Interim Co-Superintendents Take the Helm in Belmont-Redwood Shores School District 

For Nellie Hungerford and Suzanne Roy, working as a team of interim co-superintendents in the Belmont-Redwood Shores school district has been a smooth transition because they share a common vision and values. "It's working better than we ever could have imagined, "says Roy. "And we're excited about where we can take this district."

 

 

Nellie Hungerford (l.) and Suzanne Roy share the unusual role of co-superintendents in the Belmont-Redwood Shores school district

Roy and Hungerford are each working 60 to 70 hours a week, and are both on the job five days a week. Their typical work day includes continuing their previous responsibilities as assistant superintendent of educational services and personnel for Roy, and assistant superintendent of business services and operations for Hungerford, as well as co-superintendent duties related to board relations, personnel, community and parent concerns.

 

In addition Hungerford is also supervising facility renovations at six schools. They both attend community meetings and attended most of the back-to-school nights at district schools together. When it comes to school board meetings, both are present, and whoever has the hot topic is the lead for that night's meeting.

 

"This wouldn't work with two big egos," notes Hungerford. "We complement each other and agree on most things." Only one other district in the state has co-superintendents, so Roy and Hungerford are creating their own model as they go. "Our board is supportive of us," says Hungerford. "This board thinks out of the box. As far as we are concerned, interim doesn't mean just keeping things going. We want to move this district forward. The district started a strategic planning process last year and we are continuing to implement that plan. We are focused on making this district an incredible place to learn and grow."

 

The pair is focusing the district on 21st century learning, and moving work forward in the adoption of Common Core standards. They're striving to provide opportunities for professional growth for school staff in an effort to build capacity within the district for administrator positions as they open up. And like most districts, they're facing the challenges of declining school funding. "There's definitely a sense of urgency around the budget," says Roy.

 

Hungerford and Roy have a one-year contract as co-superintendents while the board conducts a full search for the position.

 

Learn more about Hungerford and Roy, and their backgrounds here

 

Note: This is the first in a series of newsletter articles profiling new superintendents in San Mateo County.

 

 

Jeanie McLoughlin and Nirmala Dillman, Early Learning Support Services staff members at the San Mateo County Office of Education (SMCOE) are having a busy fall season leading efforts to gather input from stakeholders around the state for the development of the California Comprehensive Early Learning Plan (CCELP). This work is done under contract to the California Department of Education (CDE) in conjunction with the State Advisory Council on Early learning and Care (SAC).

Jeanie McLoughlin (pictured here) along with Nirmala Dillman, lead the charge on the CCELP

"It's been a joy to work with a great team," says McLoughlin. The team is comprised of the American Institutes for Research (AIR), the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), the Glen Price Group and Education Counsel. In August, AIR released a meta-analysis that synthesizes more than 80 studies of California children that have been done in the last five to ten years.

Engaging stakeholders in the development of the CCELP involves a four-pronged approach. "We invite interested community members to: complete an online survey, participate in one of four regional meetings being held throughout the state in October, attend a local community meeting in October or November to give input, or participate in a virtual meeting online on October 22. We hope that anyone who has a stake in the future of early childhood education in California will participate in some way," says Dillman.

The deadline to complete the online survey was September 24, and McLoughlin anticipates around 600 responses. Local community members are encouraged to attend the regional meeting on October 29 at the California Endowment in Oakland, or the San Mateo County community meeting on October 12 from 1:00 to 4:00 p.m. at SMCOE, hosted by First 5 and the San Mateo County Childcare Partnership Council (CCPC). SMCOE Superintendent Anne Campbell and County Supervisor Dave Pine serve as co-chairs of the CCPC. The Glen Price Group will facilitate this local meeting.

McLoughlin, Dillman and their CCELP team have also created a toolkit of materials to help local groups conduct their own input sessions in October and November. They hosted a webinar on September 19 to instruct interested community members in how to use this toolkit.

"All the information that we gather from the survey and these meetings will be fed into the development of the comprehensive plan," notes McLoughlin. "Right now our focus is on stakeholder engagement. In the next calendar year we'll shift into heavy writing." That will mean a busy spring for the pair, as the plan is due to be completed by June 30, 2013.

To see the AIR meta-analysis, or register for one of the local meetings, check here

As the school year gets under way, Safe Routes to School is buzzing with activity. A total of 21 school districts in San Mateo County have signed on to the program, including 110 schools. There is tremendous enthusiasm, particularly as schools prepare for International Walk to School Day on October 3, 2012. "Some schools are really running with it," says Daina Lujan, Safe Routes to Schools Coordinator at the San Mateo County Office of Education (SMCOE).

Safe Routes to Schools is a national program, funded by the United States Department of Transportation. The goal of the program is to enable community leaders, schools and parents across the United States to encourage

Daina Lujan, Safe Routes to Schools Coordinator, provides tips for district coordinators at a recent SMCOE workshop.

more children to walk and bicycle safely to school. In the process, programs are working to reduce traffic congestion and increase safety around school sites as well as to improve health and the environment.

On September 17, school-level and district Safe Routes to Schools coordinators gathered at SMCOE for a workshop on the nuts and bolts of planning activities for International Walk to School Day. SMCOE provided giant charts for schools which would show how children arrived at school that day. Children who come by foot would be given a shoe sticker, while those who were driven or biked would be given a car or bike sticker to paste on the chart. In that way, each school would have its own instant survey of home-to-school transportation.

The Hospital Consortium also provided incentives such as water bottles, stickers and waterless tattoos for students. Participants also received re-usable Walk to School Day banners, posters and suggestions for Walk to School Day art and music projects courtesy of SMCOE. Adrian Padilla, a physical education instructional coach with the Belmont-Redwood Shores school district, demonstrated how to set up P.E. stations that encourage students who arrive early at school to stay active.

Another big push right now for Safe Routes to Schools in San Mateo County is a county-wide evaluation, which will serve as a baseline to determine how many children are walking, biking and carpooling to school, and what the barriers are to these modes of home-to-school transportation. There are two parts to this evaluation -- a classroom tally and a parent survey, both anonymous. SMCOE is coordinating incentives to ensure maximum participation. Incentives have been provided through a joint effort by SMCOE and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). Schools have the opportunity to win bicycles, bike helmets, bike bells, tire repair kits, and playground balls for their students, depending on the level of participation. Alta Planning and Design will tabulate the results and publish them in mid-October.

Lujan is also working on a resolution that school district boards and the SMCOE board would adopt. Citing statistics such as the 34% rate of childhood obesity in San Mateo County and the steep decline in numbers of children walking to school -- down from a high of 48% in the past to 13% today -- the resolution would focus school districts on participating in Safe Routes to Schools, and on making safety and health a priority. "We've become a road-oriented society," notes Lujan. "And this is a worthwhile initiative to improve the quality of life for students."

When voters go to the polls on November 6, 2012, they'll have a choice of propositions to address the revenue shortfall facing California public schools. Proposition 30 and Proposition 38 offer different approaches to generating revenues for public education.

Governor Jerry Brown is leading the charge for Proposition 30 while Advancement Project Co-Director and former federal prosecutor Molly Munger is the sponsor of Proposition 38. Supporters of Proposition 30 include the League of Women Voters, the California Federation of Teachers (CFT), the California Teachers Association (CTA), the California School Employees Association (CSEA), the California School Boards Association (CSBA), and the California Democratic Party. Opponents include the California Republican Party, and the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association.

Supporters of Proposition 38 include the California State PTA and the California School Boards Association (CSBA) while opponents include the California Democratic and Republican Parties, and the California Business Roundtable. 

Proposition 30 would increase taxes on earnings over $250,000 for seven years and sales tax by one-quarter cent for four years to fund schools. The estimated increased state tax revenues through 2018-19 would average about $6 billion annually. If the measure passes, planned spending reductions of about $6 billion for 2012-13, primarily directed at schools, would not occur, and the state would begin to pay back schools for the large deficits in funding that have built up over the past several years. The intent is to provide schools with more revenue on time in future years.

Proposition 38 would temporarily increase personal income tax rates for 12 years on a progressive basis for nearly all California taxpayers, with higher income individuals paying higher rates. The new revenues would be allocated to K-12 education, early childhood education and repayment of state general obligation bond debt. Proposition 38 would raise an estimated $10 billion in 2013-14, the first full year of implementation, and could potentially raise larger sums in future years. The revenues raised by the measure would not be considered General Fund revenues and would be in addition to the minimum level of K-12 funding established by Proposition 98. The dollars this measure would provide could not be used to "supplant or replace" local, state or federal support for K-12 education or child care and preschool programs.

If both measures pass, the one with the most votes will prevail. If neither passes, public schools will incur approximately $6 billion in "trigger cuts" to the 2012-13 budget, which amounts to about $457 per student.