator
Suppression Unit Evidence Unit
Patrol Training Processing Security
Sergeants Unit Unit Guards
Campus K9 Unit Patrol Watch

Officers Sergeants Command
Sergeant
Community Fleet Emergency
Outreach Unit Sergeant Response
Team
officers. Additionally, the police chief stated that, whereas FIGURE 8–4
officers perform active-shooter drills, the Risk Management HOUSTON ISD SAFETY AND SECURITY ORGANIZATION
SCHOOL YEAR 2018-19
Department performs intruder drills. Neither department
attempts to collaborate on improving these drills. Campus Superintendent
police officers do not receive consistent training on how to
handle emergencies on their campuses and are not involved
Chief Financial Chief Operating
consistently in planning and executing emergency drills.
Officer Officer
The lack of coordination and communication between the
Police Department and the Risk Management Department Risk Police
Management Department
has resulted in the district not addressing key safety and
security functions. For example, the Texas Education Code,
Section 37.109(a), requires each school district to form a Safety and Insurance
safety and security committee, which also is required in Emergency
Houston ISD’s Board Policy CK (LEGAL). This safety and Management
security committee is responsible for bringing together Environmental
district stakeholders to address safety concerns. The Texas Consulting
Services
Education Code, Section 37.108(b), requires each school
district to perform a safety and security audit of its facilities Team; Houston ISD, February 2019.
at least once every three years. Houston ISD has completed a reviews, tests, and updates the plan regularly through drills.
safety and security District Audit Report (DAR) and The involvement of stakeholders helps to ensure that
submitted it to the Texas School Safety Center (TxSSC) communication about the plans to staff and students is
every three years, and provided the review team with the consistent in an emergency.
DARs developed since 2008. In each DAR, the district
TxSSC has a School Safety and Security Committee Policy
reported having a functioning school safety and security
to assist districts to form such a committee. The policy
committee that meets regularly.
describes the duties of the committee and provides
However, the district does not maintain an active safety and recommendations for its administration.
security committee. During onsite interviews, Risk
Houston ISD should consolidate the safety functions and
Management Department staff said that the Police
form a districtwide safety and security committee to address
Department managed the safety and security committee, and
safety issues.
they reported being uncertain as to whether any risk
management staff participated on the committee. Yet, Police To implement this recommendation, Houston ISD should
Department managerial staff said that no safety and security move the safety and emergency management team and its
committee is active. One staff stated that such a committee relevant functions from the Risk Management Department
previously existed, but it has not met since September 2016. to the Police Department to improve continuity in safety
oversight and reduce the risk of failing to perform critical
Lack of preparedness in school safety results in confusion and
functions, such as maintaining an active safety and security
delay during critical incidents. At a meeting of the Marjory
committee. After reestablishing the safety and security
Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Commission
committee pursuant to requirements in the Texas Education
held in the aftermath of the 2018 school shooting in
Code, committee members should examine the district’s
Parkland, Florida, commission members raised concerns
existing emergency management plan and develop a
about the training and understanding of school safety staff
timeline to review and update the plan regularly with the
during the tragedy. Safety staff that are untrained and unclear
input of key stakeholders.
on protocols are less capable of coordinated effective
responses to threats. The district could implement this recommendation with
existing resources.
Training plays a significant role in safety operations. School
districts conduct drills to train students and campus staff
LEADERSHIP STRUCTURE (REC. 59)
on safety best practices in the event of an emergency.
Effective districts consistently and thoroughly train the staff The Houston ISD Police Department has an unclear
who are conducting these drills. The Federal Commission leadership structure, which has caused a breakdown in
on School Safety’s report identified the Los Angeles Unified communication among district leadership that affects
School District’s emergency preparedness training program safety planning.
as a best practice, stating that it “offers a comprehensive
The Texas Education Code, Section 37.081(f ), states, “The
emergency preparedness training program to build the
chief of police of the school district police department shall
capacity of all [district] employees (including educators and
be accountable to the superintendent and shall report to the
school police officers) in school safety, security, and
superintendent. School district police officers shall be
emergency management.”
supervised by the chief of police of the school district or the
Denver Public Schools has developed a comprehensive school chief of police’s designee and shall be licensed by the Texas
safety plan approved by state emergency management authorities Commission on Law Enforcement.” Figure 8–5 shows the
and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. This plan organizational structure of the district’s senior leadership.
includes emergency preparedness training requirements and The structure indicates that the police chief reports directly
accountability structures for campus leadership. to the superintendent but also reports to the chief operating
officer (COO).
Delaware utilizes the Comprehensive School Safety Program
to ensure that each campus in the state has a practical school Figure 8–6 shows additional information from Houston
safety plan. Each plan must be developed collaboratively ISD’s website indicating that the police chief reports directly
with stakeholders and specified to each campus. Each campus to the superintendent.
FIGURE 8–5
HOUSTON ISD ORGANIZATION, SCHOOL YEAR 2018–19
Source: Houston ISD, 2018.
However, Figure 8–7 shows an organizational chart from the FIGURE 8–6
district website for the Business Operations Division HOUSTON ISD STAFF REPORTING DIRECTLY TO THE
SUPERINTENDENT, SCHOOL YEAR 2018–19
indicating that the police chief reports to the COO.
In a post on the Houston ISD blog recognizing the current

police chief ’s appointment, the district states that the police
chief reports directly to the superintendent but that the
COO has administrative oversight of the Police Department.
As shown in the information available on the district’s

website, staff interviews yielded different accounts of the
reporting structure between the chief of police and senior
district leadership. The superintendent stated that the police
chief reports to her but that the COO handles all
administrative matters as part of a reporting structure that
predates her tenure. The superintendent did not specify how
the district defines administrative matters. According to the
superintendent, the police chief is a member of the Source: Houston ISD, February 2019.
FIGURE 8–7
HOUSTON ISD OFFICE OF BUSINESS OPERATIONS ORGANIZATION
superintendent’s cabinet, which consists of executive not consult the Police Department about important
leadership that meets regularly to discuss district business. decisions, including input on capital requests, and that
district leadership hinders the police chief ’s attempts to
However, the police chief reportedly does not receive
advocate for the department.
invitations to all meetings; instead, the district invites the
police chief as needed. Some staff reported that the police Some recent districtwide decisions have affected the Police
chief does not have direct access to the superintendent, and Department. The district implemented a new system for its
that the superintendent has no regular communication with magnet school campuses during school year 2018–19 that
the police chief. They met in spring 2018 to discuss the replaced many traditional neighborhood bus stops with
superintendent’s vision for the Police Department, but pickup and dropoff hub locations. For safety, the district
reportedly have had no goal planning or evaluation meetings requires police officers to staff hub locations. The district did
since then. not inform the police chief about the implementation of the
hub system until after it had made the decision. Because the
The COO stated that the police chief reported to the COO
chief had little time to plan for this project, scheduling Police
position. Although the district is aware of the statutory
Department coverage of hub locations has resulted in large
requirement that the police chief reports to the superintendent,
overtime costs.
the COO stated that following this requirement is not
practical in a district the size of Houston ISD. The COO has The district’s organizational structure does not enable the police
weekly meetings with the police chief to discuss concerns chief to advocate effectively for the department’s needs to maintain
about Police Department’s operations. district safety. Because the police chief is not a functioning member
of the superintendent’s cabinet, he is uninformed of potential
According to the police chief, the position reports to the
changes to the district that have safety implications. Without
COO, and the police chief has little interaction with the
participating with the cabinet, the police chief has limited
superintendent. District police officers expressed frustration
mechanisms to inform and direct district decisions through his
during interviews and focus groups that the police chief does
knowledge of the law and safety requirements.
not report to the superintendent, contrary to requirements in
the Texas Education Code. Police Department staff said that Peer school districts Dallas ISD and Cypress–Fairbanks ISD,
the relationship between the Police Department and district which are used for comparison purposes, each have district
leadership would improve if the police chief reported directly police departments in which the police chief reports directly
to the superintendent. Staff also stated that the district does to the superintendent.
Houston ISD should restructure the police chief ’s K-9 units and Emergency Response Teams (ERT), which are
reporting relationship so that the position reports only to similar to Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT) teams, are
the superintendent. resources that local municipalities often provide. Large cities
maintain trained teams equipped to perform these functions.
The district should establish a regular meeting between the
These municipalities can enter into agreements with local
superintendent and the police chief to discuss expectations
school district police departments to promote campus safety
for the department and goals for the district. The police chief
and respond to emergencies. Having multiple specialized
should attend cabinet meetings regularly to provide input
response teams, particularly if these teams have not trained
from a safety perspective regarding matters before the district.
together, can result in confusion in an emergency.
The district should eliminate the reporting relationship
Maintaining K-9 units are expensive, and effective school
between the COO and the police chief and discontinue their
districts often reach agreements with local municipalities to
weekly meeting. The district should remove the Police
share this resource when necessary.
Department’s website content from the Business Operations
section of the overall Houston ISD website. According to several interviews onsite, the district Police
Department is developing its own ERT. The department goal
is to staff the team at 10 officers, but it currently has seven.
existing resources.
The team is equipped with guns and Tasers, and participates
in weekly ERT training and monthly firearms training. The
KEY DOCUMENT MAINTENANCE (REC. 60)
MOUs that the district has with local law enforcement
The Houston ISD Police Department does not have agencies do not arrange for other agencies to provide these
procedures to ensure the development and regular updating services within the district.
of key department documents regarding resource sharing
The Houston ISD Police Department also utilizes its own
and communication.
K-9 unit to support drug and weapon detection on campuses.
The district has not updated memorandums of understanding Houston ISD’s existing MOUs do not arrange for other law
(MOU) with other law enforcement agencies regularly. During enforcement agencies to share their K-9 resources with the
the review team’s onsite interviews, Legal Services Department district. The Houston ISD K-9 unit consists of five dogs,
staff stated that their office receives and approves copies of new four officers, and one sergeant. The unit has no documented
MOUs, but staff did not know whether a process is in place to key performance indicators or expectations.
update them. The Police Department’s accreditation and
The review team examined an online version of Houston
special projects manager maintains the department’s procedure
ISD Police Department’s procedures manual. It covers most
documents, but staff on that team reported that the department
subjects related to campus policing, but several procedures
has never developed some standard MOUs. The Special
have not been revised since 2009. The manual is accessible to
Projects team has only hard copies of MOUs, which are not
officers in the field through a secure online system called
shared with patrol or campus officers.
Power DMS. The Legal Services Department reviews all
During onsite interviews, Houston ISD Police Department Houston ISD Police Department procedures as the
staff stated that the Houston Police Department (HPD) asks department develops them.
district police officers to handle traffic accidents involving
The procedures system does not include several key items,
district-owned vehicles. Houston ISD Police Department
including requirements to review and update the manual
staff reported not knowing whether these requests are part of
annually. The manual does not describe applicable Houston
an existing MOU with HPD or an informal arrangement
ISD board policies. It does not contain directives for campus-
between the district staff and HPD. Some campuses contract
level officers or non-sworn security staff, such as the security
with local municipalities directly to gain additional officers
guards who perform functions at several district facilities. It also
outside of agreements that Houston ISD has with other law
does not document the chain-of-command authority within the
enforcement agencies in existing MOUs. Staff also reported
department nor identify and list captains’ responsibilities.
that, although Houston ISD police officers issue traffic
citations, the district Police Department does not receive any The Houston ISD Police Department’s standards-of-service
of the collected fines associated with these citations, nor is documents, which are written expectations, for campus or
such an arrangement provided in an MOU. patrol officers, are not clearly communicated and understood
by administrative or police staff. During onsite interviews, The district’s Police Department also should update and
principals stated that the Police Department does not inform maintain the procedures manual. The Special Projects team
them of the expectations of service for officers on their should establish a regular review of existing procedures and
campuses, although the Police Department provided a regularly assess changing police practices to determine if the
standards-of-service document and stated that principals team should add new procedures.
with campus officers are required to sign it at the beginning
The Houston ISD Police Department’s Special Projects Team
of the year. Principals said that service delivery varies greatly
should develop, distribute, and maintain the MOUs for the
among campus officers, and the department reassigns these
district. The team should review the current agreements and
officers frequently. Some principals said that officers assigned
update them in collaboration with relevant agencies and the
to their campuses stay in their offices all day; others reported
Legal Services Department. The team should consult with the
that officers are proactive on campus. The review team
Council of Great City Schools (CGCS) to learn from
observed officers in both categories. Principals said that they
interagency agreements in place at other large districts. Special
did not perceive any unified district expectations for officers
Projects staff should use this information to assess the services
and expressed uncertainty about how to gauge officer
provided by the Houston ISD Police Department that another
effectiveness. Principals who contracted directly with local
agency could provide and determine the availability of local
municipalities for additional campus officers reported doing
resources to share these responsibilities. Staff should digitize
so to provide consistent coverage across their campuses and
MOUs and develop a regular review plan.
because HPD officers are more likely to comply with tasks
assigned by the principals. Additionally, the Houston ISD Police Department should
clearly communicate service expectations for all officers and
During onsite interviews, campus officers and principals
make these standards consistently available to campus
expressed frustration about each other’s roles. Officers
leadership at the beginning of the school year so that
reported attempts by principals to control them and to exert
campuses have consistent expectations and accountability for
control over the arrest process. Others reported the confusion
officers. The department should schedule meetings between
of administrative disciplinary actions and legal investigations
campus leadership and campus-level officers to review the
by some principals. Some principals expressed frustration at
services expectations within the first few months of the
not being able to direct officers as they do other campus staff
school year.
and that police supervisors back up the officers regardless of
the principals’ complaints. To revise the procedures manual, the Houston ISD Police
Department should select a procedure project coordinator
Failure to maintain and regularly update police procedures from existing staff to assemble a committee to review and
and protocols results in miscommunication and an inefficient update procedures. The committee should include positions
use of resources. Without well-maintained MOUs with other from multiple levels within the Police Department. The
local agencies, Houston ISD police perform duplicative committee should consider past procedures, board policy,
services and divert officers from campus-level safety activities. and best practices when performing updates and should
These services include the district’s current use of resources to establish a schedule for releasing updated procedures. The
develop and train K-9 units and ERTs instead of coordinating committee also should submit a draft of each procedure to
with the municipal law enforcement departments. the Legal Services Department, the police chief, and the
Houston ISD board if necessary. Additionally, the committee
Houston ISD should charge specific positions with
should conduct an annual review of procedures to ensure
reassessing, maintaining, and regularly updating key district
that they remain current.
documents, such as memorandums of understanding and
service expectations. Houston ISD also should prohibit campuses from contracting
directly with other law enforcement agencies for more
The district should revise and update its MOUs with
officers. Campus leadership should coordinate with the
municipal law enforcement agencies. The district Police
Houston ISD Police Department to acquire any additional
Department staff should clarify the duty of Houston ISD
coverage it may need.
officers regarding municipal matters, such as traffic accidents,
and establish a mutually beneficial relationship that enables The district could implement this recommendation with
sharing of existing resources. existing resources.
DATA-DRIVEN PERFORMANCE MEASURES (REC. 61) The Police Department uses a records management software
(RMS) and a computer-aided dispatch system. During onsite
Houston ISD lacks data-driven performance measures and
interviews, staff reported that the department is not using
systems to evaluate its Police Department.
several RMS modules for aggregating and summarizing data.
During onsite interviews, district staff reported that the These modules include the following areas: crime analysis,
expected performance of the Police Department was unclear. gang-related issues, internal affairs, public requests for open
The district’s organizational chart shows the police chief records, and other departments’ electronic requests for
reporting directly to the superintendent and administratively reports from the Houston ISD Police Department’s system.
to the COO as shown in Figure 8–5. The superintendent Staff said they believed that the district had purchased several
said that the district measures the Police Department’s of these modules, but the department had not trained staff
success by reviewing the number of grievances filed against it on their use.
and the number of arrests that occur on campuses. However,
Without establishing comprehensive performance and
the district did not provide context about how it uses these
efficiency measures for the Police Department, the district
data. The COO said that the district determines the
cannot evaluate the department’s performance effectively.
department’s success or failure based on how it diffuses and
Because the district does not collect and compare data, the
resolves safety concerns that arise daily. However, the district
Police Department is operating in isolation, without an
did not specify the data reviewed to evaluate the department.
understanding of its own impact. Data and performance
Some Police Department staff reported uncertainty regarding measures should determine whether the district should
how the department’s performance is measured. Some staff increase or decrease funding to a program or eliminate it,
said that they consider crime statistics for the middle school whether the department needs new programs, and whether
and high school campuses and read the local news to department programs would be more efficient if outsourced.
determine how the department is performing. Police captains Comparative data provides information to help the district
said that they utilize performance tools provided by the deploy officers toward campuses that are experiencing
district to evaluate police officers, but they do not use data to increased rates of criminal activity.
evaluate their units’ performances. Staff responded
Austin ISD has developed a district scorecard that evaluates
inconsistently regarding the methods and data used to
the entire district’s performance. Its Police Department
determine campus staffing levels. Administrative staff and
contributes to the overall district scorecard on several
Police Department staff do not use comparative data from
measures, such as the number of students who feel safe on
CGCS regarding crime on campus to evaluate the
campuses, which enables a district-based assessment of the
department’s success, although the district participates in
department’s achievements.
CGCS data reporting.
Participating school districts report certain crime metrics to
The Police Department has a crime analyst that develops a
CGCS, which provides comparative data for districts to
daily crime report for the police chief, the assistant police
analyze. Specifically, districts report rates of assaults and
chief, and the captains. It contains a summary of the previous
batteries per 1,000 students, bullying and harassment per
day’s incidents managed by district law enforcement and
1,000 students, burglary rates per site, and alarm systems per
how each incident was resolved, including arrests or
site. Houston ISD reports these data, but the district does
administrative means. The report does not include
not compare its crime and incident rates against other
comparative data to indicate whether activity levels in the
districts to determine the Police Department’s success.
district were similar during the same period during previous
years. The crime analyst also develops a weekly threat log for The district should develop and institute data-driven
the Police Department leadership team. performance measures and information sources for the
Houston ISD Police Department.
The crime analyst develops other reports by request. During
onsite interviews, the crime analyst said that department Performance and cost-efficiency measurements enable
leadership requests a summary, roughly quarterly, of all service program leaders, the school board, and the public
calls, including those that ended in arrests. Annually, the crime to determine the success of a district program.
analyst compiles a National Incident Based Reporting System Performance measures provide stakeholders with
report for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. information regarding program quality and performance,
enabling them to assess whether programs are achieving locate a female police officer, which is required when
their goals and objectives. Cost-efficiency measures provide searching female students during processing. According to
stakeholders with information regarding program efficiency, department staff, processing and transportation requires
enabling them to assess whether the program has been three to six hours to complete.
successful in the most cost-effective manner. The district
During an onsite visit, the review team observed that the
should establish performance and cost-efficiency measures
processing unit does not have a separate holding room for
for the Police Department at the department and individual
students; it has chairs secured by plastic zip ties located in
officer levels.
the unit’s main room. Figure 8–8 shows the Houston ISD
The police chief should draft an initial set of department- processing unit. Because the unit has no holding rooms,
level performance and cost-efficiency metrics, and students remain handcuffed, waiting in these chairs until
share this draft with other key Police Department staff. either their parents arrive or the district transports them
The police chief should present the metrics to the elsewhere. When students and adults are being processed at
superintendent and cabinet for review and to the board the same time, the procedure prescribed by federal law is to
for feedback and approval. The Police Department separate them in different rooms. However, separating
should coordinate with the Information Technology these groups is difficult because only one staff is present to
Department to develop efficient reporting capabilities supervise them.
for each metric and should report on these metrics at
least quarterly. During onsite interviews, patrol officers said that transporting
students after arrests requires a significant amount of time.
The district could implement this recommendation with They also said that they often must process students and
existing resources. complete documentation for arrests they did not perform
because the arresting campus officer cannot access the
PROCESSING UNIT (REC. 62) district’s RMS in the field.
The Houston ISD Police Department’s procedures for
processing arrests are unsafe, and the processing unit’s staffing The district should make staffing, transportation, and facility
level is inadequate. changes to improve the Houston ISD Police Department’s
processing unit for efficiency and safety.
When an arrestable offense occurs in Houston ISD, the
involved officer contacts the Harris County District The department’s processing unit should develop separate
Attorney’s Office before performing the arrest. An officer holding areas for students and adults. These holding areas are
then transports the student to the Houston ISD Police necessary to maintain safety and decrease the likelihood that
Department for processing. Patrol officers typically perform students will have to wear handcuffs for hours. The Houston
transportation duties, although campus officers that have ISD Police Department should develop an additional
vehicles and partners to remain on campus may transport position to staff the processing unit to avoid the possibility of
students. The district Police Department has a van capable a single staff being required to supervise processing for
of transporting students that it does not use consistently. students and adults at the same time.
During onsite interviews, department staff said that the The district also should ensure that campus officers have access
officer who brings the student into the department often to the RMS system while in the field so that the arresting
completes the arrest-related documentation. The only officer can complete documentation before processing an
full-time staff at the department’s processing unit is a arrest. Additionally, the district should ensure that all officers
security guard. When officers bring students into the understand how to use this equipment. District officers should
processing center, the security guard enters the students’ use the Houston ISD Police Department’s van as a regular
information into the Automated Fingerprint Identification transport unit, which would help provide patrol officers time
System and sends the information to the Harris County for work supporting campus operations.
Sheriff’s Office Jail. After this information is processed,
either the Police Department releases the student to a The fiscal impact assumes that the district develops an
parent’s custody, or an officer transports the student to jail. additional officer position for the processing unit at a total
Police Department staff estimate that they process eight to cost of $59,845, which equals the average salary ($49,871)
nine arrests a day. Staff also stated that it can be difficult to and benefits ($9,974) for a Houston ISD police officer.
FIGURE 8–8
HOUSTON ISD POLICE DEPARTMENT PROCESSING UNIT
FEBRUARY 2019
DISCIPLINE PRACTICES (REC. 63) When incidents occur, campus staff have several punitive
Houston ISD’s discipline practices are not consistent across possibilities available. Students may receive in-school
all campuses. suspensions (ISS) or out-of-school suspensions (OSS). The
district also may place students in one of the district’s three
Houston ISD has various methods for managing student DAEP campuses or the county JJAEP. Some incidents require
behavior issues, from assisting students with skill building a mandatory referral to a program as required by law. For
through behavior management systems, to punitive measures example, if a student commits a serious criminal offense such
after an incident on campus. The district’s Social and as aggravated assault or arson on district property or during a
Emotional Learning (SEL) Department, established during school-related activity, the district is required to expel the
school year 2016–17, provides tools to campuses for student. Campuses can manage less serious incidents at their
managing student behavior issues. The program provides an own discretion. For example, a code of conduct violation is a
opportunity for students and staff to influence behaviors discretionary referral that could result from persistent
positively before issues arise. It is intended to help students disrespect on the part of a student.
develop skills to manage their emotions, form positive
relationships, feel empathy for others, and make responsible Campuses document incidents and student behavior in the
decisions. The department includes 24 administrative districtwide student information system, which tracks
positions and 16 campus-level social workers assigned to student behavioral issues and punitive measures. A campus
various campuses. SEL staff have promoted and provided refers a student for placement in a DAEP through the
training on multiple student behavior management systems. district’s student information system, after which the safe
schools administrator reviews the referral to ensure that the
During onsite interviews, principals spoke about district
campus included all relevant information.
efforts to decrease the number of student expulsions and
suspensions, particularly among young students. Principals District staff report that few elementary campuses operate
report an increase in district requirements to document ISS rooms. Elementary students in the early grades, when
student behavior plans before campuses seek measures that removed from classrooms, are not suspended; they may be
are more punitive. Principals and counselors noted that the assigned to complete work in the principal’s office or in
SEL Department provides professional development for another classroom on the campus. When student behavior
campus staff to improve their understanding and may warrant an ISS, some elementary principals implement
implementation of student discipline, but both groups a reverse suspension, which involves the parents spending the
reported still lacking adequate training and resources. day at school with the students. Some elementary school
FIGURE 8–9
HOUSTON ISD DISCIPLINE DATA
PERCENTAGE CHANGE
CATEGORY 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18 2015–16 TO 2017–18
Houston ISD Enrollment (1) 231,911 233,955 228,377 (1.5%)
Incidents 47,044 42,852 36,940 (21.5%)
Code of Conduct Violations 42,923 39,325 33,422 (22.1%)
In-school Suspensions 30,061 28,380 21,982 (26.9%)
Out-of-school Suspensions 25,358 23,350 22,972 (9.4%)
Placements in Disciplinary Alternative Education Programs 2,707 1,884 1,658 (38.8%)
Note: (1) Data shows Public Education Information Management System annual discipline data, which differ from the enrollment data
submitted by Houston ISD.
Source: Texas Education Agency, Public Education Information Management System, school years 2015–16 to 2017–18.
counselors noted that students on their campuses serve ISS one campus with particularly high suspension rates, the SEL
in the counselor’s office, during which time counselors may director reported that the campus had not changed
review social and behavior skills with the students. substantively even after the director and the area
superintendent inspected the campus and made suggestions
At the middle schools and high schools, the principals
to the principal. During onsite interviews, staff said that the
determine how the ISS operates and whether to incorporate
district does not hold principals sufficiently accountable for
counseling or SEL learning. During onsite interviews, the
high rates of ISS, OSS, or DAEP placements. Staff also stated
chief academic officer noted a variety in ISS implementation
that the district’s administration and school support officers
among the district’s seven largest high school campuses.
have little input with principals, and that site-based
Middle school counselors also reported variety in ISS
management is more extreme in Houston ISD than in other
implementation by campus. One middle school campus
Texas districts.
dedicated a teacher to its ISS room, but this arrangement
ceased when the campus needed the ISS teacher to staff a Figure 8–9 shows disciplinary data for Houston ISD from
regular classroom. Another middle school started the 2018– school years 2015–16 to 2017–18. Houston ISD has
19 school year without an ISS room; instead, the campus decreased disciplinary incidents substantially during this
assigned students with disciplinary issues to a counselor for a period, which principals and counselors attribute to the SEL
period of self-reflection. A third middle school campus had a training and a focus by district leadership to decrease practices
separate classroom dedicated to ISS, which counselors visited that criminalize students.
to lead students through behavioral exercises.
The safe schools administrator publishes a weekly compilation
During onsite interviews, campus police officers reported of campus-level attendance and discipline data, which is
variation in how campus leadership handles discipline, distributed to the superintendent, principals, and school support
including some principals who no longer document sending officers. The review team could not determine what action, if
students home through the district disciplinary system. any, these administrators take upon receiving the report.
Officers also said that campus administrators sometimes
suggest to parents that the students stay at home for a day, Houston ISD’s Student Disciplinary Action Report 2017–18
without documenting this action as an OSS in the district’s contains data for the number, rate, and types of violent or
database. Although campus officers had their access to the criminal disciplinary incidents that occurred on each campus.
student discipline system revoked in October 2017, Houston The report documented the decreases in disciplinary actions.
ISD administrators outside of the Police Department agreed
Although the overall number of disciplinary actions has
that campus administrators are not recording all OSS
decreased, disciplinary actions by campus vary greatly.
instances accurately.
Campuses have discretion to address code of conduct
The SEL director reviews the ISS and OSS data by campus violations differently. Campuses across the district varied in
and provides these data to area superintendents monthly. At the rates of these violations among their student populations.
For example, during school year 2017–18, Deady Middle department should provide targeted professional development
School and Navarro Middle School had comparable student to principals and campus leadership during the next semester,
enrollments of 719 and 710, respectively; yet Deady had 933 including training in mitigating implicit bias and explanations
code of conduct violations that year, and Navarro had 441. regarding when student disciplinary actions must be
During the same period, the 734 students enrolled at Bell documented in the student information management system.
Elementary School received 22 code of conduct violations, Campuses should not send students home for disciplinary
and the 928 McNamara Elementary School students received reasons without clear documentation. The district should
fewer than five violations. The leadership at the district’s review progress in this area annually and present its findings to
three DAEPs recognizes that some campuses send them more the board for accountability, including a summary of campus
students than others, and an advisory team meets quarterly involvement and progress. The training that the secondary
with certain campus leaders for assistance and training DAEP staff provide to these campuses is a good effort by the
toward the goal of decreasing DAEP placements. district, but the district developed the SEL Department to
provide these types of support and training to campuses.
The nonprofit organization Texas Appleseed’s publication
Texas’ School-to-Prison Pipeline: Dropout to Incarceration, The The district could implement this recommendation with
Impact of School Discipline and Zero Tolerance notes that existing resources.
inconsistent and disproportionate reactions to behavioral
issues do not decrease incidence of the behaviors. The report TRUANCY INTERVENTIONS (REC. 64)
recommends the following types of disciplinary approaches: Houston ISD does not enforce state-mandated truancy
• target all students; intervention requirements.
• use well-coordinated and research-based methods; Pursuant to the Texas Education Code, Section 25.0915(a), “a
school district shall adopt truancy prevention measures designed
• implement positive behavioral expectations and to address student conduct related to truancy in the school
supports campuswide; setting before the student engages in [truant conduct] and
• provide adequate training and ongoing support to minimize the need for referrals to truancy court.” The statute
ensure effective implementation; requires school districts to develop behavior improvement plans
in collaboration with the student and parent and refer the
• involve campus administrators, teachers, students, student to counseling, mediation, mentoring, or other services
parents, mental health professionals, and community intended to address the student’s truancy. Each district must
resources; and document these behavioral interventions.
• incorporate regular rigorous evaluation to determine Each Texas school district receives state funding based partly
whether the programs are working. on its number of students in average daily attendance (ADA).
Houston ISD’s annual attendance consistently is slightly less
Houston ISD should standardize campus practices,
than the state average for school years 2013–14 to 2016–17.
communicate expectations, and hold principals accountable
Figure 8–10 shows the district’s annual attendance rate
for student discipline management.
compared to peer districts and the state average during this
The district should include in weekly discipline emails a period. Houston ISD is consistently below the state average.
summary of campuses’ disciplinary referrals by type of Houston ISD publishes information on its website about the
misconduct and demographic. Principals should determine importance of good attendance, but it does not include the
their campuses’ rates of disproportionality among loss in funding to the district from student absences.
demographic subgroups and their rates of discretionary
Houston ISD has developed a brochure, Compulsory
referrals compared to other campuses. The email should list
Attendance/Truancy Prevention Measures, which summarizes
resources that principals can use to improve discipline on
the following campus duties in improving attendance:
their campuses.
• make students and parents feel welcome;
The district also should direct the SEL Department to review
the data already compiled to determine which campuses have • make same-day person-to-person contact when a
the most disproportionate rates of disciplinary action. The student is absent;
FIGURE 8–10
HOUSTON ISD ATTENDANCE RATES COMPARED TO PEER DISTRICTS AND STATE AVERAGE
DISTRICT 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 2016–17

Houston ISD 95.6% 95.6% 95.6% 95.5%
Dallas ISD 95.7% 95.6% 95.6% 95.6%
Cypress–Fairbanks ISD 96.1% 96.0% 96.0% 95.9%
Austin ISD 95.3% 95.2% 95.5% 95.2%
State Average 95.9% 95.7% 95.8% 95.7%
Source: Texas Education Agency, Texas Academic Performance Reports, school years 2013–14 to 2016–17.
• secure and supervise campus entry and exit points; referring truant students to the district. The Attendance
Office’s staff is too small to implement all the required
• direct teachers to offer classroom incentives in
interventions before filing a truancy case.
recognition of great attendance;
Houston ISD should develop an enforcement mechanism to
• post daily or weekly student attendance data inside
ensure that campuses are utilizing all required interventions
each classroom;
before making truancy case referrals.
• reward and recognize good and improved attendance,
The Attendance Office should refuse referred cases that do
not just perfect attendance; and
not have documented interventions. The Attendance Office
• inform parents of absences and tardiness daily. should develop a report documenting which campuses most
often have incomplete documentation, and the district
The district also instructs campuses to use the truancy
should use it to inform the principals, school support officers,
prevention and intervention form required by state law to
and area superintendents responsible for those campuses.
document interventions before referring a truancy case to the
The area superintendents should require targeted professional
district. Houston ISD requires campus attendance offices to
development for the principals of these campuses. The
provide home visits for consistently absent students and to
district should develop a new position in the Attendance
direct conferences with the students and parents. The district
Office to ensure that adequate staff are available to complete
requires that campuses document their behavior interventions
these additional duties.
and attach these documents to the truancy prevention and
intervention form. The fiscal impact assumes a potential 0.2 percent increase in
the district’s 95.5 percent attendance rate to the 95.7 percent
Attendance Office staff reported that, notwithstanding state
state average rate. Houston ISD’s school year 2018–19 ADA
requirements for campuses to attempt and document specific
maintenance and operations revenue is $8,590 per student.
interventions before referring truancies to the district,
Based on Houston ISD’s school year 2018–19 enrollment of
campuses routinely refer cases that do not have documented
209,772, increasing the district’s attendance by 0.2 percent,
interventions. Staff acknowledged that the district requires
or 420 students, equals a revenue increase of $3,607,800
these documented interventions, but said that no enforcement
(420 x $8,590).
mechanisms are in place to deter poor documentation. The
district employs a limited number of caseworkers to manage The fiscal impact also assumes that the district develops an
dropout prevention and attendance issues. The Attendance additional Attendance Office position at a total cost of
Office previously staffed as many as 20 caseworkers, but $63,593. The average salary for an Attendance Office
currently it employs six. position is $52,994. Accounting for the additional 20.0
percent cost of annual benefits, the total cost of this position
Houston ISD has established procedures and interventions
is $63,593 (salary of $52,994 + benefits of $10,599).
to reduce truancy and improve student attendance. However,
the district has not established enforcement procedures to The total net fiscal impact is $3,544,207 ($3,607,800
ensure that campuses are utilizing these interventions before – $63,593).
During the onsite fieldwork, the review team observed
additional issues regarding the district’s programs and services
to students, staff, and the community. These observations are
report’s other findings and recommendations.
• During interviews, Police Department staff

acknowledged that Houston ISD police officers
routinely perform security-related work for other
entities after their regular working hours, while still
in uniform and armed. Although this practice is
common in many police departments, it presents
potentially increased liability for Houston ISD.
• The review team observed that many separate

department and campus budgets noted safety
expenditures. The district does not have one position
or department that oversees these expenditures as a
whole, leaving the district uncertain of the overall
safety costs in the district.
FISCAL IMPACT
TOTAL
5-YEAR ONETIME
8. SAFETY AND SECURITY MANAGEMENT
62. Make staffing, ($59,845) ($59,845) ($59,845) ($59,845) ($59,845) ($299,225) $0
transportation, and
facility changes to
improve the Houston
ISD Police Department’s
processing unit for
efficiency and safety.
64. Develop an enforcement $3,544,207 $3,544,207 $3,544,207 $3,544,207 $3,544,207 $17,721,035 $0
mechanism to ensure
that campuses are
utilizing all required
interventions before
making truancy case
referrals.
Total $3,484,362 $3,484,362 $3,484,362 $3,484,362 $3,484,362 $17,421,810 $0
The Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance Review Team could not determine a fiscal impact for other recommendations.
The implementation of these recommendations may result in savings in several areas; however, the review team does not have
the data to estimate a fiscal impact. Recommendation 58 (divided safety functions) should result in combining departments
and increased efficiency. Recommendation 60 (key document maintenance) should result in more thorough agreements for
resource sharing with HPD, decreasing the resources expended by the Houston ISD Police Department.
9. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT
Houston Independent School District’s (ISD) Information Recommendation 68: Develop an IT staffing
Technology (IT) Department manages the district’s strategy that addresses retention, recruitment,
network, hardware, and software support needs. At the time salary, and potential reallocation of resources from
of the Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance efficient areas within the IT Department.
Review Team’s onsite fieldwork, the interim chief information
Recommendation 69: Establish and enforce
officer (CIO) supervised the IT Department. For school year
minimum standards for technology funding and
2018–19, the IT Department’s budget was $57.0 million.
require campuses to replace devices on a regular cycle.
FINDINGS Recommendation 70: Analyze the help desk

Houston ISD lacks governance structures required data regularly and standardize help desk
to effectively prioritize, allocate, and oversee processes districtwide.
information technology.
Recommendation 71: Combine Educational
Houston ISD does not follow IT processes consistently. Technology and Instructional Technology into one
organization, based in the Academic Department.
Houston ISD does not have a current district plan
for technology.
BACKGROUND
Staffing budget decreases and staff retention issues
An independent school district’s technology management
threaten the Houston ISD IT Department’s ability to
affects the operational, instructional, and financial functions
sustain operations and complete key projects.
of a school district. Technology management requires
Houston ISD enables technology and teacher planning and budgeting, inventory control, technical
support inequities to develop through decentralized infrastructures, application support, and purchasing.
funding of IT assets, campus service representatives, Managing technology is dependent on a district’s
and campus instructional technicians. organizational structure. Larger districts typically have staff
dedicated to administrative or instructional technology
The Houston ISD IT Department’s help desk
responsibilities, and smaller districts may have staff
feedback is inconsistent.
responsible for both functions.
The separation of the Educational Technology and
Administrative technology includes systems that support a
Instructional Technology teams causes confusion,
district’s operational, instructional, and financial functions
lack of coordination, and duplication of efforts in
(e.g., financial management, human resources, payroll,
Houston ISD.
student attendance, grades, and Public Education
Information Management System reporting).
RECOMMENDATIONS
Administrative technology improves a district’s operational
Recommendation 65: Establish districtwide IT
efficiency through faster processing, increased access to
and data governance structures based on industry
information, integrated systems, and communication
best practices.
networks. Instructional technology includes the use of
Recommendation 66: Retrain and monitor key technology as a part of the teaching and learning process
IT processes and use a semiannual maturity (e.g., integration of technology in the classroom, virtual
model assessment as part of the system of key learning, and electronic instructional materials).
performance indicators. Instructional technology supports curriculum delivery,
classroom instruction, and student learning.
Recommendation 67: Develop a three-year to
five-year technology plan aligned to the district Figure 9–1 shows the organization of Houston ISD’s
improvement plan. Information Technology Department.
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
FIGURE 9–1
HOUSTON ISD TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
Interim Chief Information Officer
Executive
Director, Director, Director, Infrastrucure,

Data and Business Educational Technology Engineering and Operations
Solutions
Director, Student Senior Manager, Director,

Management Systems Strategic Planning Customer Service
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team,; Houston ISD, February 2019.
The IT Department has approximately 300 staff. The CIO using digital tools, resources, and strategies that support
oversees all of Houston ISD’s information technology teaching and learning. The district funded and coordinated
applications, data, infrastructure, and services. The CIO also the PowerUp program centrally at the district level. It
serves as the director of infrastructure, engineering, and purchased personal computers for each high school student
operations. Reporting to the CIO are four director-level to provide them access to a single type of device for
positions and the senior manager of strategic planning. The instructional purposes and functionality. The purchase was
director of student management systems oversees the teams that accomplished through a lease agreement, which also enables
support the student information system and the Texas Education computer upgrades every four years. Equipping all high
Agency’s Public Education Information Management System school students with the same devices enables the district to
(PEIMS). The director of educational technology oversees the standardize the device configuration and the spare parts
training and support for teachers regarding technology in the inventory for timely repairs.
classroom and manages the integration of systems and tools
used in classrooms. The director of customer service supervises DETAILED FINDINGS
the teams that train department staff, operate the help desk, and
IT GOVERNANCE (REC. 65)
provide application support. This position also manages
Administrative Services, which includes district records Houston ISD lacks governance structures required to effectively
management, post office, fleet copiers, and the district print prioritize, allocate, and oversee information technology.
services. The senior manager of strategic planning manages the The district has not established an IT governance or oversight
department’s budget, the district’s E-Rate Program, the IT entity to establish strategic direction for technology
Infrastructure Asset Management team, the IT Bond budget districtwide, determine project priorities, adjudicate resource
and expenditures, and procurement of technology hardware, constraints, and reallocate resources to fund the district’s
software and services, IT contracts, and board items. In addition, technology needs.
approximately 100 staff work on campuses in the area of
technology. These staff sometimes consult with the IT During school year 2018–19, Houston ISD hired a
Department regarding their work, but the campus principals consulting firm, BDO USA, to assess the IT Department.
supervise these staff. The firm used the Control Objectives for IT and Related
Technologies (COBIT) framework to select the process areas
The district initiated the PowerUp program in 2014 to help for review. These areas were selected based on their potential
students engage regularly in personalized, interactive learning to introduce or remediate risks within the Houston ISD
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT
environment. In the resulting 2018−2019 Information • delays in the response to and remediation of
Technology Risk Assessment Report and IT Audit Plan, the security incidents;
consultants rated IT governance as a top risk for the district.
• risk of a security breach being undetected;
The report defines IT governance as “the responsibility of
• possible noncompliance with relevant regulations or
executives and the board of directors, and consists of the
legislation; and
leadership, organizational structures, and processes that
ensure that the enterprise’s IT sustains and extends the • increased average time to recovery in case of
organization’s strategies and objectives, including how critical incidents.
emerging technologies are managed (i.e., the Internet of
Things, Artificial Intelligence, and robotics, etc.).” These risks can result in significant costs and regulatory
compliance issues and significant negative effects on public
Houston ISD had issues with IT governance before the confidence and support. Effective districts have governance
review. The 2011 Council of the Great City Schools (CGCS) processes that prioritize the completion of remedies to
report on Houston ISD noted the following issues: identified issues.
There is no top-level portfolio management in the Effective districts pair a disaster recovery plan with a business
district to select and control major IT projects, so that continuity plan. Houston ISD has a disaster recovery plan.
authorized projects represent the balanced, optimal However, it does not have a current business continuity plan
portfolio to meet district strategic objectives with and does not regularly test the disaster recovery process. A
limited resources. disaster recovery plan identifies the steps required to recover
technical operations after a disaster, but it requires a
—
companion business continuity plan to fully manage the
There is a pervasive lack of systems and data ownership effects of a disaster. The business continuity plan addresses
in the district, which can contribute to poor information how business will be conducted until damaged sites and
quality. For example: technology assets are restored. The plan identifies alternative
work locations, interim procedures, and contingencies for all
• Responsibility for the integrity of each of the district’s business operations, not just IT.
data elements has not been assigned.
The organization structure for IT varies between centralized
• Some departments make corrections to data for and decentralized, depending on the customer department.
their own reporting purposes, but do not ensure that For example, staff from the IT Department provide technology
corrections get made in the base systems. support for most of the district’s departments, except for the
The district’s 2017 annual financial audit also points to a lack departments in the Business Operations Division. The
of data governance practices regarding data privacy and Business Operations Division has a separate IT support team
which positions are authorized to assign role-based data that reports to the chief operating officer, not the CIO, and
access rights in the district’s enterprise resource planning supports Nutrition Services, Transportation, Police, and
software, SAP. The audit found “that inappropriate users Facilities Services department applications. It is not clear what
with privileged access to SAP existed which gave them the guidelines were used to make this decision. Although this
ability to manage security, import changes to production, separation might be a good business unit decision, the highly
execute all transactions, modify programs and tables, open/ centralized versus decentralized IT structures have pros and
close the SAP client, and make changes directly in the cons. An underfunded, centralized IT department that cannot
production instances.” respond quickly to customer demand can prompt business
units to internalize their own IT support. This internalization
During the onsite fieldwork, the review team observed many of can improve responsiveness internal to the business unit,
the same issues noted in these previous reviews. Due to lack of provide increased funding for the IT within that business unit,
funding, district staff said that they have not addressed the and improve customer satisfaction. However, this approach
cybersecurity gaps, including district network security issues and can increase total IT costs and result in inefficiencies and
security issues related to the student information system (SIS). duplication of services. Effective districts weigh the pros and
These findings identified the following risks to Houston ISD: cons of decentralizing IT services and establish guidelines and
operating practices to maintain a proper balance of centralized • Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act violations
or decentralized services. result from the release of personally identifiable
student data.
The district has not established a data architecture and
interoperability strategy. No cross-district decision-making Additionally, without a cross-district set of IT and data
process is in place requiring the establishment and governance structures, the district does not have a process to
enforcement of data standards and adherence to source prioritize funding for IT projects to ensure that projects align
systems of record for reporting. A large school district such with district needs. This failure to prioritize can result in
as Houston ISD requires and accrues multiple computer project funding decisions becoming influenced by individual
applications and data structures to support the daily needs department preferences rather than by district priorities for
of the business and educational processes. Without a well- strategic initiatives.
defined data architecture and application interoperability
Without cross-district decision making, IT services that
strategy, these systems grow naturally without a plan or
affect the entire organization (e.g., allocations for the
guidelines. This lack of structure results in duplicated data
purchase of new or replacement computers, or staffing for
across multiple systems, which are impossible to keep
support of systems and applications) are determined without
synchronized. This practice also makes it difficult to discern
the benefit of broad customer input. Inequities can develop
where the accurate data resides. The resulting point-to-
as the business areas or campuses spend their IT resources.
point data integration required is costly to maintain and
Business functions may decide to decentralize (i.e., establish
difficult to replicate when staff replace a system. Effective
their own) IT functions with the intent of improving IT
districts have a governance process for IT to provide a
services to their own departments. This decentralization
venue and format to establish a well-defined data
often causes hidden IT costs and inefficiencies that actually
architecture and interoperability standards. Such a
can increase overall IT costs for an organization.
governance process also provides a system to adjudicate
adherence to and deviations from the architecture. COBIT is an internationally recognized framework for IT
management published by the IT Governance Institute and
According to the publication Health Care IT Advisor, “Most
the Information Systems Audit and Control Association.
organizations struggle with IT governance. Signs of a failing
Figure 9–2 shows the COBIT role for IT governance as
governance process include unsustainable workloads,
ensuring strategic alignment, value delivery, risk management,
unresourced mandates, planning silos, lack of focus on
resource management, and performance measurement.
outcomes, and misplaced accountabilities, among others.”
An overall IT governance structure varies depending on the
Without a cross-district set of IT and data governance
size of the organization, type of business, and complexity of
structures, the IT Department must balance resource
the IT operations and infrastructure. Typically, the structure
allocation within its limited budget. The result often is that
has at its apex an IT governance committee that includes a
the department does not fund high-risk demands that do not
small group of the highest-ranking executives in the
have an immediate effect on operations and customer-facing
organization. This group meets infrequently (e.g., quarterly)
work, such as cybersecurity and business continuity, so that
to set strategic direction and policy for IT and to oversee the
the more immediate and observable work can be sustained.
workings, recommendations, and issues identified by the
This approach often results in serious incidents that could be
subcommittees and work groups they have chartered.
prevented, such as the following situations:
Subcommittees or work groups might include a data
• a Houston ISD cybersecurity breach during calendar governance committee, resource allocation committee, and a
year 2010 caused widespread system disruption; cybersecurity committee.
• multiple data sources without a data governance The IT governance committee is formed by charter, which
process increases the risk of inaccurate or incomplete typically includes the following elements:
releases of data to the state or news media;
• introduction;
• the district might be unable to recover data and
• statement of purpose;
business operations after a natural disaster or a
cybersecurity breach; and • definitions;
FIGURE 9–2
CONTROL OBJECTIVES FOR INTERNET TECHNOLOGY AND RELATED TECHNOLOGIES FRAMEWORK, CALENDAR YEAR 2009
Information • Strategic Alignment; • Resource Management; and
Technology (IT) • Value Delivery; • Performance Measurement
Governance • Risk Management;
Business and Information Criteria and Application Controls

Governance
Requirements
Enabling • IT Resources; • Infrastructure; and

Information and • Applications; • People
Technology • Information;
Delivering IT Process Controls and Process Maturity

Processes
Plan and Organize

Goals Metrics
Direct
Monitor and Evaluate Acquire and Implement
and
Control
Deliver and Support

Source: Information Systems Audit and Control Association, 2009.
• IT governance rules; • develop a draft IT governance committee charter for

the formation of the highest-level component of the
• procedures and responsibilities; and
structure and submit the draft to the superintendent
• membership of the IT governance committee. for review and approval; the CIO and superintendent
The Michael and Susan Dell Foundation sponsored a Data also should approve the committee membership;
Governance Collaborative that includes approximately 15 • complete a review and address all cybersecurity risks;
education agencies from across the U.S. Figure 9–3 shows
one of the researched models, which shows the roles of data • develop a business continuity plan to accompany the
owners, data stewards, a data management working group, disaster recovery plan; and
and a data procedure committee.
• develop clear delineation of the centralized and
Houston ISD should establish districtwide IT and data decentralized IT structures in the district.
governance structures based on industry best practices. The
CIO should perform the following actions: The CIO also should collaborate with the superintendent to
orient the membership of the IT governance committee
• collaborate with the superintendent to establish an
regarding their roles and expectations, as defined in the
understanding and support for the formation of a
charter. The first meetings of the IT governance committee
governance structure;
should establish an initial set of objectives and issues that the
• assign staff to research governance structures from committee must address, including the formation of a data
other education agencies and select the model that governance structure. The objectives also should include the
best suits Houston ISD; following goals:
FIGURE 9–3
DATA GOVERNANCE OPERATING MODEL
CALENDAR YEAR 2013
Data Procedure
Committee
Executive Leadership
Data Management
Working Group
Led by Data Quality Director
Data Stewards
For Process or Data Clusters
Data Owners
Responsible for Individual Data Elements
Source: Michael and Susan Dell Foundation, 2013.
• a plan and resource allocations to address the these data stewards and their roles as defined by the data
cybersecurity remedies recommended in the BDO governance procedure. After the data stewards are identified,
USA consulting report; the IT governance committee should orient them regarding
their roles and the overall data governance process.
• resource allocation to develop a business continuity
plan; and The district could implement this recommendation with
existing resources.
• developing an overall data architecture and
interoperability strategy. PROCESS ADHERENCE (REC. 66)
The IT governance committee should use research regarding Houston ISD does not follow IT processes consistently.
data governance practices in education agencies to inform
Houston ISD has documented processes for key technology
the development of a data governance model. The committee
functions, such as software development, quality assurance,
should appoint the chief academic officer (CAO) and the
work intake, change and request management, project
chief financial officer (CFO) as cosponsors for overall data
management, and the help desk. The district provided
governance. They should assign a district position outside of
evidence of adherence to some of these processes, such as a
the IT Department to assume responsibilities for overall data
well-documented Houston ISD software development life
governance, because data governance is more of an
cycle (SDLC) for the work performed on the District
organizational culture shift than a technology issue. The
Advisory Committee application.
CAO and CFO lead the areas with the most customers of the
district’s technology services. Therefore, they should codirect However, the review team observed a lack of adherence or
the drafting of a data governance procedure that describes fidelity to these processes for key technology functions. Also,
the roles of data governance and submit it to the IT the district does not always use its key performance indicators
governance committee. After this procedure has been effectively to monitor and improve process performance.
approved, the CAO and the CFO should direct the data Adherence to an SDLC for procurements requires the
governance coordinator to develop a list of data stewards following elements: (1) careful documentation of the
corresponding to the high-level data categories of the district. functional business requirements; (2) approval of these
The IT governance committee should review and approve requirements by the business owner; (3) demonstration of
the ability to meet the requirements, both documented in requires programmers to build records management
the proposal response to the request for proposal (RFP) and requirements into any new application and helps to ensure
through scripted demonstrations of the vendor finalists; and that staff in charge of procurement consider this requirement
(4) contract language requiring that the vendor meets the in the selection process.
requirements of the RFP. The district did not follow these
The IT Department does not ensure that all changes to
steps with fidelity, resulting in the procurement of a system
systems complete user acceptance testing (UAT). For
that did not meet minimum district business requirements.
example, the department recently upgraded the asset tracking
IT staff that develop or revise computer applications do not system without the participation of key users in UAT. The
always provide proper advance notification of server capacity SDLC requires that all changes to any computer system
and server configurations to all IT staff. An IT unit the size complete UAT before placing the change into production.
of Houston ISD’s requires a rigorous change control process This testing identifies any potential issues with the system
to ensure continuous operation of the overall infrastructure. changes and ensures that key users know about the changes
Such a process requires that planned changes to any in functionality to the system, so that they can adjust their
component of the IT infrastructure (including changes to business processes and training accordingly.
computer applications, network changes, server upgrades or As in other large school districts, Houston ISD’s IT
replacements, requirements for new servers, etc.) are Department has a Project Management Office (PMO) to
communicated and coordinated across all parts of the IT help manage major technology projects. A robust project
organization (including the help desk) with ample lead time management process typically includes gate review processes
to identify issues and potential conflicts. Even small changes intended to ensure that all work for each project phase has
to the IT infrastructure can cause unanticipated consequences been completed to the appropriate level of quality and
and disruptions to other parts of the infrastructure. A good thoroughness before the next phase of work begins. Houston
change control process ensures the proper planning and ISD staff reported that the IT Department does not conduct
communication of all changes to help reduce the negative project management gate reviews consistently for all projects.
effects of unintended consequences. Houston ISD has a The absence of a gate review process increases the risk that
change control process in place; however, onsite interviews the department does not catch issues until later stages of the
reveal gaps in notifications to key stakeholders. Some of the project when the issues may be more difficult to resolve.
gaps may occur because the district does not require the
representation of new development project managers in the The fixed asset accounting team in the district’s Controller’s
change control process. Lack of adherence to the change Office tracks all capital assets and all electronic and
control process can result in poor availability across the technology equipment and coordinates annual inventories.
infrastructure and project delays. In the case of the vendor The district requires most electronic and technology
that could not meet the PEIMS requirements, the IT equipment to have an asset tag affixed, regardless of price.
Department did not identify the project manager’s need for Assets purchased using IT Department funds are tagged by
additional server capacity early in the process, resulting in the supplying vendor as part of the contract. However, if a
additional work to avoid delaying an application deployment. campus purchases equipment with campus funds, it provides
and affixes these identification tags to the assets, even though
According to interviews, the IT Department does not plan the campuses purchase equipment from the same vendor as
adequately for adherence to the district’s records management the IT Department. According to the district’s Financial
procedures as it develops or procures new applications. Records Procedures manual, when a campus receives technology
management staff expressed concern at the lack of discussion equipment, it must print the asset tags using the district’s
of records management strategies and procedures during the asset tracking system, TIPWEB-IT, affix the tags to the
design phases of the SDLC process. Records management is an equipment, and scan the tags into TIPWEB-IT using a
important function within a school district that helps to ensure barcode reader. The review team observed that campuses
data privacy and regulatory compliance for all records, implement the district’s asset tracking process for technology
including digital records, and especially those containing inconsistently, and some campuses do not follow the process.
student and staff data. Effective districts typically plan for If campuses do not track technology assets through the
proper adherence to records management procedures when system, then the district’s Controller’s Office does not have a
developing or procuring a new application. This consideration complete inventory of technology at the campuses.
Inconsistent asset tracking at the campus level makes • change management – system availability;
Houston ISD’s asset inventory data unreliable. The IT
• project management – percentage of project
Department needs reliable inventory data to plan for device
milestones delivered on time and on budget; and
replacement and to determine which campuses have aging
inventories that need replacement. Without an accurate • help desk – call wait time, backlog of tickets, average
inventory, the district cannot monitor or measure perceived time to close tickets, the number of priority tickets,
equity issues. customer satisfaction.
Establishing and adhering to overall processes such as SDLC, Such measures are known as key performance indicators
change control, PMO, and quality assurance helps districts (KPI), and the IT Department can use them to recognize the
to accomplish the following goals: trend in the performance of processes to determine whether
processes are improving and moving toward optimization.
• minimize error and defect rates for new software releases;
Houston ISD should retrain and monitor key IT processes
• minimize help desk call rates and volumes when
and use a semiannual maturity model assessment as part of
systems are released;
the system of key performance indicators.
• maintain high customer satisfaction with systems that
The CIO should collaborate with each owner of the key IT
are delivered;
processes to establish these processes’ overall maturity level
• ensure high system availability; and and to review the current KPIs. The staff should use this
discussion to determine the necessary actions to optimize the
• identify potential problems early in the process to
process. Actions might include additional process
avoid project delays.
improvements or refinements, training on the process,
A capability maturity assessment process can be used to additional skill development, or improved accountability for
measure the level of performance or maturity of key IT process fidelity. Specifically, for the examples discussed
processes. A typical maturity rating scale includes the previously, the process owners for the SDLC, PMO, and
following rankings: change control processes should examine their processes to
determine the cause of deviations from process adherence
(1) initial – just implemented; a lot of confusion in and what improvements could prevent this cause.
process execution;
Additionally, the CIO should review KPIs to determine
(2) repeatable – the process is at least documented, and whether monitoring them would inform process
repetition of the same steps may be occurring; maturation. The CIO should review the maturity ratings
(3) defined – the process is defined and used as a and KPIs at least semiannually and form the basis for an
standard business process; overall IT performance scorecard.
(4) managed – the process is measured and The IT department also should require vendors to tag all
managed; and technology purchased by campuses to ensure that the tagging
process occurs properly.
(5) optimizing – process management includes ongoing
process optimization and improvement. The district could implement this recommendation with
existing resources.
As the rating scale indicates, measuring and optimizing processes
are key aspects of capability maturation. Well-defined processes TECHNOLOGY PLAN (REC. 67)
lend themselves to measurement. These documented IT
Houston ISD does not have a current district plan
processes could include the following typical measures:
for technology.
• software development – cycle time, number of release
The Center for Education and Leadership in Technology
defects, customer satisfaction;
(CELT) developed Houston ISD’s most recent technology
• quality assurance – number of defects at user plan in calendar year 2012, which ran through calendar year
acceptance testing, number of defects at release; 2017. The plan presents a strategic framework that includes
a mission statement and goals for information technology. It aggressive slate of technology initiatives on behalf of campuses
also outlines multiple aggressive and best practice and has curtailed services for its central office.
recommendations to improve technology in the district. The
The lack of a technology plan and the absence of a
district completed some of these items; however most are
collaborative planning process affects Houston ISD in several
delayed, partially completed, or still being developed. Figure
ways, including the following examples:
9–4 shows the review team’s assessment of the
recommendations from the calendar year 2012 technology • the district has not established a technology
plan and their completion status. planning committee to develop the components of
a plan; the district’s current technology plan assigns
The staff said that budget cuts to IT have affected the district’s
responsibility for strategies to certain positions, but
ability to fully realize the plan’s recommendations. The review
the plan does not require these staff to collaborate to
team could not determine why the district has not implemented
make recommendations to update the plan;
the plan components that do not require funding. According
to the CGCS, Houston ISD was in the top quartile of large • an effective technology planning process uses
school districts for cost per pupil for IT spending during multiple focus groups to gather input and feedback.
calendar year 2017. Due to spending decreases, the IT These groups include community, campus, and
Department has a diminished ability to implement an district representatives. Such feedback might identify
FIGURE 9–4
HOUSTON ISD RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CALENDAR YEAR 2012 TECHNOLOGY PLAN AND COMPLETION STATUS
FEBRUARY 2019
CATEGORY RECOMMENDATION STATUS
Organization/ Reorganize the Information Technology (IT) Department to include instructional Not implemented
Staffing/ technology services.
Professional
Build internal capacity among IT staff. Partially implemented
Development
Define technology proficiencies for all positions. Not implemented
Develop proficiency-based professional development opportunities for teachers and Not implemented
principals.
Technology Establish a standards committee with a process that considers the return on investment Partially implemented
Standards and the total cost of ownership of all technology products.
Continue to adopt the Information Technology Infrastructure Library and Control Partially implemented
Objectives for Information and Related Technologies frameworks for managing
technology services from a customer support and security perspective.
Explore educational data exchange standards including School Interoperability Partially implemented
Frameworks, Ed-Fi, and Common Education Data Standards for exchange between
data source systems and the data warehouse.
Planning Establish an IT Governance Committee to review and evaluate existing and proposed Partially implemented
technology policies and practices.
Charge the IT Governance Committee to reach out to all departments and have a Not implemented
transparent process that supports IT project identification, review, and decision making.
Develop a Balanced Scorecard reporting structure to list the goals and strategic Partially implemented
objectives outlined in the Houston ISD Strategic Direction.
Ensure that each initiative has an individual project plan and that all campus and Partially implemented
department activities correspond to the master plan.
Develop a full disaster recovery plan including risk management, communication Partially implemented
strategies, business continuity analysis, and plans for automatic disaster recovery.
Develop an upgrading policy that includes the decommissioning of all old technology. Not implemented
Including outdated equipment with poor performance, increasing support needs, and
diminishing capabilities ultimately may harm the district when considering the overall
technology experience of the students, teachers, and staff. Consider entering all
computer purchases into a centrally managed upgrading program and seeking the
necessary funds to maintain a modern and well-performing inventory.

HOUSTON ISD RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE CALENDAR YEAR 2012 TECHNOLOGY PLAN AND COMPLETION STATUS
FEBRUARY 2019
CATEGORY RECOMMENDATION STATUS
Process Explore options and partner with vendors to decrease or eliminate data export Partially implemented
Improvement requirements and improve data integration.
Specify an authoritative source for each data element. Partially implemented
Complete a comprehensive campus and district technology inventory asset Partially implemented
management process.
Adopt a formal project management process that can identify tangential systems and Implemented
monitor projects.
Implement security solutions to improve network penetration identification and Partially implemented
notification and provide processes to reduce user device vulnerability.
Deploy an enterprise data warehouse to provide a neutral platform that establishes Complete
updated, accurate, and consistent data and analysis tools for decision making.
Explore options and partner with vendors to decrease or eliminate data export Partially implemented
requirements and improve data integration.
Specify an authoritative source for each data element. Partially implemented
Upgrade the current wide area network to improve quality of service and minimize the Complete
current single-point-of-failure affecting multiple campuses.
Continue using the E-Rate application to seek funding for the wireless networks for Complete
eligible campuses. Regardless of E-Rate support, install a standard foundational
wireless network solution at all campuses.
Reconfigure cable plants to bring all campuses to a consistent foundation level. Partially implemented
Establish processes, structures, and tools to monitor improvements in equity of Not implemented
access, use as recommended in the IT Blueprint, and document the effects on learning
outcomes.
Develop a request for proposal to establish a more robust connection to the Internet Complete
that includes direct peering with networks and other service providers.
Upgrade data center electrical connections, environmental monitoring, and air- Complete
conditioning units, and restructure workspace to build a network operations center.
Increase automation in the data center for tasks such as job scheduling. Adopt a Partially implemented
service management program based on the Information Technology Infrastructure
Library.
concerns noted previously, such as equity among tentative strategies to address the most recent
campuses and inconsistent help desk services. An decreases include decreasing or eliminating the
effective process would provide a forum for discussion PMO. The district is considering these options while
and elevate such concerns to a level where they might implementing several challenging projects, such as
be discussed, measured, and addressed objectively; the SIS replacement, for which project management
disciplines will be essential.
• without a technology plan, long-standing issues or
risks do not receive the attention of the Houston ISD Planning for the use of technology, for business and
Board of Education and executive staff and likely will operations and for instruction, is an important and ongoing
not receive the needed required funding; these issues process. Without technology planning, the district lacks a
include high-profile risks, such as cybersecurity; and clear path forward for how to utilize technology advancements
and effectively integrate them into operations and instruction.
• decreasing the department’s budget without a
clear plan can cause confusion, inefficiencies, and Many public and private organizations conduct strategic
unintended consequences. According to interviews, thinking and planning relative to their missions.
Unfortunately, many organizations lack the ability to Figure 9–5 shows the Plan–Do–Check–Act model.
transform strategic plans into actionable projects.
Houston ISD should develop a three-year to five-year
CELT developed a best practice approach for implementing technology plan aligned to the district improvement plan.
a strategic plan for Saint Louis Public Schools in 2015. The
The CIO first should establish a technology planning
Transformation Plan Oversight Committee Process
committee (TPC). The committee should include all parties
Guidebook for Establishing and Sustaining a Transformation
that have a responsibility for a strategy in the latest technology
Plan Oversight Committee Process presents an approach called
plan and principals, teacher representatives, parent
the Plan–Do–Check–Act model. The model calls for the
representatives, and student representatives. The CIO, with
following actions:
help from IT Department staff, should update the plan to
• Plan – developing the plan with input and document what the district has completed, what is completed
representation from the campuses, departments, partially, and what is no longer applicable. The senior
community stakeholders, and curriculum areas; manager of strategic planning should facilitate a
• Do – continuously working on implementing the comprehensive plan update to the full TPC for all strategies
strategies of the plan; in the plan. With the TPC, the senior manager of strategic
planning should then establish an approach to gather input
• Check – periodically checking the plan’s progress and from stakeholders to revise the plan. The approach should
the results of the measures that track the plan’s results include campus, community, local business, and other key
and effects on organizational performance; stakeholder groups as appropriate to update the plan’s goals
• Act – acting on the information learned during the and recommendations. The effort should include surveys,
Check step and on changes to conditions affecting including customer satisfaction surveys, to identify the
the plan (e.g., budget decreases) that can necessitate strengths and weaknesses of the IT Department’s services.
changes to strategies, assignments, timelines, or After the TPC develops a draft of the plan’s goals, objectives,
resources; and and initiatives, the CIO should collaborate with IT
• return to Plan – updating the plan through periodic Department staff and staff that support applications in other
reviews and planning activities involving the departments to estimate the cost of the initiatives in the plan.
originators or owners of the plan. These costs should be distributed as appropriate across the
FIGURE 9–5
PLAN–DO–CHECK–ACT MODEL FOR TECHNOLOGY PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
CALENDAR YEAR 2015
Plan Strategic Planning

What should we focus on? • What – identify mission, vision goals;
• What – craft key performance indicators; and
• How – choose theory of action for key strategies
Do Project and Process Management Programs
Are our efforts effective? • develop project workplans;
• launch and manage projects;
• establish leadership; and
• manage and improve processes
Check Periodic Plan Checkpoints
What can we do to improve • review leading indicators;
results? • assess strategies; and
• determine changes needed
Act Remediation Activities

How do we need to adjust • adjust strategies;
our plans? • revise project plans; and
• provide professional development
Source: Center for Educational Leadership and Technology, 2015.
life of the plan. The CIO should present the plan to the the duties of the unfilled positions. BDO USA’s review noted
superintendent and the board for approval. that the IT Department does not cross-train cybersecurity
staff and that “existing NOC resources lacked the necessary
Finally, the CIO should implement the plan using the Plan–
training to detect potential security threats.” The department
Do–Check–Act model, coordinated by the senior manager of
also does not have training funds to maintain or improve the
strategic planning and the PMO. This implementation should
IT Department staff’s specialized skills, which further
include initiating the approved projects of the plan in the
exacerbates the retention issue.
proper sequence, conducting project status reports at least
monthly, and reviewing the KPIs and plan measures quarterly. Attrition in the district also affects the business areas, where
The CIO should ensure an environment of continuous subject matter experts (SME) are leaving. According to onsite
improvement and customer focus for the IT Department. interviews, the lack of SMEs places the burden of business
knowledge and expertise onto the application development
staff, which erodes the separation of duties between the IT
existing resources.
Department and business operations.
STAFFING AND STAFF DEVELOPMENT (REC. 68) Finally, the district has several large projects scheduled soon,
Staffing budget decreases and staff retention issues threaten including the replacement of the SIS. These projects will
the Houston ISD IT Department’s ability to sustain place a heavy demand for experienced IT professionals across
operations and complete key projects. a broad spectrum of IT capabilities.
Houston ISD has customer-facing positions (e.g., help desk, The Houston ISD IT Department is a sophisticated unit,
application developers, project managers, desktop support) with well-developed capabilities, including skilled staff,
and internal operations staff (e.g., network engineering, processes, and technology assets. The loss or erosion of any of
system engineering, and data center operations). Operations these major components renders the capability ineffective.
include a network operating center (NOC) that is staffed 24 This loss of capability can affect IT operations and data
hours a day. security, which in turn affect the operations of the entire
district. Correcting this erosion in capabilities is difficult and
Interviews with IT Department staff indicate that important
time-consuming. It is not sufficient to hire replacement
staff leave the department each week due to a combination of
skills, because new hires require weeks or months to learn the
concerns for job security and a robust private-sector hiring
specific processes and technology assets that contribute to the
market for IT professionals in the Houston area. Recent
capabilities they support.
budget decreases and Board of Education discussions about
district fiscal issues have raised concerns among IT Public sector organizations often struggle with IT staff
Department staff about job security. Additionally, the IT job attrition and private sector competition for highly skilled
market in Houston is strong, and salaries in the private sector staff. Best practices for addressing this issue include the
are difficult for the district to match. Despite using higher following efforts:
pay scales for IT positions, Human Resources (HR)
Department staff report difficulty competing with the private • pursuing higher pay scales for critical positions, which
sector to recruit and retain IT staff. Although the IT is an ongoing process in a strong economy and requires
Department staff indicated that turnover is high, it was not continuous monitoring to remain competitive;
able to provide the turnover rate for technology staff. The • contracting for positions that are the most difficult to
review team did not find evidence that the district’s HR fill; contract rates tend to be greater than salaries overall,
Department closely monitors turnover rates or performs but contracting can help to secure scarce IT skills;
market analyses to compare district IT salaries to private
sector salaries. BDO USA’s 2018 follow-up report to the • outsourcing certain functions such as data center
Information Technology Risk Assessment Report and IT and network operations, help desk, application
Audit Plan noted the loss of cybersecurity positions and the development and support, desktop support, or
difficulty to attract IT security staff in the Houston market. architecture development; and
As staff leave the department, insufficient funds are available • internal training, (including cross-training, to develop
for training or seminars to develop current staff to perform the skills of district staff).
The following strategies can be helpful when budget • ensuring that customer-facing operations are
constraints force staff decreases: prioritized when considering the areas to decrease or
resources to reallocate.
• shifting resources from areas within IT where
efficiencies gained enable operations with fewer After the CIO develops a draft staffing and resource strategy,
staff; and the CIO should assign costs to the overall strategy through
the following actions:
• decreasing hours of operations for certain functions,
such as Houston ISD’s data center, and shifting these • estimating the cost of replacing internal positions
resources to other areas. with contractors;
Houston ISD should develop an IT staffing strategy • estimating the cost of outsourcing contracts;
that addresses retention, recruitment, salary, and
• estimating the costs of salary increases required to
potential reallocation of resources from efficient areas
retain internal staff;
within the IT Department.
• estimating the cost of training modules and staff time
The CIO should collaborate with the chief HR officer and
for training; and
the senior manager of strategic planning to develop a matrix
of positions and skills and long-term and short-term options • summarizing the overall benefits and risks of the
for filling each position, including the following options: staffing strategy.
• internal staffing; The CIO should finalize the staffing strategy and submit it to
the board for approval.
• contracted resources;
• outsourcing contract;
existing resources.
• reallocating; and
IT FUNDING INEQUITIES (REC. 69)
• not filling the positions.
Houston ISD enables technology and teacher support
The matrix should identify the benefits and risks associated inequities to develop through decentralized funding of IT
with each option. The CIO should use the matrix to assets, campus service representatives, and campus
develop an overall strategy for which IT functions the instructional technicians.
district should staff internally, supplement with contracted
resources, fully outsource, or decrease and reallocate. As the Each campus determines its spending level for technology,
district develops the overall strategy, the CIO should when to upgrade the technology devices, and how to place
consider the following factors: them. The district requires campuses to adhere to technology
standards and procurement guidelines set by the IT
• the strain that the pending SAP and SIS projects Department in acquiring these devices; however, the district
will place on the organization and the importance of has not established requirements regarding how much
disciplines such as the PMO and quality assurance for technology campuses acquire and how often it is acquired.
ensuring quality rollouts;
The district provided information, by elementary and middle
• high-risk areas, such as cybersecurity, that require a school campus, on the number of laptop, desktop, and tablet
strategy that ensures the retention of adequate skills computers available for student use. The overall student-per-
and resources; device ratio is 1.37 for middle school campuses and 2.33 for
elementary school campuses. At 38 middle school campuses,
• ensuring that the business areas understand the
the ratio ranged from 0.7 students to 2.8 students per device.
importance of maintaining SMEs and process owners
The ratio for the majority of these campuses ranged from 1.0
to preserve the separation of duties between business
student to 2.0 students per device. At 172 elementary school
operations and IT;
campuses, the ratio ranged from 0.8 students to 11.2 students
• allocating training funds to develop skills and staff per device. The ratio for the majority of these campuses ranged
from within the district; and from 1.0 student to 4.0 students per device. These numbers
suggest a wide range of technology availability among needs to spend approximately $15.0 million per year to
campuses. Each high school student receives a device for replace aging computers systematically. Currently, the
personal use and, therefore, are not included in this analysis. campuses and departments are investing about $2.0 million
annually for that purpose.
According to onsite interviews, approximately one-third of
campuses excel at choosing and upgrading computer devices; The district’s recommended practice is for each campus to fill
one-third are rated satisfactory; and one-third struggle in this the CSR and CIT positions, especially the high school
regard, especially those campuses that are smaller and do not campuses that participate in the PowerUp program.
have the budgets of larger campuses. Other interview Additionally, the district recommends that campuses upgrade
participants mentioned that parents perceive large differences technology on a regular cycle. However, the district does not
among technologies used at different Houston ISD campuses. require campuses to follow either recommendation.
The district requires each Houston ISD high school PowerUp Houston ISD should establish and enforce minimum
campus to hire two technical support staff: a customer service standards for technology funding and require campuses to
representative (CSR) and a campus instructional technician replace devices on a regular cycle.
(CIT). Each staff has a different role to fill. The CSR handles
The CIO should collaborate with the CAO and the
the operations of technology devices and how to use them.
superintendent to establish required guidelines for technology
The CIT is focused instructionally and helps teachers use
spending and support positions at the campuses. The board
technology in the classroom. These positions are important
should either establish these guidelines in district policy or
for the campuses that participate in the PowerUp program.
centralize the responsibility for these budget items to ensure
Middle school and elementary school campuses have the
consistency and equity among campuses for IT spending and
option to staff a CSR position based on the campus budget.
support. If the board centralizes technology funds in the IT
Although the requirement for these positions exists for high
Department, the CIO should establish allocation formulas
schools, some high schools do not hire CSRs or CITs, and
to ensure an objective, predictable, and equitable distribution
the district does not enforce the mandate.
among the campuses. The CIO should develop campus
Campuses that do not hire the CSR or CIT can struggle to technology equity reports that show device obsolescence by
use and troubleshoot technology effectively. These campuses campus to enable prioritization of need by campus.
call upon the IT Department for more support. The unfilled Guidelines also should require the regular replacement of
CSR and CIT positions save the campuses budget funds but devices, typically every five years.
increase costs in other areas, including the IT Department.
The district should ensure that every campus that participates
The absence of these staff also results in lost time and
in PowerUp fills the CSR and CIT positions. Since the time
productivity for teachers and may limit the use and
of the review, district staff indicated that the superintendent
availability of technology at the campuses.
will begin enforcing the requirement for CSRs and CITs at
The variability in spending for technology among campuses the PowerUp campuses in school year 2019–20.
results in perceptions of inequality. It also can increase costs
The fiscal impact assumes that the funds to fill the CSR and
overall, because outdated or older hardware costs more the
CIT positions at the PowerUp campuses already are in the
longer it is retained. During calendar year 2013, the IT
campuses’ budgets.
Department assessed devices at all 280 campuses and at
district offices and determined that nearly 64,000 desktop
HELP DESK (REC. 70)
and laptop computers should be upgraded to the Microsoft
Windows 7 operating system (OS). Of those computers, the The Houston ISD IT Department’s help desk feedback
IT Department determined that an estimated 39,000 were is inconsistent.
ineligible for the upgrade and instead needed to be replaced,
Houston ISD has an IT Department help desk that
because campuses and departments had not maintained
receives staff calls and processes requests for assistance with
technology to current standards. In December 2013, the
technical issues.
district spent $35.0 million to upgrade those computers with
a new OS, Microsoft Windows XP. Most personal computers The central IT help desk includes the following KPIs: root
have a life cycle of about 5.0 years. Therefore, the district cause, call wait time, call volume, first-call resolution, and
customer satisfaction. The district does not maximize accurate help desk data results in the IT management having
opportunities to collect all possible KPIs from the help an incomplete understanding of the department’s operations
desk. The KPIs that the help desk collects indicate the and inhibits the leadership’s ability to improve IT capabilities.
following data:
Help desk KPIs require the capture of robust and accurate data
• a lack of technology training for district staff most for all calls. These data include the following indicators: who
often is cited as the root cause for calls to the help made the call; the type of problem; the priority assigned to the
desk; it is a standard practice for IT Department staff ticket; the date and time of the call; who responded to the call;
to review calls and identify the root causes, which who provided second-call or third-call resolution if needed;
provides the district with valuable information to duration of the call; time to resolve the problem; classification
improve operations; of the root cause; ticket closure information such as who,
when, and with what action; customer satisfaction with the
• call wait times are 8.0 seconds on average;
result; and call wait time for the customer.
• peak times for the help desk call volume are at the
Effective districts use accurate help desk data to determine
start of the school year and at the return to school
trends and continuous improvement opportunities for IT
after holidays; the department assigns additional staff
capabilities and processes. Obtaining high-quality help desk
to the help desk during these peak times to limit call
data requires attention to how the data are captured at the source
wait time;
and discipline and accountability for adhering to data guidelines
• the first-call resolution response rate is 73.0 percent. and standards. Such data also can be helpful in identifying
According to MetricNet’s benchmarking database, performance issues for staff in the IT support structure.
the average net first-call resolution rate for service
Houston ISD should analyze the help desk data regularly and
desks worldwide is 74.0 percent. Rates range from
standardize help desk processes districtwide.
about 41.0 percent to 94.0 percent; and
The CIO should perform the following actions:
• the customer satisfaction rate is 95.0 percent.
• require all campuses to use the district’s help
KPIs for the help desk show a healthy process overall. For
desk system;
example, the district employs some strategies, such as
planning for peak times, to keep the help desk performing • improve the consistency and quality of the data by
well to meet customer demand. However, although the clarifying guidelines for data capture and ensuring
reported KPIs indicate good performance, interviews with accountability for its quality;
campus staff indicated a low level of customer satisfaction
with the help desk. During the review team’s onsite fieldwork, • send a survey to each ticket owner whose ticket has
many campus staff expressed dissatisfaction with response not been resolved after a certain period to better
time and the quality of the help desk service. Some of the understand the views of all customers;
campuses that have CSRs have implemented their own ticket • establish a process for using the same call center
systems and use different tools for onsite request, bypassing tool across technology-related service areas to better
the district’s help desk. The result is that none of that data is collaborate and optimize site visit planning and
reported to the IT Department help desk. Another result is other activities;
that help desk functions can vary from what the campus does
to what the district does. • require all help desk service providers to keep accurate
help desk data, including customer satisfaction ratings;
The help desk typically is the main contact point for IT
customers. The help desk process generates information that • establish a set of reports and schedule for reviewing
identifies the maturity and performance of the IT processes the reports;
and capabilities. Problems with quality assurance, application
• conduct data analysis exercises at regular intervals,
development, change control, or release management often
such as monthly, at the CIO staff meetings; and
manifest themselves in help desk calls. Consequently,
accurate help desk data is essential to understanding an IT • conduct an annual customer satisfaction survey
organization’s capability maturity. Conversely, a lack of for IT Department and help desk services, identify
discrepancies in help desk data and survey data, and Multiple interviews confirmed confusion about both teams
act on discrepancies to determine their root causes. among customers. Campuses do not know which team to
contact when an issue arises related to technology in the
classroom. As a result, both teams confirmed overlap and
existing resources.
duplication of work, mixed messages, and confusion. Each
team often performs work that technically is not its
EDUCATIONAL AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY
responsibility because it is easier than explaining to customers
(REC. 71)
to contact a different department. In addition, certain
The separation of the Educational Technology and
campuses prefer working with one team or the other.
Instructional Technology teams causes confusion, lack of
coordination, and duplication of efforts in Houston ISD. Large school districts typically locate instructional and
educational technology either in the technology department
The district has an Educational Technology team in the
or in the academic department. This team also consults with
IT Department and an Instructional Technology team in
the other department to address crossover between
the Academics Department. Both teams previously
technology and academics.
existed in the Academics Department. The Educational
Technology Department had both a secondary and Houston ISD should combine Educational Technology and
elementary team reporting to the assistant superintendent Instructional Technology into one organization, based in the
of elementary and the assistant superintendent of secondary. Academic Department.
In June 2011, the district eliminated those positions due to
department budget cuts. In 2012, the CIO recognized the The head of the IT Department (CIO) should work with the
need to have an Educational Technology team to assist CAO to develop a plan to combine the two teams. The plan
teachers with the use of office productivity tools, digital should address the following considerations:
tools such as projectors and electronic whiteboards, and • the timing of the move;
define digital standards for interoperability between
systems. The IT department reallocated positions from IT • selecting the team leader;
to form a new Educational Technology team. The • redefining the combined roles and division of
Instructional Technology team focuses on instructionally responsibility between the two teams;
focused assistance to campuses and teachers, including the
following areas: • the review process for the new structure;
• training that encompasses digital resources; • communicating the new structure to the
campuses; and
• technology training at the new teacher academy;
• the subsequent measurement of the new organization’s
• events throughout the year to perform certain performance to determine the effectiveness of
projects, such as a focus to deliver laptop computers combining the teams.
for eighth grade students; and
The district should use this new group to monitor the way
• communication with the campuses regarding campuses plan, fund, support, and use technology resources
instructional technology developments. in the classroom. The CAO and CIO should establish a set of
The Educational Technology team focuses on deploying KPIs for these areas.
laptop computers, broadband hotspots, and approved The district could implement this recommendation with
application software. In addition, the team works on existing resources.
data privacy, safety and security awareness training, and
works with the various teams and vendors to work on
data standards for data interoperability and machine
FISCAL IMPACT
learning. Both teams use the help desk system to track Some of the recommendations provided in this report are
and cross-reference help desk tickets. The groups previously based on state or federal laws, rules, or regulations, and
met regularly, but did not coordinate regularly at the time should be promptly addressed. Other recommendations are
of the review. based on comparisons to state or industry standards or
accepted best practices, and the district should review to

determine the level of priority, appropriate timeline, and
method of implementation.
The Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance Review

Team could not determine a fiscal impact for the
recommendations in this chapter. Any savings or gains will
depend on how the district chooses to address these findings.
However, the implementation of these recommendations
may result in savings from streamlining the department’s
organization and eliminating inefficiencies. If Houston ISD
implements Recommendation 65 (IT governance) and
Recommendation 67 (technology plan), the district may
achieve savings from planning the use of the IT Department’s
resources in a strategic manner and eliminating spending on
projects that do not support the district’s goals directly. If the
district implements Recommendation 71 (educational and
instructional technology), the district may realize savings
from streamlining the functions of these departments and
eliminating duplicated duties.
10. NUTRITION SERVICES MANAGEMENT
Houston Independent School District’s (ISD) Nutrition The Nutrition Services Department provides minimal
Services Department offers breakfast, lunch, and supper to nutrition education to students.
all district students. During school year 2018–19, Houston
The Nutrition Services Department’s catering and
ISD had 209,772 students enrolled in prekindergarten to
grade 12. The district has 280 cafeterias and operates 247 adult-only meal operations are inefficient and do not
kitchens. Some of the campuses are hub kitchens that generate sufficient revenue to cover costs.
produce and distribute meals to satellite campuses. The The external focus of the catering operation does not
district also has a centralized food production facility, which direct valuable facility and staff resources to the district’s
produces and distributes components for meals to every campus meals programs and Houston ISD students.
campus in the district.
The Nutrition Services Department’s food
During school year 2017–18, the Nutrition Services Department
production facility is underutilized and depletes
had $127.3 million in revenue and $125.0 million in
department resources.
expenditures, a revenue gain of $2.4 million. The department
had an ending fund balance of $28.2 million for the year. The
Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance Review Team RECOMMENDATIONS
conducted onsite fieldwork to review Nutrition Services in Recommendation 72: Analyze participation rates
January 2019. During onsite interviews, district staff estimated monthly, develop and implement strategies to
that the department would lose $8.5 million for school year increase participation, and develop board policies
2018–19 due to a new requirement to pay for contracted that address challenges to participation.
custodial services, maintenance costs for the food production
Recommendation 73: Hold principals accountable
facility and administrative offices, and a decrease in enrollment.
for ensuring that all competitive foods sales on
campuses comply with United States Department
ACCOMPLISHMENT
of Agriculture regulations.
Houston ISD provides breakfast, lunch, and supper
at no charge to students through the Community Recommendation 74: Develop guidelines for meal
Eligibility Provision program. scheduling to assist principals.

FINDINGS procedures and systems to provide oversight
Houston ISD does not ensure maximum participation and consistent management of campus
in the federal Child Nutrition Programs. cafeteria operations.
Competitive food sales at campuses violate state Recommendation 76: Use productivity data to manage
and federal regulations and affect Nutrition Services staffing in accordance with industry standards.
Department revenue negatively.
Recommendation 77: Develop an annual plan
Houston ISD campuses set meal schedules with little for nutrition education and menu displays in
input from the Nutrition Services Department. campus cafeterias.
The Nutrition Services Department does not Recommendation 78: Develop a plan to improve
hold operations managers or food service team catering and adult-only meal operations to a
leads accountable for financial and operational financially accountable position.
management of the campus cafeterias.
Recommendation 79: Maximize catering facility
The Nutrition Services Department does not use and staff resources to support district meal programs
existing data adequately to determine staffing levels. and student culinary academic programs.
NUTRITION SERVICES MANAGEMENT HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
Recommendation 80: Use the contracted during the day as part of the USDA’s Fresh Fruit and
consultant’s report to eliminate inefficiencies Vegetable Program (FFVP). The district provides snacks to
and decrease costs at the Nutrition students at campuses through afterschool, educational,
Services Department. enrichment-based programs as part of the NSLP. SBP,
NSLP, CACFP, and FFVP collectively are referred to as the
BACKGROUND Child Nutrition Programs (CNP). Houston ISD also
receives donated foods through the USDA’s Foods
An independent school district’s food service operation
Distribution Program. During school year 2014–15, the
provides meals to its students and staff. The district
district began offering free breakfast, lunch, and supper to
may provide meals through the federally funded Child
students at some campuses through the Community
Nutrition Programs, which include the School Breakfast
Eligibility Provision program. During school year 2017–
and National School Lunch programs. The School
18, the district expanded its offering of free meals to
Breakfast Program (SBP) is a federal entitlement
students at all campuses. The district serves breakfast in the
program administered at the state level by the Texas
classroom at all elementary schools and middle schools and
Department of Agriculture (TDA). Participating
some high schools.
campuses receive cash assistance for breakfasts served
that comply with program requirements. Districts The Nutrition Services Department has 2,087 staff,
receive different amounts of reimbursement based on including 1,744 food service attendants and team leads
the number of breakfasts served in each of the benefit who work in the cafeterias. The district organizes the
categories: free, reduced-price, and paid. Texas state law campus cafeterias into 20 areas throughout the district.
requires campuses to participate in the breakfast program Operations managers oversee each area and report to
if at least 10.0 percent of their students are eligible to Nutrition Services Department administration.
receive free or reduced-price meals. The National
School Lunch Program (NSLP) serves low-cost or free Figure 10–1 shows the district’s reporting structure for
lunches to students. Like the breakfast program, the Nutrition Services Department. The officer of
lunches must comply with federal nutrition guidelines nutrition services oversees the department and reports to
and are reimbursable to campuses based on the number of the district’s chief operating officer. The officer of
meals served within the benefit categories. A district’s nutrition services ensures compliance with federal, state,
food service operation also may offer catering services to and program requirements and develops and administers
supplement the food services budget or provide training the food service budget. The general manager oversees
for students interested in pursuing careers in the food the teams responsible for kitchen operations, menu
service industry. planning, and catering services. The director of food
literacy and food inclusion leads the department’s food
The food service operation is dependent on the literacy initiatives and the implementation of campus
organizational structure of the district. The two primary gardens. The senior manager of accountability and
models of organizing food service operations are self- compliance tracks performance measures and develops
management and contracted management. Using the self- financial reports for the department. The senior manager
management model, a district operates its food service of food production oversees the operations of the
department without assistance from an outside entity. food production facility. The senior manager of
Using a contracted management model, a district contracts materials and safety manages the department’s warehouse
with a food service management company to manage either operations and the delivery of food and dry goods to the
all or a portion of its operations. In this arrangement, a campus cafeterias.
district may rely on the company to provide all or some
The district uses Primero Edge, a point-of-sale (POS)
staff, or may use district staff for its operations.
software, to count and claiming reimbursable meals.
Houston ISD participates in the SBP and the NSLP. The District custodial staff clean the dining rooms at most
district also offers supper to all students as part of the U.S. campuses, and contracted custodial staff clean
Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Child and Adult Care approximately 55 campus cafeterias. Most high schools are
Feeding Program (CACFP). More than 30 elementary open campuses that authorize students to leave campus
campuses provide fresh fruits and vegetables to students during their lunch periods.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT NUTRITION SERVICES MANAGEMENT
FIGURE 10–1
HOUSTON ISD NUTRITION SERVICES DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
Officer, Nutrition Services
Senior
Senior Manager, Senior Manager, General Manager, Director, Senior Manager,

Accountability and Food Production Nutrition Services Food Literacy Materials
Compliance – contact and Food Inclusion and Safety
with Finance Department
Manager, Manager, Community

Production – Production – Outreach
Sanitation Bakery
Manager, Manager, Manager,

Production – Production – Nutrition
Cook Chill Cold Products Services
Operations
Farmer
Team Lead, Executive Consultant Manager,
Student Chef Logistics and
Eligibility Transportation
Manager, Senior Area Senior

Nutrition Manager, Manager,
Operations
Services Operations Warehouse
Catering
Kitchen
Dieticians – 4 Manager, Area

Research
Quality Manager
and
Assurance Development
Chefs – 2
Senior Area Chef
Administrative Manager Trainers – 2
Assistant
Chef Operations
Trainers – 3 Managers – 10
Operations
Managers – 10
Note: Since the time of the review team’s onsite visit, the department has added a third area manager. Each area manager oversees from six
to seven operations mangers.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, January 2019.
DETAILED ACCOMPLISHMENT access to the system through the online Texas Unified
Nutrition Programs System.
COMMUNITY ELIGIBILITY PROGRAM
Houston ISD provides breakfast, lunch, and supper at no Because the reimbursement rate depends upon the number
charge to students through the Community Eligibility of directly certified students, the Nutrition Services
Provision (CEP) program. Department continually updates student files to identify as
many eligible students as possible. The department obtains
The CEP program became available to school districts most of this student information through the matching
through the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010. CEP is process, but district staff also identify students who are
a nonpricing meal service option that enables campuses and homeless or runaway children. This team’s diligence affords
districts in areas that have high levels of poverty to serve the district the greatest reimbursement rate possible.
breakfast and lunch at no cost to all enrolled students without
CEP offers the following benefits:
collecting household applications. School districts that adopt
CEP are reimbursed using a formula based on the percentage • students have access to free nutritious meals without
of students that are categorically eligible for free meals based any social stigma attached to income-based ability to
on their participation in qualifying programs, such as the pay, spend less time in cashier lines, and have more
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), time to consume nutritious meals;
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Head Start, and
state funded prekindergarten. Migrant, homeless, and foster • parents do not have to complete household
care students are also categorically eligible for free meals. applications and do not have to track meal
TDA is approved to operate a demonstration project which accounts; and
enables districts to use Medicaid data from the Texas Health • administrators have less paperwork and administrative
and Human Services Commission to establish free eligibility costs, do not have to track unpaid meal charges, and
without application. receive the benefit of improved program integrity and
streamlined meal service operations.
Houston ISD began implementing CEP during school year
2014–15 at 169 sites. The number of CEP sites since has The Center for Public Policy Priorities provides the following
expanded, and, during school year 2017–18, the district reasons why CEP benefits Texas school districts:
transitioned to CEP after Hurricane Harvey’s landfall in
• more children are fed;
August 2017, which coincided with an increase in the
number of area families that were eligible for SNAP. • administrators and families have less paperwork;
Houston ISD’s website explains CEP benefits for families. • claiming rates improve; although CEP claiming rates
District staff reported that parent support for the program can remain in effect for up to four years, schools
has grown in response to the district’s educational outreach, and districts may reestablish rates annually if their
which emphasized the fact that federal funding, not local identified student percentages increase;
funding, pays for student meals.
• districts realize increased revenue; and
The federal reimbursement rate per meal for the CEP
• districts’ nutrition services align with Texas school
program is based on the claiming percentage derived from
breakfast requirements.
the number of students who are directly certified for the
program due to their participation in categorical programs. If
DETAILED FINDINGS
62.5 percent or more of students are directly certified, the
district receives the maximum reimbursement rate for each STUDENT PARTICIPATION (REC. 72)
breakfast and lunch served. If fewer students are identified
Houston ISD does not ensure maximum participation in the
through direct certification, a portion of meals served are
federal Child Nutrition Programs.
reimbursed at the maximum rate. TDA provides a data
matching system to districts to develop a direct certification From calendar years 1997 to 2017, Houston ISD contracted
list. The system the district receives the data from is called with a food service management company (FSMC) to
Texas Eligibility List Management System. TDA provides operate the CNP in the district. To improve food quality,
FIGURE 10–2
HOUSTON ISD BREAKFAST AND LUNCH MEAL PARTICIPATION RATES COMPARED TO RATES REPORTED TO THE COUNCIL OF
THE GREAT CITY SCHOOLS
HOUSTON ISD CGCS MEDIAN CGCS UPPER QUARTILE
SCHOOL YEAR BREAKFAST LUNCH BREAKFAST LUNCH BREAKFAST LUNCH
2015–16 57.3% 64.4% 37.4% 65.3% 54.1% 80.4%
2016–17 57.8% 65.7% 40.6% 67.4% 54.0% 80.2%
Source: Council of the Great City Schools, Managing for Results, 2018.
increase student participation and decrease costs, the district not have access to data to assess student participation at the
transitioned to the self-management model for food service site level. Operations managers reported that they do not
operations during school year 2017–18. The district has receive student participation data for their specific campuses,
made increased efforts to improve food quality, yet it still has so they cannot provide feedback to the cafeteria team leads or
opportunities to increase student participation rates. discuss participation changes with them.
Although the district’s SBP participation rates are greater
than industry standards, breakfast participation has decreased The department does not record the individual menu items
for the past several years. In addition, participation in the selected in a meal, which means that the POS system does
NSLP is less than industry standards. not collect true demand data. For example, during lunch at
Black Middle School, the review team observed cashier used
The Council of the Great City Schools (CGCS) publishes the number one button to indicate the student selected a
performance measures and performance data related to reimbursable meal with the cheeseburger entrée and the
business operations in urban public school districts. Its 2018 number two button to indicate the spicy chicken sandwich.
publication Managing for Results, shows the median, high, This entry provides demand data only for the entrée items.
and low values for performance metric data from districts Although students can select from multiple side items, the
reporting to the CGCS. Districts in the upper quartile department does not record and track which items are most
reported the highest values for a given metric, and districts in popular. The department already logs ice cream sales by
the lower quartile reported the lowest values. assigning a separate POS entry to each type, and it could
Figure 10–2 shows a comparison of Houston ISD’s meal configure the system similarly to collect data for individual
participation rates to the median and upper quartile rates meal components.
reported to the CGCS for school years 2015–16 to 2016–17. In addition to a lack of detailed, campus-level data related to
During that period, Houston ISD student participation rates participation and demand, the review team observed several
for breakfast were greater than the median and upper quartile factors during the onsite fieldwork that affect student
rates, and lunch participation rates were less than the participation negatively.
comparison rates.
First, the process for developing menus does not involve
During school year 2018–19, Houston ISD’s average daily
stakeholders, and the department does not have a formal
participation (ADP) rate for lunch was 58.3 percent, and the
process to evaluate and improve menus. At the time of the
ADP for breakfast was 48.6 percent. Although the district’s
onsite review, the senior manager of nutrition services
school year 2018–19 breakfast participation rate was higher
developed menus. Four dietitians in the Nutrition Services
than the school year 2016–17 CGCS median rate, it is lower
Department review the menus for accuracy and food
than the district’s rates for school years 2015–16 and 2016–
availability. Although menus meet the federal nutrition
17. The district’s lunch participation rate is less than both the
standards, stakeholders provide minimal input in the process.
CGCS median and upper quartile participation rates.
For example, operations managers and food service team
According to the review team’s onsite interviews, Nutrition leads have ideas to increase participation based on firsthand
Services Department administrative staff analyze student knowledge of student response to menu items. However,
participation data by grade level and adjust menus in response department administration does not seek feedback from
to changes in participation levels. However, cafeteria staff do either group to inform menu decisions. The Nutrition
FIGURE 10–3
HOUSTON ISD KINDERGARTEN THROUGH GRADE EIGHT LUNCH MENU
JANUARY 2019
MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY
1 2 3 4
Bean and Cheese Hamburger Chicken Tamale Cheesy Fish

Pupusa
Mandarin Oranges Mixed Fruit Diced Pears Diced Peaches
7 8 9 10 11
Beef Nachos Pepperoni Pizza Chili Mac Cheese Enchiladas Chicken Sandwich
with Supper Roll
Diced Pears Diced Peaches Mixed Fruit Mandarin Oranges Pineapple Chunks
14 15 16 17 18
Thai Chicken and Cheese Pizza Hamburger/ Chicken Nuggets Spaghetti and Meatballs
Broccoli Lo Mein Cheeseburger
Mandarin Oranges Mixed Fruit Sliced Peaches Orange Slices Diced Pears
21 22 23 24 25
Crispy Wings and Pepperoni Pizza Hamburger/ Chicken Carnitas Soft Cheesy Fish
Biscuit Cheeseburger Tacos with Chips and
Queso
Pineapple Chunks Mandarin Oranges Mixed Fruit Pineapple Chunks Orange Slices
28 29 30 31
Beef Nachos Cheese Pizza Chicken Sandwich Cheese Enchiladas
Diced Pears Diced Peaches Mixed Fruit Mandarin Oranges
Services Department has five chef trainers that visit cafeterias Another factor that may affect student participation is the
and provide training as necessary to ensure that staff follow lack of variety in the menus. Figure 10–3 shows the hot
recipes properly and handle food in accordance with food entrees and fruits available during January 2019. That
safety standards. According to interviews, the chef trainers month, pizza was on the menu four out of five weeks, and
do not participate in menu planning and do not communicate hamburgers were on the menu three out of five weeks. In
regularly with the senior manager of nutrition services or the addition, few of the fruit options are fresh fruit.
dietitians. Thus, the staff developing the menus may not
know whether cafeteria staff have the skills necessary for The review team observed substantial plate waste at a number
successful menu preparation. of campuses. Department staff stated that the menu often
does not provide a good variety of color and that items were
The lack of student input into menu planning also may not always kid-friendly. In a focus group, team leads and
contribute to low student participation. According to staff, food service attendants said menus lack variety and flavor.
the department conducts frequent surveys of students, but
the district did not provide evidence of these surveys. When the department introduced salad bars at the elementary
Interviews with various operations managers revealed campuses, it replaced a second entrée choice for lunch with a
concerns with the current menu and its evaluation. Some salad bar. During interviews, leaders in the department stated
operations managers noted that about half the students like a recognition of the need to continue salad bars but provide
the menu, and that the participation rate still can be more variety. Staff said that salad bar participation has waned
improved. Others stated that the district lacked student focus because students are tired of the same offerings. Some items
groups for taste testing. on the line, such as beans and pasta salad, are not selected
and become trash each day. Some staff stated that students • network with other food service directors and dietitians;
miss having a second entrée choice now that the salad bar has
• cook from scratch and use batch cooking;
become the only other option.
• obtain student feedback;
Authorizing students to dine off campus affects meal
participation at high schools negatively. Houston ISD does • introduce change slowly and offer variety;
not have a board policy regarding open campuses, and most
• introduce students to foods using samples, fun
high schools authorize students to leave campus during the
activities, and educational methods;
lunch periods. Nationally, among school districts with more
than 25,000 students, 33.9 percent have open campus for • involve campus administrators and teachers to
high school lunch. In the southwestern U.S. region, 28.1 promote change; and
percent of districts have open campus for high school lunch.
• inform parents regularly.
If a school district does not maximize participation, it risks
The School Nutrition Association’s School Nutrition Trends
that students are not receiving the nutrition benefits available
Report, 2017, documents innovative changes that districts
through the CNP. The review team did not observe that meals
have made to increase participation. According to the report,
brought from home were substantially healthier than the
the most helpful way to increase participation is to implement
cafeteria meals. According to the national Food Research and
changes suggested by the customers—the students and staff.
Action Center, studies show that participation in school
The menu drives participation, and positive changes to the
breakfast is associated with improved math grades, attendance,
menu will increase participation.
and punctuality. Students who eat breakfast show improved
cognitive function, attention, and memory. Research shows Houston ISD should analyze participation rates
that children who eat breakfast at school, closer to class and monthly, develop and implement strategies to increase
test-taking time, perform better on standardized tests than participation, and develop board policies that address
those who skip breakfast or eat breakfast at home. They found challenges to participation.
that school breakfast participation is associated with a lower
body mass index (an indicator of excess body fat), lower The district should implement the following actions:
probability of being overweight, and lower probability of • the general manager of nutrition services should
obesity. Educator comments, published on the USDA Food continue to review student participation monthly
and Nutrition Service’s website, further assert that children by elementary, middle, and high school campuses
who do not eat properly are hard to discipline. Conversely, and share participation data for each campus with
students who receive a nutritious lunch show a marked operations managers and cafeteria staff;
improvement in attitude.
• the general manager of nutrition services should
Houston ISD meals provide 25.0 percent of the daily develop strategies to meet participation goals for each
nutrient requirements at breakfast and 33.0 percent of the grade group and provide recognition and rewards for
daily requirements at lunch. High levels of meal participation campuses that reach these goals;
are evidence that more students are receiving nourishing
meals to complement learning in the classroom. When • the senior manager of nutrition services should
participation is low or decreasing, the Nutrition Services track participation by menu, adjust menus based on
Department is not meeting its goal. popular items, and consider returning the second
entrée choice to elementary lunch menus;
In addition, if participation is not maximized at the campus
level, the district forgoes potential revenues from
consider requiring cafeteria staff to record all items
reimbursement claims for students who are not participating.
selected in a meal to track the popularity of individual
The following USDA’s best practices are recommended to
entrées and side items;
increase student participation:
• provide opportunities for students to try new foods;
collaborate with the senior manager of nutrition
• attend trade shows and sample products; services and the senior area manager of operations to
FIGURE 10–4
HOUSTON ACTUAL VERSUS PROJECTED REVENUE FOR BREAKFAST WHEN AVERAGE DAILY PARTICIPATION (ADP) INCREASES
TO 57.8 PERCENT FOR BREAKFAST
JANUARY 2019
ADP AT 48.6% OF ENROLLMENT PROJECTED 57.8% ADP
ADP REVENUE PER MEAL TOTAL REVENUE ADP TOTAL REVENUE INCREASED DAILY REVENUE
105,062 $2.14 $224,833 125,027 $267,558 $42,725
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Federal Register, Volume 83, Issue 139, National School Lunch,
Special Milk, and School Breakfast Programs, National Average Payments/Maximum Reimbursement Rates; Houston ISD, January 2019.
FIGURE 10–5
HOUSTON ACTUAL VERSUS PROJECTED REVENUE FOR LUNCH WHEN AVERAGE DAILY PARTICIPATION (ADP) INCREASES TO
65.7 PERCENT FOR LUNCH
JANUARY 2019
ADP AT 58.3% OF ENROLLMENT PROJECTED 65.7% ADP
ADP REVENUE PER MEAL TOTAL REVENUE ADP TOTAL REVENUE INCREASED DAILY REVENUE
126,111 $3.39 $427,516 142,115 $481,770 $54,254
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Federal Register, Volume 83, Issue 139, National School Lunch,
Special Milk, and School Breakfast Programs, National Average Payments/Maximum Reimbursement Rates Houston ISD, January 2019.
develop a robust program to seek student and staff authorized by the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch
feedback on menu items, serving-line attractiveness, Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 available for sale to
cafeteria ambience, and specific school factors that students on the school campus during the school day.”
likely affect meal participation; and
TDA guidance further defines competitive foods as “foods
• the Houston ISD Board of Trustees should develop and/or beverages sold to students that compete with the
board policies to eliminate open campus during meals. school district’s operation of the NSLP and/or SBP. This
definition includes, but is not limited to, food and/or
By implementing the strategies identified, the district could
beverages sold a la carte in a meal service line, in vending
achieve a districtwide participation increase. Figure 10–4
machines, in campus stores, or as part of fund raisers.”
shows that Houston ISD could realize more than $42,000 in
increased daily revenue for breakfast when ADP is increased USDA and TDA regulations govern the sale of competitive
to the district’s school year 2016–17 breakfast participation foods. All competitive foods must meet nutrition standards
rate of 57.8 percent. established by USDA’s Smart Snacks in Schools regulation.
The TDA allows the sale of competitive foods on campus as
Figure 10–5 shows a gain of more than $54,000 in projected
long as they meet those nutritional standards. USDA defines
daily revenue when ADP for lunch is increased to the district’s
a school day as the period from the midnight before to 30
school year 2016–17 lunch participation rate of 65.7 percent.
minutes after the end of the official school day.
The fiscal impact assumes that the district increases breakfast
TEA rules published in Texas Administrative Code, Section
participation to 57.8 percent and lunch participation to 65.7
26.2, and Houston ISD Board Policy CO (LEGAL) authorize
percent, resulting in a total projected annual gain of
six fund-raisers per year on each campus that sell foods that
$17,456,220 ($96,979 x 180 days).
do not meet Competitive Food Nutrition Standards. Board
COMPETITIVE FOODS (REC. 73) Policy FJ (LEGAL) authorizes those fund-raisers, “provided
that no specially exempted fund-raiser foods or beverages
Competitive food sales at campuses violate state and federal
may be sold in competition with school meals in the food
regulations and affect Nutrition Services Department
services area during the meal service.” The district relies on
revenue negatively.
the legal policies for guidance related to competitive foods;
Federal regulations define competitive foods as “all food and however, the board has not developed a local policy on this
beverages other than meals reimbursed under programs topic. Nutrition Services Department administrators noted
that the sale of competitive foods is a large problem at many standards. Figure 10–6 shows examples of competitive foods
Houston ISD high school campuses, and the board does not observed during observations at Westside High School,
enforce the district’s competitive food policy. Bellaire High School, and J.P. Henderson Elementary School.
Numerous campus-related support organizations such as The presence of competitive foods that do not meet USDA’s
parent–teacher organizations (PTO) sell competitive foods at nutritional standards is a violation of federal regulations
Houston ISD campuses. Campus principals determine concerning the operation of school meal programs. TDA
whether to authorize organizations to conduct fund-raisers reviewers have noted the presence of competitive foods
or sell competitive foods on campus. Although board policy potentially in violation of TDA and USDA regulations at
authorizes six fund-raisers per year, staff reported that some Houston ISD campuses.
principals authorize these organizations to sell competitive
According to the corrective action document TDA issued to
foods on campus, during the school day, throughout the
Houston ISD in December 2018, TDA reviewers observed
entire school year, or 180 days. Principals do not coordinate
food and beverage items that did not meet USDA’s Smart
with the Nutrition Services Department on decisions to
Snacks requirements. At Bellaire High School, TDA monitors
authorize organizations to sell food on campuses. Staff
observed an “ice cream vending machine not owned and
reported that the department loses revenue due to the
operated by the Child Nutrition Department, available and
prevalence of competitive food sales at many campuses. All
operating to all students throughout the day in the cafeteria.
revenue from these sales belongs to the fund-raising
The machine was operational and purchases were made
organization or the campus.
throughout the day. Documentation requested demonstrating
In addition to PTOs, campus principals authorize fast-food compliance was not available upon request.” At Forest Brook
vendors to sell competitive foods on campus. Staff noted that Middle School, TDA monitors observed “a snack cart being
vendors such as Pizza Hut, Chick-fil-A, and McDonald’s operated by the PTO in the campus hallway. The snack cart
bring food trucks to campuses and sell items of minimal was not owned or operated by the Child Nutrition
nutritional value to students. The review team observed Department. These snacks were being sold at 3:40 pm, before
many instances of competitive foods for sale during meal the end of the instructional day. Documentation requested
times at campuses that likely do not meet nutritional demonstrating compliance was not available upon request.”
FIGURE 10–6
COMPETITIVE FOODS OBSERVED AT WESTSIDE HIGH SCHOOL, BELLAIRE HIGH SCHOOL, AND J.P. HENDERSON ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
JANUARY 2019

COMPETITIVE FOODS OBSERVED AT WESTSIDE HIGH SCHOOL, BELLAIRE HIGH SCHOOL, AND J.P. HENDERSON ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL
JANUARY 2019
Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, January 2019.
Nutrition Services Department staff identified the following 17 FIGURE 10–7

high schools that have routine problems with competitive foods ANALYSIS OF A LA CARTE SALES AT HOUSTON ISD HIGH
SCHOOL CAMPUSES
that potentially are in violation of TDA and USDA regulations: OCTOBER 2018
• Bellaire High School; AVERAGE A LA CARTE
COMPETITIVE FOOD SALES CAMPUSES SALES PER STUDENT
• Carnegie Vanguard High School; With known competitive 17 $1.99
food sales
• Challenge High School;
Without known 21 $3.19
• East Early College High School; competitive food sales
• Eastwood Academy; Team; Houston ISD, January 2019.
• Energy Institute High School;

Food service programs are required to comply with federal
• High School for Performing and Visual Arts;
guidelines regarding competitive food sources. In addition,
• Milby High School; Houston ISD board policy COC (REGULATION) states
that “Food Services, in agreement with successful bidders and
• North Forest High School; in accordance with federal and state guidelines on competitive
• Sam Houston Math, Science, and Technology Center; food, will control the types of competitive food and drink
offered for sale and the number and kinds of machines or
• Sharpstown High School; dispensers used in dining rooms and snack bars.”
• Waltrip High School; Houston ISD should hold principals accountable for
• Westbury High School; ensuring that all competitive foods sales on campuses comply
with United States Department of Agriculture regulations.
• Westside High School; The district should complete the following actions:
• Wheatley High School; • develop a memo from the superintendent to the
principals explaining USDA requirements regarding
• Yates High School; and
Smart Snacks;
• Young Womens College Preparatory Academy.
• direct principals to remain informed about state and
A review team analysis shows that competitive foods for sale federal guidelines by collaborating more closely with
at identified campuses may affect Nutrition Services the Nutrition Services Department;
Department a la carte sales negatively. Figure 10–7 shows a
• conduct unannounced site visits at locations to ensure
comparison of a la carte sales for these 17 campuses to the a
that campuses follow guidelines;
la carte sales of 21 campuses that staff do not consider to have
competitive food sales. In October 2018, the Nutrition • restrict or eliminate future vending or cart sales for
Services Department’s a la carte sales in campuses with campuses with repeated infractions discovered in the
competitive foods were on average $1.20 less per student site visits;
than a la carte sales in campuses without competitive foods.
• direct principals to require PTO and other support
If vending machines are operating during times when they organizations to find other means of raising funds; and
should be idle, or if a school-support organizations such as
• require principals to identify the six fund-raisers
PTOs are operating food carts during meal hours, students
where competitive foods will be available, and submit
might choose to snack instead of eating a reimbursable meal or
the dates to the Nutrition Services Department.
purchase snacks instead of buying a la carte items available
through the Nutrition Services Department. This competition Since the time of the review, the chief operating officer sent a
decreases the department’s potential revenue and could result letter to all campus principals requiring them to immediately
in students’ consumption of food or beverages that do not cease the sales of competitive foods that are in violation of
meet USDA’s Smart Snacks requirements. the Smart Snacks standards.
The fiscal impact assumes increased revenue from a la carte 20 minutes. At some campuses, waiting in line for more than
sales. If the district ends competitive food sales that likely are five minutes would leave students less than 20 minutes to eat.
in violation of TDA and USDA regulations at the referenced
Figure 10–8 shows lunch period lengths and the longest
17 high schools, the monthly revenue would increase by
observed line wait times at 13 Houston ISD campuses. The
$28,662 (23,885 students at the 17 high schools x $1.20).
American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that students
The total projected annual revenue would increase by
receive at least 20 minutes of actual eating time, which is not
$257,958 ($28,662 monthly revenue x 9 months).
available to students at four of these campuses.
MEAL SCHEDULING (REC. 74) Although studies show that scheduling recess before lunch
Houston ISD campuses set meal schedules with little input encourages less plate waste, the district does not require
from the Nutrition Services Department. elementary campuses to schedule recess before lunch each
day. During its onsite fieldwork at one campus, the review
According to district board policy DP1 (REGULATION), team observed posted classroom schedules showing recess
principals schedule student lunch periods to provide rapid after lunch. At another elementary campus, the positioning
service and sufficient time for eating. The board policy for of recess in relationship to lunch depends on the scheduling
meal periods provides that lunch periods must begin after of physical education for each class, which is intended to
10:00 am and finish by 2 pm. The Nutrition Services provide students a daily period of activity before and after
Department is not involved in scheduling meal periods and lunch, according to the principal. At campuses where recess
does not guide principals on best practices for scheduling is scheduled after lunch, the review team observed that some
meals. The department also does not evaluate whether all students were more interested in socializing than eating.
students have adequate time to eat in each cafeteria. The lack
of standards for meal scheduling results in a variety of issues At the time of the onsite review, campuses that had after-school
observed during the onsite fieldwork. remediation or enrichment programs offered supper meals.
These campuses offered supper on the days during which the
Some campuses schedule lunch periods such that there are remediation or enrichment programs occurred. A few campuses
not enough seats for students assigned to the lunch periods. serve supper in the classroom with the same equipment used to
For example, at one middle school, the review team counted provide breakfast. Campuses typically schedule supper at the
635 seats available (including 112 seats outside) for each of end of the school day, rather than toward the end of afterschool
the two lunch periods. According to the principal, the programming. Principals reported being unclear on requirements
campus’s enrollment was 1,230 on the day of the observation. related to the timing of supper meals. Some principals stated
The 635 seats would have sufficed if the students had been that they believed that regulations did not authorize supper to
assigned equally to each lunch period. However, the principal be served until 15 minutes after the end of the regular school
reported assigning most of the sixth graders to the first lunch day, and others said it could be served immediately after the last
period and most of the grade seven and eight students to the bell. Some principals stated that transportation poses challenges
second period. This unequal split results in some students to supper participation because students riding the bus do not
not having a seat during the second lunch. have time to eat supper at school.
In another example at a high school, the review team counted Nutrition Services Department staff noted that principals
928 seats available for student dining (including indoor and could request snack programs immediately after the end of
outdoor seating). The school year 2018–19 bell schedule for the regular school day and then schedule supper closer to the
the campus includes two 25-minute lunch periods on regular end of remediation or enrichment services. This practice
days, and one lunch period on early dismissal days. With an would place supper closer to a traditional evening meal time.
enrollment of 3,320 and 928 seats, the campus needs at least Department leaders report that some campuses offer students
four lunch periods to seat every student. The review team breakfast, lunch, snack, and supper and that they have
observed students eating lunch sitting on a hallway floor. resolved any transportation issues.
The review team also observed that campuses do not schedule Not providing students with sufficient time to eat, or
meals to provide all students sufficient time to eat. During 19 scheduling meals at times when they are less hungry, can
lunch observations, the review team counted an average line result in students eating less, eating less nutritiously, and
wait time of eight minutes, with a range from three minutes to increased food waste.
FIGURE 10–8
HOUSTON ISD LUNCH PERIOD LENGTH AND LINE WAIT TIMES AT SELECT CAMPUSES, JANUARY 2019
LUNCH PERIOD LONGEST LINE WAIT TIME 20 MINUTES PROVIDED
CAMPUS LEVEL (IN MINUTES) (IN MINUTES) TO ALL FOR EATING?
Bellaire High 25 7.5 No
Furr High 30 7.3 Yes
North Forest High 30 5 Yes
Westside High 50 20 Yes
Black Middle 35 3 Yes
Burbank Middle 30 18 No
Hamilton Middle 30 8 Yes
McReynolds Middle 30 16 No
Elmore Elementary 30 20 No
Janowski Elementary 30 8 Yes
Piney Point Elementary 30 6 Yes
Port Houston Elementary 30 5 Yes
Twain Elementary 30 3 Yes
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, January 2019
The School Nutrition Association (SNA), in its Keys to guide for schools to improve students’ diet and health. The
Excellence: Standards of Practice for Nutrition Integrity, following three keys are related to lunch periods:
2017, notes as a best practice that “meal schedules and
(1) all students will have designated lunch periods of
operational procedures are planned to meet the food,
sufficient length to enjoy eating healthy foods with
nutrition, health, and social needs of students.”
friends; these lunch periods will be scheduled as near
SNA provides indicators for this best practice.
the middle of the school day as possible;
Figure 10–9 shows that Houston ISD does not fully
meet all of these indicators. (2) schools will provide enough serving areas to ensure
student access to school meals with a minimum of
In 2000, the USDA and five medical groups formed a
wait time; and
partnership to address concerns about the increasing
incidence of childhood obesity in the United States. One (3) schools will provide space that is adequate to
result of this partnership was the development of Prescription accommodate all students and pleasant surroundings
for Change: Ten Keys to Promote Healthy Eating in Schools, a that represent the value of the social aspects of eating.
FIGURE 10–9
MEAL SCHEDULING BEST PRACTICES COMPARED TO HOUSTON ISD
INDICATOR DESCRIPTION PRESENT IN HOUSTON ISD?

C2.1.1 Meal service is evaluated at all cafeterias to ensure students have adequate time to eat No
based on current research and benchmarks.
C2.1.2 School schedules allow all students access to school meals. Yes
C2.1.3 “Recess Before Lunch” is discussed with site-based educators and evaluated as a meal No
schedule option.
C2.1.4 School nutrition personnel meet regularly with site-based administrators to review meal No
schedules.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, January 2019; School Nutrition Association, Keys to
Excellence: Standards of Practice for Nutrition Integrity, 2017.
In 2004, the National Food Service Management providing lunch periods that are long enough for
Institute (now the Institute of Child Nutrition) released a the last student served to have 20 minutes to eat,
report detailing its findings about the relationship and providing options for scheduling supper meals.
between meal scheduling and plate waste. It found that The guidelines should include best practices and
campuses that provided students recess periods before research associated with each scheduling area. The
lunch, rather than after, experienced less waste. guidelines should highlight the positive practices
Specifically, students that had recess before lunch yielded in identified Houston ISD campuses to provide
the following nutrition indicators: principals with examples of how these practices
could work at their campuses;
• ate 24.0 percent more food by weight;
• direct the chief operating officer to coordinate with
• wasted 30.0 percent less food by weight;
the chief academic officer to distribute the guidelines
• consumed 8.0 percent more calories; to all principals;
• consumed 35.0 percent more calcium; and • direct the Nutrition Services Department operations
managers to request meetings with principals to
• consumed 13.0 percent more vitamin A. review options for improving meal scheduling and
The School Nutrition Association found in its 2018 expanding snack and supper services; and
Operation Report that 48.0 percent of responding districts • develop an annual comparison of Houston ISD
scheduled recess before lunch on at least one campus. campuses that have appropriate meal scheduling
Another 9.1 percent were considering implementing it to those without, comparing student attendance,
during school year 2018–19. achievement, and discipline data.
The USDA’s guide, At-risk Afterschool Meals, provides the The district could implement this recommendation with
following information regarding serving supper meals: existing resources.
When school is in session, the meal or snack served in
SITE-LEVEL ACCOUNTABILITY AND OVERSIGHT (REC. 75)
at-risk afterschool programs must be served after the
student’s school day and during the hours the afterschool The Nutrition Services Department does not hold operations
program is operating. Otherwise, there are no federal managers or food service team leads accountable for financial
requirements regarding the timing of meal service. For and operational management of the campus cafeterias.
example, there is no federal requirement of how much Operations managers monitor cafeterias through periodic
time must pass between the end of school and the meal site visits. While visiting a campus, they review areas such as
service. Additionally, there is no requirement for the inventory management, food quality, kitchen cleanliness,
order of meal and snack service; however, states may and food service team leads’ proper completion of the Red
establish meal time requirements. Book. The Red Book is a required component of each
TDA has not established meal time requirements; cafeteria. It contains daily and weekly food safety and
therefore, USDA’s guidance suggests that campuses have sanitation requirements to which food service team leads
flexibility to schedule snack service and supper to promote document adherence.
maximum participation. The department has not established expectations for
monitoring visits and does not collect or analyze data from
Houston ISD should develop guidelines for meal scheduling
monitoring visits. Operations managers stated that there are
to assist principals. To develop these guidelines, the district
no formal requirements that outline how often operations
should complete the following actions:
managers should visit each of their assigned cafeterias.
• request that the Nutrition Services Department Interviews indicated that some operations managers spend as
draft guidelines, including information regarding much as 80.0 percent of their time visiting campuses, and
the importance of scheduling recess or physical others estimated less time. Two operations managers stated
education before lunch, ensuring that all students that the general expectation is three short visits per week and
scheduled for a lunch period can have a seat, one quality assurance (QA) visit per semester.
Operations managers do not have a process to document the testing the financial module on a trial basis, but no decision
quick visits but do use a paper form to document their QA had been made on whether to move forward with purchase.
visits. Operations managers use the QA site visit form to
monitor kitchen operations and compliance with regulations Another site-level activity that lacks expectations for
and health and safety standards. On the QA visit form, accountability from the Nutrition Services Department is
operations managers rate food items for presentation, taste, inventory management. According to interviews, food
packaging, portioning, and temperature. They also answer 97 service team leads take inventory twice a month, and
questions related to uniforms, TDA compliance, service and operations managers reconcile inventories. If a cafeteria has
merchandizing, production, safety, sanitation, Hazard Analysis too large a quantity of an item, the department expects
operations managers to help the cafeterias reduce inventory,
Critical Control Point standards, and cash management.
either by decreasing future orders, making menu
Although the QA form collects detailed information from the
substitutions, or moving items to another cafeteria.
site visit, the department does not collect the data digitally for
analysis. Therefore, area managers and department leadership Although staff reported awareness of general expectations for
cannot use this data to compare performance among the the inventory process, the review team did not find evidence
cafeterias and identify common problem areas. In addition, that the department has documented these procedures.
the Red Book data stays at each cafeteria, and the department Furthermore, the department has not established periodic
does not collect it digitally for meta-analysis. No compilation automatic replenishment (PAR) levels through which cafeterias
or analysis of the data gathered in these inspections appears to manage their inventory and program financial resources. The
exist. The general manager expressed a desire to implement an PAR level is the expected minimum inventory required to
electronic solution. meet customer needs. In addition, the Nutrition Services
Department has not provided sufficient guidelines for when
As with monitoring visits, the Nutrition Services Department
and how to conduct inventories. The Red Book used by the
does not provide operations managers with expectations for
food service team leads requires them to perform a few duties
financial performance of the cafeterias. Although operations
related to inventory management. These items include
managers make decisions that affect the cafeterias financially,
checking that “all food is wrapped, labeled and dated,” and the
include hiring and assigning staff and approving grocery
practice of “first in, first out.” These items alone do not support
orders and inventories, the department does not provide
best practices in inventory management. In addition, the Red
operations managers with site-level data to monitor the
Book does not require food service team leads to record dates
profit-and-loss status of cafeterias, This is because the
of completed inventories. According to district staff, food
Nutrition Services Department is not able to report on and
service team leads enter inventory dates electronically into
analyze campus-level profit and loss reports due to limitations
Primero, and the entries are date and time stamped.
of the current systems. The department receives some data
that reside in the systems applications products (SAP) data In communications to cafeteria staff, the Nutrition Services
processing system from central accounting and compiles Department does not emphasize effective inventory
department-level Statements of Revenues and Expenditures, management. In a review of 269 email communications to
but these data are neither available in a timely manner nor cafeteria staff from August 2018 to January 2019, one email
detailed by campus. mentioned taking inventory. It required team leads to
validate expiration dates before schools closed for the
The department uses several Primero modules, including Thanksgiving holiday.
POS, student eligibility, inventory, menu planning, and
production. However, the department has not yet purchased As a result, cafeterias may not be conducting inventories
the Primero financial module. With some integration work, properly. Food service team leads plan for weekly meals using
the financial module could receive accounting data from the Primero planning module. However, evidence shows that
SAP and provide the department with campus-level profit- some operations managers do not ensure that food service
and-loss statements that would provide operations managers team leads conduct inventories before ordering food. Staff
and department administration the financial status of each that deliver food and commodities from the production
site by meal type. The Nutrition Services Department has an facility report that cafeteria freezers are overstocked, which
information technology manager that is knowledgeable in places freezers at risk of malfunctioning due to stacks of
Primero and SAP. As of spring 2019, the department was products blocking vents. In addition, the review team
observed overstocked freezers and refrigerators in several The Nutrition Services Department should develop
campuses. One operations manager reported that food and implement procedures and systems to provide
service team leads have a tendency to over-order because they oversight and consistent management of campus
are concerned about having an inadequate supply of items. cafeteria operations.
The lack of documented expectations for how and when The officer of nutrition services should complete the
operations managers should conduct site visits increases following actions:
the risk for inconsistent management of the cafeteria
sites. Continuing to collect QA visit data and Red Book • explore the purchase of a financial reporting system
data in a paper-only format limits the ability of the that can provide monthly, campus-level profit and loss
department to understand and quantify ongoing statements on a timely basis. The officer of nutrition
challenges. Keeping the paper Red Books for more than a services should perform the following actions: (1)
few months, up to one full school year, causes storage initiate a task force consisting of knowledgeable staff
problems in some cafeterias. from the Information Technology, Accounting, and
Nutrition Services departments to assess financial
Without financial data available by campus, operations system options; (2) select a system and develop
managers and department leadership cannot identify procedures for select Nutrition Services Department
problem areas readily, and department leadership cannot staff to run monthly, campus-level profit-and-loss
hold operations mangers and site-level staff accountable for reports; and (3) distribute monthly profit-and-loss
the financial performance of the cafeterias. Although the statements to each cafeteria and require operations
Nutrition Services Department can access operational managers with supporting campuses to improve their
measures such as meals per labor hour, this metric does not profit-and-loss statuses;
provide a complete analysis of the operation’s status.
• establish industry-standard inventory management
The absence of documented procedures and oversight for control measures at the cafeterias. The officer
inventory management leads to inconsistent and inefficient of nutrition services should perform the
ordering at the cafeterias. Over-ordering causes unnecessary following actions:
use of program funds and storage space. Under-ordering
results in product shortages and affects menus, nutrition ºº implement a robust Nutrition Services
guideline compliance, kitchen operations, and customer Department product forecasting and monitoring
satisfaction. Infrequent inventory counts do not identify system, utilizing the expertise of the senior
problems with pilfering, spoilage, or other product issues. manager of materials and safety, the general
manager, and other identified core staff;
Effective districts ensure that department-level and campus-
level staff have the training and the access to generate reports ºº utilize the forecasting and monitoring system
as needed on a districtwide, area, and campus basis. The to establish minimum and maximum levels for
Institute of Child Nutrition’s publication, Financial individual cafeterias;
Management: A Course for School Nutrition Directors, 2nd
ºº review the cafeteria ordering process to
Edition, states that it is important to prepare statement-of-
identify inefficiencies;
activity reports for each individual cafeteria to get an accurate
picture of its financial status and to establish site-level goals ºº review the cafeteria inventory process to eliminate
and best practices. overstocked coolers and freezers;
Implementing industry-standard inventory management ºº identify strategies to eliminate inefficiencies,
standards is critical to a well-managed school nutrition utilizing technology whenever possible; and
program. Forecasting and Procurement Best Practices, published
by the American Commodities and Distribution Association ºº require operations managers to provide a
publication, recommends specific planning, ordering, and consolidated report of inventory problems so that
modification steps to forecast product ordering and inventory the Nutrition Services Department leadership can
accurately. Forecasting is a cornerstone of inventory control. quantify the extent of the problem and monitor
Maintaining PAR levels is an industry best practice. trends in addressing it; and
• develop and make greater use of technology in STAFFING (REC. 76)

the oversight and recordings of cafeterias. The Nutrition Services Department does not use existing
The officer of nutrition services should perform data adequately to determine staffing levels.
the following actions: (1) develop the operations
manager review form into an electronic form; Meals per labor hour (MPLH) is an industry-standard
(2) develop a timeline to collect as much Red productivity measurement for campus kitchens, calculated by
Book data as possible electronically, using dividing the total meal equivalents (ME) for a given period by
scanning or optical character recognition, catalog the total number of paid labor hours for the same period.
physical pages of the book, or collect data According to the Nutrition Services Department
electronically using a tablet computer directly administration, a staffing level of 19.0 MPLH is the target
at the cafeteria; and (3) provide cafeteria staff for elementary and middle schools, and 17.0 MPLH is the
with a retention schedule for the paper-based target for high schools. A review of the district’s monitoring
monthly Red Books and destroy those past the data for January 2019 reveals that many campuses do not
retention date. meet these targets. Figure 10–10 shows that 94 campuses’
kitchens produced less than the district’s MPLH target,
The fiscal impact assumes that the district purchases a
which could indicate overstaffing; 132 produced more than
financial module that integrates with Primero and SAP for
the target, which could indicate understaffing. Among all
an annual cost of approximately $54,600 ($195 per cafeteria
campuses, 21 met the target.
x 280 cafeterias).
The review team did not find evidence that the Nutrition
The fiscal impact assumes that the district currently loses Services Department is using this data to determine staffing
1.0 percent of its annual food purchases due to expirations, levels or manage operations. Operations managers said they
spoilage, and pilfering, and that reducing waste through do not alter staffing often or in response to changes in MEs.
improved inventory management will achieve an annual In addition, the district has inconsistency in knowledge of
savings of $450,860 (0.01 x $45,086,049). staffing standards. Some operations managers stated that the
The fiscal impact assumes that the department purchases previous food service management company had set MPLH
tablet computers to record QA review data and Red Book standards, but the department has not established MPLH
data digitally for an average price of $850 per tablet, goals since the district became self-operated. Food service
resulting in a onetime cost of $257,550 [($850 x 20 team leads reported goals of 30.0 MPLH for elementary
operations managers) + ($850 x 280 cafeterias) + ($850 x 3 schools and 25.0 MPLH for middle and high schools, which
administrators (2 area managers and 1 senior area are different from the targets identified by department
manager)]. The fiscal impact assumes that the department’s administrators. Department leaders said that the department
existing team of IT specialists could provide technical does not use MPLH to assess performance. Multiple staff
support and maintenance. said they perceived that cafeterias are overstaffed and not
meeting goals. Some staff also stated that staffing for school
The combined fiscal impacts assume that the department will year 2018–19 started at the same level as staffing for school
achieve annual savings of $396,260 ($450,860-$54,600) year 2017–18, and those levels have been unchanged for
and have a onetime cost of $257,550. more than two years.
FIGURE 10–10
HOUSTON ISD CAMPUSES AT, BELOW, OR ABOVE NUTRITION SERVICES MEALS PER LABOR HOUR TARGET
JANUARY 2019
CAMPUS TARGET BELOW TARGET AT TARGET ABOVE TARGET

Elementary 19 44 15 114
Middle 19 16 4 16
High 17 34 2 2
Total 94 21 132
FIGURE 10–11
INDUSTRY STANDARD RECOMMENDED MEALS PER LABOR HOUR
CALENDAR YEAR 2014
CONVENTIONAL SYSTEM CONVENIENCE SYSTEM
DAILY MEAL
EQUIVALENTS LOW PRODUCTIVITY HIGH PRODUCTIVITY LOW PRODUCTIVITY HIGH PRODUCTIVITY
101–150 9 11 11 13
151–200 10–11 12 12 14
201–250 12 14 14 15
251–300 13 15 15 16
301–400 14 16 16 18
401–500 14 17 18 19
501–600 15 17 18 19
601–700 16 18 19 20
701–800 17 19 20 22
801 and greater 18 20 21 23
Source: School Food and Nutrition Service Management for the 21st Century, Dorothy Pannell-Martin and Julie A. Boettger, 2014.
Furthermore, the targets may not conform to industry this analysis may indicate inefficient staffing at some
best practices because they do not account for variation campuses, further analysis of each campus kitchen is
in MEs by site. School Food and Nutrition Service required to determine appropriate staffing. According
Management for the 21st Century, Sixth Edition, by to Pannell-Martin and Boettger, “no magical formulas
Dorothy Pannell-Martin and Julie A. Boettger, provides can be applied to staff all schools food service
guidance for determining appropriate staffing levels for programs. Many factors influence the hours needed.”
campus kitchens based on MEs. Its staffing guidelines Schools may have unique challenges that prevent
are used nationwide and are considered the industry achieving targets for high productivity. For example,
standard for staffing to achieve maximum productivity kitchen size and layout affect whether staff can work in
and control labor costs. Figure 10–11 shows these parallel or in a series, which in turn may limit the
guidelines, which base recommended MPLH levels on the maximum MPLH possible.
number of MEs served at the individual cafeterias rather
than a districtwide target. Labor and benefits are major costs for child nutrition
programs. Failure to manage operations using MPLH data
The review team observed that Houston ISD uses a results in overstaffing at some campuses and understaffing
convenience system of food preparation, which involves at others.
using a large number of processed food items. Figure 10–12
shows the numbers of Houston ISD campuses that are equal According to Pannell-Martin and Boettger, best
to, above, or below industry standards for high productivity practice goals for percentage of revenue range from
in a convenience system. 35.0 percent to 40.0 percent for labor and benefits. In
school year 2016–17, Houston ISD’s labor costs as a
Figure 10–12 shows that 157 campuses had MPLH percentage of revenue were within industry standards at
levels below the industry standard for high productivity 39.9 percent.
in a convenience system, 74 campuses had MPLH
levels above the standard, and 16 campuses had MPLH However, for the most recent two years for which data are
levels at the industry standard. An analysis of MEs and available, Houston ISD’s labor costs as a percentage of
monthly work hours per campus showed that, in total, revenue have been greater than the median among districts
campuses may have had an excess of 1,681 daily work reporting to CGCS. Figure 10–13 shows a comparison of
hours greater than the amount needed to meet industry the district’s labor costs as a percentage of revenue to the
standard MPLH targets for high productivity. Although median percentages published by CGCS.
FIGURE 10–12
HOUSTON ISD CAMPUSES MEETING INDUSTRY-STANDARD RECOMMENDED MEALS PER LABOR HOUR
JANUARY 2019
DAILY MEAL
EQUIVALENTS TARGET FOR HIGH PRODUCTIVITY IN A CONVENIENCE SYSTEM AT TARGET ABOVE TARGET BELOW TARGET
101–150 13 0 0 1
151–200 14 0 0 0
201–250 15 0 1 2
251–300 16 0 0 5
301–400 18 0 0 8
401–500 19 2 3 9
501–600 19 3 8 14
601–700 20 2 9 15
701–800 22 1 16 16
801 and greater 23 8 37 87
Total 16 74 157
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; School Food and Nutrition Service Management for the 21st Century,
Dorothy Pannell-Martin and Julie A. Boettger, 2014; Houston ISD, January 2019.
Districts that base staffing decisions on MPLH calculations FIGURE 10–13

to help reach expenditure goals often maintain adequate COMPARISON OF HOUSTON ISD LABOR COSTS AS A
PERCENTAGE OF REVENUE TO THE MEDIAN REPORTED TO
Nutrition Services Department fund balances to cover all THE COUNCIL OF THE GREAT CITY SCHOOLS
operating costs. These districts mitigate the risk of having SCHOOL YEARS 2015–16 TO 2016–17
to use district general funds to bridge gaps between
YEAR HOUSTON ISD MEDIAN
expenditures and revenue. Administrators are able to
identify challenges in a timely fashion to improve efficiency. 2015–16 39.1% 38.3%
Food service directors in these districts regularly provide 2016–17 39.9% 38.7%
the superintendent and board with district and campus
Source: Council of the Great City Schools, Managing for Results,
MPLH and production updates. 2018.
The Nutrition Services Department should use productivity

data to manage staffing in accordance with industry • develop a list of all cafeterias that need adjustments
standards. The general manager of nutrition services should to labor hours noting either a reduction or increase
complete the following actions: in hours or staff;
• direct area managers to notify operations managers of • direct operations managers and area managers to
the new method of staffing cafeterias based on ME, collaborate to allocate new staffing assignments based
effective for school year 2019–20, and train operations on needed adjustments; and
managers and team leads on the new method;
• direct operations managers to monitor ME and
• require operations managers to tabulate ME and MPLH on a monthly basis noting any campuses not
total assigned labor hours by cafeteria for all of their meeting industry standards and make adjustments as
assigned cafeterias, before school year 2019–20; necessary at the midyear point.
• require operations managers to evaluate the size and The fiscal impact assumes that the Nutrition Services
layout of each kitchen and the scheduling of meal Department adjusts staffing at the cafeterias to meet industry
periods to determine if industry MPLH targets for targets for high productivity in a convenience system, resulting
high productivity are feasible and to adjust targets on in an annual savings of approximately $3,630,960 [(1,681
a campus-by-campus basis; daily work hours x 180 serving days) x ($12 hourly wage)].
NUTRITION EDUCATION AND PROMOTION shows the nutritional information posted for Scroggins
(REC. 77) Elementary School lunch January 29, 2019. The district
The Nutrition Services Department provides minimal provides nutritional information for each meal served each
nutrition education to students. day through the School Café application. However, the
application does not list every ingredient in each food item.
The Healthy, Hunger-free Kids Act of 2010 requires each
For example, it does not list the specific ingredients in the
school district that participates in the NSLP or other federal
ranch dressing. In addition, the application does not enable
Child Nutrition programs to establish a local school wellness
the user to access more than one day’s menu readily. The
policy for all campuses under its jurisdiction. The wellness
review team did not observe students consulting the
policy must include specific goals for nutrition promotion
application while in line for lunch.
and education, physical activity, and other campus-based
activities that promote student wellness. The statute also The district does not post menu information anywhere besides
requires school districts to post signage at the beginning of the School Café application. The review team observed that
each service line to indicate to students what menu items most dining rooms have bulletin boards and wall space that
constitute a reimbursable meal. could display menus and nutrition information, but almost no
nutritional content or menus were posted at the 35 cafeterias
The district’s school health advisory council (SHAC)
visited. Figure 10–15 shows one of two monitors at Westside
developed Houston ISD’s wellness policy. Board policy FFA
High School cafeteria. At the time of the onsite visit, the
(LOCAL) outlines the wellness policy and establishes the
campus did not use the monitor to display menus or anything
following goals for nutrition promotion:
related to the food service program.
• the district’s food service staff, teachers, and other
Similarly, Figure 10–16 shows examples of empty bulletin
district personnel shall consistently promote healthy
boards observed districtwide.
nutrition messages and food choices in cafeterias,
classrooms, and other appropriate settings; According to onsite interviews, the FSMC removed all line
marketing signage at the end of the contract, but some
• the district shall share educational nutrition
signage frames remain at campuses. Figure 10–17 shows an
information with families and the general public to
example of empty frames that the district has not filled.
promote healthy nutrition choices and positively
influence the health of students; and Providing nutrition information solely through a website or
application presumes that all stakeholders have ready access
• the district shall ensure that food and beverage
to the Internet. A lack of readily available nutritional
advertisements accessible to students during school
information could lead stakeholders to draw incorrect
hours on district property contain only products
conclusions about foods offered through the school meal
that meet the federal guidelines for meals and
programs. The absence of available menu information in the
competitive foods.
cafeterias could lead to reduced student participation. In
Although the district has developed goals for nutrition addition, USDA regulations require that districts post
promotion, the Nutrition Services Department does not information at the beginning of the service line. This
maximize opportunities to share nutritional information or information must inform students of what items to take for
promote nutrition messages in cafeterias. a reimbursable meal.
The district’s website provides limited nutritional information SNA, in its Keys to Excellence, notes as a best practice that
directly. The Nutritional Information link on the Nutrition effective school nutrition programs encourage and support
Services webpage includes carbohydrate counts for what nutrition education. SNA provided seven indicators for this
appears to be all entrée, side, milk, and condiment options best practice. Figure 10–18 shows an analysis of the best
available in Houston ISD meals. The Breakfast and Lunch practice indicators observed in Houston ISD. The review
Menus link on the Nutrition Services webpage leads to the team found that Houston ISD fully meets none of these
School Café application and website for more information. indicators. The only nutrition education materials observed
By using the School Café application via the website option in the district resulted from the initiative of a food service
(www.schoolcafe.com), parents and students can access team lead, not as part of a districtwide effort. In six out of 29
nutritional information for a particular day. Figure 10–14 instances, the review team observed cafeteria staff encouraging
FIGURE 10–14
EXAMPLE OF NUTRITIONAL INFORMATION FOR SCROGGINS ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LUNCH
JANUARY 29, 2019
Source: Houston ISD, January 2019.
students to select fresh fruits and vegetables. Nutrition through training and technical assistance for food service
Services Department leadership said that the district needs and nutrition education for students. Schools that
more nutrition education and promotions at the cafeterias. participate in the NSLP can sign up to become a Team
Team Nutrition is an initiative of the USDA Food and Nutrition School, which provides the campus access to
Nutrition Service to support the child nutrition programs nutrition education and training materials and provides
opportunities to collaborate with other Team Nutrition FIGURE 10–15

Schools. Although all Houston ISD campuses are eligible HOUSTON ISD WESTSIDE HIGH SCHOOL CAFETERIA
JANUARY 2019
to join this program, less than half of the district’s campuses
are registered as Team Nutrition Schools through the
USDA. These campuses include 35 elementary schools,
seven middle schools, and three high schools.
According to the National Center for Education Statistics,

more than 90.0 percent of U.S. schools offer nutrition
education through the federal school meals program. Most
information, 65.0 percent, is conveyed through nutrition
displays on bulletin boards; 51.0 percent of information is
presented during school lunch week.
TDA provides the following guidelines for menu signage:
• is posted at or near beginning of the serving line;
• identifies the minimum number of items or

components that constitute a reimbursable meal;
• identifies the maximum number of items or

components that may be taken as part of a
reimbursable meal; and
• indicates the required fruit or vegetable

component quantity. Team, January 2019.
FIGURE 10–16
HOUSTON ISD BULLETIN BOARDS
JANUARY 2019
Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, January 2019.
The Nutrition Services Department should develop an FIGURE 10–17

annual plan for nutrition education and menu displays in OBSERVED HOUSTON ISD SIGNAGE FRAMES
JANUARY 2019
campus cafeterias. All campuses should enroll in USDA’s
Team Nutrition School program to receive free educational
materials throughout the school year.
The officer of nutrition services should complete the

following actions:
• collaborate with department leadership and

SHAC members to develop an annual nutrition
education plan;
• enroll all remaining campuses in the Team Nutrition

School program and require all cafeterias to use
materials available from this program;
• provide cafeteria staff with the resources to

make nutrition education an integral part of the
comprehensive education goals of the campus;
• designate a location such as menu boards or

stanchions to post menus for students, then require
cafeteria staff to display either monthly, weekly, and/
or daily menus; and
• research other programs that also provide free

nutrition information. The Food and Nutrition
Section of USDA’s website is a good source of
information, and there are many other websites with Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
relevant nutrition education information. Team, January 2019.
FIGURE 10–18
ANALYSIS OF NUTRITION EDUCATION BEST PRACTICE INDICATORS IN HOUSTON ISD
JANUARY 2019
INDICATOR DESCRIPTION PRESENT IN HOUSTON ISD?
A3.1.1 Current, age-appropriate, science-based nutrition and nutrition education materials are No
recommended and promoted.
A3.1.2 Nutrition education materials such as posters, displays, and bulletin boards are used on Partially present
campus.
A3.1.3 Meals and other foods and beverages served in the school cafeteria reinforce the Dietary Partially present
Guidelines for Americans and other accurate nutrition messages.
A3.1.4 Nutrition messages are shared with parents using available media resources such as Partially present
printed menus and newsletters, social media, school websites, school cable stations,
parent meetings, and school board presentations.
A3.1.5 School nutrition personnel serve as a resource for nutrition activities through kitchen No
tours, food demonstrations, tasting parties, and/or participating in classroom nutrition
education activities.
A3.1.6 School nutrition personnel prompt students to choose fruits and vegetables. Partially Present
A3.1.7 Nutrition education programs promoted by the school nutrition program are evaluated for No
effectiveness.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; School Nutrition Association, Keys to Excellence: Standards of Practice
for Nutrition Integrity, 2017; Houston ISD, January 2019.
The district could implement this recommendation with interviews indicate that the catering and adult-only
existing resources. Multiple nutrition education resources operations have not operated at a profit since before Houston
are available at no cost. All of the cafeterias observed by the ISD began self-operating the CNP.
review team had space available to post menus and
nutritional information. High food costs affect profits from the catering and nonstudent
operations negatively. Figure 10–20 shows the food cost as a
CATERING AND ADULT-ONLY MEALS (REC. 78) percentage of revenue for each of the catering operations and
the Bennington staff cafeteria. The catering and Hattie Mae
The Nutrition Services Department’s catering and adult-only
White dining facility have high food costs as a percentage of
meal operations are inefficient and do not generate sufficient
revenue, 56.5 percent and 58.6 percent, respectively. The
revenue to cover costs.
Bennington cafeteria has food costs of 1,364.0 percent.
The Nutrition Services Department operates the following
nonstudent meal operations: A contributing factor to the losses of the catering operation
is competition from outside vendors. Although some
• catering for campuses and district departments; campuses and district departments use Houston ISD catering
services, there is no requirement to do so, and many hire
• a staff cafeteria at the Nutrition Services administration
outside vendors to provide catering services for events. It is
(Bennington) facility;
unclear whether the district requires campuses and
• a dining facility at the Hattie Mae White departments to obtain quotes from the district’s catering
administration building from which district staff team before contracting with vendors. Nutrition Services
and visitors may purchase breakfasts, lunches, and Department staff stated that no requirement exists, but
snacks; and Business Logistics and Purchasing Department staff stated
that departments are required to obtain these quotes. District
• a Starbucks franchise at the Hattie Mae White
staff reported that principals sometimes obtain quotes from
administration building.
Nutrition Services Department catering as leverage to
The executive chef oversees the staff at each of these negotiate lower prices from other vendors.
operations. The district previously operated a staff cafeteria at
Subsidizing staff meals contributes to losses at the Bennington
the Houston ISD McCarty Center called the 228 Diner,
facility staff cafeteria. Any staff may purchase breakfast at the
which closed at the end of December 2018.
Bennington facility. Nutrition Services Department staff
Figure 10–19 shows the projected revenues and expenses for receive free lunch at the Bennington facility, and all others
the catering operations and the Bennington staff cafeteria for must purchase lunch. The Nutrition Services Department
school year 2018–19. The five operations are projected to covers the cost of operating the Bennington staff cafeteria,
have an annual combined financial loss of $417,422. Staff which complies with applicable federal and state directives.
FIGURE 10–19
HOUSTON ISD CATERING OPERATIONS PROJECTED PROFIT AND LOSS
OPERATION REVENUES EXPENSES PROFIT/(LOSS)
Catering $796,702 $920,272 ($123,570)
Bennington Staff Cafeteria $6,730 $141,830 ($135,100)
Hattie Mae White Dining Facility $454,880 $606,418 ($151,538)
Hattie Mae White Starbucks $86,492 $108,302 ($21,810)
228 McCarty Cafeteria (2) $67,094 $52,498 $14,596
Total $1,411,898 $1,829,320 ($417,422)
Notes:
(1) School year 2018–19 revenues, expenses, and profit and loss include actual data for August 2018 to December 2018 and projected data
for January 2019 to May 2019.
(2) The 228 McCarty cafeteria closed in December 2018. Revenues, expenses, and profit and loss data for the cafeteria is actual data from
August to December 2018.
FIGURE 10–20
HOUSTON ISD CATERING OPERATIONS FOOD COST AS A PERCENTAGE OF REVENUE
OPERATION FOOD COST REVENUE PERCENTAGE OF REVENUE
Catering $449,896 $796,702 56.5%
Bennington Staff Cafeteria $91,790 $6,730 1,364.0%
Hattie Mae White Dining Facility $266,450 $454,880 58.6%
Hattie Mae White Starbucks $27,194 $86,492 31.4%
228 McCarty Cafeteria $13,803 $67,094 20.6%
Note: (1) Food costs and revenues include actual data for August 2018 to December 2018 and projected data for January 2019 to May 2019.
TDA’s 2018–19 Administrator’s Reference Manual, Section food contracts for the catering program to reduce
15.28, states that employees directly involved in the operation food costs;
or administration of meal planning, preparation, and service
• develop a plan to stop providing free lunch to
may or may not be charged for their meals at the discretion
Bennington facility staff and charge prices that will
of the contracting entity. These employees include
cover the direct and indirect costs of meals; and
supervisors, managers, cooks, and servers. A meal served at
no cost to nutrition program employees is considered a fringe • collaborate with the superintendent to consider
benefit that counts as an allowable program cost. requiring campuses and departments that purchase
food with district funds to purchase from the
Although providing lunch at no cost to Nutrition Services
Nutrition Services Department catering operation.
Department staff at the Bennington facility is authorized
according to state and federal regulations, this practice may The fiscal impact assumes that efficiencies achieved through
prevent the Bennington staff cafeteria from operating in a a cost-benefit analysis of contracting the nonstudent meal
fiscally responsible manner. operations, soliciting competitive bids for food contracts,
According to Pannell-Martin and Boettger, the management and eliminating free lunch for the Bennington facility staff
of finances is important to a successful, sound school food will result in a 20.0 percent decrease in losses each year, or a
and nutrition service program. Effective districts operate the savings of $86,404 during the first year ($432,018 x .20),
program with the revenues generated, which is usually the $69,123 during the second year ($345,614 x .20), $55,298
goal of superintendents, school boards, and upper during the third year ($276,492 x .20), $44,239 during the
management. School districts are often on tight budgets and fourth year ($221,193 x .20), and $35,391 during the fifth
may not be prepared to subsidize the school food and year ($176,955 x .20).
nutrition service program.
FACILITY AND STAFF RESOURCES (REC. 79)
The Nutrition Services Department should develop a plan to
The external focus of the catering operation does not direct
improve catering and adult-only meal operations to a
valuable facility and staff resources to the district’s campus
financially accountable position. The officer of nutrition
meals programs and Houston ISD students.
services should complete the following actions:
The executive chef oversees the catering operation and the
• assess options for decreasing costs in the two Hattie
research and development team. The executive chef also
Mae White operations, including eliminating breakfast
develops recipes for the school nutrition programs and snacks
service, offering only a lunch meal, and performing a
that meet USDA’s Smart Snacks regulation. According to
cost benefit analysis to determine if contracting with
interviews, the catering function has been operating at a loss
vendors to manage the two operations is more cost-
and the catering kitchen is underutilized. At the time of the
effective than self-managing them;
review, staff reported that the focus of the catering operation
• coordinate with the Business Logistics and Purchasing was to provide “high-end” meals for district events and in the
Department to issue requests for proposals (RFP) for staff cafeteria. Many of the catering staff have culinary
training and experience in fine dining. To boost catering Houston ISD also may be missing an opportunity to leverage
revenues, staff and administration are exploring expanding the expertise of the catering team to enhance the district’s
the services of the catering function to nondistrict customers, career and technical education (CTE) programs. Eight
such as using existing facilities to package crackers for an campuses offer CTE programs that focus on culinary arts
external customer and offering catering to businesses outside and restaurant management career pathways. Although the
the district. executive chef and the catering team in the Nutrition Services
Department have industry experience, they have no standard
The department’s focus on these initiatives does not
role in campus culinary arts programs.
maximize catering staff talents and Bennington facility
resources to directly support the department’s Good Food The Nutrition Services Department should maximize
initiative to improve the quality, diversity, and presentation catering facility and staff resources to support district meal
of school meals. programs and student culinary academic programs.
Goals for the Good Food initiative include: The executive chef should perform the following actions:
• providing food choices that are rich in nutrients; • develop a plan to utilize the catering kitchen facility as a
training site for cafeteria staff. The executive chef should
• promoting consumption of more fruits and vegetables develop training modules in cooking, food preparation,
that are abundant in variety and quantity, prepared in food presentation, kitchen management, and other skills
healthful ways, such as steaming, roasting, and raw, identified as needed to achieve the Good Food initiative
and offered daily; goals. This plan ultimately should increase campus meal
• assuring that grains provided are rich in whole participation and customer satisfaction; and
grains; and • coordinate with the director of career and technical
• reducing the sodium content of meals. education to identify opportunities for integration
between the Nutrition Services Department catering
Campus kitchen facilities have equipment and staffing operation and the campus culinary arts programs.
to prepare more than heat-and-serve-style entrees.
However, cafeteria staff do not have the skills to provide The district could implement this recommendation with
onsite preparation of fruits, vegetables, and recipes that existing resources.
department administration would like to integrate into
FOOD PRODUCTION FACILITY (REC. 80)
the menu cycle. Cafeteria staff also do not have access
to coordinated cooking, food preparation, presentation, The Nutrition Services Department’s food production facility
and kitchen management training modules to is underutilized and depletes department resources.
successfully achieve the goals of the Good Food initiative
In 2004, Houston ISD built a facility to centralize the Nutrition
and improve school meals. The Nutrition Services
Services Department’s food production, warehousing, and
Department has five chef trainers that provide some
distribution activities. The facility is located on 15.0 acres in
coaching and culinary-related training at cafeterias.
northeast Houston, and includes an 80,000-square-foot storage
Interviews and on-site observations indicate that the
and distribution center with a central receiving area, cooler and
current chef trainer model does not provide the type of
dry storage, and more than 25 delivery trucks. The facility also
training needed to achieve these goals. Department
has 95,000 square feet for food production with bakery, cook,
administration said that Nutrition Services Department
chill, and cold preparation capabilities, 45,000 square feet for
staff lack training on cooking fundamentals necessary to
administrative, maintenance, and supply chain staff, and
follow more complicated recipes.
dedicated training space.
Current catering operations do not provide access to a
valuable training location in which cafeteria staff could learn According to the district’s website, the goals of the food
from catering program staff that have cooking, food production facility are to:
preparation, presentation, and kitchen management • produce consistent, quality products;
experience. Such training and facilities are available in the
catering kitchen at the Bennington facility. • improve food safety;
FIGURE 10–21
HOUSTON ISD PRODUCTION FACILITY PRODUCTS
JANUARY 2019
Chicken patty biscuit Marinara sauce Sugar
Kolache Ketchup Taco meat beef
Orange slices Meatloaf Strawberry topping
Lemon muffin Queso mix Blueberry topping
Sweet potato muffin Sloppy joe Turkey roast
Blueberry muffin Brown sugar BBQ sauce
Brownie cake mix Cajun blend spice
Sweet potato spice cake Fajita blend spice

• increase menu variety; week, for nine months to 12 months. Additionally, the
department guarantees staff pay for a 10.0-hour shift even
• improve menu nutritional value;
when production is slow and that level of labor is not
• make school kitchen operations easier; needed. The consulting report estimated that the
department could save 25.0 percent of labor costs if staffing
• decrease equipment costs; matched the level of production.
• increase commodity utilization; and
The cost analysis indicated that the facility does not produce
• support emergency relief efforts, if or when they foods at a lower average cost than its competitors. According
are needed. to the report, increasing production would be costly as the
food production facility needs substantial capital
At the time of the onsite fieldwork, the food production
improvements. For example, equipment in the facility
facility produced a limited number of meal components for
requires specially designed parts that are expensive, which
delivery to campuses. Figure 10–21 shows the items
can result in maintenance staff buying raw steel to forge the
produced at the food production facility in January 2019.
necessary parts. Additionally, Houston ISD tried to increase
In 2018, the Nutrition Services Department contracted production by baking and delivering fresh bread containing
with Schrupp Consulting to perform an assessment of no preservatives to the campuses. However, this initiative
the facility. The consultant’s report concludes that the failed because the fresh bread began to develop mold, and
food production facility is substantially underutilized the district has returned to purchasing bread for the
and inefficient. According to the report, the food campuses. The data suggests that Houston ISD has begun
production center and warehouse space operates below to use the facility less to save money and serve healthier
capacity, using less than 50.0 percent of available space. The foods to the students.
food production facility has 219,000 square feet of space
Because Houston ISD is serving fewer processed foods
with 95,000 square feet dedicated to food production.
and using the facility less, the consulting report
However, the department uses a small part of that area for
recommended that the district transition to using
producing food from scratch. The district purchases 85.0
other vendors for food distribution. It recommended a
percent of food precooked from vendors. The precooked
school year 2019–20 pilot plan to continue providing
food ships directly from the vendor to the cafeterias, or it
students with healthier food options by using a food
ships to the food production facility to be repackaged and
distribution company to ship food directly to one-quarter
sent to the cafeterias.
of campuses (i.e., high schools). The report also
The consulting report also concludes that the food recommended that the district stop using the central
production facility wastes energy and labor. The facility kitchen at the food production center for heated foods.
has the capacity to run 24 hours a day; however, the The department implemented these recommendations
department runs one 10.0-hour shift for four days a with the aid of a recent bond that allowed for all
campus kitchens to prepare their own food onsite. Nutrition Services Department. The officer of nutrition
According to onsite interviews, Houston ISD plans to services should complete the following actions:
close the facility during summer 2019. When the
• move production of certain food items from the food
facility closes for food production, the consulting
production facility to campus kitchens; and
report recommends that the district lease it to outside
businesses to generate revenue. • coordinate with the Business Logistics and Purchasing
Department to develop an RFP to find a food
The Schrupp report estimates the follow savings for
distribution company for other items.
implementing its recommendations:
• leasing areas of the facility could generate from existing resources.
$240,000 to $1.2 million;
• eliminating the heating kitchen at the facility saves

approximately $900,000;
• closing the food production portion of the center

saves approximately $6.9 million; and
• eliminating the need for capital investments saves

approximately $1.5 million.
Closing the facility will benefit the students by providing

them with healthier and less processed foods. The district will
likely benefit by reducing costs with the use of a food
distribution company. Additionally, if Houston ISD chooses
to lease the facility, it could take advantage of the unused
space and generate revenue.
According to Pannell-Martin and Boettger, a school

district’s goal in managing the finances of its food
and nutrition service program typically is to operate
the program with the revenues it generates. School
districts may not be prepared to subsidize the program
due to tight budgets.
Pursuant to federal law, the food service program must not

end a school year with a deficit, although it may use a fund
balance from the previous year to offset the deficit. If there is
no fund balance, the school district’s general fund must cover
the deficit. When a deficit occurs, the district must begin
planning for ways to resolve the problem. Pannell-Martin
and Boettger suggest the following steps for resolving
financial problems:
• determine what is causing the financial problem;
• act to decrease cost; and
• increase revenue to offset the increased expenses.
Houston ISD should use the contracted consultant’s report

to eliminate inefficiencies and decrease costs at the
FISCAL IMPACT

10. NUTRITION SERVICES MANAGEMENT
72. Analyze participation $17,456,220 $17,456,220 $17,456,220 $17,456,220 $17,456,220 $87,281,100 $0
rates monthly,
develop and
implement strategies
to increase
participation, and
develop board
policies that address
challenges to
participation.
73. Hold principals $257,958 $257,958 $257,958 $257,958 $257,958 $1,289,790 $0

accountable for
ensuring that all
competitive foods
sales on campuses
comply with U.S.
Department
of Agriculture
regulations.
75. Develop and $396,260 $396,260 $396,260 $396,260 $396,260 $1,981,300 ($257,550)
implement
procedures
and systems to
provide oversight
and consistent
management of
campus cafeteria
operations.
76. Use productivity data $3,630,960 $3,630,960 $3,630,960 $3,630,960 $3,630,960 $18,154,800 $0
to manage staffing
in accordance with
industry standards.
78. Develop a plan to $86,404 $69,123 $55,298 $44,239 $35,391 $290,455 $0

improve catering
and adult-only
meal operations
to a financially
accountable position.
Total $21,827,802 $21,810,521 $21,796,696 $21,785,637 $21,776,789 $108,997,445 ($257,550)
The School Performance Review Team could not determine a fiscal impact for other recommendations. However, the
implementation of these recommendations may result in savings from increasing student participation and eliminating
inefficiencies. If Houston ISD implements Recommendations 74 (meal scheduling) and 77 (nutrition education and
promotion), the district may achieve revenue gains, because these recommendations are intended to encourage students to
participate in campus meal programs.
The potential savings from implementing Recommendation 80 (food production facility) will depend on how the
district chooses to implement the consultant report’s recommendations. Costs will depend on the menu selection,
which could vary by year and season; how the district chooses to replace a food item previously provided by the food
production facility (i.e., requiring campus kitchens to produce the item from scratch versus procuring from a vendor); and
the pricing offered by vendors.
11. TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT AND FLEET OPERATIONS
The Houston Independent School District’s (ISD) The Fleet Operations Department does not manage
Transportation Department maps and serves the bus routes that spare and surplus vehicles effectively to maximize
transport students to and from school each day, and coordinates efficiency and meet industry standards.
transportation for athletics and extracurricular trips. The
The district’s high percentage of out-of-
district’s Fleet Operations Department purchases, maintains,
service vehicles negatively affects service delivery
and repairs school buses and general service vehicles.
for several departments.
The district operates 819 regular routes, which include 535
regular education routes and 284 special services routes, and RECOMMENDATIONS
maintains a fleet of 1,127 school buses. During school year Recommendation 81: Reorganize Transportation
2018–19, the district transported approximately 25,000 Department functions and develop strategies to
students daily. Houston ISD has approximately 1,000 improve recruitment and retention of staff.
general service vehicles, including cars, trucks, and vans,
assigned to departments throughout the district. Recommendation 82: Develop and implement a
process to count transported students regularly
Houston ISD houses and operates buses in four Houston- and assess ridership to consolidate stops and
area terminals: Barnett, Butler, Central, and Northwest. The routes and improve on-time performance.
district maintains and repairs the buses at service centers
Recommendation 83: Explore options to achieve
located at each terminal. The district maintains and repairs
the 1,000 general service vehicles at the Truck Service Center, greater inclusion and promote the use of the least
which is located at the Central bus terminal. restrictive environment on buses.
Recommendation 84: Establish processes to

Houston ISD is a school-choice district in which students
strengthen Transportation Department internal
can choose to leave their home campuses to attend another
and external communications and solicit feedback
Houston ISD campus, magnet program, or in-district charter
from stakeholders.
campus. The district has 121 campuses with magnet
programs and transported approximately 21,000 magnet Recommendation 85: Enhance transportation
program student riders during school year 2018–19. training for drivers and students and address safety
concerns at the terminals and on school buses.
FINDINGS
Recommendation 86: Develop a bus replacement
The Transportation Department has an inefficient plan that includes industry-standard criteria and
organizational structure and a significant bus decrease the number of spare and surplus school
driver shortage. buses in the district’s inventory.
The Transportation Department has operational Recommendation 87: Develop and implement
deficiencies that negatively affect routing efficiency processes to monitor service center productivity
and service delivery. and vendor performance to decrease the district’s
Houston ISD does not transport regular number of out-of-service vehicles.
education students on the same bus as their
special education peers. BACKGROUND
An independent school district’s transportation function
The Transportation Department lacks efficient
transports students to and from school and other school–
methods for communication with stakeholders.
related activities. This function is regulated by federal and
The Transportation Department lacks procedures to state laws related to funding, vehicle type, driver education,
promote the safety of students and staff. and safety issues. Districts implement these regulations,
TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT AND FLEET OPERATIONS HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
budget and allocate resources, and establish operational transported. Each district annually submits transportation
procedures for bell schedules, bus routes, and transportation reports containing these data to the Texas Education
fleet maintenance. Agency (TEA) for this purpose.
Managing transportation operations is dependent on Houston ISD self-manages its transportation operations.
the organizational structure of the district. Districts either The Transportation Department consists of 842 staff. The
may contract for or self-manage their transportation general manager of transportation oversees the department
operations. Using a contracted management model, and reports to the chief operating officer. Two senior
districts rely on the company to provide supervision of its operations managers report to the general manager. A newly
transportation operation. In this arrangement, a district established senior operations manager position oversees
may rely on the company to provide all or some staff, or it school bus operations and supervises senior terminal
may use district staff for its operations. Using the self- managers. Each terminal is assigned area managers, bus
management model, a district manages transportation drivers, team leads, field safety investigators, safety trainers,
and general clerks. A second senior operations manager
functions without assistance from an outside entity.
oversees the routing and scheduling, dispatch, and
Managing transportation operations requires planning;
compliance functions. Each terminal has assigned bus
state reporting and funding; training and safety; and vehicle
attendants from the Shared Services Department that ride
maintenance and procurement. Primary transportation
special education routes. Figure 11–1 shows the organization
expenditures include capital investments in vehicle fleets
of Transportation Department staff.
and annual costs of maintenance and operations. State
transportation funding for each school district is determined Figure 11–2 shows the organization of the Fleet Operations
by a formula that includes the number and type of students Department, which has 154 staff. The general manager of
FIGURE 11–1
HOUSTON ISD TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION, SCHOOL YEAR 2018–19
General Manager
Senior
Senior Operations Senior Operations

Manager Manager
Senior Terminal Managers – 4: Senior Routing Compliance Business

Barnett, Butler, Central, and Manager Representative Operation
Northwest terminals Team Lead
Area Team Lead Safety Team Business General

Managers – 4 Trainers – 4 Lead Analysts Clerk III
Field Safety General
Investigators – 4 Clerk II – 4
Routing Dispatchers
Bus Drivers Technician
General
Clerk III
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT AND FLEET OPERATIONS
FIGURE 11–2
HOUSTON ISD FLEET OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
General Manager of Logistics and Fleet Operations
Senior Manager of Fleet Operations
General Clerk II
Manager of Telecommunications Shop Foremen – 4:

Vehicle Parts Team Lead Truck Service Center; and
Barnett, Butler, Central and
Northwest Shops
Warehouser, Parts Warranty Upholsterers Transportation Parts

Team Lead Technician Representative Mechanic Team Technician – 5
Leads – 5
Telecom Mechanics (1) General
Repairers Clerk II – 5
Notes:
(1) Mechanic positions include senior transportation mechanics, transportation mechanics, associate transportation mechanics, and
transportation mechanic helpers.
(2) Since the time of the review team’s onsite visit, the manager of vehicle parts position has been eliminated. Vehicle parts technicians and
team leads report directly to the foreman of the shop to which they are assigned.
logistics and fleet operations oversees the department and efficiency metrics for the Houston ISD Transportation
reports to the facilities services officer. The senior manager of Department compared to CGCS reporting districts in the
fleet operations oversees the shop foremen responsible for upper, median, and lower quartiles.
each service center. Each service center is assigned
transportation mechanic team leads, mechanics, parts Figure 11–3 shows that Houston ISD’s cost per mile
technicians, and general clerks. operated and cost per bus during school year 2016–17
were near the median values reported to CGCS. Houston
The performance measures of cost effectiveness for a ISD’s cost per rider was in the upper quartile among
student transportation operation include the annual reporting districts.
cost per mile operated, cost per student rider, and cost
per bus. The Council of the Great City Schools (CGCS) At the time of the Legislative Budget Board’s School
publishes performance measures and performance data Performance Review Team’s onsite visit, Houston ISD
related to business operations in urban public school made recapture payments pursuant to the Texas
districts. Its 2018 publication Managing for Results, Education Code, Chapter 41. As a result, the district does
2018, includes the high, median, and low values for not receive a transportation allotment through the state’s
performance metric data from districts reporting to the Foundation School Program. Houston ISD funds student
CGCS, including Houston ISD. Districts in the upper transportation from the district’s general fund. For school
quartile reported the highest values for a given metric, and year 2018–19, the Transportation Department’s budget
districts in the lower quartile reported the lowest values. was $42.6 million, and the Fleet Operations Department’s
Figure 11–3 shows cost-effectiveness and operating- budget was $17.7 million.
FIGURE 11–3 DETAILED FINDINGS

HOUSTON ISD AND COUNCIL OF THE GREAT
CITY SCHOOLS KEY COST-EFFICIENCY MEASURES ORGANIZATION, RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION
COMPARISON, SCHOOL YEAR 2016–17 (1) (REC. 81)
COST PER MILE OPERATED
The Transportation Department has an inefficient
$8.00
organizational structure and a significant bus driver shortage.
$7.50 $7.36
The general manager of transportation in the Transportation
$7.00 Department assigns a large span of control to each of the
$6.50 senior terminal managers. Span of control is the number of
$6.00
subordinates that a supervisor directly oversees. At the time
of the onsite review, excluding the bus drivers, each senior
$5.50 $5.16 terminal manager had 14 directly reporting positions,
Median
$5.00 $5.07 including the area managers, team leads, field safety
$4.50 $4.24
investigators, safety trainers, and general clerks. Large spans
of control are too broad to be effective and contribute to a
$4.00 lack of efficiency and effectiveness, the fostering of
Upper Quartile Houston ISD Lower Quartile
informational and operational silos, and communication
COST PER RIDER breakdowns where staff cannot or do not interact with each
$2,000 $1,901 other effectively.
$1,800
$1,600 $1,479 In addition, some duties performed at each terminal are
$1,400
duplicated by department staff at the main transportation
administration building. The Transportation Department
$1,200 Median employs six dispatchers at the main administration building
$1,000 $1,075
$774 that communicate with the bus drivers and the motor pools
$800
via two-way radio. Dispatchers respond to accident reports
$600
and maintenance requests for broken-down buses. They
$400 also communicate with campuses and external parties such
$200 as parents, principals, campus nurses, and emergency
$0 medical services. Each terminal employs three general
Houston ISD Upper Quartile Lower Quartile
clerks that also perform dispatch duties that are not
COST PER BUS included in the job description for these positions. The
$80,000 $77,139 general clerks communicate by radio with bus drivers
$70,000 regarding late arrivals, accidents, and requests for buses due
$60,083 Median to overloads or the need to pick up a driver. Like the
$60,000 $60,272 dispatchers, the general clerks receive calls from parents and
$50,000 $47,256 other stakeholders. The general clerks at the terminals are
$40,000 not performing duties consistent with those at the
administration building, who perform clerical duties,
$30,000
prepare statistical reports, and maintain office files.
$20,000
Although some duties are duplicated within the department,
$10,000
other similar duties are separated. School districts are
$0 required to report certain transportation metrics annually to
Houston ISD Upper Quartile Lower Quartile TEA. The department’s compliance representative prepares
Note: (1) The Council of the Great City Schools 2018 report, the Transportation Route Services Report, and the general
Managing for Results, publishes data from school years 2013–14
to 2016–17. manager prepares the Transportation Operations Report.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Districts that follow best practices typically assign one
Team, February 2019; Council of the Great City Schools, Managing
for Results, 2018. position to prepare and submit both reports to maintain the
accuracy and consistency of the data reported to TEA, which events and job fair information from spring 2018. Such
is crucial to ensure compliance. outdated recruitment information can dissuade candidates
from applying for positions in the district.
At the time of the onsite review, the Transportation
Department had a shortage of 65 bus drivers, with 754 A department’s organization, staffing, and supervision can
drivers covering 819 routes. Senior terminal managers said affect its operations’ effectiveness and efficiency directly. Best
that route coverage is their biggest challenge. All of the practices indicate that span of control for a supervisory position
drivers are employed part-time with the exception of response should have no more than six to eight positions reporting to it
drivers, which are guaranteed 8.0 work hours per day. directly. In addition, effective organizations monitor and track
Response drivers serve as substitute drivers, perform clerical why staff leave. According to the Harvard Business School, a
tasks, monitor bus drivers’ pre-trip and post-trip inspections, strategic exit interview program provides insight into what
and perform yard or facility cleaning and vehicle fueling. staff are thinking, reveals problems in the organization, and
Because the department assigns some drivers multiple routes provides information about the competitive landscape.
to cover all the routes, some drivers incur overtime.
Effective bus driver recruiting programs employ various
Department staff stated that driver turnover is due partly to methods to attract applicants. These methods include word
concerns about budget decreases and to opportunities to of mouth, in which districts encourage current staff to recruit
earn higher wages in surrounding districts. Staff also said that qualified prospective applicants. Another strategy is to
other school districts offer previous experience pay, but advertise job announcements in local media, on signs at
Houston ISD offers the same starting pay of $16.65 per hour campuses, and at the bus facilities. Some districts give
to bus drivers regardless of experience. According to staff, the presentations to community groups. Another method is for
department eliminated some bus driver incentives, including the district to attach posters or banners advertising
a $250 recruitment award for staff who referred new drivers, employment opportunities to a bus parked at a business or a
and a $250 sign-on bonus after driving for 90 days. community or campus event. Districts also welcome
applicants aboard parked buses to discuss the job and
Although department staff acknowledged that the bus driver complete applications. During the interview and hiring
shortage is a significant problem, they reported various process, districts ask applicants how they learned of the job
numbers for the current driver turnover rate, indicating that opportunity to better optimize future advertisement and
the department does not track this metric accurately. Some recruiting efforts.
staff reported a bus driver turnover rate ranging from 5.0
percent to 7.0 percent. Others reported a rate of 10.0 percent The general manager of transportation should reorganize
or 20.0 percent. The district’s Human Resources Department Transportation Department functions and develop strategies to
provides an online exit survey for all district staff; however, improve recruitment and retention of staff. The general manager
the Transportation Department does not have an internal of transportation should complete the following actions:
process to gather concerns from departing staff and track the
• initiate a comprehensive staffing study to ensure that
reasons why bus drivers leave service. Bus drivers and other
all department functions are staffed appropriately
department staff reported perceiving a lack of appreciation
with the goal of emulating industry best practice.
and recognition from department management.
Evaluate the current organizational structure and
According to staff, the Transportation Department sends a work flows to determine whether staff could be
team of bus drivers to job fairs, libraries, shopping malls, repurposed or processes reengineered to achieve
laundromats, and other community locations to recruit operational efficiencies and effectiveness;
potential candidates. However, the department may not be
• evaluate staff responsibilities for appropriateness and
maximizing communication opportunities with the public.
take corrective action where needed;
According to interviews, Strategic Engagement and Outreach
Department staff update the website after receiving new • consider reorganizing operational and support
information from the Transportation Department. At the functions under each senior operations manager so
time of the onsite review, a link on the Transportation that one senior operations manager oversees school
Department’s website labeled “Now hiring bus drivers – bus operations, including the four terminals and the
Apply now” opened a recruitment page that lists upcoming dispatch function, and the other manager oversees
FIGURE 11-4
HOUSTON ISD TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT FUNCTIONAL ORGANIZATION EXAMPLE, APRIL 2019
Transportation General Manager
Senior Operations Manager Senior Operations Manager

of School Bus Operations of Operational Support
Dispatch Terminals Route Bus Driver Athletic

Planning Safety and and Field
Training Trips
Field Safety Technology State
Investigation Reporting
Source: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, April 2019.
the functions that support operations, which include recruitment information shown on the
route planning, safety, training, and technology. In department’s website is current.
this model, transferring the field safety investigators
Since the time of the review, the general manager of
and the safety trainers to the operational support
transportation has reorganized the department to decrease
reporting structure and shifting the dispatch function
the span of control for the terminal managers. The general
to the school bus operations reporting structure
manager of transportation added a training manager position
decreases the number of positions that report directly
that oversees the field safety investigators and senior bus
to the terminal managers. Figure 11–4 shows an
drivers (formerly titled safety trainers).
example of a functional organization chart that aligns
the operations and support functions to report to The district could implement this recommendation with
each senior operations manager: existing resources.
• monitor turnover rates and, in coordination with the
ROUTING AND SCHEDULING (REC. 82)
Human Resources Department’s online exit survey,
The Transportation Department has operational deficiencies
establish a process to solicit feedback from staff before
that negatively affect routing efficiency and service delivery.
they leave the Transportation Department to identify and
track the causes of their leaving and identify opportunities During school year 2018–19, the Transportation Department
to make or recommend changes in department procedure; implemented major changes to student routing to decrease
ride times, improve on-time arrivals, and improve
• coordinate with the Human Resources Department
communication with parents and campuses. The
to develop a recruiting program that includes best-
Transportation Department’s service delivery objectives
practice advertisement strategies;
include limiting student ride times to no more than 15 to 30
• partner with the Human Resources Department and minutes for zone route riders and no more than 60 to 90
review and update job titles and job descriptions minutes for magnet program riders. The department also
to provide a realistic portrayal of current duties, strives to ensure that students are not picked up before 6:00
responsibilities, expectations, and reporting lines. am and that zone route riders walk no more than 2.0 miles to
Redistribute revised job descriptions to affected staff their bus stops.
to ensure accountability; and
A significant change the district implemented at the start of
• coordinate with the Strategic Engagement school year 2018–19 was a new system for magnet program
and Outreach Department to ensure that the students that replaced many traditional neighborhood stops
with pickup and dropoff hub locations. There are 48 hub FIGURE 11–5
locations at designated Houston ISD campuses districtwide. COUNCIL OF GREAT CITY SCHOOLS ON–TIME
PERFORMANCE
Also during school year 2018–19, the district purchased a SCHOOL YEAR 2016–17
new global positioning system (GPS) provider, Zonar QUARTILE ON–TIME PERFORMANCE
Systems, to assist with rider eligibility and tracking. The Upper Quartile 100.0%
district also implemented a student badge program to track Median 99.9%
ridership and utilization of buses, routes, and stops, and to
enable parents to track when their students get on and off the Lower Quartile 99.7%
buses. The district provided personalized radio frequency Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
identification badges to all registered Houston ISD bus riders Team, February 2019; Council of the Great City Schools, Managing
for Results, 2018.
to scan as they enter and exit the buses.
In another major transition, the district implemented a new resulting in stops that were more than 2.0 miles from
routing and scheduling system at the start of school year students’ homes. According to onsite interviews, some
2018–19. Previously, the district used the Trapeze application students had to walk up to 6.0 miles to their assigned bus
for bus routing and scheduling. Following Hurricane Harvey stop. In addition, the Transportation Department did not
in August 2017, Trapeze was unable to update the district’s validate the routes adequately to ensure that they could be
routes, and the district replaced Trapeze with a new hosted driven in the time scheduled. The department conducted dry
application, Transfinder, at the start of the school year. runs to test the routes, but not during actual morning rush
The Transportation Department used the new routing and hour pickup times.
scheduling software to map the new routes at the beginning Transportation Department administration reported that they
of the school year. To route students, the district imports eliminated 90 routes through consolidation since the start of
rider eligibility information from the Chancery student the school year. They also reported decreasing late arrivals from
information system into the routing and scheduling seven to 10 late buses per day and achieving an on-time arrival
application, and the system maps routes based on the performance of from 85.0 percent to 90.0 percent.
student’s address and the district’s routing criteria.
Although the department has consolidated routes and
The district experienced several issues with the implementation decreased the number of buses arriving late, the current on-
of these new systems that resulted in service delivery time arrival is less than industry standards. Figure 11–5
outcomes that did not achieve the department’s goals. shows that Houston ISD’s reported on-time performance
According to onsite interviews, from 150 to 200 buses were rate ranging from 85.0 percent to 90.0 percent is less than
late per day during the first several months of the school year, those of districts in the lower quartile reporting to CGCS.
causing many students to miss class time, miss breakfast, and
arrive home late. In addition, the system did not assign all According to onsite interviews, although the district has
eligible students to buses. installed GPS tracking on all buses, it does not track buses that
run late or deviate from route paths. The Transportation
According to onsite interviews, inaccurate data and flaws in Department determines how many buses are late each day
the route mapping caused the issues. Historically, the district from reports from terminal staff that are in direct contact with
has not had a process to monitor ridership data. Transportation the bus drivers. According to interviews, the GPS tracking
Department staff reported that the district’s practice is for system often does not work properly due to technical issues.
drivers to pick up students waiting at stops, regardless of the
students’ eligibility or route assignments. When the district Another factor that contributes to late arrivals is the
transitioned to the hub system and developed new routes, it department’s inability to maximize route efficiency. The
underestimated the volume of eligible student riders and did department’s current inability to identify accurately the
not assign routes to an estimated 7,000 to 10,000 students actual number of students riding daily makes it difficult to
for the start of the school year. consolidate stops and routes. At the time of the onsite review,
the department had nearly 46,700 students (21,000 magnet,
Another issue with the new system was that it mapped routes 18,000 zone, 3,700 students with disabilities, and
using straight-line distance instead of walkable street paths, approximately 4,000 other students) routed and assigned to
bus stops. Transportation Department administration staff previously did not have bus routes because they were
estimated that 25,000 to 30,000 students are active riders neighborhood campuses, and all attending students lived
but expressed low confidence in the department’s ability to within 2.0 miles from their campuses. As a result, the
track the actual number of students riding daily. department did not have enough bus drivers to provide
transportation for these relocated students. To provide
One reason for this reservation is the district’s practice of
coverage, the department contracted with charter bus
picking up any student on any bus, regardless of route
companies, budgeting $4.8 million to outsource transportation
assignment. In addition, the quality of the electronic data
for relocated students during school year 2018–19. The need
from the student badge system is poor. Department staff
to contract with vendors for this function is costly and will
reported that of its estimated 25,000 to 30,000 active riders,
continue if the department is unable to consolidate routes
about 3,000 students scan their badges on the buses. Bus
effectively and decrease the bus driver shortage.
drivers reported that the student tracking system is not
updated consistently with route changes before morning According to interviews, planned budget decreases
routes begin, resulting in the scanners not processing will require the Transportation Department to
students’ badges correctly. eliminate approximately 60 routes for school year
2019–20, increasing the need to improve route
According to interviews, drivers do not enforce the district’s
efficiency. Maintaining route efficiency is critical to
badge policy consistently. Drivers are required to ensure that
ensuring the timely and safe transportation for students
students scan their badges and to enter information into the
and decreasing transportation costs. In addition, TEA
system manually for students without badges. In addition,
requires school districts to report certain transportation
drivers are required to complete eligible rider reports each
metrics, including student ridership, annually. Without a
month to document which students on the roster actually
process to count student ridership accurately, the district
ride the bus. The district’s school year 2018–19 Business
risks noncompliance with this requirement.
Operations Employee Handbook discusses this requirement,
but it does not establish consequences for noncompliance. The Transportation Department should develop and
According to interviews, some drivers perceive a disincentive implement a process to count transported students regularly
to correctly report ridership counts for fear that their paid and assess ridership to consolidate stops and routes and
hours may be decreased. At the time of the review, department improve on-time performance. The general manager of
administration staff said that they were starting to review transportation should perform the following actions:
school bus videos randomly to verify ridership counts and
• continue to educate drivers regarding the importance
arrival and departure times in response to suspicions that
of enforcing the badge policy and consult with
some drivers may be overreporting student ridership.
other departments to consider all types of student
Another factor contributing to inefficiencies in routing and identification used in the district and whether a
scheduling may be the lack of input from affected staff and universal badge system is feasible;
departments. The location of the buses at designated
• remind drivers that TEA requires accurate
terminals in relation to their route assignments affects route
reporting of the number of students transported.
efficiency, but senior terminal managers did not view all the
The general manager also should add language to
routes at the start of school year 2018–19 and were not
the student count sheet advising drivers that the
involved in determining terminal assignments for the buses.
count sheets are official Houston ISD documents
Students’ late arrival at campuses disrupts classrooms and and that falsifying any of their contents can lead to
may preclude some students from participating in the school staff discipline, including termination. This language
breakfast program. Monitoring actual daily ridership is an also should appear in the Employee Standard of
industry best practice essential to identify opportunities to Conduct section of the district’s Business Operations
decrease costs by consolidating routes and buses, eliminating Employee Handbook;
stops, or equalizing loads.
• validate ridership counts and arrival and departure
At the time of the onsite review, the district used vendors to times by assigning department staff to monitor
provide relocation transportation from campuses closed due to campus loading and unloading zones daily and
damage from Hurricane Harvey. The relocated campuses continuing to review school bus videos;
• leverage current GPS technology to track arrival Houston ISD provides curb-to-curb service to 100.0 percent
and departure times, and utilize current software to of special education students that need transportation as a
generate daily exception reports of routes that run related service according to their individualized education
late or do not follow the prescribed route paths. The programs (IEP). The district transports 3,700 special
general manager should hold area managers and education students on 284 dedicated routes.
senior terminal managers accountable for taking
The review team did not find evidence that the district has
prompt and appropriate action to correct on-time
considered integrating special education and regular
performance issues; and
education students onto the same routes to better comply
• establish an interdepartmental routing timeline with the U.S. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
committee to annually develop appropriate and (IDEA), which requires that students with disabilities have
acceptable deadlines for the submission of data and the opportunity to be educated with nondisabled peers in the
completion of tasks. This committee should include “least restrictive environment.” Specifically, the federal law
key staff from the Transportation, Academics, requires school districts to ensure that:
Special Education, Student Support Services, Fleet
… to the maximum extent appropriate, children with
Operations, Communications, and Information
disabilities, including children in public or private
Technology departments and others as appropriate.
institutions or other care facilities, are educated with
The committee should complete the following tasks:
children who are nondisabled. … special classes, separate
ºº ensure that routing staff have sufficient time to schooling, or other removal of children with disabilities
prepare summer and fall routes that are efficient from the regular educational environment occurs only if
and cost-effective; the nature or severity of the disability is such that
education in regular classes with the use of supplementary
ºº discuss the service and fiscal impact of proposed
aids and services cannot be achieved satisfactorily.
changes to bell schedules, program placements,
and new academic initiatives; and IDEA also addresses the transportation needs of students
with disabilities. Transportation is a related service as
ºº review routing policies and practices to maximize
defined by the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR),
collective ride times, earliest pickup times, the
Title 34, Section 300.34, that includes travel to and from
number of students on each bus including load
campus and between campuses; travel in and around
counts and seat utilization, distances to walk to
campus buildings; and the use of specialized equipment
bus stops, and the number of stops on each run
such as special or adapted buses, lifts, and ramps. Each
with the goal of decreasing the number of trips
student’s IEP team determines if transportation is required
and buses used.
to assist a student with a disability to benefit from special
Since the time of the review, the Transportation Department education and related services, and how the district should
has implemented Z-pass, which enables the department to provide transportation services.
capture data for the number of students riding the bus each
According to guidance published by the federal Office of
day. The Transportation Department indicated that drivers
Management and Budget, IDEA does not require local
will be held accountable for student ridership counts and the
education agencies to transport students with disabilities in
department has added language to the school year 2019-20
separate vehicles, isolated from their peers. The guidance
Business Operation Handbook describing the importance of
states that students with disabilities can receive the same
student ridership and warning of disciplinary action for
transportation provided to nondisabled children, in
failure to accurately complete rider reports.
accordance with 34 CFR, Sections 300.114 to 300.120.
The district’s practice of transporting special education and
existing resources.
regular education students separately does not promote the
spirit of inclusion pursuant to IDEA. In addition, this
SPECIAL EDUCATION TRANSPORTATION (REC. 83)
practice may inhibit the Transportation Department from
Houston ISD does not transport regular education students achieving maximum route efficiency and decreasing
on the same bus as their special education peers. transportation costs per student. According to interviews,
some bus drivers reported that they typically have 25 regular with the teams they supervise and with the general manager.
education students on 75-passenger buses and less than five However, terminal staff reported varying frequencies of
students on 47-passenger special education buses. meetings with their teams and with senior terminal mangers,
with some teams meeting weekly, every few weeks, monthly, or
Efficient districts transport students that have disabilities once or twice a year. Some staff said that they do not meet with
with students that do not have disabilities when the location their teams or the senior terminal manager, and they receive
and schedule of both student groups enable this practice. information through newsletters. Several staff noted a lack of
communication in the department and stated that they
Houston ISD should explore options to achieve greater
preferred more regular meetings with terminal management.
inclusion and promote the use of the least restrictive
environment on buses. The Transportation Department also does not communicate
effectively with campuses. Campus administrators reported
The district’s general counsel, Special Education Department
that they are not always notified of late buses or other
staff, and Transportation Department staff should form a
interruptions of service. According to the administrators, the
committee to evaluate the district’s approach to encouraging the
department sends an email that identifies the numbers of the
least restrictive environment in transporting students with
routes that are late or changed. However, the emails do not
disabilities. The committee should perform the following actions:
identify which students or stops are affected. Although the
• consider expanding the ridership of bus routes Transportation Department provides campus principals with
dedicated either to students with disabilities or lists of students and route assignments at the beginning of the
regular education students to establish routes that school year, the lists become inaccurate as the department
incorporate both student groups; and changes routes. The department does not always notify the
campuses of student roster changes in a timely manner. In
• establish IEP meeting protocols to determine if special addition, principals reported that calls to the terminals often
education students—based on the disability, needs, are not answered during peak hours, which impedes the ability
and other related factors—should be transported to of campus staff to respond when parents call to locate students.
and from home or could be transported to and from
a campus or designated route stop along with their The Transportation Department notifies principals of service
nondisabled peers. changes primarily at principals’ meetings, which occur
monthly. The general manager of transportation presents
The Transportation Department senior routing manager information at these meetings, but principals do not have the
should ensure that routing staff map routes that can opportunity to ask questions. In addition, the Transportation
accommodate street corner and curb-to-curb bus stops safely. Department does not include principals’ input in developing
The district could implement the recommendation to form and implementing changes to bus service. For example,
the committee within existing resources. The fiscal impact to principals said that they were not included in the decision to
consolidate special education and regular education routes transition to a hub system. Some principals had safety
cannot be estimated until the district determines the number concerns upon learning a few weeks before the school year
of special education students to be picked up and dropped began that their campuses were hub locations. Principals
off at assigned bus stops and the number of these students stated that the operation of the hub bus system affects their
that require curb-to-curb service. staff and that campuses fund after school staff to direct traffic
to ensure that buses are in line first and to check rosters to
COMMUNICATION (REC. 84) ensure that students board the correct buses. Principals
expressed a need for more inclusion and input into
The Transportation Department lacks efficient methods for
transportation-related decisions.
communication with stakeholders.
To foster communication with parents, the Transportation
The department has opportunities to improve communication
Department conducts bimonthly meetings to share updates
among internal department staff. Regularly scheduled staff
and progress, identify ongoing challenges, and gather
meetings do not occur throughout the department.
feedback. However, the district’s transportation-related
The senior terminal managers report to the general manager. communication for immediate questions from parents and
Each senior terminal manager reported meeting once a week community members has opportunities for improvement.
During school year 2017–18, the Business Operations The general manager of transportation should ensure that
Division established the Customer Care Call Center to regular staff meetings take place at each level of the
receive all calls from parents, residents in the community, Transportation Department. These meetings should include
students, and staff regarding matters that pertain to Houston specific agendas, documented minutes of discussions,
ISD business operations, including transportation. However, decisions, and follow-up activities. These documents provide
many stakeholders reported being unaware of this service staff the following information:
and calling multiple phone numbers with transportation-
• the district’s and department’s goals and objectives
related questions and concerns. Principals and hub monitors
and how they will be achieved;
reported calling the terminals directly for information on late
buses. Parents reported calling the bus terminals, central • meetings for interdepartmental collaboration with all
dispatch, or the campuses to locate their students. appropriate departments and stakeholders;
Furthermore, the telephone number posted on the back of
Houston ISD school buses is routed to the Transportation • how staff will be held accountable and evaluated
Department dispatch office instead of to the Customer Care using performance-monitoring metrics;
Call Center.
• why changes are made that may affect the team and
The Transportation Department does not conduct surveys to expected outcomes of these changes;
gauge customer satisfaction with transportation services or to
• that managers and supervisors are dissem-
identify areas of concern. Poor communication and planning
inating information and feedback within and
and the lack of inclusion can lead to operational failure, low
among departments;
morale, and employee attrition.
• that staff feedback and suggestions are welcomed,
CGCS’s publication Building Public Confidence in Urban
considered, and valued; and
Schools, 2009, suggests developing strategies and tactics to
communicate with all segments of an organization, including • that communication channels are available to distribute
the following strategies: department news and information regularly.
• develop staff opinion surveys to gauge what The general manager also should perform the
communication tools would be most effective in following actions:
informing them and helping them support the system;
• develop and implement a communications protocol
• refine and improve the communication tools used to to ensure that the Transportation Department
disseminate information to staff; updates campuses regarding route changes regularly
and timely; the protocol should ensure that campuses
• develop a communications toolkit for managers that
consistently have updated information to locate
includes key messages to be shared when describing
students when buses are late to decrease the volume
a major initiative, memo templates for use in
of parent and staff calls to bus terminals;
communicating with staff, and talking points for staff
meetings; and • implement programs to measure customer satisfaction,
including the use of customer surveys and focus groups,
• convene a standing internal communications
to identify service concerns and establish priorities
advisory group.
and training. At a minimum, the general manager
District’s following best practices communicate with students of transportation should solicit input from parents,
and parents through email, phone, text, and fliers provided to campus administrators, teachers who lead field trips,
students. They also solicit stakeholder input for transportation athletic directors, and coaches; and
functions and services, including contributions from bus
drivers, students, parents, and campus administrators. • coordinate with the general manager of customer
care to analyze the volume of phone calls to the
The general manager of transportation should establish processes bus terminals, central dispatch, and the Customer
to strengthen Transportation Department internal and external Care Call Center. Evaluate strategies to decrease
communications and solicit feedback from stakeholders. the volume of transportation-related calls directly
to the terminals and dispatch; encourage parents monitor bus drivers to ensure that they scan or manually
and campus staff to contact the Customer Care Call enter students’ ID badges at boarding.
Center for all transportation questions and concerns.
Bus drivers do not receive additional training from the
Consider forwarding the phone number posted on
district. Unsafe operating practices observed during the
school buses to the Customer Care Call Center rather
onsite review indicate a need for refresher training to ensure
than to central dispatch.
that drivers follow procedures taught during the preservice
Since the time of the review team’s onsite visit, the training appropriately.
Transportation Department has implemented Let’s Talk!, an
Figure 11–6 shows examples of unsafe operating practices
online communication tool that parents and campus staff
observed by the review team compared with school
can use to submit questions and concerns, track inquiries,
transportation best practices and requirements in statute.
and rate transportation services. The Transportation
Department also implemented SafeStop, a school bus- In addition, the district ceased providing certain safety-
tracking application that enables parents to track their related training for bus drivers and bus attendants. At the
students’ buses and view where the buses are along their time of the onsite review, the district did not provide first aid
routes. The application also provides expected arrival times or cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) training for drivers
for each stop. of buses that transport regular education students. Bus
attendants reported that they no longer receive training to
address student discipline on the buses.
existing resources.
The district also has opportunities to provide school bus
TRAINING AND SAFETY (REC. 85) safety awareness to students. Houston ISD does not provide
The Transportation Department lacks procedures to promote training to prepare students for school bus emergencies.
the safety of students and staff. Although state law does not require mandatory school bus
emergency evacuation drills, Texas Education Code, Section
The Transportation Department has a preservice program to
34.0021 provides the following guidelines related to
train new bus drivers to obtain class B commercial driver
emergency evacuation training sessions:
licenses and proper endorsements through the Texas
Department of Public Safety (DPS). Each terminal has • a district may conduct a training session for students
senior bus drivers that are dedicated safety trainers. They and teachers concerning procedures for evacuating a
provide behind-the-wheel instruction and technical training school bus during an emergency. If it so chooses, the
to new bus drivers and remedial training to drivers that have district is encouraged to conduct the training session
been in preventable accidents. The safety trainers also observe between July 1 and December 31, and to structure the
bus drivers perform pre-trip and post-trip inspections and session so that: (1) it applies to school bus passengers;
FIGURE 11–6
HOUSTON ISD TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT’S OBSERVED OPERATING PRACTICES
FEBRUARY 2019
OBSERVATIONS SAFETY BEST PRACTICE
Multiple incidents in which the bus driver pulled away from the A school district may not require or allow a child to stand on a
curb while students onboard were standing or walking to their moving school bus or passenger van, pursuant to the Texas
seats. Education Code, §34.004, and Board Policy CNC (LEGAL).
Multiple incidents in which students in loading zones rushed to the Students stand six to 10 feet from the curb until the driver opens
curb as buses approached. the door to signal that students may approach the bus.
No observed supervision by transportation staff to ensure that Regular oversight of bus safety inspections, including
drivers completed required bus safety inspections. unscheduled monitoring visits.
An incident at a magnet hub location in which a driver reversed Utilize another person to watch for hazards while operating bus in
a large school bus unaided in a loading zone while pedestrians reverse to warn driver of safety issues.
walked nearby.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, February 2019; Texas Association of School Boards
Policy Service.
(2) a portion of the session occurs on a school bus; Exhaust fumes inside the bus are a health and safety hazard
and (3) the session lasts for at least one hour; to students, drivers, and bus attendants.
• the training must be based on the recommendations Figure 11–7 shows a sampling of best practice training
of the most recent edition of the National School topics for school bus drivers that are useful during pre-
Transportation Specifications and Procedures, as adopted employment and in-service training.
by the National Congress on School Transportation, or a
Houston ISD should enhance transportation training for
similar school transportation safety manual.
drivers and students and address safety concerns at the
• the district is encouraged to review school bus terminals and on school buses.
emergency evacuation procedures with the passengers
The general manager of transportation should perform the
immediately before each field trip involving
following actions:
transportation by bus, including a demonstration of
the emergency exits and how to safely exit; and • provide ongoing training of drivers to reinforce all
safety, bus loading, bus riding, bus unloading, and
• within 30 days of completing the training session,
other procedures, including reversing the bus in and
the district must provide DPS with a record
around campuses and parking lots;
certifying its completion.
• hold transportation staff accountable for monitoring
The review team observed safety concerns related to the
bus inspections, student loading and unloading, and
physical condition of the parking lots at the bus terminals.
hold drivers and students accountable to safe riding
During early morning onsite reviews of the Butler and
practices and related statutes;
Central motor pool parking lots, the review team observed
parking lot lighting that was inadequate and, in some areas, • coordinate with the general manager of maintenance
almost nonexistent. These parking lots also contained large services and repairs to evaluate the adequacy of the
areas of cracked and broken blacktop, pot holes, and uneven outdoor lighting at the Butler and Central parking
pavement. The review team observed pooling water, which is facilities. Consider providing fluorescent and
indicative of inadequate drainage. reflective safety vests to drivers, supervisors, bus
attendants, and fleet maintenance to enhance their
During onsite interviews, staff reported safety concerns on
visibility in bus parking areas;
the buses. These concerns included heaters and air
conditioners that do not work properly and exhaust fumes • form a team of staff from the Risk Management,
that enter buses when students are aboard. Facilities, and Transportation departments to
evaluate grading, slope, and drainage; structural
Failure to provide refresher training for drivers increases the
failures such as cracking, potholes, and sink holes;
risk that unsafe operating practices continue uncorrected. In
elevation changes; and other potential safety, risk,
addition, the lack of conducting emergency evacuation drills
and liability issues at the Butler and Central motor
leaves students unprepared for emergencies. Students also
pool parking lots and other locations as necessary.
lack the understanding of how to safely wait for the school
Develop recommendations, priorities, and estimates
bus until it arrives, safely board and ride the school bus,
to bring these parking facilities up to acceptable safety
safely evacuate the school bus if needed, and safely exit and
standards. Investigate whether capital funds or other
move away from the school bus.
unassigned fund balances can be used to improve
Poor lighting impairs drivers’ pretrip bus inspections and safety and mitigate risk;
increases the likelihood of accidents. Bus drivers and others
• examine the benefits of reinstating first aid and CPR
in the bus parking lot do not wear fluorescent and reflective
training for all drivers and possibly other department
safety vests to enhance visibility, increasing the danger.
staff; seek grant-funded opportunities if district
Inadequate drainage also may contribute to reports of water
funding is not available;
seeping into underground gasoline and diesel storage tanks.
Inadequate climate control on buses puts passengers at risk • emphasize to drivers and supervisors that buses
of exposure to dangerous temperatures, a particular concern without properly functioning climate controls are not
for students who have long ride times or health concerns. to be driven; require drivers to report malfunctioning
FIGURE 11–7
BEST PRACTICE TRAINING TOPICS FOR SCHOOL BUS DRIVERS
FEBRUARY 2019
TOPIC DETAILS
Emergency and disaster preparedness Training for managing emergencies that happen when the bus is on its route,
including driving emergencies, emergency evacuations, and use of emergency
equipment
Safely running a route Entering and exiting the bus garage and yard, following a route sheet or map, use
of GPS technology, entering and exiting school zones, and handling mechanical
difficulties and breakdowns
Safety procedures in the school loading and Passenger safety and special training for managing students that have disabilities and
unloading zone students that must be secured in wheelchairs
Cell phone and electronic communication In accordance with applicable regulations, laws, and local policies
device restrictions
Defensive driving skills Avoidance of distracted driving and aggressive driving
Activity trips Training on laws, policies, and procedures specific to activity trips, including interstate
transportation regulations
Accidents Accident investigation and management procedures
First aid Complying with blood-borne pathogen and first aid protocols
Managing student discipline on the school bus Including bullying prevention
Drug and alcohol regulations Driver compliance and reporting by bus drivers of prescription and over-the-counter
drug use to supervisors managing confidential records
Adult behavior Requirements for reporting inappropriate behavior of other adults, including Houston
ISD staff
Threatening situations Handling threatening situations on the bus, including hostage situations
Protective equipment Proper use of personal protective equipment and child safety restraint systems
Railroad crossings Procedures at railroad crossings
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Compliance with the federal law governing transport of children that have disabilities
Head Start Preservice and in-service training requirements for drivers of Head Start passengers
pursuant to the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 45, Part 1310
Safe driving Techniques for safe driving, including mirror use and adjustment; smooth starts and
stops; use of emergency brake; safe turning, reversing, and reference-point driving;
and the reduction of costly school bus idling
Vehicle damage Techniques to identify and avoid practices that result in driver-related vehicle damage
Fueling vehicles Training for fueling buses and handling and preventing fuel and other hazardous
materials spills
Sight zones Maintaining unobstructed bus driver sight zones from the driver’s seat
Preparedness Physical and mental preparedness to perform required duties adequately
Communication Communicating effectively with campus staff, students, parents, law enforcement
officials, and the public on roadways
Routes and schedules Routing and scheduling guidelines
Legal policies Legal issues and a review of local school transportation policies, plans, and
procedures, and liability in school transportation
Reports Completing required state and district reports
Maintenance Maintaining a clean and uncluttered bus with unobstructed access to emergency exits
heaters and air conditioners to fleet maintenance Department determine whether old buses should be sold at
promptly; and auction or destroyed and sold as scrap metal.
• prioritize the monitoring of excessive bus engine At the time of the onsite review, the district operated 819 bus
idling to decrease the risk of exhaust entering bus routes and owned, maintained, inspected and serviced 1,127
interiors. Require fleet maintenance to examine all buses. These amounts equate to a 27.3 percent spare ratio,
door seals and gaskets and replace them as necessary which is greater than the industry standard of a spare ratio
to prevent exhaust from entering the buses. Reinforce, ranging from 10.0 percent to 12.0 percent.
through training, that bus drivers should remain alert
Onsite interviews yielded widely varying estimates as to the
for the odor of exhaust fumes inside the bus.
average age of the fleet. Estimates from staff ranged from 7.0
The Houston ISD Board of Education should consider years to 13.0 years, and others estimated the average age from
requiring school bus evacuation and safety training for all 15.0 years to 16.0 years. Using data provided by the district,
students. If the board adopts this requirement into policy, the review team calculates the weighted average of the
the general manager of transportation and bus drivers should Houston ISD school bus fleet to be 10.0 years. The trade
train students on the following procedures: publication School Bus Fleet releases fleet information
regularly. Its 2017 survey reported an average fleet age of 9.0
• procedures for students waiting at the bus stop, years for participants, which is less than the district’s reported
loading and unloading at bus stops, riding the school and calculated averages.
buses, and loading and unloading in the school zone;
The district’s lack of a robust vehicle replacement plan
• seating safely and securing carry-on items in the contributes to the large spare ratio and higher-than-average
school bus; fleet age. According to onsite interviews, the district
• rules for managing the school bus danger zone – determines when to replace a bus based primarily on its age.
students should stay at least 12 feet from the sides of At the time of the review, the district’s vehicle replacement
the bus, should not cross behind the bus, and should plan tracked a vehicle’s construction year and warranty status.
cross the roadways at least 12 feet in front of the bus; However, the plan does not track other variables that are
critical to determining vehicle replacement and disposal.
• school bus evacuation training at least twice a school Such variables include the total miles driven, age of key drive
year, including all eligible students and students that train components, repair history, and operating cost per
have special needs; and mile. The plan also lacks replacement criteria by vehicle
capacity and body type; anticipated revenue of the sale of
• procedures for how students that have disabilities
replaced vehicles; anticipated maintenance savings by
should load and unload the bus and be secured
removing older vehicles that are more expensive to maintain;
in wheelchairs.
anticipated annual cost increases of new vehicles; enrollment
The district could implement this recommendation with trends and projections; or potential funding sources. The
existing resources. The fiscal impact assumes no additional plan’s financial data for cost by replacement cycle are scant
costs for bus driver training because the department already and incomplete.
has positions dedicated to this function. In addition to the large spare ratio, the district does not
appear to manage its derelict vehicles appropriately. The
ASSET MANAGEMENT (REC. 86) review team observed approximately 35 vehicles, including
The Fleet Operations Department does not manage spare buses and general service vehicles, identified as nonfunctioning
and surplus vehicles effectively to maximize efficiency and located at the northeast corner of the Butler Terminal.
meet industry standards. According to onsite interviews, these vehicles have been idle
for several years, and district staff were unaware of plans to
Each Transportation Department terminal has assigned
auction them for scrap metal.
active-route buses and spare buses. The Transportation
Department determines the assignment of buses to terminals, Maintaining an excessive amount of spare buses is costly to
and the Fleet Operations Department procures, maintains, the district. The Texas Transportation Code, Chapter 548
and disposes the buses. Fleet Operations and the Fixed Assets requires school buses to have certified annual inspections,
regardless of whether they are used regularly for routes. The The senior manager of fleet operations should prioritize the
district must continue to pay annual state inspection and decommissioning of surplus buses and prepare them for sale as
registration fees for each bus in its inventory. prescribed in district policy. The senior manager should expedite
the disposal of all vehicles and associated metal currently stored
Effective districts develop bus replacement plans to maintain
at the northeast corner of Butler Motor Pool facility or any
the necessary fleet size and to reduce maintenance costs by
location where unused vehicles and equipment are stored.
replacing buses when they reach the end of their life cycles.
Although buses are a large capital investment for school Since the time the review, the district reported that it has a
districts, comprehensive replacement plans offer many developed a vehicle replacement plan based on age, mileage,
benefits. Districts that have replacement plans regularly and work order/repair history.
introduce new buses into their fleets to replace those that
The fiscal impact assumes that the district decreases the spare
have the highest operating costs. These districts also rotate
fleet ratio to 12.0 percent by auctioning 196 buses and selling
buses from the longest routes to the shortest to extend the life
35 nonfunctioning buses for scrap metal. If the district sells
of the buses. Staff reevaluate the replacement plan annually
196 buses at an average price of $2,185 per bus, and sells 35
to determine which buses should be sold depending on
buses for scrap metal at an average price of $840 per bus, the
mileage or condition. Regular purchase of buses can prevent
district would achieve a total onetime gain of $457,660
the necessity to acquire a large number of buses during a
[($2,185 x 196) + ($840 x 35)].
single year. This practice enables a district to plan retiring
buses and increase or decrease the fleet to meet student The fiscal impact results in an annual savings of $12,152 for
enrollment demands. eliminating annual registration and inspection fees for 196
buses ($62 commercial vehicle inspection and registration
The Fleet Operations Department should develop a bus
fees x 196 buses).
replacement plan that includes industry-standard criteria
and decrease the number of spare and surplus school buses in
FLEET MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR (REC. 87)
the district’s inventory.
The district’s high percentage of out-of-service vehicles
The senior manager of fleet operations should develop
negatively affects service delivery for several departments.
business case justifications for a robust vehicle replacement
strategy that incorporates processes to ensure the acquisition Houston ISD’s Fleet Operations Department performs all
of sufficient vehicles to meet the district’s needs. preventive maintenance and most major repairs for the
district’s school buses and general service fleet vehicles. The
In developing the plan, the senior manager of fleet operations
department operates a service and repair shop at each of the
should include key data such as long-range enrollment forecasting
terminal locations to repair school buses. The department also
and percentage of enrolled students transported. The plan should
operates a Truck Service Center at the Central terminal for the
separate replacement criteria based on vehicle capacity and body
maintenance and repair of the general services fleet vehicles.
type into different models and include the following data:
• vehicle mileage; The Fleet Operations Department budget provides all
funding for the maintenance and repair of the district’s
• maintenance costs compared to vehicle value; school bus and general services fleets. The senior manager of
• per-mile operating cost; fleet operations has the discretion to prioritize which vehicles
to repair first, and which vehicles will undergo major repairs.
• anticipated annual cost increases of new vehicles;
The district has high ratios of out-of-service school buses and
• per-seat cost for school buses; general service fleet vehicles. Staff reported that approximately
• anticipated revenue from the sale of replaced 10.0 percent of buses and 15.0 percent of general service fleet
vehicles; and vehicles are out of service at any given time. Fleet Operations
Department administrators stated that the department’s goal
• anticipated maintenance savings by removing older is to decrease the ratio to 5.0 percent for both fleets.
vehicles that are more expensive to maintain, and
including revenue from potential funding streams District staff from various departments, including the
such as capital funds, bonds, and others. Transportation, Facilities, Nutrition Services, and Police
departments stated that they are satisfied overall with the Service center staff stated that they lack critical resources and
turnaround time for routine preventive maintenance repairs. training to diagnose and service vehicles properly and timely,
especially newer vehicles. In addition, service centers lack
However, staff reported significant wait times for repairs, which
updated manuals for diagnostic software, repair, and parts.
can take weeks or months. Staff said that a terminal with 174
routes has from 30 to 40 buses out of service, and another Warranty repairs also contribute to lengthy out-of-service
terminal with 213 routes has 50 buses out of service. According periods, often days or weeks, according to onsite interviews.
to onsite interviews, 20 of the Police Department’s 95 vehicles The district’s newer propane-powered buses experience large
were at the Truck Service Center awaiting repairs at the time of amounts of warranty repair, exacerbating the challenge of
the review. Similarly, the Nutrition Services Department keeping vehicles in service. The district has not made
reported that many delivery trucks are out of service, and one agreements with dealerships and vendors to enable Houston
truck had been at the service center for three months. The ISD mechanics to perform warranty repairs onsite. As a
Nutrition Services Department delivers meal components on result, the district cannot expedite warranty repairs nor
daily routes to 280 campus cafeterias. Staff reported that, due to control when those vehicles are returned to service.
the number of out-of-service delivery trucks, the Nutrition
Services Department had to rent refrigerated vehicles from According to interviews, vehicles also are placed out of service
vendors to maintain route coverage for food deliveries. due to budgetary reasons. Fleet Operations Department staff
stated that when annual repair funds are exhausted, no major
Several factors contribute to the timeliness and quality of repairs can be made until the next fiscal year, which can keep
repairs. The Fleet Operations Department does not use vehicles out of service for long periods. At the time of the onsite
industry-standard productivity measurement tools to review, the district performed all preventive maintenance,
evaluate the performance of the mechanics and the service including basic preventive maintenance, inspection, and service.
centers. According to onsite interviews, department The Fleet Operations Department has not performed a business
management monitors performance by comparing the case analysis to determine whether outsourcing selected
productivity of the service centers to each other. Department preventive maintenance services would be more cost-effective.
staff stated that if one service center has a better-than-average
performance time for a particular task, then management Unscheduled out-of-service vehicles negatively affect service
will try to learn what that service center is doing to be more delivery to campuses and students. Staff stated that long
efficient. However, the department has not established flat- repair wait times impede the Houston ISD Police
rate times to ensure that service centers have consistent Department’s ability to deliver emergency services. The
standards for the time it takes to perform similar or identical shortage of functioning police vehicles causes delays in
services and repairs. Department managers stated that they response times to high volumes of emergency calls. In
use an honor system to determine the amount of time it addition, long repair wait times impede the Nutrition
should take mechanics to complete tasks. As a result, little Services Department from transporting food safely. When
consistency exists among service centers when measuring the trucks are out of service, the department has to pack more
time to perform repairs. food product onto the operational trucks, which taxes the
refrigerator units onboard and forces campus kitchens to
In addition to a lack of performance standards, workflow at dispose of food that arrives at incorrect temperatures.
the service centers is inefficient, and work stoppage is
frequent. Each service center’s parts room is accessible only The Fleet Operations Department should develop and
to parts technicians who have the keys. According to onsite implement processes to monitor service center productivity
interviews, mechanics cannot access parts when parts and vendor performance to decrease the district’s number of
technicians are not present. Therefore, repair work stops out-of-service vehicles. The senior manager of fleet operations
until a parts technician opens the parts room and issues the should perform the following actions:
needed part, which could be the next day. Mechanics
• hold shop foreman accountable for ensuring that their
reported that no system requires them finish a quantifiable
shops meet or exceed productivity goals. Establish
amount of work by a deadline, and the service centers do not
accountability through the following steps:
have weekly mechanic assignments. If work stops on a vehicle
due to a parts delay, then the mechanic may not have another ºº requiring shop foremen collectively to establish
vehicle to attend. appropriate flat-rate times for all department
services and routine repairs through the use of purchase contracts to ensure that the district receives
industry-standard productivity measurement the following assets: (1) the appropriate number of
tools and an accountability process across manuals for diagnostic software, repair, and parts
the department; for any vehicle or vehicles purchased; (2) all software
updates as they are released; and (3) hands-on training
ºº requiring shop foremen to reassign mechanics
for all appropriate fleet maintenance staff regarding the
promptly to other service or repair tasks until
maintenance and repair of all new vehicles in the fleet;
needed parts are available; and
• coordinate with the Legal Services Department and
ºº scheduling monthly individual accountability
the Business Logistics and Purchasing Department to
meetings with each shop foreman to monitor
consider incorporating the following language into
productivity and consistency among service centers;
vehicle purchase contracts:
• conduct a study to determine how many minutes each
parts room is closed during two weeks. If, during this ºº enable the district to make selected warranty
period, any parts room is closed for an aggregate total repairs and to charge back to the dealer or vendor
of 30.0 or more minutes in a day, provide all shop the district’s full cost of the repair, receive credit
foremen key access to the parts room at their locations; for future repair work, or use these credits to
procure parts; and
• consider moving consumables, such as fasteners,
bolts, nuts and washers, near service bays to help ºº protect the district from unreasonable delays in
mechanics timely complete repairs by providing them dealer or vendor warranty work completion times.
quick access to these consumables. Parts room staff Liquidated damage (LD) language should appear
should leave the facility rarely to pick up parts when in all vehicle procurement contracts to define, by
no other staff is available; category, liquidated damages for each day that
warranty work is not completed and the vehicle
• conduct a business case analysis to determine is not ready for pickup. For example, a Category
whether certain preventive maintenance and other I repair could include repairs that reasonably
selected repairs can be outsourced cost-effectively. If should take no more than 3.0 days to complete.
outsourcing is a viable option, identify opportunities If the vehicle is not ready by the end of the third
to repurpose mechanic staff to other functions to day, LD charges of, for example, $100 will be
decrease the number of out-of-service vehicles. assessed each subsequent day until the vehicle is
Perform this analysis through the following steps: ready. Categories II and III repair could include
repairs that should reasonably take no more than
ºº define the elements of preventive maintenance
five days or seven days, respectively, to complete,
inspection and service that the district requires;
with LD charges accruing on subsequent days in
ºº coordinate with the Business Logistics and a similar manner.
Purchasing Department to solicit requests for
proposals (RFP) from private service facilities ; and The district should consider moving all annual funding for
repairs, on a pro-rata basis, from the Fleet Operations
ºº compare bids received with the full cost of an Department budget to the individual departments that
identical service performed onsite. Include discounts operate each specific vehicle. The Fleet Operations
in the RFP for economies of scale (i.e., multiple Department would provide cost estimates for repairs to the
vehicles serviced daily, weekly, and monthly); appropriate department manager for consideration. Based on
the needs and priorities of each department, department
• consider sending fleet maintenance staff, on a rotating
managers would prioritize, determine, and approve which of
basis, to courses and training to improve current skills,
their vehicles would be funded for repairs. Preventive
develop special expertise that is not represented, and
maintenance and repair funds should not be used for any
learn about new technology and techniques;
other purpose. Repair funds should be authorized to carry
• coordinate with the Business Logistics and Purchasing forward into the next fiscal year, without adjusting down the
Department to include language in all vehicle department’s repair budget for the subsequent fiscal year. All
funds for preventive maintenance would remain in the Fleet

Operations Department’s budget to ensure that the district’s
vehicle assets receive all appropriate preventive maintenance
inspections and service.
Since the time of the review, the senior manager of fleet

operations initiated an assessment of the truck service center
to determine if the department should outsource fleet
maintenance and repair services.

existing resources.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Legislative Budget Board’s (LBB) School Performance Review Team has identified a fiscal impact for the following
recommendation:

11. TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT AND FLEET OPERATIONS
86. Develop a bus replacement plan that $12,152 $12,152 $12,152 $12,152 $12,152 $60,760 $457,660
includes industry-standard criteria and
decrease the number of spare and
surplus school buses in the district’s
inventory.
Total $12,152 $12,152 $12,152 $12,152 $12,152 $60,760 $457,660
The LBB’s School Performance Review Team could not determine a fiscal impact for other recommendations due to a lack of
data. However, Houston ISD has the potential for significant savings by implementing the following recommendations:
Recommendation 81: Reorganize Transportation Department functions and develop strategies to improve recruitment
and retention of staff. The implementation of this recommendation could result in savings from reducing duplication of
duties and streamlining organizational functions.
Recommendation 82: Develop and implement a process to count transported students regularly and assess ridership
to consolidate stops and routes and improve on-time performance. The implementation of this recommendation could
result in savings from consolidating and decreasing the number of routes and the number of buses needed to service the
district’s routes.
Recommendation 83: Explore options to achieve greater inclusion and promote the use of the least restrictive
environment on buses. The implementation of this recommendation could result in savings from increasing ridership
per run, consolidating stops and routes, and decreasing the number of buses needed to service these routes.
12. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
The Houston Independent School District (ISD) has several FINDINGS

departments whose responsibilities include engaging the The Office of Communications and the Strategic
community. Figure 12–1 shows the departments that are Engagement and Outreach Department perform
responsible for various aspects of the district’s community similar duties, causing confusion in the district and the
involvement function. community regarding their roles and responsibilities.
Houston ISD lacks effective oversight of campus
ACCOMPLISHMENTS and department webpages, resulting in inconsistent
Houston ISD’s Ascending to Men Project information and messaging.
connects positive role models with male students
Houston ISD is not adhering to its affiliation
of color to help guide them academically, socially,
and professionally. agreement with the Houston ISD Foundation.
Houston ISD has inconsistent procedures for
Houston ISD developed Parent University to provide
campuses to report donations.
parents with information on the importance of
parental involvement and the district programs that Houston ISD lacks effective oversight of district
support student academic achievement. partnerships with external organizations.
FIGURE 12–1
HOUSTON ISD COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT RESPONSIBILITIES BY DEPARTMENT
CHIEF OFFICER DEPARTMENT/SUBDEPARTMENT RESPONSIBILITIES
Chief Communications Officer Office of Communications Informs the community of district changes, events,
initiatives, and achievements. Handles crisis
communication.
Chief Operating Officer Strategic Engagement and Outreach Informs the community of changes, events, initiatives,
Department and achievements related to the Business Operations
Division. Assists in crisis communication.
Chief Development Officer Houston ISD Foundation Raises and tracks funds for district initiatives,
departments, and campuses. Organizes fund-raising
events.
Strategic Partnerships Department Builds partnerships with external organizations and
connects them with campuses and departments.
Information Center The first point of district contact. Connects outside
entities to the correct department or staff. Updates the
district central directory.
Volunteers in Public Schools (VIPS) Manages district and campus volunteers.
Program
Chief Financial Officer Grants Development Department Tracks donations given directly to the district and
campuses.
Chief Strategy and Innovation Family and Community Engagement Engages parents and families to be involved in
Officer (FACE) students’ academics. Informs them of available district
departments and programs.
Ascending to Men Project Engages community members to mentor male students
of color.
Chief Academic Officer Wraparound Services Department Connects students and families to resources and
organizations that provide medical, emotional, legal, or
other support.
COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT
HoustonISD has no centralized process to update A successful community involvement program

department and staff directories. addresses the unique characteristics of the school
district and the community. A high level of
Houston ISD lacks formalized training for volunteers.
community involvement plays a critical role in school
improvement and accountability systems. Community
RECOMMENDATIONS representatives and volunteers provide valuable
Recommendation 88: Consolidate the Office of resources that could enrich and enhance the
Communications and the Strategic Engagement educational system. In turn, the community directly
and Outreach Department to streamline the benefits from an informed citizenry, an educated
district’s communications functions. workforce, and future community leaders.
Recommendation 89: Develop and implement Houston ISD covers 312 square miles and is located in
written procedures to update campus and Houston within Harris County. Houston had a population
department websites with consistent and of 2.3 million residents in 2017, about a 10.0 percent
current information. increase since the official 2010 census that counted 2.1
Recommendation 90: Update the affiliation million residents. Figure 12–2 shows the demographics of
agreement between the district and the the city of Houston compared to the demographics of
Houston ISD Foundation to reflect actual students enrolled in Houston ISD.
practices and promote accountability and
Compared to Houston’s overall population, Houston ISD’s
transparency to the public.
demographics show that the Hispanic population is
Recommendation 91: Review the different overrepresented in the district, and the White population is
ways that donations are reported to the district underrepresented. The majority of Houston ISD students
and develop a unified plan to accept and track live within the district boundary in Houston.
campus donations.
During calendar year 2017, the median age of Houston
Recommendation 92: Update procedures residents was 32.9 years. The percentage of individuals that
to manage partnerships with external have a bachelor’s degree or higher was 31.7 percent, greater
organizations and develop a system to track all than the state average of 28.7 percent. Of the 838,950
district partnerships. households in Houston during this period, 275,384
Recommendation 93: Ensure the efficient households had children younger than age 18. The median
communication of staff and department changes household income for Houston during 2017 was $49,399
to the Information Center to maintain an updated compared to the state median household income of
and cohesive central directory. $57,051. For calendar year 2018, the average home value in
the Houston area was $297,032.
Recommendation 94: Develop guidelines to train
parent and community volunteers. Houston is home to several large industries such as oil and
gas exploration, basic petroleum refining, computer and
BACKGROUND aerospace technology, and medical research. After Hurricane
Harvey made landfall in August 2017, Houston sustained a
An independent school district’s community involvement
loss of 25,000 jobs and damages of $73.5 billion.
function requires communicating with stakeholders and
engaging them in district decisions and operations. District The Houston area has four state universities and
stakeholders include students, staff, parents, residents, and several private universities. Houston has 19 school
businesses. Stakeholders must be aware of issues facing the districts, including Houston ISD, and multiple private
district, support its priorities, and respond to its challenges. charter schools.
Communication tools include public meetings, campus-to-
home communications, family and community engagement The Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance
events, local media, the district’s website, other technological Review Team visited the district during January 2019 to
tools, and social media. April 2019.
HOUSTON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
FIGURE 12–2
CITY OF HOUSTON DEMOGRAPHICS COMPARED TO HOUSTON ISD
CITY OF HOUSTON HOUSTON ISD
African American African American

22.4% 24.0%
Hispanic Hispanic
44.5% Asian Asian
6.6% 61.8% 4.1%
White
8.7%
White
24.9%
Two or more ethnic groups Two or more ethnic groups

1.2% 1.2%
Note: American Indian, Alaska Natives, Native Hawaiian, and Other Pacific Islanders had populations that rounded to 0.0 percent and, thus,
were excluded.
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Houston ISD, February 2019; U.S. Census Bureau, 2013–2017
American Community Survey 5-year Estimates.
DETAILED ACCOMPLISHMENTS meetings, twice a week. It offers participating students

academic tutoring and the opportunity to tour college
ASCENDING TO MEN PROJECT
campuses, attend plays, and engage in other events to which
Houston ISD’s Ascending to Men Project connects positive they might not have access.
role models with male students of color to help guide them
academically, socially, and professionally. The district selects students for the program who are in need
of additional support. ATMP works with Houston ISD’s
African American and Hispanic male students in
Research and Accountability Department to track
Houston ISD historically have underperformed
participating students’ attendance, behavior, grades,
academically. Houston ISD established the Ascending to
performance, and state academic test scores to measure the
Men Project (ATMP) during school year 2018–19 to
program’s success.
address these students’ need for support. ATMP provides
these students with targeted mentorship focused on At the time of the review, ATMP had grown from serving
developing character and leadership skills. ATMP also 270 students at 12 campuses to serving 800 students at
provides students with academic advocates to support 47 campuses. Response to the program has been positive
their educational aspirations. Students are exposed to among campus staff and the community. Houston ISD
college and career exploration experiences and staff reported a high demand for the program
extracurricular activities to support their transition into throughout the district, and they are working to expand
adulthood. The program seeks to improve attendance, it to all the campuses. The district has received requests
academic performance, graduation rates, and the number for a program for female students, which it plans to
of students transitioning into postsecondary education. introduce for school year 2019–20.
The program recruits and trains volunteer mentors, who are
district staff, community members and business leaders. PARENT UNIVERSITY
ATMP provides program mentors a curriculum of topics to Houston ISD developed Parent University to provide
discuss with participating students during their 30-minute parents with information on the importance of parental
involvement and the district programs that support student DETAILED FINDINGS
academic achievement.
COMMUNICATION TEAMS (REC. 88)
Parent University supports parents and families in the
The Office of Communications and the Strategic Engagement
education of their children, providing an introduction
and Outreach Department perform similar duties, causing
to district programs, community resources, and parent
confusion in the district and the community regarding their
engagement strategies. Parent University is a districtwide
initiative that takes place once a month at four to six
campuses throughout Houston ISD. The Equity and Houston ISD has two communications teams with 38 staff
Outreach Department develops the scope and sequence who report to two chiefs, the chief communications officer
of the presentations and the Family and Community and the chief operating officer (COO), in two departments.
Engagement Team coordinates the event. Local vendors, Both teams promote district initiatives, engage the
agencies, and district departments set up tables and community, and provide marketing support to the district.
share information about opportunities and resources The school year 2018–19 actual expenditures for the Office
with parents. The district provides dinner to those of Communications were $2.0 million, and expenditures for
in attendance. the Strategic Engagement and Outreach (SEO) Department
were $1.2 million, a combined total of $3.2 million.
Parent University is tracking the success of its inaugural year,
school year 2018–19, through participant registration, Figure 12–3 shows the reporting structure for the Office
attendance and surveys. of Communications.
FIGURE 12–3
HOUSTON ISD’S OFFICE OF COMMUNICATIONS ORGANIZATION
Chief Communications Officer
Senior Executive
General Manager of General Manager of Press Secretary,

Communications and Publications Communications and Multimedia Press Office
Team Lead, Manager, Strategic Senior Senior Senior Media Media

Web and Multimedia Communications Producer/ Multimedia Relations Relations
Mobile Brand and Specialist Director – 2 Technician Specialist Specialist
Design Design (Internal
Communications)
Manager, Writer Producer/
Translation Director and
Services Audiovisual
Specialist
Web Web Content

Designer – 2 Administrator
Translator – 4
The Houston ISD Office of Communications has 23 staff. Houston ISD police, and transportation. At that time, the
The chief communications officer oversees the district’s Office of Communications provided limited services for the
communication functions, including publications, business operations departments. Additionally, the district
multimedia, and media relations, which is referred to as the terminated its contract with a food service management
press office. The general manager of communications and company, which previously produced marketing materials
publications reports to the chief communications officer and for the Nutrition Services Department. Four staff from the
oversees web and mobile design, translation services, Office of Communications moved to the SEO Department
branding, and online publications. The web and mobile when it was established.
design team maintains the main district website, and trains
The SEO Department works independently of the Office
campus and department webmasters to update their
of Communications but coordinates with them for
webpages. The translation team translates district documents
additional staff or equipment to cover select events or
and webpages to Spanish, Vietnamese, and Arabic. The
stories. Figure 12–4 shows the reporting structure for
multimedia brand and design team focuses on district
the SEO Department.
branding and marketing, including billboards, brochures,
fliers for major district initiatives, and the district branding The SEO Department has 15 positions. The officer of SEO
guidelines. The writer position manages the primary district coordinates strategic marketing campaigns with the other
social media accounts, attends district and campus events, business operations departments. During crises, the officer of
and helps produce written content that is published in the SEO is the intermediary between the business operations
district’s HISD News Blog. The strategic communications departments and other district departments, including the
specialist manages internal communications, which includes Office of Communications.
web content production and maintenance of Houston ISD
staff webpages. The general manager of SEO reports to the officer of
SEO and oversees the editorial strategy team, the visual
The general manager of communications and multimedia media team, and the event planning and social media team.
oversees two senior producer/directors, a producer/director The editorial strategy team writes press releases and stories
and audiovisual specialist, and a senior multimedia for the HISD News Blog that promote the Business
technician. The communications and multimedia team Operations Division and updates all business operations
operate the district’s television channel, Houston ISD TV, departments’ webpages.
which provides district news and information to parents,
students, staff, and the community. The communications The visual media team produces videos and digital content to
and multimedia team develop video content for the channel, accompany pieces written by the editorial strategy team. This
which broadcasts 24 hours a day on cable television and on team also designs fliers, banners, and brochures for business
Houston ISD’s website. The team also oversees the technical operations departments. The event planning and social
aspects of the audiovisual projection systems in the Hattie media team maintains the Business Operations Division
Mae White Educational Support Center, Houston ISD’s social media accounts and coordinates events, such as
central office, including the board auditorium during board groundbreaking ceremonies for new school buildings.
meetings, agenda reviews, and workshops. The SEO Department publishes news stories and conducts
marketing campaigns related to the Business Operations
The press secretary and the two media relations specialists
Division, including communications to the public about
handle crisis communications, media statements,
bond proposals. During onsite interviews, Houston ISD staff
press releases, and requests for interviews with district
said that no written procedures or guidelines delineate the
staff. The press secretary coordinates with the SEO
responsibilities of each communications department. The
Department during crisis communications and with
departments report having an informal understanding that
interview requests for the other departments within the
the SEO Department covers stories related to the Business
Business Operations Division.
Operations Division, and the Office of Communications
In January 2018, the COO established the SEO Department covers all other stories related to the district. Houston ISD
to promote and market the work performed by the staff stated that Business Operations Division staff received
departments in the Business Operations Division including direction from management to reach out only to the SEO
construction services, facilities services, nutrition services, Department when they need communications assistance.
FIGURE 12–4
HOUSTON ISD STRATEGIC ENGAGEMENT AND OUTREACH DEPARTMENT ORGANIZATION
Chief Operating Officer
Officer of Strategic Engagement and Outreach
General Manager of Strategic

Engagement and Outreach
Manager of Manager of Manager of Event

Editorial Strategy Visual Media Planning and Social Media
Strategic Communications Communications Graphic Communications Marketing

Communications Specialist Specialist Designer Specialist Technician – 3
Specialist
Senior
Writer
Several Houston ISD staff stated that it is inefficient for organizations want to interview district staff, they reach out
the SEO Department to be separate from the Office to media relations in the Office of Communications. The
of Communications. press secretary gathers the necessary information, contacts
the requested department, and prepares the interview subject.
Both the Office of Communications and the SEO
In comparison, if the interview request is for a business
Department focus on engaging the community and
operations department, then the press secretary reaches out
promoting Houston ISD. They also have staff with similar
to the SEO Department as a mediator. The officer of SEO
job responsibilities, which involve writing stories and press
gathers the necessary information, contacts the requested
releases, preparing district staff for interviews, producing
department, and prepares the interview subject before
videos, updating webpages, maintaining social media
returning the matter to the press secretary.
accounts, and designing promotional materials. Maintaining
two separate departments with similar duties and a similar Figure 12–5 shows the interview request process for business
number of staff is a duplication of effort and an inefficient operations departments.
use of resources.
The existence of two communications teams also has caused
Additionally, the separation establishes an added layer of confusion in the district and the community. For example,
reporting for district staff when they need to coordinate with prior to January 2018, the Office of Communications used
business operations departments. For instance, when outside to contact the Houston ISD Police Department directly to
FIGURE 12–5
HOUSTON ISD INTERVIEW REQUEST PROCESS FOR BUSINESS OPERATIONS DEPARTMENTS
Media Relations receives request for information or interview related to Business Operations (Police, Transportation,
Facilities, Nutrition Services, Construction Services, and Support departments)
Media Relations submits request to Business Operations, Strategic Engagement and Outreach Department
Strategic Engagement and Outreach Department reviews request to confirm that it is for a Business Operations area
Strategic Engagement and Outreach Department contacts the appropriate Business Operations department to gather
information and identify and prepare an appropriate interview subject
Strategic Engagement and Outreach Department submits the approved information and interview candidate with the
subject’s potential availability to Media Relations
Media Relations prepares information for distribution and coordinates with the staff that made the request to provide
the information and to schedule interviews
Note: Media Relations is in the Office of Communications.

Source: Houston ISD, February 2019
fact-check information about a crisis at a campus. At the Communications in a timely manner to keep the community
time of the review, the crisis communications process informed of the issue.
required the Office of Communications to reach out to the
Having two communications departments to promote a
SEO Department as an intermediary for all business
school district is unique to Houston ISD. For example, each
operations departments, including Houston ISD PD. Figure
of the next five largest Texas school districts—Dallas ISD,
12–6 shows the process of drafting a letter and/or automated
Cypress–Fairbanks ISD, Northside ISD (San Antonio), Fort
call to parents after a crisis event occurs that involves a
Worth ISD, and Austin ISD—has one communications
business operations department.
team. Furthermore, Figure 12–7 shows Houston ISD
According to interviews, the need for approvals from staff in compared to larger school districts in the U.S.
different departments slows down the crisis communications
process and prevents the district from informing parents in a Houston ISD should consolidate the Office of
timely manner. Houston ISD staff also said that having two Communications and the SEO Department to streamline
communications teams is a duplication of effort, and has the district’s communications functions. The superintendent
resulted in misinformation being reported to the superintendent should complete the following actions:
and other staff during a crisis. The inability to reach out to • eliminate the officer of SEO position; and
Houston ISD Police Department directly impedes the Office
of Communications from performing its duties effectively. • move the SEO Department and its budget to the
Office of Communications to use district resources
Additionally, the formation of the SEO Department has and staff more efficiently.
caused confusion within Houston ISD. During onsite
interviews, staff indicated that the responsibilities of the two The chief communications officer should evaluate all
communications teams are not always clear. For example, positions to change or eliminate duplicate positions to better
during the November 27, 2018, Special Board Meeting, a address the district’s needs. The chief communications officer
trustee criticized the Office of Communications for not should present the plan to the superintendent for review and
informing parents properly regarding bus transportation approval. Additionally, the district should identify other
issues. However, that responsibility belonged to the SEO departments with communications responsibilities and
Department, which did not coordinate with the Office of evaluate whether any additional reorganization is needed.
FIGURE 12–6
HOUSTON ISD CRISIS COMMUNICATION PROCESS
Principal reports incident to School Support Officer (SSO)
SSO, principal, or area superintendent recommends a callout or sending a letter to parents and guardians
SSO, principal, or area superintendent email or call the Press Office to report the incident and request a callout
or letter
Press Office gathers information regarding the incident from the following parties:
• SSO;
• area superintendent;
• principals; and
• the Business Operations Communications Department (1), which reaches out to the Transportation,
Houston ISD Police, Facilities Services, and Nutrition Services departments as needed
Press Office writes the callout or letter and sends it for approval to the following recipients: SSO; area
superintendent; Business Operations, Communications Department; Legal Services Department; and the medical
director, if appropriate
Press Office writes a media statement and sends it to the Legal Services Department for approval
Chief Communications Officer performs the following actions:

• approves callout script, letter, and media statements;
• informs interim superintendent of the crisis, and the superintendent approves media statements; and
• informs the Houston ISD Board of Education of the crisis
Press Office performs the following actions:

• provides area superintendent, SSO, and principal with the approved callout script or letter; and
• releases the media statement
Notes:
(1) The Business Operations Communications Department is the Strategic Engagement and Outreach Department.
(2) Media Relations, also called the Press Office, is in the Office of Communications.
(3) A callout is a scripted, automated call, text, or email sent to parents and guardians to notify them of an incident at a campus.
FIGURE 12–7
NUMBER OF COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENTS OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS IN THE U.S.
DISTRICT ENROLLMENT COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENTS
New York City Department of Education 1,135,334 1
Los Angeles Unified School District 571,855 1
Clark County (Nevada) School District 322,901 1; also produces bond communications
Houston ISD 209,772 2; also produces bond communications
Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team, February 2019; “DOE Data at a Glance,” New York City Department of
Education, May 2019; “Fingertip Facts for L.A. Unified,” Los Angeles Unified School District, May 2019; “Budget Transparency,” Clark County
School District, May 2019; Houston ISD, February 2019.
The fiscal impact assumes that the district eliminates the salary + $29,067 for benefits). The fiscal impact also
officer of strategic engagement and outreach position, assumes a 10.0 percent decrease of the combined
resulting in an annual savings of $174,404 ($145,337 departmental budgets to address the decreased number of
staff. For school year 2018–19, the two departments’ total address, or both. Not all department pages provide
budget was $3,170,462. The fiscal impact would be an organization charts to indicate whom to contact for
annual savings of $317,046 ($3,170,462 x 10.0 percent). specific needs. Others provide contact information
This consolidation would result in a combined annual for staff who are no longer in those positions;
savings of $491,450 ($174,404 + $317,046).
• some campus websites provide outdated resources,
such as a student handbook that has not been updated
WEBSITE (REC. 89)
in five years, a campus newsletter that is four years
Houston ISD lacks effective oversight of campus and old, or inaccurate staff directories;
department webpages, resulting in inconsistent information
• campus website layouts and navigational systems are
and messaging.
not consistent, and some campuses do not maintain
The Office of Communications updates the main Houston a website at all;
ISD district and staff webpages. Each campus and
• departmental webpages contain numerous broken or
department is responsible for updating its own webpage.
misdirected links; and
Campuses and departments assign webmaster
responsibilities to one or two staff who update the pages as • inconsistent translation services are provided on the
needed. The Office of Communications provides campuses website for the following languages:
and departments with a template and provides training and
ºº Spanish – using the translate function when
support to staff that are assigned webmaster responsibilities.
viewing department webpages misdirects visitors
The web and mobile design team offers weekly trainings for
to a translated main Houston ISD website instead
webmasters that cover building and editing a webpage. The
of translating the current page. Additionally, some
Office of Communications maintains a list of department
departments provide alternate translation services
and campus webmasters, but Houston ISD staff stated that
to visitors;
webmasters change often, which makes it difficult to keep
track of who they are and whether they have attended ºº Vietnamese – using the translate function when
training. It is the responsibility of the webmaster to attend viewing department webpages misdirects visitors
training, but Houston ISD staff stated that new campus to a translated main Houston ISD website instead
and department webmasters also can be trained by former of translating the current webpage; and
webmasters. This discrepancy can result in a gap in
ºº Arabic – using the translate function on the main
knowledge for webmasters and prevent proper updating of
Houston ISD website and department webpages
campus and department webpages.
directs visitors to published newsletters that are
Houston ISD lacks written procedures to require campuses not always updated.
and departments to update webpages regularly, resulting in
The review team observed that 40.0 percent of campus
incomplete or outdated information on the pages.
websites contain outdated information. Out of 30 randomly
Furthermore, the district has no oversight of the website
selected department webpages, 14 had broken links or
activities of the 13 in-district charter campuses, which are
outdated information. During onsite interviews, Office of
not required to use the district’s webpage template nor to
Communications staff said that none of their 23 positions
maintain a website at all. The district requires campuses to
reviews campus sites and department pages to ensure that
post addresses, contact information, and campus profiles on
they have updated information. Staff stated that if they see
their webpages. The district requires departments to post
outdated information, they notify the campus or
contact information and an approved logo on their webpages,
department to update the information and offer technical
but they have discretion regarding the page layout.
support. However, the Office of Communications does not
The review team found several Houston ISD webpages that follow up to ensure that the campus or department updates
displayed outdated or inconsistent information, including the information.
the following instances:
State law requires the district to post certain information on
• contact information varies by department webpages, its website. The Texas Association of School Business Officials
with some providing a phone number, an email (TASBO) and the Texas Association of School Boards
(TASB) provide lists of required information. Figure 12–8 with state statutes, their websites contain accurate and
shows some of the state requirements compared to updated information regarding staff, contact information,
information available on Houston ISD’s website. Of the 32 district news, and upcoming events. Furthermore, effective
required postings shown, 10 requirements are either partially districts regularly inspect posted web links to ensure that
or entirely incomplete. they are functioning properly.
Additionally, in-district charter campuses are not required to Henderson ISD has a webpage dedicated to legally required
follow the same statutes or Houston ISD Board Policy as Internet postings. Each requirement shown provides either a
other campuses. The contracts between in-district charter link to a webpage where the information can be found or a
campuses and Houston ISD do not include website downloadable PDF of the information. Additionally,
maintenance requirements. Yet, Houston ISD Board Policy effective school year 2020–21, the Texas Education Agency
contains several requirements that campus websites need to will require each school district to post legally mandated
follow, such as posting a copy of the student code of conduct. financial information on its website as a financial compliance
measure in the Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas.
Outdated websites hinder Houston ISD parents and the Abiding by legal statutes to publish required information will
community from receiving important, current information, help ensure that Houston ISD meets the fiscal transparency
which impedes effective parent engagement. compliance measure.
Effective school districts regularly maintain their websites to The Office of Communications should develop and
engage and inform the community. While in compliance implement written procedures to update campus and
FIGURE 12–8
HOUSTON ISD WEBSITE COMPLIANCE CHECKLIST
REQUIRED POSTING STATUTE IN COMPLIANCE
General
Main Office Contact The Texas Local Government Code, §140.008(f)(2) Incomplete
Information
Requires district to post contact information for its Contact information is posted on main district
main office, including physical address, mailing website, but an email address is not provided.
address, main telephone number, and an email
address.
Graduation Plans The Texas Education Code, §28.02121(b) Incomplete
Requires district to post a notice that includes Houston ISD’s Plan Your Path webpage has a link
information provided by the Texas Education Agency to a PDF that explains the graduation plan.
(TEA) on benefits of various graduation plans, levels
of achievement, and endorsements. Published The webpage also provides the information in
information is to be in languages(s) in which Spanish, but not in Vietnamese or Arabic.
parents or legal guardians are most proficient, or
language(s) that at least 20 students in a grade level
primarily speak.
College Credit Programs The Texas Education Code, §28.010(b) Yes
and Courses
Authorizes a school district to post on its website Information for college credit courses and programs
a required notice of availability of college credit is available through different webpages, within
courses. Innovation and Postsecondary Programming and
College and Career Readiness.
Immunization The Texas Education Code, §38.019(a) Incomplete
Requirements and
Recommendations Requires district to post a list of required and The Health and Medical Services webpage
recommended immunizations, health clinics has information on required and recommended
that offer the influenza vaccine, and a link to the immunizations and local health clinics, but it does
Department of State Health Services (DSHS) not have a link to the DSHS website.
website that contains information on immunization
exemptions in English and Spanish.

General (continued)
Physical Activity Policies The Texas Education Code, §28.004(k)(1) Incomplete
Requires a school district to post information on Houston ISD’s Health and Physical Education
physical activity policy by campus level. webpage provides the physical activity policy for
elementary school students, but not middle school
or high school students.
School Health Advisory The Texas Education Code, §28.004(k)(2)(A) Yes
Council Meetings
Requires a school district to post the number of The School Health Advisory Council and
times the district’s school health advisory council Committee webpage lists the meeting dates.
met during the preceding year.
Vending Machine and The Texas Education Code, §28.004(k)(2)(B) Yes
Food Service Guidelines
Requires a school district to post policies to ensure Information can be found in Houston ISD’s Board
campuses follow guidelines to restrict student Policy Manual, although not easily found. This
access to vending machines. information is not posted directly on the website.
E-cigarette Use Policies The Texas Education Code, §28.004(k)(2)(C) Yes
Requires a school district to post policies regarding A PDF of the Student Code of Conduct handbook is
the use of e-cigarettes by students or others on posted on the website that includes the e-cigarette
campuses or school sponsored events. use policy. Houston ISD’s Board Policy Manual
also includes the information.
Access to Student’s The Texas Education Code, §28.004(k)(3) No
Physical Fitness
Assessment Results Requires a school district to post a notice that A notice informing parents on requesting their
informs parents of their right to request their child’s students’ physical fitness exam results was not
physical fitness assessment results. found on the website.
Home Schooled Student The Texas Education Code, §29.916 No
Testing
Requires a school district to post the dates for the The date for the PSAT/NMSQT is posted, but it is
Preliminary SAT/National Merit Scholarship Qualifying outdated; AP exam dates are not given.
Test (PSAT/NMSQT) and any advanced placement
(AP) tests that will be administered, and provide Instructions for home schooled students to register
instructions for home-schooled students to register. for the PSAT/NMSQT or AP exams are not provided.
Transition and The Texas Education Code, §29.0112 Yes
Employment Guide for
Students in Special Requires a school district to post the transition Houston ISD’s Special Education webpage
Education and their and employment guide developed by TEA in provides a link for the Texas Transition and
Parents collaboration with the U.S. Department of Health Employment Guide.
and Human Services.
Local Programs and The Texas Education Code, §33.906 No
Services Available
to Assist Homeless Requires a school district to post information Houston ISD’s Homeless and Foster Care
Students regarding local programs and services, including webpage provides a PDF of the Houston ISD
charitable programs and services, available to assist Community Resource Guide but the guide is from
homeless students. 2014.
Procedure for Reporting The Texas Education Code, §37.0832(e) Yes
Bullying
Requires a school district to post the procedure for Bullying reporting procedures are posted on the
reporting bullying. Student Support Services webpage.
Notice Regarding Ability The Texas Education Code, §37.105(g) Incomplete
to Refuse Entry or Eject
Requires a school district to post a notice on the Notice is provided on the Media Relations webpage
Certain Persons and
district website and each campus website regarding but it refers only to journalists. Not all campus
Appeals Process
the right of the district or campus to eject or refuse websites have the notice posted.
entry to any person.

General (continued)
Landowner’s Bill of The Texas Property Code, §21.0112(b)(2) Yes
Rights
A school district is required to post a landowner’s A link to a PDF copy of the Landowner’s Bill of
bill of rights prepared by the Office of the Attorney Rights is provided on the Building Programs
General. webpage.
Accountability
Campus Report Card The Texas Education Code, §39.362(1) Yes
Requires a school district to post campus report Campus report cards are provided on the district
cards. and campus websites.
Texas Academic The Texas Education Code, §39.362(2) Yes
Performance Report
Requires a school district to post the Texas The Research and Accountability webpage
Academic Performance Report (TAPR). provides a link that directs visitors to the TEA
website where the TAPR can be retrieved.
Accreditation Status and The Texas Education Code, §39.362(3) Yes
Performance Rating of
the District Requires a school district to post the most recent The Research and Accountability webpage
accreditation status and performance rating. provides a link to a PDF of the district’s
accountability rating and accreditation status.
Definitions and The Texas Education Code, §39.362(4) Yes
Explanation of Each
Performance Rating Requires a school district to post the definitions and The Research and Accountability webpage provides
explanations of each performance rating. a link of downloadable summaries of the information.
Annual Federal Report The U.S. Code, Title 20, Chapter 70, Subchapter I, No
Card Part A, Subpart 1, §6311(h)(2)(B)(iii)(I)
The main Houston ISD website does not have a
Requires a school district to post its federal report link to the district’s federal annual report card.
card.
Board of Education
Notice of Board Meeting The Texas Government Code, §551.056 Yes
Requires a school district to post board meeting The Houston ISD Board Meetings webpage has
notices; requires certain districts, including Houston meeting notices and agendas for the meetings
ISD, to also post the meeting agenda. posted.
Internet Broadcast of The Texas Government Code, §551.128, as Yes
Board Meetings amended by House Bill 523, Eighty-fifth Legislature,
Regular Session, 2017 The Houston ISD Board Meetings webpage has
a link to archived video and audio for open board
Establishes timeframes that govern when larger meetings, special meetings, and work sessions.
districts, including Houston ISD, must post audio
and video recordings of certain meetings on their
websites and how long they must maintain online
archives of these meetings.
Targeted Improvement The Texas Education Code, §39A.057(b) Yes
Plan
A school district is required to post on its website Houston ISD’s Board of Education agenda and
a targeted improvement plan for a low-performing meetings state approval of targeted improvement
campus before the board’s public hearing on the plans.
subject.
Conflicts Disclosure The Texas Local Government Code, §176.009 Yes
Statements and
Questionnaires Requires a school district to post completed conflicts Each board trustee webpage provides a PDF link for
disclosure statements and questionnaires. the trustee’s conflict disclosure and questionnaire.

Accountability (continued)
Election Notice The Texas Election Code, §85.007(d)(1) Yes
Requires a school district to post election notices. Houston ISD’s General Information webpage
provides a downloadable PDF of the election
notice(s).
Campaign Finance The Texas Election Code, §254.04011(b) Yes
Report
Requires larger school districts, including Houston Each board trustee’s webpage provides a PDF link
ISD, to post campaign finance reports for board for the trustee campaign finance reports.
members and candidates.
Employment
Employment Policies The Texas Education Code, §21.204(d) Yes
Requires a school district to post its employment The Employee Relations webpage provides links
policies. to employment policies found in the Houston ISD
Board Policy Manual.
Vacancy Position The Texas Education Code, §11.1513(d)(1)(B) Yes
Postings
Requires a school district to post a 10-day notice for Job postings requiring a license or certificate are
vacant position requiring license or certificate. current.
Group Health Coverage The Texas Education Code, §22.004(d) Yes
Plan and Comparability
Report Requires a district that has a self-funded health The Benefits Office webpage provides information
insurance plan to post a report containing on the different health insurance plans Houston
information on the coverage it provides. ISD offers.
Financial
Summary of Proposed The Texas Education Code, §44.0041 Yes

Budget
Requires a school district to post on its website a The Budgeting and Financial Planning webpage
summary of its proposed budget concurrent with provides PDF links to the proposed budget for
when the public meeting notice regarding the budget school year 2019–20 and public meeting notice.
appears in the newspaper.
Adopted Budget The Texas Education Code, §44.0051 Yes
The district’s budget must remain posted on the The Budgeting and Financial Planning webpage
website until three years after its adoption. provides PDF links for at least the last three
budgets.
Superintendent’s The Texas Administrative Code, Title 19, Part 2, No

Contract Chapter 109, Subchapter AA, §109.1001(q)(3)(B)(i)
The superintendent’s contract is not posted on
The school district must provide a copy of the the website nor is it disclosed in the district’s
superintendent’s contract either as a disclosure in the comprehensive annual financial report.
financial management report or on the district’s website.
Note: Not all state-required postings are shown.

Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review Team; Texas Association of School Business Officials; Texas Association of
School Boards; Houston ISD, February 2019.
department websites with consistent and current information. • ensure that procedures include maintaining accurate
The chief communications officer should complete the lists of campus and department webmasters and
following actions: whether they have attended webmaster trainings; and
• direct the web and mobile design team to carry out FIGURE 12–9
the following tasks: PROGRAMS AND CAMPUSES FUNDED THROUGH THE
HOUSTON ISD FOUNDATION
ºº develop an update checklist for webmasters to SCHOOL YEAR 2017–18
follow when updating a webpage. The campus PROGRAM OR CAMPUS DONATION
checklist can include a staff directory, parent Hurricane Harvey Relief $11,002,577
resource links, important event dates, and Student Scholarships $263,607
academic, and enrichment activities offered. Energy Institute High School $115,903
The department checklist can include contact
Las Americas Newcomer School $20,957
information and procedures for checking web
Home Instruction for Parents of Preschool $12,500
links. Campus and department webmaster Youngsters
checklists should include regular checks of the
Monarch Heroes Program $9,664
TASBO and TASB legal resources websites for
updated information regarding state law website Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
Team; Houston ISD Foundation, school year 2017–18.
posting requirements;
ºº send regularly scheduled update reminders to of the Schools luncheon). Figure 12–9 shows some of the
campus and department webmasters to ensure programs and campuses that received funds through the
that the information on webpages is current; and foundation for school year 2017–18.
ºº collaborate with the Translation Services The foundation and the district have an affiliation agreement,
Department to ensure that department websites last updated in 2011. The agreement reiterates that the
have consistent translation services. Houston ISD Foundation is a separate entity from the
In-district charter campuses are part of Houston ISD and district, and both parties have agreed to enter an agreement
should follow the same guidelines and procedures when to raise funds to support the students of Houston ISD. As
maintaining websites as noncharter campuses. The board part of the agreement, the district provides the foundation
should include a communications requirement in contracts office space, office supplies, utilities for up to four foundation
with in-district charter campuses to ensure that they maintain staff, and access to a computer printer free of charge.
their websites properly. The affiliation agreement between Houston ISD and the
The district could implement this recommendation with foundation also states that the foundation is responsible for
existing resources. hiring its own staff and will provide them with compensation
and benefits from the foundation’s budget, including the
FOUNDATION AGREEMENT (REC. 90) “foundation president” (executive director) who will oversee
the foundation. However, the district will assign a full time
Houston ISD is not adhering to its affiliation agreement with
secretary (executive assistant) to the foundation for which
the Houston ISD Foundation.
the foundation will reimburse the district 50.0 percent of the
The Houston ISD Foundation is a not-for-profit organization, cost of this person’s salary and benefits.
as classified by the U.S. Internal Revenue Code, Section
Figure 12–10 shows the reporting structure for
501(c)(3), that was established in 1994 to help raise funds to
the foundation.
support Houston ISD. The foundation is located in the
Hattie Mae White Educational Support Center. It is governed During onsite interviews, staff stated that the foundation
by a 13-member board made up of Houston business leaders, pays for one full-time staff, a finance and data analyst. School
the Houston ISD superintendent, the Houston ISD board year 2018–19 payroll data from Houston ISD shows that the
president, and the district’s chief development officer, who foundation executive director, director, and executive
also serves as the foundation’s executive director. Part of the assistant are Houston ISD staff. Houston ISD staff stated
chief development officer’s responsibilities is overseeing the that these district staff’s time is split between 60.0 percent for
foundation. The foundation holds two annual fund-raisers, the district and 40.0 percent for the foundation. Additionally,
the Houston ISD Foundation Golf Tournament and the staff stated that other district staff that report to the chief
Public Education Matters benefit dinner (formerly the State development officer also assist the foundation as needed.
Figure 12–11 shows the reporting structure for Houston FIGURE 12–10
ISD’s Fund Development Division. HOUSTON ISD FOUNDATION ORGANIZATION
Staff stated that the special events planners assist the
Houston ISD Foundation Board
foundation in organizing the Houston ISD annual fund-
raisers, and the Strategic Partnerships Department helps raise
money for these events.
The annual financial audit of the foundation, performed by Houston ISD Foundation Executive Director;
Chief Development Officer
an independent auditor, does not show any reimbursements
to the district for the executive assistant’s position from
Executive Assistant
school years 2015–16 to 2017–18, as stated in the agreement,
nor for other district staff that assisted the foundation.
However, the report for school year 2016–17 states that
“HISD contributes office space, supplies, and printing. In
Director Finance and
addition, [Houston ISD] reimbursed the foundation
Data Analyst
$15,000 and $37,000 for salaries in 2017 and 2016,
respectively.” Figure 12–12 shows the value of the resources Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
Team; Houston ISD Foundation, May 2019; Houston ISD, February
that Houston ISD provides to the foundation. 2019.
FIGURE 12–11
HOUSTON ISD’S FUND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION ORGANIZATION
Chief Development Officer;

Houston ISD Foundation
Executive Director
Special Events General Manager Volunteers in Public

Planner – 2 of Strategic Partnerships Schools Program
Administrator
Senior Administrative
Assistant – 2
Senior Manager Manager of

of Community Information Center
Partnerships Community
Relations
Liaison
Partnership
Liaison – 2
Senior Front Desk
Information Receptionist – 2
Center
Representative
Information
Center
Representative – 2
Although included in the audit, the affiliation agreement FIGURE 12–12

does not state the value of the office space, utilities for staff, VALUE OF HOUSTON ISD RESOURCES PROVIDED TO THE
HOUSTON ISD FOUNDATION
or printing and technology resources that the foundation
receives from the district. The lack of a dollar value assigned
RESOURCE 2015–16 2016–17 2017–18
to these resources prevents the district from documenting
Office Space $18,000 $18,000 $22,755
accurate financial data for the costs of the foundation to the
district. For example, as shown in Figure 12–12, school Supplies and $9,688 $4,755 $0
Other Materials
years 2016–17 and 2017–18 report different values for the
Salaries $37,000 $15,000 $0
office space provided to the foundation, $18,000 and
$22,585, respectively. Without a set amount documented in Total $64,688 $37,755 $22,755
the affiliation agreement, the district could be valuing the use Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
Team; Houston ISD Foundation, school years 2015–16 to 2017–
of the office space and other benefits provided to the 18.
foundation inaccurately.
Although it is common for district staff to also perform work • a brief overview of how the district and the foundation
for a not-for-profit education foundation as part of their transfer funds between each other;
duties, the National School Foundation Association
recommends that school districts and their education • a statement on the use and sharing of donor and
foundations have an independent legal relationship. This alumni records;
independence includes ensuring that the foundation hires its • a description of the foundation administrative
own staff, either paid or volunteer. If district staff are structure and how it is financed;
performing work for the foundation, clear guidelines must
be stated in an agreement or memorandum of understanding • definitions of terms and conditions, including
(MOU) between the two parties. The Association of circumstances for terminating the agreement, the
Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges and the distribution of assets if the foundation is dissolved,
Center for Education Trusteeship and Governance developed and a statement on revising or updating the MOU
a guide to writing an MOU between a campus or district and as needed; and
an education foundation. It describes the following items • a formal adoption of the MOU by the district’s
that an MOU should include: governing board and the foundation’s board leadership.
• a summary of the relationships between the foundation Houston ISD should update the affiliation agreement
and the district that states the role and responsibility between the district and the Houston ISD Foundation to
of the foundation in supporting the district’s mission, reflect actual practices and promote accountability and
vision, and goals. It should make clear that the transparency to the public. The chief development officer
foundation is a separate organization from the district should coordinate with the chief financial officer to determine
but that it has the authority to use the district’s name a cost-accounting methodology to determine the costs of the
and conduct work on the district’s behalf; foundation to the district and use that information to amend
• a description of the governance and leadership the affiliation agreement between Houston ISD and the
selection process of the district and the foundation; foundation. The district should evaluate costs for the
following items:
• an outline of the responsibilities and mutual
expectations between the district and the foundation • the time allotted to district staff to assist the foundation;
and how each is held accountable to the other. This • the cost of salaries and benefits for district staff that
outline also should include the types of services or assist the foundation, either full-time or part-time; and
materials each party will provide;
• the value of office space, supplies, and services
• a statement on the roles and expectations for district provided by the district to the foundation.
staff that assist the foundation, either regularly or
for special events, and whether the foundation will The district could implement this recommendation with
compensate the district for the use of its staff; existing resources.
REPORTING DONATIONS (REC. 91) Department. Figure 12–14 shows the district’s process for
Houston ISD has inconsistent procedures for campuses to accepting donations through the foundation.
report donations. Figure 12–15 shows the district’s process for direct donations
Donations to school districts and campuses help provide to Houston ISD and the campuses.
funding for extracurricular programs, student and teacher A donor to the Houston ISD Foundation or the district
incentives, supplies, and more. The Fund Development identifies the specific purpose of the donation, which bars its
Division, which includes the Houston ISD Foundation and use for a different purpose. Only direct donations to the
the Strategic Partnerships Department, works with the foundation are tax-deductible. When the board of trustees
Grants Development Department to seek and accept (board) approves a donation greater than $5,000 to the
donations on behalf of Houston ISD. foundation or the Grants Development Department, it also
Figure 12–13 shows the amount of donations received by accepts any conditions attached to the gift, thus ensuring it is
the Houston ISD Foundation, the Strategic Partnerships used for its specified purpose. The Houston ISD Foundation
Department, and the Grants Development Department for or the Grants Development Department monitor donations
school years 2016–17 to 2018–19. less than $5,000 to ensure that they are used for the intended
purpose by the campus and district.
The chief development officer works with the manager of
Campuses must report monetary or in-kind donations to the
grants development to update a database that tracks
Grants Development Department. In-kind donations are
donations received by the Strategic Partnerships and the
donations of goods or services. Donors complete a form
Grants Development departments.
stating the purpose and value of the donation regardless of its
According to staff, Houston ISD has two ways of accepting type or amount. Neither the district nor campuses can accept
donations, either through the Houston ISD Foundation, or cash donations. Houston ISD staff said that campuses should
directly to the district through the Grants Development report donations to the Grants Development Department as
FIGURE 12–13
DONATIONS TO HOUSTON ISD
HOUSTON ISD STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS GRANTS DEVELOPMENT
SCHOOL YEAR FOUNDATION (1) DEPARTMENT (2) DEPARTMENT TOTAL
2016–17 $1,010,070 $529,040 $1,071,950 $2,611,060
2017–18 $27,305,980 $1,108,600 $8,570,110 $36,984,690
2018–19 as of December 2018 (3) N/A $878,200 $459,920 $1,338,120
Notes:
(1) Amounts show direct contributions to the foundation only, not including special events revenue or other income.
(2) Although the Strategic Partnerships Department accepts donations directly, the Grants Development Department processes the donations.
(3) The full amount of donations for school year 2018–19 was not available as of February 2019.
FIGURE 12–14
PROCESS TO DONATE TO HOUSTON ISD FOUNDATION
Houston ISD Foundation receives donation
Board of Trustees approval is required if the donation is valued at more than $5,000
Foundation manages gift and purchases the award items or gives the funds to the district or campus
District or campus uses the donation for its specified purpose

FIGURE 12–15
GRANTS DEVELOPMENT PROCESS TO DONATE DIRECTLY TO HOUSTON ISD OR A CAMPUS
Grants Development in External Funding receives donation for campus or district
Houston ISD Board of Education approval is required if the donation is valued at more than $5,000
Grants Development transfers the donation to Special Revenue
Special Revenue transfers the donation to Budget/Financial Planning
Donation is placed in campus or district budget or activity fund
Campus or district uses the donation for its specified purpose
soon as possible. However, because of the decentralization of alternate receipt and deposit the donation using bank deposit
the district, campuses may have their own reporting slips provided by the Internal Service Funds Department. An
processes. Staff stated that some campuses might be accepting armored courier collects and transports these funds to
donations without reporting them. Houston ISD’s central depository bank to be deposited in
the centralized activity funds account. The manual states that
Houston ISD staff stated that the Grants Development
at least two campus staff always should be involved in
Department offers training to principals and their designated
collecting and receipting monies to ensure proper financial
staff for accepting donations, but more training is needed.
oversight. The Financial Procedures Manual does not state
The review team identified a third way that campuses can that the board must approve a donation greater than $5,000.
accept donations. According to the Financial Procedures
The review team found several examples of donations that
Manual provided by the district Controller’s Office, campuses
appear to follow the Financial Procedures Manual and not
can accept monetary donations, including cash, from external
the Grants Development Department procedure. For
organizations without reporting them to the Grants
example, interviews with a Houston ISD parent–teacher
Development Department. Figure 12–16 shows the process
organization (PTO) leader stated that the organization has
described by the Controller’s Office.
donated meals for students on field trips or as student
Campus staff provide the donor with a receipt from a incentives, and has donated cash toward the teacher and staff
Houston ISD Activity Fund cash receipt book or an official winter luncheon. The PTO leader stated that the organization
FIGURE 12–16
HOUSTON ISD CONTROLLER’S OFFICE PROCESS TO DONATE DIRECTLY TO A CAMPUS
Campus receives donation and provides donor with a receipt or signed letter
Assigned campus personnel deposit donation into activity fund bank account
Amount of donation is tracked in the district’s systems, applications, and processes system
Campus uses the donation for its specified purpose
did not complete a donation form in any of these instances, • the chief audit executive should update the district’s
but that campus staff did provide a receipt or letter with internal audit plan to include the updated campus
students’ names and teacher signature for their donations. donations procedures.
Another example appears on Lamar High School’s website, The district could implement this recommendation with
which shows donations by the Lamar PTO for school year existing resources.
2018–19 totaling more than $28,500. None of these 31
donations appear on the donation database list provided by DISTRICT PARTNERSHIPS (REC. 92)
the district.
Houston ISD lacks effective oversight of district partnerships
The Office of Internal Audit performs an annual audit that with external organizations.
includes the campus central activity fund. Additional audits, Strong community partnerships provide school districts with
such as special audits, change of principalship audits, and added resources through the donation of goods and services
change of general clerk or school secretary audits are or monetary assistance. Houston ISD’s Strategic Partnerships
performed as needed. These audits ensure proper donation Department acts as an intermediary between the district and
tracking and reporting in compliance with the Financial outside organizations and assists organizations in building
Procedures Manual but do not include donations reported to partnerships with campuses and departments. Houston ISD
the Grants Development Department. community partners include the Houston Astros Major
Proper donation reporting is necessary to continue to build League Baseball club and the Astros Foundation, Capital
trust between Houston ISD, donors, and the community. One Bank, the Kroger Co., Reliant Energy, Smart Financial
The multiple ways in which campus donations are reported Credit Union, and others. District staff stated that they are
puts the district at risk for theft or fraud because it results in unable to provide a definite number of district partnerships
a gap in the tracking process. because these partnerships take different forms, including
ongoing or term-limited and monetary or service based.
Los Lunas Public Schools in New Mexico has a board policy
The first step for organizations that want to collaborate with
that requires the uniform reporting of all donations,
Houston ISD and have contacted the Strategic Partnerships
monetary and in-kind. The policy also states the
Department is to complete a questionnaire describing the
responsibility of the donor to complete and submit the
purpose of the partnership and what they want to help the
district’s gifts and donations form to the superintendent or
district accomplish. After an organization submits the
his or her designee. It also includes the acceptance
questionnaire, the Strategic Partnerships Department
procedures for any gift or donation.
connects the organization to campuses and departments with
Houston ISD should review the different ways that donations needs that match the organization’s goals. According to
are reported to the district and develop a unified plan to Houston ISD staff, the size of the district requires the
accept and track campus donations. The district should Strategic Partnerships Department to hand the partnership
perform the following actions: to the campus or department after it is established. After this
point, it is up to the campus or department to maintain the
• the manager of the Grants Development Department partnership. Staff stated that the Strategic Partnerships
should collaborate with the chief financial officer to Department maintains a database of partnerships it helps
complete the following actions: form, but that partnerships made independently by other
ºº develop a unified plan for campuses to follow departments or campuses are not tracked. Houston ISD staff
when accepting a donation; said that campuses previously recorded partnership
information in a database twice a year, but that step is no
ºº update the training for principals and designated longer required due to technical issues. Other district staff
campus staff responsible for collecting donations stated that partnerships are not tracked.
to reinforce proper reporting procedures; and
If an external organization contacts a campus or department
ºº inform the Fund Development Division of to collaborate, the campus or department is not required to
donation procedure changes to track donations notify the Strategic Partnerships Department. The
accurately; and department has an online partnerships guideline for
FIGURE 12–17
MADISON, WISCONSIN, METROPOLITAN SCHOOL DISTRICT’S SCHOOL COMMUNITY PARTNERSHIP GUIDING PRINCIPLES
1. Partnerships require an agreed-upon investment of material and human resources, organizational accountability, and shared
responsibility and decision making.
2. Partnerships are most productive when they are built on trust and reflect true collaboration among participating entities.
3. Effective partnerships outline roles and responsibilities for all involved and establish ongoing mechanisms for communication
regarding program development, implementation, operation, and evaluation.
4. It is the district’s responsibility to ensure that partnerships address student needs and that barriers to participation are removed.
5. Partnerships should evolve to meet the changing needs of students, schools, and families. Systematic monitoring and review
by all involved help ensure continuous improvement and determine how agreements could change to meet new needs or could
dissolve.
6. The district will provide interested community partners with a systematic process for accessing opportunities for collaboration.
7. Partnerships will honor legal and ethical obligations to student privacy.
8. The district’s partnership decisions will reflect its fiscal responsibilities as a steward of taxpayer funds.
Source: Guidelines for School–Community Partnerships, Madison Metropolitan School District, May 2019.
campuses to follow when forming and maintaining of the partnerships. For example, Houston ISD staff stated
partnerships with organizations, but district staff stated that that campus leadership maintains partnerships after they are
the guideline is outdated. The online guideline does not state formed, but campus leaders may lack the training to sustain
that campuses should contact the Strategic Partnerships the partnership or may choose to forgo the partnership.
Department to build the partnership. It suggests that the External organizations may view this as a negative aspect of
campus perform a needs assessment to evaluate how the partnering with the district and may elect not to pursue
partner can best support the campus. Departments have no partnerships with Houston ISD in the future.
partnerships guideline. The senior manager of community
partnerships conducts trainings on this topic when requested The Madison Metropolitan School District (MMSD) in
by a campus or department. Wisconsin publishes guidelines and detailed procedures for
school–community partnerships on its website. The
Furthermore, the Strategic Partnerships Department guidelines define a partnership, and list guiding principles
encourages campuses and departments, such as for establishing a successful partnership. Figure 12–17 shows
Wraparound Services, to seek out their own partnerships MMSD’s guiding principles.
with community and religious organizations without
notifying the department. MMSD includes the process for developing new partnerships,
beginning with an online inquiry form. The partnerships
As a result, the management of partnerships is inconsistent administrator reviews the form to ensure that the proposed
across the district. Some departments formalize partnerships partnership is realistic and aligns with district goals. The
through an MOU that is overseen by the Strategic district and the partner collaborate to outline the goals,
Partnerships Department, and others do not have a written logistics, protocols, and roles and responsibilities of each in
agreement. Without adequate oversight of all the campus the proposed partnership. A partnership agreement or MOU
and department partnerships, the Strategic Partnerships guides the partnership. Additionally, the agreement is
Department is not aware of all the entities with which the revisited regularly to assess progress of goals and make any
district engages. Several Houston ISD staff stated that their needed changes to the agreement.
departments independently seek to collaborate with
organizations but do not report these interactions to the MMSD staff record partnerships in the district’s partnership
Strategic Partnerships Department. This practice could lead database and update changes annually. The partnership
to a duplication of efforts by these departments, with many administrator oversees the maintenance of the database.
district staff potentially contacting the same organizations.
Houston ISD’s Strategic Partnerships Department should
Campus and department staff do not have clearly defined update procedures to manage partnerships with external
roles and responsibilities or methods to evaluate the success organizations and develop a system to track all district
partnerships. The general manager of strategic partnerships FIGURE 12–18

should complete the following actions: HOUSTON ISD INFORMATION CENTER ORGANIZATION
• revise and update the online partnerships guideline
Chief Development Officer
for campuses and departments and ensure that the
guideline and training have a unified message;
General Manager of Strategic Partnerships
• ensure that the updated online partnerships guideline
and training include the following procedures: Manager of Information Center
ºº the initiation, planning, and development of

partnerships;
Senior Front Desk
ºº documenting a partnership agreement in Information Receptionist – 2
an MOU; Center
Representative
ºº ongoing tracking of partnerships; and
Information
ºº monitoring and evaluation of goals and objectives Center
of partnerships; and Representative – 2
• collaborate with the Information Technology Sources: Legislative Budget Board School Performance Review
Team; Houston ISD, February 2019.
Department to offer the partnership training
online and track it using the district’s online
training program. Houston ISD’s directories are posted on the General
Information webpage. According to interviews, Houston
ISD experiences a steady staff turnover, and staff do not
existing resources.
update the directories to ensure the availability of current
information. At the time of the review, the central office
DISTRICT DIRECTORIES (REC. 93)
directory had been updated at least three times since
Houston ISD has no centralized process to update December 2018. The contact role directory, the administrative
department and staff directories. departments directory and staff listings were updated last in
December 2018. The campus directory was updated last in
The Information Center is the primary point of district
September 2018.
contact for parents, community members, and external
organizations. Additionally, this department administers the Figure 12–19 shows the five directories on the district’s
district directories, including campus and staff listings, the website and the outdated or inconsistent information
central office directory, and a contact role directory, which they contain.
are available to download in PDF form. Figure 12–18 shows
the reporting structure for the Information Center. Staff stated that departments are supposed to inform the
Information Center about changes in staff, and position
The manager of the Information Center oversees the front and department title changes. Other staff said that the
desk, the main district call center, and security at the Houston Information Center reaches out to staff and departments to
ISD central office building. The manager also trains district update the central directories. As a result, changes may
and campus staff to use School Messenger, an application occur in departments that are not communicated to the
that district and campus staff use to communicate important Information Center in a timely manner. The multiple
information to staff and parents by voice, text, and by various inaccuracies in the directories demonstrates that neither of
means online. these processes are successful in ensuring that directories
contain updated information.
Information center representatives answer calls placed to the
main district call center and answer inquiries or route the The review team observed that certain staff listed in the
calls to departments. The front desk receptionists greet and school year 2018–19 central office directory, which was
sign-in visitors to the Houston ISD central office building. updated April 8, 2019, were no longer employed by the
FIGURE 12–19
HOUSTON ISD DIRECTORIES
DIRECTORY DESCRIPTION OUTDATED OR INCONSISTENT INFORMATION
Central Office Directory This directory is organized by departments and • contains incorrect or inconsistent job titles for staff;
subdepartments. It provides staff names, job • contains incorrect department names;
titles, and phone numbers. • erroneously lists some positions as vacant;
• lists staff that are no longer employed at the district;
• some staff and departments are not listed; and
• does not list staff email addresses
“Who Handles What in This directory includes search terms, the Missing some departments
Houston ISD,” Contact department responsible, and appropriate phone
Role Directory number.
Administrative This directory is organized by department. It • includes staff that are no longer employed at the
Departments Directory includes the department head and his or her district; and
email address and phone number. • includes staff and departments that do not appear
in the Central Office Directory or the Staff Listings
Staff Listings This directory lists staff alphabetically by last • lists staff that are no longer employed at the district;
name and includes the department and a phone and
number for each. • missing some staff and departments
Campus Listings This directory lists all Houston ISD campuses • lists some campuses twice; and
including in-district charter campuses, early • lists principals that are no longer at the campus
childhood education centers, and alternative
campuses. It provides addresses and phone
numbers for each campus, and the principals’
and school support officers’ names.
district. The central office directory also does not identify all campus name, address, contact information, principal name,
district departments, such as Wraparound Services. and other information that is not provided in the campus
Additionally, the directory lists incorrect department names, listing. The school search is updated by multiple departments,
such as Strategic Branding Marketing and Communications including the Office of Communications, the Human
instead of the correct title, Strategic Engagement and Resources Department, and the Research and Accountability
Outreach. The directory also lists incorrect position titles, Department. Maintaining two campus directories that
such as manager instead of director for reading/English and contain conflicting information assures that website visitors
language arts. do not always receive accurate information.
According to interviews, the district has reorganized Houston ISD has four different staff and department
departments without communicating the updated directories and a campus directory that are updated at
information to the Information Center. For example, staff different times. Therefore, parents, staff, and community
stated that the student support services officer position had members cannot find accurate contact information reliably
been eliminated. As a result, positions that reported directly and may not receive prompt assistance from district staff in
to the student support services officer now report to the response to inquiries. In addition, because the district
wraparound services director. The school year 2018–19 provides the directories as downloadable PDFs, website
central office directory does not include this change. visitors will not always know whether staff or departments
have changed.
Additionally, because the Information Center updates the
campus directory at the beginning of the school year, it will Austin ISD has an interactive directory on its website that
not always contain updated information. For example, the enables visitors to search for staff by name or department. The
review team observed two principal changes during school staff directory includes central office staff, campus staff, and
year 2018–19 that the campus listings did not include. The part-time staff. Additionally, it lists the job title, department or
Houston ISD website has a school search function that lists campus, email, and phone number for each staff.
FIGURE 12–20
HOUSTON ISD VOLUNTEER REGISTRATION PROCESS, SCHOOL YEAR 2018–19
Volunteers register on the Houston ISD website and complete the application
District contracts with a third-party vendor to conduct background checks within two days to 21 days
Approved applicants can start volunteering District may require applicants that are not approved to submit
additional information, or applicants may appeal the decision
Houston ISD should ensure the efficient communication of Houston ISD staff said that about 30,000 volunteers are
staff and department changes to the Information Center to active each school year, most of whom volunteer in
maintain an updated and cohesive central directory. The elementary schools. Volunteers participate in the following
manager of the Information Center should complete the activities, among others:
following actions:
• providing classroom or office assistance;
• evaluate and communicate reporting procedures
for district staff to follow when organizational • mentoring and tutoring students;
changes occur, including staff, position, or • staffing concession stands during campus events;
department changes;
• cleaning and organizing classrooms or closets; and
• work with the web and mobile design team to develop
a cohesive district staff and department directory for • chaperoning field trips.
publication on the Houston ISD website; and
Although the district trains VIPS coordinators, it does not
• direct the Information Center webmaster to place require coordinators to train volunteers. Interviews with
a link to the school-search tool on the General Houston ISD staff indicated that the district does not offer
Information webpage in place of the campus training for volunteers. Instead, staff said that campuses
listing PDF. determine whether and how to train volunteers. Volunteering
at a campus may expose volunteers to sensitive student
information, and emergency safety drills or real emergency
existing resources.
events. Inconsistent training could result in volunteers not
knowing how to conduct themselves in accordance with
VOLUNTEER TRAINING (REC. 94)
district procedures and federal laws.
Houston ISD lacks formalized training for volunteers.
For example, volunteers who are not familiar with the federal
Parents and community members who wish to volunteer at
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act may
Houston ISD campuses and sponsored events must enroll
unintentionally discuss private student information with
through the Volunteers in Public Schools (VIPS) program
other volunteers or parents, violating students’ privacy rights.
and consent to a background check. All volunteers,
Volunteers unfamiliar with school emergency safety
including parents, must register annually. Houston ISD
procedures can place an added strain on campus staff who
board policy GKG1 (REGULATION) requires that each
must direct the volunteers while guiding students to safety.
campus assign two staff to VIPS coordinator duties. The
VIPS program administrator trains coordinators on how to Mercer Island School District in Washington requires its
best assign volunteers and track their hours through the volunteers to view a training video that covers volunteer
volunteer database system. Houston ISD’s Information procedures at the campus, responsibilities, effective student
Technology Department tracks VIPS coordinator training. interaction strategies, emergency safety procedures, student
Some campuses encourage volunteerism by providing confidentiality laws, and antiharassment and
access to a computer through which volunteers can register. nondiscrimination rules. The training requires completion of
Figure 12–20 shows the steps to register as a VIPS volunteer. a brief questionnaire as proof that volunteers completed and
understood the training. Volunteers also receive a volunteer • Houston ISD has many departments with similar-
handbook. Campus staff track volunteer training by logging sounding titles, which can be confusing to the
the questionnaires. community and district staff. During interviews,
staff said that when Parent Engagement changed
In addition, the U.S. Department of Education website its title to Family and Community Engagement
provides information for campus volunteers on protecting (FACE), community members were confused as
student privacy. to whether they should contact FACE or
Community Partnerships to seek a partnership
Houston ISD should develop guidelines to train parent and
with the district. Additionally, some departments,
community volunteers. To ensure effective volunteer
such as the Student Support Office, Student
training, Houston ISD’s VIPS Program Administrator
Services, and Student Support Services, have titles
should develop a training course for volunteers that covers
that do not indicate clearly how their functions
general safety practices and volunteer procedures and
differ. The district may consider evaluating
responsibilities. The training could be offered online and
department titles so that they clearly represent the
tracked by the campus VIPS coordinators in the volunteer
responsibilities of each department.
database system. Volunteers should answer a questionnaire
based on the training or submit a signed form to the VIPS
coordinator confirming that they have completed the
volunteer training.

existing resources.
During fieldwork, the review team observed additional issues
regarding the district’s programs and services to students,
staff, and the community. These observations are presented
for consideration as the district implements the report’s other
• The Information Center is the primary point of district

contact and communicates important information
to parents and the community. It is located within
the Fund Development Division. During interviews,
several staff stated that the Information Center could
better serve the Houston ISD community if it were
located in a different department, although opinions
varied on which that should be. The district may
consider evaluating if the Information Center might
best serve the district and the community within
another department;
• Houston ISD is a decentralized school district in

which campus leaders have the authority to accept
or decline partnerships with external organizations.
Houston ISD staff stated that principals’ ability to
decline partnerships that offer volunteers or resources
might lead to inequity among campuses, because
students who need these additional supports may not
receive them; and
FISCAL IMPACT
The Legislative Budget Board’s School Performance Review Team has identified a fiscal impact for the following recommendation:

12. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT
88. Consolidate the Office of $491,450 $491,450 $491,450 $491,450 $491,450 $2,457,250 $0
Communications and the
Strategic Engagement and
Outreach Department to
streamline the district’s
communications functions.
Total $491,450 $491,450 $491,450 $491,450 $491,450 $2,457,250 $0
The School Performance Review Team could not determine a fiscal impact for other recommendations due to lack of data.
However, Houston ISD has the potential for significant savings by implementing the following recommendation:
Recommendation 90: Update the affiliation agreement between the district and the Houston ISD Foundation to reflect actual
practices and promote accountability and transparency to the public. The district could gain additional revenue from the
Houston ISD Foundation by adding a reimbursement component to the affiliation agreement for the use of office space,
supplies, printing services, and district staff.

Houston ISD Performance Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Houston ISD Performance Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Houston ISD Performance Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What is the purpose of the report?

What is the purpose of the report?

What recommendations does the report provide?

What recommendations does the report provide?

LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD

Houston Independent School District

Management and Performance Review

PREPARED BY LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF

WWW.LBB.STATE.TX.US NOVEMBER 2019

PREPARED BY LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD STAFF

WWW.LBB.STATE.TX.US NOVEMBER 2019

Dr. Grenita Lathan

Dear Dr. Lathan:

The report is available on the LBB website at http://www.lbb.state.tx.us.

Mailing Address: P.O. Box 12666 • Austin, TX 78711-2666

cc: Diana Davila Rhonda Skillern-Jones

• Develop a bus replacement plan that includes

37 other campuses, including those serving combined FIGURE 3

Houston ISD Houston ISD

Houston ISD Houston ISD

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 900 950 1000 1050

Houston ISD Houston ISD

SAT or ACT college admissions tests. Houston ISD scored FIGURE 6

LBB SCHOOL PERFORMANCE REVIEW Carol Alvarado 26.0%

BACKGROUND Joan Huffman 20.0%

effectiveness and efficiency of the operations of school Sarah Davis 12.0%

recommendations based upon the analysis of data and onsite

among campuses. board members to attend trainings regarding their

BACKGROUND president can call special meetings at his or her discretion or

Elementary 160 100,793 48.1%

Middle 38 33,054 15.8%

High 37 47,785 22.8%

Combined or Alternative (2) 37 24,616 12.1%

Total 280 209,772

Elizabeth Santos Second Vice President District I 2021 8 months

Dr. Sergio Lira Secretary District III 2019 8 months

Anne Sung Member District VII 2021 1 year and 9 months

Source: Houston ISD Mission and Beliefs, 2019.

Source: Houston ISD Beliefs and Goals, 2019.

Chief Audit Executive

Chief of Police Interim Superintendent General Counsel

Chief Strategy Chief Government Chief Chief Chief Chief

Chief Information Chief of Staff Area Chief Chief Human

DETAILED FINDINGS The superintendent directly supervises 18 staff from

Chief Chief Chief of Staff Chief Human General Counsel

Chief Strategy Chief Chief Chief Chief of Police

Source: Houston ISD, school year 2018–19.

FIGURE 1–12 (CONTINUED)

Many requests are time-consuming for staff to fulfill, September 43 5

The number of information requests from board members

• exhibits, also known as forms, are supporting FIGURE 1–18

• establish and define rights; G – Community and Governmental Relations GA – GRC

Legal policies represent existing statute and often provide

Regulations 312 254 31 12 15

BOARD COMMITTEES (REC. 8) FIGURE 1–21

Board committees can be standing or ad hoc. Standing

• “As long as we have the divided personalities, it’s

• encouraging board members to reflect on their • implement and monitor implementation of

• fostering open communication; • regularly review, update, and archive

• Houston ISD’s regular board meetings average more

Recommendation 31: Analyze property insurance