Education Town Hall Meeting-2003

8/8/2019 Education Town Hall Meeting-2003

1/43

Building Community,

Restoring TrustTown Hall Meeting 1

Education

Presented by Valerie F. Leonard

Guest Presenters: Willie ColeGatanya Arnic


2/43

What Well Cover

Education Environment

Reading and Math Scores Graduation and Dropout Rates

School Finances and Facilities

Restorative Justice Benefits and Wraparound Services

Valeries Agenda


3/43

Education Environment

Presenter: Valerie F. Leonard


4/43

The Education Environment Demographics

There are 33 public schools in the 24thWard, including 3high schools and 30 elementary schools

Approximately 2/3 of the students in 24thWard publicschools are living in poverty

Depending on the school, 8%-31% of the students areenrolled in the special education curriculum

Student-to teacher ratios range from 12-1 to 19-1, which

could put them in danger of being classified asunderutilized Over 90% of the students qualify for free or reduced

lunches The local 24thWard school budgets range from

approximately $2.2 million to $6.3 million


5/43

Performance With notable exceptions, most 24thWard schools

underperform City Averages in math and reading

Most communities in the 24thWard tend to beamong those with the highest dropout rates andlowest graduation rates in the City of Chicago

Schools tend to be the schools of last resort rather

than the schools of choice


6/43

After School and Extra-Curricular Activities and There are very few opportunities for ongoing recreationaland extracurricular activities

There are several youth and after school programs. Someprograms are high quality, while others are not

Youth Employment and Mentoring There is a shortage of mentoring and job training programs

for our children

Parental Involvement and Civic Engagement Compared to other communities, parents, community

based organizations and churches tend to be less engagedin the education of our children

There is not enough school funding available to provide thenecessary supports


7/43

School Policies

Renaissance 2010-A number of schools have been closed, phasedout or turned around, with very little evidence that school qualityhas improved

Chicago Educational Facilities Task Force Comprised of representatives from State Legislature, CPS,

Chicago Teachers Union and Community Based Organizations Review policies regarding school openings, closings,

turnarounds and boundaries

Emphasis on Tests, Focus on College Preparatory Curriculum vs.Vocational and Technical Education The current curriculum could be improved to be more relevant

for students as well as employers

Little alignment between curriculum in feeder schools, highschools, colleges and employers


8/43

There is a tendency to involve the police andJuvenile Detention Center in the discipline ofstudents, which could lead to expulsion from

school or incarceration


9/43

Reading and Math ScoresPresenter: Valerie F. Leonard


10/43

20.7%

29.9%

51.1%

61.4%

36.98%

47.84%

64.75%

72.0%

15.0%

25.0%

35.0%

45.0%

55.0%

65.0%

75.0%

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

North Lawndale

Citywide

24th Ward

Elementary Math Scores: 24th Ward vs. City AveragePercent of Students meeting or exceeding ISAT math targets


11/43

25.7%

54.2%

40.33%

64.91%

15.0%

25.0%

35.0%

45.0%

55.0%

65.0%

75.0%

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

North Lawndale

Citywide

Elementary Reading Scores: 24th Ward vs. City AveragePercent of students meeting or exceeding ISAT reading targets

24thWard


12/43

Graduation and Dropout RatesPresenter: Valerie F. Leonard


13/43

The State of Affairs in 2004

The communities in the 24thWard ranked 37,57, 65, 67 and 69 out of 77 of Chicagos

Community Areas with respect to graduationrates for high school students.

The city average at the time was 56.6%.

The national graduation rate was 70%


14/43

24th Ward Graduation Rates

19 Years Old in:

Rank 13 Years Old in:

37 South Lawndale 50.7% 936 48.7% 917 53.0% 876 56.4% 871

57 Austin 44.6% 1,541 41.2% 1,513 44.4% 1,478 47.0% 1,490

65 East Garfield 43.6% 330 46.1% 332 49.8% 297 43.2% 33167 West Garfield 42.4% 403 41.1% 375 37.5% 400 41.1% 331

69 North Lawndale 44.2% 719 43.0% 693 41.4% 696 38.8% 616

24th Ward Graduation Rates by Age 19

Broken Out by Community Area

1998

2001 2002 2003 2004

1995 1996 1997


15/43

56.4%

48.5%

46.9%43.4%

43.2%

38.8%

56.6%

30.0%

35.0%

40.0%

45.0%

50.0%

55.0%

60.0%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

South Lawndale

Lower West Side

Humboldt Park

Near West Side

East Garfield

North Lawndale

Citywide

4-Year Graduation Rates:North Lawndale vs. City and Nearby Communities

Source: Chicago Public Schools

In 2004, North Lawndale had a lower graduation rate than all of the

neighboring communities.


16/43

23.1%

12.5%

22.1%

13.2%

19.7%

12.4%

19.4%

13.1%

21.3%

15.6%15.7%

9.9%9.0%

11.0%

13.0%

15.0%

17.0%

19.0%

21.0%

23.0%

25.0%

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

South Lawndale

Lower West Side

Humboldt Park

Near West Side

East Garfield

North Lawndale

Citywide

1-Year DropOut Rates:North Lawndale vs. City and Nearby Communities

Source: Chicago Public Schools

In 2004, North Lawndale had a higher high school dropout rate than allother neighboring communities


17/43

Getting Behind the Numbers

Voices of Youth in Chicago Education (VOYCE),a collaborative of youth from around the city

used youth researchers to survey youth on thereasons why they drop out.


18/43

What VOYCE Found Finding #1: Students in Chicago Public Schools believe that they

are the ones to blame for the failures of the school system.

Finding #2: Dropping out is not something that students plan or

anticipate. It is something that happens slowly over time.

Finding #3: Teachers, parents, and students agree that relevancein curriculum is critical to students engagement in school. Students often dont find the curriculum to be relevant

Finding #4: The curriculum needs to explicitly make theconnection that school is a stepping stone to college and futurecareers. One way to do this is by taking students to visit college campuses

Source: Student- Led Solutions to the Nations Dropout Crisis, A Report by Voices of Youth in Chicagos Education, November, 2008


19/43

School Finances and FacilitiesPresenter: Valerie F. Leonard


20/43

FY 2010 Budget SummaryFY 2010 Proposed Budget for All Funds (In Millions)

Fund Type FY 2008Expense

FY 2009Adopted

FY 2010Proposed

FY 09-FY 10$Change

FY 09-FY 10% Change

Special Fund $3,280.9 $3,550.3 $3,666.0 $ 115.7 3.3%

Special Revenue 1,113.7 1,304.6 1,661.9 357.3 27.4%

Operating Total $4,394.7 $4,854.9 $5,327.9 $ 473.0 9.7%

Debt Service 260.4 288.1 499.7 211.6 73.4%

Capital Projects 463.1 1,014.4 1,035.4 21.0 2.1%

TotalAppropriation

$5,118.2 $6,157.4 $6,863.0 $ 705.6 11.5%


21/43

City of Chicago

Local School Expenditures 2002-2009 Approximately one half of CPSs budget has been spent on

Instruction

Year Fiscal Year

Instruction General Support Other

(%) Administration Services Expenditures

(%) (%) (%)

20022000 - 01 49.3 1 41.2 8.5

20032001 - 02 50.7 1.6 38.5 9.2

20042002 - 03 50.3 1.7 39.3 8.8

20052003 - 04 51.8 1.2 36.7 10.2

20062004 - 05 49.6 1.1 39.7 9.6

20072005 - 06 52 1.2 38.6 8.2

20082006 - 07 50.5 1.2 37 11.3

20092007 - 08 50.5 1.2 38.4 9.9

Source: Illinois Board of Education (ISBE) Interactive Report Card


22/43

FY 2011 Budget Status

CPS has been holding regular and special boardmeetings to address a potential $700 million deficit

Potential methods of closing the budget gaps include

Borrowing up to $800 million Laying off 2,700 teachers

Increasing individual class sizes to 35 pupils

Chicago Teachers Union opposed the layoffs

Newly elected CTU President believes the budgetprocess should be more transparent.


23/43

The Relationship Between

Chicago Public Schools and TIFs Over $58.5 million in TIF funds have been used to secure general

obligation bonds issued by CPS between 2002 and 2004. (1)

According to a study carried out by Robert Ginsburg and Don

Wiener on behalf of SEIU's Illinois Council, Chicago's TIF systemabsorbed $552 million in property tax revenue in 2008.

Considering that over half of every property tax dollar goestoward schools, it's fair to assume that roughly $300 million ofthe revenue generated in TIF districts each year would otherwise

end up in CPS's coffers.

Instead, that money is stashed away for the Daley administrationto use as it saw fit. (2)

(1) CPS FY2010 Budget2)Adam Doster, A Teacher's Fight To Open Up Chicago's TIF Budget, Progress Illinois, May 19,2010


24/43

Worth Noting

The City of Chicagos budget allowed for costscovering up to 30 charter schools.

The State Legislature recently lifted the cap onthe number of charter schools allowed in theState.

It is expected that the number of charter schoolswill increase over time.


25/43

The Chicago Public Schools 2010 budget allowed forover $310 million in payments to charter schools,yet the CPS financials do not provide individual financial

summaries for Charter Schools The CPS capital assessments do not include capital

plans for charter schools CPS has a history of increasing capital expenditures in

certain failing traditional schools, closing them and

effectively re-opening them as charters This action effectively transfers assets from traditional

schools to charter schools with almost no accountabilityto the public.


26/43

Restorative JusticePresenter: Willie Cole


27/43

What We Found

Between 1999 and 2003, over 10,000 youth werearrested and referred to Juvenile Court from the

24th Ward Community.

There were 720 24th Ward cases pending inJuvenile court, the largest number of cases from

any community in Chicago. The Chicago Tribuneexposed the Cook County Juvenile TemporaryDetention Center as a warehouse for kids.


28/43

Most of the youth confined are low-level, nonviolentoffenders, mainly drug offenders

Research cited by the Illinois Juvenile Justice Initiativereports:

Cook County has the highest rate of drug arrests in thestate

From 2005 to 2007 Cook County annually committedmore than 100 youth to juvenile prisons for drug

offenses. Some counties did not commit any youth fordrug offenses


29/43

Data from the Cook County Juvenile DetentionAlternatives Initiative for the 2nd quarter of 2009revealed that 83% of the admissions to detention fromApril to June of 2009 were Black, while only 3% were

White, and

Chicagos West Side continues to be disproportionatelyrepresentedas the city is the only significant jailer ofdrug offenders in the state


30/43

Juvenile ArrestsNumber of Juvenile

Arrests by District, 2008

In 2008, 10 of the 25 Policedistricts accounted for 64% ofthe juvenile arrests.

Rank District

1 District 8

2 District 11 (24th Ward)

3 District 3

4 District 6

5 District 15

6 District 4

7 District 5

8 District 7

9 District 25

10 District 9

Source: Chicago Police Department, Juvenile Justice Volume 4 Issue 1Juvenile Arrest Trends 2003-2008


31/43

Juvenile Arrests by Offense Type

The top two offenses were drugabuse violation and simple

battery.

The offenses with the largest

increases between 2003 and2008 were Robbery

Miscellaneous non-indexoffenses,

Vandalism and warrant arrests

The offenses with the greatestdecreases include Drug abuse violations

Simple battery

Motor vehicle theft

24th Ward Schools: Gaining Ground or on Shaky Ground/June 16, 2010

Source: Chicago Police Department, Juvenile Justice Volume 4 Issue 1

Juvenile Arrest Trends 2003-2008


32/43

For the nonviolent offenders, does

incarceration do more harm than good?

Some recent research shows

Incarceration can have severe detrimental effects on youth: theirown economic productivity and their communitys economic health;disrupt families, introduce them to delinquent peers, expose them totraumatic experiences

Higher recidivism rate than youth allowed to remain in community:education suspended, disruption to normal process of agingout of

crime

50 percent of released youth return to juvenile prison within threeyears


33/43

What is the cost and impact? Incarceration can cost over $85,000 per youth

per bed annually.

10 years of research show that an increase inincarceration does not correlate to decrease incrime during same time period


34/43

What are the alternatives? Alternatives: Invest in more community-based programs. Shown to

be more cost effective and some programs shown to reducerecidivism by 22 percent

1. Implement more Balanced and Restorative Justice (BARJ)

practices (accountability, community safety, competencydevelopment)

Peer Juries at schools

Community Panels for Youth

Circles

Expungement Info/Support Victim Impact Panels

Community Service

Competency Development Programs (education, jobtraining, drug abuse treatment, parenting classes, anger

management)


35/43

2. Ensure Cook County participates in RedeployIllinois Initiative (Began in 2004 in ruralcounties and St. Clair, Peoria, Macon counties,

made permanent in 2009; saved $18.7 millionand lowered commitments by 51 percent):

Agree to cut number of youths sentenced top securefacilities by 25 percent over previous three years

State reimburses county for funds spent toadjudicate youth locally


36/43

3. Fund holistic, family focused programs suchas: Functional Family Therapy (FFT) and Multi-Systemic Therapy (MST)

4. Implement models such as AggressionReplacement Training (ART)

5. Support Multidimensional Treatment FosterCare (MTFC) one youth-one family placement

versus group placement/detention center


37/43

Public Benefits and

Wraparound ServicesPresenter: Gatanya Arnic


38/43

Valeries Agenda


39/43

1. Develop 24th Ward Master Educational

Facilities Planning Task Force

Comprised of stakeholders from CPS, CTU, businesscommunity, nonprofits

Provide input into facilities and curriculum planningfor 24thWard Schools

Encourage alignment of curriculum of feeder

schools with high schools, and alignment of highschool curriculum with employers and colleges

Evaluate impact of school openings, closings,turnarounds and attendance boundaries


40/43

2. Encourage Stronger Collaboration & Partnerships

Between Chicago Public Schools and Community

Advocate for CPS Board meetings to be on differentdates from City Council meetings

Broker relationships between Schools, communitybased organizations and churches

Replace negative competition with spirit ofpartnership

Put community in a better position to seek federalfunds for education and after school programming

Provide more cohesive delivery of services


41/43

3. Make Schools the Center of Community

Encourage CPS to expand Community Schoolsprogramming in the 24thWard

Schools open for extended hours to be used by theentire community

Supportive Services

Adult Learning

Job Training

After School Programs

Recreational Activities


42/43

4. Reduce Criminalization of Our Children

Advocate for funding for proven crimeprevention programs and strategies

Restorative Justice Programming Afterschool programs with mentoring and job

training components

Summer employment

Service Learning and Unpaid Internships

Greater access to and coordination of supportiveservices and benefits


43/43

5. Increase Parental InvolvementWork with LSCs and parent advocacy groups to

reach out to foster greater involvement of

parents in their childrens education

Advocate for more funding to support programsthat promote parental involvement through

education and training Broker partnerships between CPS, parent groups,

churches and other community basedorganizations

Education Town Hall Meeting-2003

Documents