5/14/2026 - FCPS Budget Committee of the Whole Meeting

001Mhm. >> Mhm. >> budget uh board budget committee at to off the whole to or to order at 5:10 p.m. Miss Dix Miss Lady has submitted a request to attend tonight's meeting remotely. She's not on? Okay. All right, that's good. I call on Dr. Reed for a presentation on the FY 2027 approved budget. Thank you, Miss Dixon. And it's my pleasure this evening to introduce our Chief Financial Officer uh Miss Lee Burden uh who is going to present our final approved budget prior to discussion. So, Miss Burden. Good evening. Um you know, the the superintendent, you know, presented the um her recommendations for reductions to align with the funding levels that are known at this point in time last Thursday. So, I'll do a little quick review of where we are with that. Um do

002we have a remote or can somebody click for me? Okay. Next slide. You know, of course, you know, we use our resources strategically. Um all of our schools are fully accredited. These are some stats that we are really proud of. The next couple of slides are, you know, giving information about the Baldrige Gold Award um that we recently received. Next slide. Next slide. Then our strategic budget priorities. Uh I'm just going to cut to the chase of the list of items that the superintendent's recommending. Next slide. Although this one is worth mentioning uh after I said I wasn't going to. You know, the HR department has great job and their principals, of course, at um you know, making sure that we're fully staffed for this upcoming uh school year, fiscal 27. And you can see

003that we've had 97% of our employees uh indicate that the it's their intention to return. So, that's uh something we're really proud of. Next slide. Um this shows what the county transfer shortfall is at 39.7 million. Um we do have some additional state funds that are equivalent action for compensation of 10.7. So, we're using that as a beginning balance to bridge the reductions. The superintendent's made recommendations to reduce the staffing reserve at 8.8 million to um leverage alternate major maintenance funding. So, that's 7.5 million reduction. Extend our FCPS on technology device refresh. Um that's a savings of 5.3. Defer micro-credentialing for um 1 year. That's 4.9 million. Reduce the math adoption curriculum materials. That's 4.2 million. Reduce the superintendent's strategic reserve at 2.5 million. And then we're adding in the middle school after school program

004and the VIP program at an addition of 4.2. So, the total reductions are nearly 29 million. That aligns with our revenue. And next slide. This is just an overview of what is included in the superintendent's proposed what what was included in the superintendent's proposed budget. Um you know, of course, we want to honor our collective bargaining agreements with FEU and PSA. We also have some rate changes for our employee benefits, both retirement and health care. Baseline adjustments, which is a reduction for our enrollment and student needs, but we were able to restore uh partially the staffing formula changes that we made in fiscal 26, as well as the special education department chairs, and the AART teachers. But, the all three of those things have been restored, the staffing formula partially. Then, we have some multi-year

005initiatives, which you all are familiar with, the movement of family liaisons to uh TEs and hourly, uh some student uh athletics program funding, fine and performing arts, certified athletic trainers, K-12 robotics, and educator math credentialing. And again, the additional reductions to balance the budget, staffing reserve, major maintenance, FCPS on, um micro-credentialing, math uh curriculum materials in the superintendent's strategic reserve, and then the add of the middle school after school program and VIP. So, the total increase to our budget would be 168 million overall. Next slide. And we did pass out the reductions for fiscal 26, fiscal 27 with a narrative. I think that's something that you all had requested. Um for fiscal 27, the total reductions are 120.2 million. Fiscal 26, it's 87.9. You may recall that the reductions were about 120 million last year

006or this year that we're in, fiscal 26, but we excluded the ones that we restored in fiscal 27. So, that's why that number is slightly different. Next slide. So, our county transfer increase overall is 98.8 million. State revenue, 71.1 million. Again, we are hopeful that the state will conclude its budget deliberations um by the end of June. Federal revenue, we're not expecting any additional funds, and other revenue are slightly reduced as well, again for 168 million increase overall. Next slide. This is the work session. We already had the public hearing and the presentation last Thursday. Uh after this work session, the next thing on the agenda is um or on the calendar is adoption next Thursday, May 21st, at the regular school board meeting. That's it. Okay. Thank you. Uh I have Mr. Moon. Oh,

007thank you. >> [clears throat] >> I have a couple of questions to ask. Thanks for the presentation. Uh the first question goes to 97% return retention percentage. Uh could you tell me whether the 97% reflects Okay, let me ask you this way. We obviously have a people retiring. Uh so, when you have the 97%, that does not include people retiring, correct? They don't I'm going to ask Mr. Solomon to respond to this. He's right behind you um as far as what the 97 reflects. Mr. Moon, thank you very much for the question. Uh as part of our annual staffing process, we provide school-based employees an intent to return form. That form is completed digitally uh, by all of our school-based staff members just to get a sense of what their intention is and what they're

008thinking about for the 2026-2027 school year. And in that form it asks them, "What are your intentions for 2026-2027? Do you intend to return to your current position at your same school, uh, a similar position at a different school, are you pursuing a promotion, do you need to pursue a leave of absence, or do you need to resign or retire?" So, from all of those options, 97% indicated that they intend to return to FCPS in some form or fashion for 2026-2027. And then of course, after staffing season we'll be able to see what actual is. Okay, so so um, assuming that there are many of the retirees have also responded to that survey questions, uh, of course it, you know, they are not obligated to return. So, answer the survey questions, but again assuming they

009have replied to those survey questions, are you then implying that less than 3% of our employees are retiring? What I would say is that plans can change. At the time the survey was administered, 3% of our staff indicated that they don't intend to return for the 2026-2027 school year. What I would say however is that when you look at our retention rate year over year for the past 4 years, it's increased every single year. In fact, this current year for our teaching workforce, it's at 90.9% and for our employee workforce as you saw on the slide, it's higher. I will also add, Mr. Solomon, as I recall, we had, because I remember the retirement night was a lot shorter this year than last year, and you were telling me how many fewer retirees did we

010have this year? Hundreds fewer at the ceremony. We honored 180. Fewer. I I 97% is a great, I mean, great percentage, but at the same time, that also might be an indication of what the job market situation out there is like, which isn't necessarily good. Uh, and and also whether our staff if the percentage of retired is small whether it is something that we expected to happen. Uh, it's it's been low for uh, several years. Just this year, somehow people are not hiring and whether you could give us a little more information on that. Uh, I think it sounds like uh, we have less fewer retirements this year. Uh We have a significantly higher rate of retention this year. I was at a meeting for the Commonwealth yesterday around a new partnership for K-12 schools

011and the business sector for the Commonwealth of Virginia. And one of the key areas they want to work on across the entire Commonwealth is the educator shortage and staffing shortages. And we're right now not in that position. So, I felt very proud of the work that our teams are doing because we're retaining the staff we have. So, we're very pleased about that. Okay. Okay, thank you. The second question that I had is with staffing reserve. Uh I was looking at a one of the budget questions that I think one of the supervisors did ask that question and we provided response that is question number three. Uh, for FY25, it looks like I know we are in FY26 and we are dealing with FY27. But the response we provided for FY25 is we have, you know,

012virtually used up all staffing reserve, 450 positions. For FY26, how many positions were set aside as a stepping reserve, and and how many have been used up? I'd like to ask Matthew Norton to respond to that cuz he kind of rides herd over the staffing reserve. Uh yes, thanks for the question, Mr. Moon. Um in the proposed budget, um we had utilized 251.2 of the 310 positions through December. And then I can tell you, just not published anywhere, but you know, since December, we've only used a handful more of staffing reserve positions. Uh so, I my estimate is that we probably are around 260 of the 310 utilized. Okay. And then now a a superintendent's latest proposal, is it reducing the staffing reserve from 310 to 240, and and and superintendent feels that that is

013sufficient to cover next year's needs, you think? Well, I think it'll need to be sufficient because that's what we can afford. Um so, we have to live within our means at this time. Uh but I will say that we when I made my budget remarks last week, I was very clear to say that um the reason we're not in a worse budget situation now is that we didn't uh continue to pull staff out of a staffing reserve, that we actually held the line on staffing, we reassigned staff. We've been um schools and departments have been making do uh at a very tight line all year long so that we could uh retain staff at the end of the year. So, I believe that the current estimate uh estimated staffing reserve will have to function for

014us next year. We're going to continue to have to scrutinize every request because we're going to have limited ask access to those resources. Okay. Uh thank you. With 18 seconds left, left, I'm going to just make a one comment. At the last school board meeting, I made a request to for you to provide us with impact statements and that I know that you did provide a information which is pretty large quite a few number of pages right there, which I have not had a chance to review. So, I'll probably have to get back to you after reviewing them. Thank you. >> [clears throat] >> Dr. Anderson. Thank you. Firstly, I I will say some of the things that I talked about at the um at the presentation, which is one this is a little bit

015I guess less painful than I was anticipating um cuz last year was definitely a huge challenge and we had over 200 people at the um at the public hearing in this last time around we had 13, which is indicative of something. Um I also do want to say I appreciate the middle school after school programming being part of this budget because that is an important component to our community and I did not want us to be left holding the bag since the Board of Supervisors had earmarked it. And so, that has happened. Just to follow up there, one of the things that you said during the presentation is that it's this year. Do you have an anticipation of next year being not involve I mean not um part of our budget? Um we're funding it

016this year out of one-time dollars, I think, or potentially non-recurring full costs. Um the Board of Supervisors have indicated they may not fully fund it moving forward. Um so, I think anything that is not clearly and fully funded moving forward means that we can account for it this year, uh but we're going to have to be thoughtful because we have competing commitments often for the same dollars. So, we want to make sure that we're um you know, making the best utilization of those dollars given whatever the county uh may or may not choose to fund us uh in the coming year. Okay, thank you. Um the second thing that I want to raise is this document um the impact statements. Thank you for providing that. That's something I know you and I talked about right

017after our joint meeting, talked about that last year. I'm glad to see it here because it really gives a little bit of um context to what is happening or not happening in our division. Um I do have a question regarding the Baldrige report as I think Mr. Smith is very surprised at. Can you thread the line for me a little bit in terms of that work and just giving the higher-level summary impacted in what did that impact in terms of savings, in terms of reduction? Because I'm not seeing the connection. So, I think and good evening everyone. I think that what you'll see is less of a one-to-one in terms of the Baldrige process with certain line item savings. I know that we've answered questions in the past around uh savings that we perhaps have

018realized uh based on our Baldrige work. A lot of the work that we looked at uh with uh reorganizing our alternative programs came out of our review of those programs through a Baldrige lens. Uh we uh initially uh as part of the Baldrige application uh had a review of all of our major contracts in the organization and then had an opportunity to look at those contracts, review contracts with our chiefs, have conversations about the work moving forward, and that then became part of the foundation for a budget conversation. So, while there isn't a one-to-one in terms of the process and then savings in the budget, it did help shape and our our thought processes around the budget. What we will see with our report that we get our assessment that we get from the Partnership

019for Excellence will be several recommendations that they call opportunities for improvement where we can create greater efficiencies. So, again, if you think about our alternative programs, we had several different programs for students, for adult students in different places, and we were able to consolidate a lot of that work and and realize savings through staffing with some of that work. And I think that we'll see recommendations with those opportunities for improvement, which will create greater efficiencies in the organization, which I hope will point to even greater savings as it relates to programming and staffing for the future. Okay, so let me summarize what I believe I heard. Through the work, through that reflection, through the completion of the application, what we're seeing right now has just been staff-led where you've been able to see some places

020where we could be a little tighter. It is still outstanding that we would receive more recommendations from the Baldrige work that could potentially lead to more savings. That is correct. We had 19 examiners who reviewed our our work from top to bottom both at the central office level and at the school level, had conversations with hundreds if not thousands of staff members during that process and then we're able to make a recommendation to their body which then gave us the gold and then as part of that process we will receive several they're called OFIs in the the terminology OFI an opportunity for improvement and then we will certainly be sharing those OFIs with the board so that you have an understanding of where we have space to grow and and or become more efficient and

021so I'm looking forward to that process and looking forward to implementing many of those recommendations. Sure and I think that would be a wonderful opportunity to have I'm expecting that this will be a public discussion if it is not then I would want to offer that it'd be a public discussion so that our public is aware of how is it that we're going around about being efficient and being lean with our resources we could gain a lot of credibility I believe if that were to be a more public discussion and or report. So thank you for that that is very helpful. I want to talk about the 97% retention rate that was just discussed and I may need to be put on the go back I do have other questions. Is that all staff or

022teaching staff? Have you disaggregated that in any way? It's representative of all school based staff. Just school based staff. Yes ma'am. Thank you um cuz here's the question that I want to lean into and I don't know if I have enough time lots of feedback from our principals regarding the freeze in hiring. If we have so many of our staff returning that means we don't need to hire as many people right? That is correct and just to peel back the curtain a bit, our hiring volume is for teaching positions as one example has decreased pretty tremendously. In a normal year, we hire about 2,000 teaching positions. Last year, it was 1,500. I don't have the full numbers yet after staffing season, we will, but I'm projecting anywhere between 1,000 and 1,200. So, the number of

023teachers we're having to hire is decreasing year over year because our retention rate is increasing. And that's a great problem to have, which brings me to the connection to some of the other initiatives that have been in place when we did, if I can just finish this question. The other initiatives that were in place when we did need to have a lot more hiring occur, such as the ambassador teachers and the TFAs. If we are um increasing our retention rates, that means we have less of a dependency on those initiatives. How are we making that work? I think what I would say is we're still going to be hiring 1,000 to 1,200 teachers. We still need teachers, we're still recruiting teachers. We want to welcome high-quality educators to Fairfax County Public Schools for the 26-27

024school year. Um and we want to engage with these programs to diversify our workforce, to achieve our goals around executive limitation four and things of that nature. Um but we are continuing to hire. I'll take a go back, please. Mr. Dannon. Good afternoon. Um first, just want to thank you all for all the work you put into this. This is a lot, and um I mentioned last uh last week, I believe, that um you know, a year ago, as a as a parent, I was frustrated that the process didn't seem to be as collaborative as it could have been. In this past year, you all have done a really excellent job working through that. Um I want to just build off Dr. Anderson's question around middle school after-school programs. Um I I the chance to

025visit Irving's program last week, and um it was really great. I I wish I had the chance when I was a kid. I was I was working since I was in seventh grade. So, it Um but I I I know the the Board of Supervisors budget guidance references creating a sliding fee scale and I would just wanted to hear from you kind of what you've heard from the community about this um and then what options and what's the consideration for that um going forward if we need to do something like that. So, [clears throat] thank you, Mr. Dannon. I I know there um Mr. Horn and a group of staff from the division as well as staff from the county have been working on crafting a model that uh once they're satisfied with that I'll

026be sharing with you as a board because at the end of the day that is the board decision in terms of whether or not you want to go down that road. Um so, we're looking at that and possible other options to make up uh the about $1.2 million gap I think that the Board of Supervisors um identified determined or not sure how they determined that was the number, but um that $1.2 million which is uh would be in question uh for a year from now is not insignificant. So, we want to make sure that um you know, we'll have plenty of time to dialogue about that, but I will uh provide you that model as soon as it's um ready for prime time, which I will check in with the team and hopefully that'll be

027fairly soon. That's great. Thank you. Ms. Meron and Mr. Frisch. Good evening. I'm going to start with just a very specific question. I was excited to see that composting is something that's going to expand and Marshall Road Elementary is really the leader in doing it and the students are all engaged. However, they pay for that service out of PTA funds. So, in your recent um sharing with the board, there was talk about expanding composting sites. How will those be paid for? There are some Get to Green funds that have been set aside in that budget that in the Get to Green uh budget that will be utilized. Well, I haven't talked to the Marshall Road leaders, but I'd like to know how they can then apply that because the PTA is shelling out $285 per

028month for that service. I think there's also a hope that they could compost on campus rather than have a service pick up the material and take it somewhere else. Um because I think ideally that would engage students with the full composting process and cycle of composting. So, I think a long-term goal is to not have to contract with someone to come pick up, you know, the compost if that's something that we can do on site. Sure. I I just I don't I'm not clear on the plan then. I mean, the students do an amazing job of taking it from start to finish. And so, you know, if schools is kind of like back when I was trying to do after classrooms, there's some schools that just organically had it and others that needed the money.

029So, what's the roll out here and how can programs that are already paying their own money get reimbursed? I that makes sense to me. >> to check with Dr. Presidio as he oversees that particular aspect. >> Yeah, that should be addressed, please. I've had several people ask me about high-intense high-impact tutoring. Can you share where that's at and is there any uh chance that it will be restored? I understand that it's not being funded. Right. The funding for high-impact tutoring came in for came from the All In for Virginia grant that we received. And those grant funds have ended, is my understanding. So, uh we do we are partnering with um different nonprofits. I know tomorrow I actually have a a meeting with Edgeututor. And we've partnered with them. Uh we're looking at expanding that

030partnership. So, I think that work will continue in some way, but it won't be at the concentration level that we had when we had grant funds for that program. Thank you. Was that a successful strategy? I would have to go back. Dr. Ponce is not here this evening, but um I think it was a strategy that showed promise in some areas more than others, but there you know, there's certainly it's a promising practice. Well, that's one of those things where if the board can understand better what investments are working, then we can know where to suggest money be moved. So, um I do wish there was more clarity around that. The what I was hoping to discuss tonight more deeply was the response to my budget request um question request about the information technology department.

031And although I shared it last week, I would think some of this information is readily available like number of devices and the refresh and I I do recognize the the um reduction you've included in the proposed budget to not have $5 million worth of refresh, but there are 320 There are 327 full-time staff that are non-school based in the chief technology budget, and that's a lot. So, I do think that it's appropriate that the board understand where these you know, what the goal is of these um these positions and if any are vacant. So, that was my question. I'm kind of at a loss now if I don't have that information. I just don't have it. So. Yeah, T specs are non-school based, but they are listed as part of IT, even though they are

032essentially school-based employees. So, a couple hundred of them. Yeah. Yes, and I had wondered Thank you. I mean, I had wondered about it. That's not, you know, a complete answer and I'd like something more in writing. I mean, we have almost 200 school-based employees from the Chief Technology Officer. So, I guess those aren't the S bits then. So, that was my question is we have Well, there S bits and T specs and those are two different roles. So, um I think we can get that information. I know Mr. Sethi's out of the office right now. Um I'm sorry. Oh, Mr. Norton. It's okay. Yeah, so so I So, I do know that the response to your budget question is being worked on, right? So, So, first just, you know, know that you will get you

033know, a response to that. Um what I can say is that between FY19 and FY22 there were increases related to um the FCPS one-to-one technology refresh, right? And those were T spec positions and we went from not really having a staffing formula to having a staffing formula, particularly at the high school level, that would have that would have applied more than one T spec to a school, right? Um the other thing that I would say is that both that T spec formula and the S bits formula are related to SOQ standards. Um and so, you know, there is a standard that requires us to have a certain number of technology positions per thousand students. Um and so, they they both fit into that category. Um you also asked about vacancies. I do happen to know

034that there 18 vacancies at the moment right now in in um information technology. Um and so, that will be part of the response that you receive as well. Thank you, Mr. Norton. Is it possible to have that information by Tuesday's governance meeting where we'll be talking about education technology because it really goes hand-in-hand, you know, what positions are we funding to carry out the instructional technology requirements of the school division? Uh we we would hope to have it answered by then, especially since you've now asked for that. Um but it might be, you know, well, that we need to talk to um Mr. Sethi and uh Mr. and Dr. Presidio. Um that they're the last review of the answer. I I appreciate that the vote is 1 week from tonight. So, if I'm to propose

035any motions, I have to do it by Tuesday evening. So, I really do need this, please. We will do our best. Thank you. Um and I also, you know, just regarding SBITs, our school-based technology specialists, I've heard, you know, they do a lots of different things. And we it needs to be clear what they're doing to instruct kids. And be more firm about it. So, that's why I'd like that data. Thank you. Mr. Frisch. Thank you. Um I want to talk about the tertiary benefits of a high retention rate. How are we quantifying the lack of additional expenses that go along with not having to retrain staff? I think of things like the the wonderful Great Beginnings conference that we have each year. If that's being reduced in capacity by I'm creating these numbers based

036on what's been talked about, roughly half or roughly a third year over year, it's going to be cheaper. But then also, from a professional development perspective and a mentoring perspective and all these other things that we think about when it when we think about a new teacher has an upfront cost of X number of dollars, how do we factor in that kind of a savings? Cuz there are things that, you know, it's very easy when you look at the budget to say, "Well, they cut that and that saved a million dollars." How do we quantify a savings around retention? Sorry. >> [clears throat] >> Mr. Frisch, that's a great question. And how do you quantify an adjoining question tangentially, I guess, is how do you quantify the impact Right. >> of an experienced educator, right?

037Because we know that experienced educators are they're just more experienced and tend to have a higher impact. [clears throat] Um I will say that uh we would likely need fewer mentors, but I'm going to turn to Mr. Solomon and um kind of your thoughts on how we quantify that. I do if we also have to recruit less, that costs less money, right? The retention in and of itself, but uh William? No, that's exactly right. And Mr. Fresh, I will be going back and sitting down to tabulate what it is, but just off of the top of my head, you have fewer teachers who are coming to Great Beginnings, right? So, when whereas we had 2,000 before, 1,500 this past year, probably 1,000 to 1,200 this coming year, that's fewer teachers who need to come to

038a four-day long event, be on-boarded, all of those things. Uh food, fewer uh mentors as Dr. Reed shared, um who need to be assigned to these new teachers to get them acclimated uh to the division, uh less professional development for new people who are needing to come on board, uh recruitment costs alone are incredibly lower. I'm not having to send my team out as much as we did before. And actually, a lot of our recruitment has been within the locus of this area. While we still recruit in places where we know we have incredible pipelines, it's not as urgent or necessary to go as far out. Um you can focus on this area, within 100-mile radius, within a 200-mile radius, all of those different things. And as Dr. Reed shared, just the value of having

039somebody who understands FCPS, who's acclimated, who's bought into the culture, and who's excited about coming to work every day. It you can't quantify that. I also >> [clears throat] >> want to share. I think we Ms. Burden, we did add to the top of each scale as part of the agreement. Is that correct? Yes. >> So, many of our what we were seeing up through 2021-22, right? 23 even, some of [clears throat] our educators at the high end were retiring to leave to go work in another division, but as we've added steps, um they're choosing to stay. Um that's a part of a reason, I think, for some. Um, which again, actually, you know, we think enhances the education for our students. I mean, I think that's the biggest uh, benefit, to be honest. Well,

040in in addition to understanding the savings, it might also be worth exploring how do we redeploy the investment to better support teachers who are on the bubble uh, of staying in the system or not, especially with newer educators who have already received some mentorship support, special education teachers, etc. Um, so I'd be interested in knowing that, and and being mindful of those types of changes internally going forward, so that we can share the story of um, what success results in savings. Um, in terms of uh, I think at our last conversation about this, I asked Ms. Burden to project into the future with her crystal ball, uh, what the state would give us, but I'm not going to do that this time, because I know I'll get the same answer. But, I am curious. We

041know that if the um, the gap is filled by the state that those items that are projected for uh, delays or cuts this year will be backfilled. What would be the priority? Let's $29 million roughly right now that we need. What if we get 40? And I know that the question is interesting, because it could be one-time funding, it could be, you know, renewable funding, so I'm interested in knowing a little bit more about what priorities we might invest in, um, with one-time or recurring funds that would benefit benefit our students. So, I think [clears throat] it's a great question. I know that the one-time versus recurring is a significant data point. I also want to be really thoughtful about where we're how we're setting up the coming year. Uh because we know what our

042collective bargaining agreement commitments are for the third year of our FEA contract and the first full year and um of our uh FC >> PSA PSA contract. And so, we also know that we've had the benefit this year of a an unusual VRS benefit deferment, which we've not had to pay in as a division, which was a $52 million benefit for us that we know will not be in place in the coming year. It will not happen as a second year in a biennium. So, I've really I've talked with Ms. Burton because I come from a system where we had to have multi-year budgets. I really want us to think about whatever we do receive in the context of how we're going to make sure next year at this time that we're able to sit

043here and have a similarly calm conversation because we've been thoughtful in our planning. So, before I would recommend the restoration perhaps of things that might be on this particular list, I might actually come back and say it might be more important to make sure we're going to be able to adequately fund next year's budget in some way. So, I I think you're going to hear um us balancing the immediate needs with what we know are our long-term needs. So, I think that that's going to be a conversation we'll have to have at that point. One thing that I think might be worth investigating, and this is not in terms of where this money might be invested, this is an entirely different tangent. Um you're hearing more and more from schools with shifting populations about difficulties

044around whether it's middle school theater, whether it's high school choir, orchestra, band, etc. I think it might benefit the school division to rethink how funding is allocated for those programs to ensure that there's equitable access to those programs. Um, you know, and that in in drier years where an educator might need to be held harmless to make the gap and increase program, um, you know, that we're mindful of those types of things, um, because it's going to continue to be a problem. It is and I I think the middle school theater is one example and there certainly is equitable access across the division. What's happening is in some schools there's less, I don't know if I want to call it interest or less enrollment sign up for certain courses which then makes it difficult to

045staff if there are fewer kids. >> end, because we think CTE is beneficial, we do a lot to promote CTE as beneficial to students, to their families, for their entire career in FCPS. We should be considering the same thing for the arts. Agreed, 100%. I think everybody who's wanted a first turn has had one. Um, I'll take a quick turn then. I think Ms. Dixon you wanted to go. Um, I agree with Dr. Anderson. This was not anywhere near as painful as I thought. Um, but of course I get the benefit of seeing the final product and not the one that has to do all the hard lifting behind the scenes to get to the end product. So, you know, thank you, Dr. Reed and Lee and your team for the work that you've done

046to get us here. Um, as I said last Thursday, we've prioritized and protected the in-classroom experience for kids, which is really what it's all about. Um, that slide showing the $208 million in cuts, I have a quick question on that. Um, that's $208 million in the last two FYs. Do we have any sense of what if we were to look at that on the county side of the ledger, how much in cuts they've made. It's less. Okay. If you give us a second, we probably can look up the answer real quick. Yeah, what I what I can say without getting overly specific is that it it's the county's reductions over the last 4 years have been in the hundred million dollar range, you know, above a hundred million but less than two hundred million. We'll

047we'll try to find the exact figures. >> just curious. But but yeah, it's less, you know, maybe by about 60%. Okay. All right, thank you. So, our our cuts are greater than the county's by about 60%. So So, our 208 million the the numbers quoted by the county were a 4-year reduction that was in the neighborhood of 130 to 150 million if my memory is serving me. So, we'll we'll get the exact number though cuz I don't I don't want you to leave without, you know, with just me off the cuff 130 to 150. I'll I'll get the exact number. Got you. Okay. Interesting. Um and I've heard a lot from the community on as I think probably most people around this table have on the middle school after school programs and the VIP summer

048camps. I'm really happy that we're able to continue that. And obviously we're going to have to figure out a long-term solution, but one foot in front of the other as this business goes. Um so, anyway, thank you for everything. Mr. Dixon. So, thank you so much for this uh budget presentation and this opportunity to discuss. As my colleague said, this was definitely a hard budget uh to do this year. Um reductions at any point for any any school division, it's it's hard to do, especially affecting the student population. Luckily, uh thanks to all your hard work, that does that reduction did not come to students and teachers and and uh directly education, but all this is important. The 28 million dollar we are reducing or we're not funding, it's everything there is is very important.

049Um and I I I just want to be like, you know, for next year and next year, it's it's just going to get hard with, you know, if if the county or other funders are not meeting their mark, we don't we're not going to get to the stay at the best uh school system in in our state and and leading in the country. So, uh I wanted to ask about uh a little bit about the um micro-credentialing funding. And that's uh 4.9 million dollars. Uh what does it entail? What kind of uh fun uh micro-credentials? So, we intended [clears throat] that to include uh micro-credentialing for multilingual uh student micro-credentialing, um math micro-credentialing, um we had uh universal design for learning credentialing for uh the staff with our inclusion work. So, just a variety of

050um bringing opportunities for our educators to gain new skills and upskill and receive credentialing uh recognition for that. And yeah, that's that's a tough one there, too. And obviously, the math curriculum we've all been working so hard for uh to bring uh math textbooks in our school. Um most of this and I middle school after school is kind of the worst uh situation for me. Every year, we are at that situation where like, are we going to get funding on this and are we going to do it next year? Now, we funded this year, but again, next year we might be in the same situation. Um if we continually uh sleep if we don't get funded by our funding partners, I think we are we're making lot of our um population our students and our

051families very in in anxious about it. So, I I I don't like this. Uh we definitely need to make sure there is um we get proper funding for all our programs which are specially going to students helping them at the phase of life. I've I've also gone to middle school after school program at Rocky Run and they do amazing work there and and I think that almost like 1200 kids you know they participate even during the whole year like in different programs. So um I also wanted to mention about when 2 years ago when I got on the board we were seeing a staffing shortage issue. We were like talking about we won't have enough teachers and credential teachers and looking at like growing our own and and Dr. Reid you presented in many times

052how we will recruit and retain teachers at at FCPS. We were at 58 in a salary range in the neighborhood districts within and compared to neighbor district. Coming from that to be able to say we have 97% and retention rate I want to give a huge praise to Mr. Solomon he's not here right now but it is amazing work and Dr. Reid your leadership it's it is amazing to see that we have that kind of uh person. So I'm going to take a go back but thank you for this budget. Okay. I have for first sir Oh Matthew sorry. Yeah sorry I just wanted to circle back I've been able to locate the number as of the county's advertised budget their four-year total reductions they they quote as being more than 124.5 million. That includes

0536.3 million in across the board reductions in FY24, reductions in FY25 and 26 of 34.3 and 51 million respectively and then the 32.9 million reductions that were identified in their advertised budget. So the math on those four numbers 124.5 and it may be slightly impacted by whatever the board actually finally adopted in the last couple of weeks. Got you. Thank you. I have Dr. Anderson first before I go back. But Mr. Moon was first. I thought he was first. Oh, I'm so Were you for Oh, Miss Mr. Moon then Dr. Anderson then Ms. Miran. Thank you Thank you, Mr. McDonnell. I have a few questions to ask. Uh starting with MSAS, I'm sorry, middle school after school program for this summer till the no fee. Is that I believe there's always been a fee for

054VIP camp. I'm talking about what the county county was expecting us to do to generate 1. 2 million dollars. That's not this summer. >> I think they were expecting that to be within the the after school programming during the school year was my understanding, but Mr. Horn can respond to that. >> what they do in the school year. Correct. Correct. Okay, thank you. The second one has to do with a perception. On page one of this approved the budget summary revenue adjustments because we had been all along saying that a a county was underfunding us by 44 million dollars rather than 39. 7. That's what the county has been saying. It's a 39.7, and we've been saying it's a 44. That's the gap. You would seem to be on this, you know, document. We seem

055to be using county's method of doing the math rather than even though that does your explanation statement right there, this uh includes county transfer to programs, etc. But I would have hoped to see us to be consistent in presenting to the public the actual gap. Actual gap is a 44, not 30.97. I mean, I hope that, you know, superintendent will consider that as you present to the public that gap is 44, not 30.9 overall. And third one has to do with a lapse when we developed about that, you know, superintendent has had to assume a certain lapse rate for the next school year, and then put that into our budget assumptions. With such high percentage of our staff returning indicating their return to back to work and staying with the work, the lapse, how does

056it affect our assumption for the lapse rate for the next year? We reduced it. You would reduce that? >> Yes, we have already accounted for that in the fiscal 27 budget that we would we would have less lapse and turnover because our retention rate is >> if you could give me the number, how much that's been reduced to? >> that for you. >> Okay. Thank you. The last one has to do with the state funding. Is uh please correct me, Dr. Reed, if I understood you wrong. And your recommendation could it come I mean, we don't have a money yet from state. So, uh if and when the state's general assembly sends us more money, then it sounded as if earlier that you might consider a recommending to the board instead of backfilling these cuts,

057setting aside certain amount of money to deal with even further even more difficult potentially more difficult budget situation in the following year. With the perhaps uh that >> [snorts] >> you know, VRS pension payment, you know, from that rate that we have to pay, uh might go back to where it used to be, so we have to pay more money. So, set aside the money and set that Did I understand you correctly? What I want to make sure I am clear about is that we So, you don't want to automatically backfill these cuts with additional General Assembly funding. >> my tendency is I'm fairly pragmatic, right? So, I'm always going to want to look at what are all of the choices in front of us that are good for today and good for tomorrow, right?

058Because we're we're not uh we don't have the luxury to just budget for today, right? We have to be really thoughtful right now because we have multi-year negotiated agreements with our uh labor groups. As well as we know certain needs that are upcoming that are predictable. Uh we have to at some point order math curriculum materials. Um we really do have to make sure um that um our staff have the appropriate training and so forth, right? That So, we're going to have to catch up with major maintenance at some point. So, we know we have high needs. I just think we're going to have to have a thoughtful conversation uh depending on what money we get and whether it's ongoing recurring funding or whether it's going to be one-time-only dollars and then where are our

059largest needs because we know we're facing another difficult budget year in the coming year. Uh Dr. Reid, I don't disagree with anything you said. But, my concern is uh that when we get more funding from General Assembly, because we had been make you know, we had been presenting to the Board of Supervisors, we These are our needs. Now, we are making a cut of $40 million. We have additional money from the Assembly. Oh, well, we're going to set that aside. We're not going to Oh, I Yeah. We're going to set that aside for the future years. That means Board of Supervisors could interpret that you didn't actually need those money from the get-go. So, I'm not saying tonight that we would set that money aside. What I'm saying tonight is I think that as we

060continue to be underfunded as a school division, we're going to continue to have to make difficult choices. And as I said last week, it is not sustainable to continue to ask fewer and fewer people with less resources to continue work that is the expectations are huge. They're high. They're high from everyone around this table, everyone in this county, and frankly everyone in the country who follows the school division. And when you have high expectations and your support doesn't match that, you need high support for high expectations. And when there's not a match, what you end up with is high frustration. And we're not going to continue to get the high achievement that we're seeing right now. So, what I'm saying this evening is absolutely we needed the dollars that we asked for, and we're not

061going to get them, obviously, at this time. And we don't know what the state's going to do. The state could come through with significant more funds, which enable us to do what we had planned to do. But in the meantime, if we're not able to continue with major maintenance, and we're not able to continue or to follow through with purchasing curriculum materials, those are going to have a toll in the system. So, we may look at state dollars, depending on whether they come as recurring or one-time, and say absolutely we have to backfill these things. And we may say, "Golly, if it's all one-time dollars, can we afford to? Or are we better off?" So, I just I I want to foreshadow that that's a conversation we're going to need to have because the VRS

062payment is so large for a county our size, you know, $52 million is going to be significant, which we did not have to pay this year. Understood. Thank you. Yes, sir. I appreciate the clarification. I'm glad you uh asked for me to clarify that. I appreciate that. And then um Ms. St. John Cunningham for your first round and then Dr. Anderson for a go back. Thank you. Um yeah, I I I want to, you know, referring again to slide eight, which at our last meeting what was characterized as savings, and it really isn't a savings. Uh it it's it's a cut. It and every cut, what it represents, is is not savings, it's a sacrifice. We're having to sacrifice certain things. Um in terms of the middle school uh after-school program, that I remember when

063that program was initiated, and it was initiated as a county program that was an anti-gang program to help solve youth being occupied and not being out in the community when there was an increase of gang activity. What happened was that it was placed in the schools, and we were very successful with it, and it grew. The fact that it is successful doesn't mean that we have to sacrifice the funding for it. It should be the other way around. And it should still be funded by the county, not as our general funds. So, I I I just want to make that very clear because I remember when it was initiated as a part of an opportunity neighborhood initiative in certain areas. Um I also laud you for thinking long term because when I first came on

064this board, and I recognized the creep that has come into schools of the services that we provide that are going to only increase because what our economy is. We provide rapid around services. The mental health needs of our students are going to be on the increase when they have parents that aren't working, that have financial responsibilities that they have to face. That doesn't include that even includes our teachers who are a couple then maybe their spouse or partner has been laid off from the federal government. We We have food pantries in our schools. We have food markets in our schools. We have clothing closets. We have supply drives. That's only going to increase. And if we're not going to have funding for this when I first came on this board, what I wanted to see

065was an increase in social workers, in counselors, in family liaisons because what has happened is the schools are providing those services. And we're making sacrifices just to have maintenance, basic maintenance. And that's the frustration for me. And I just kind of wanted to put that out there. And I just want to commend you for doing that. I I want to commend the Baldrige report for everything we're doing, but we we have to recognize that we are sacrificing a lot of programs. And we're sacrificing serving our kids in not just the academic areas, but in other areas, as well as staff members and our community members. Um and I really want to say that investing in our staff is what's helping with that retention rate. And I want to mention that it's just not teachers. It's

066staff. Like a good administrative assistant is worth their weight in gold. A good um you know, a good clinic aid is worth their weight in gold. When you have people that have to come in and be a good a good finance tech is worth their weight in gold. So, when we're talking about this retention rate of staff, it's not just teachers. It takes more to run a building than just teachers. And not I'm not putting teachers down because obviously that's what we're in the business of, but there's a lot of work that goes into the operation of that school building. So, thank you for your work and thank you uh Thank you for making it not seem like a difficult year, but it but it is a difficult year. Dr. Anderson. Thank you. I just

067want to go back to the questions regarding retention. Um just to be a little bit more pointed. Given that we had we have such high levels of retention, which is a great thing. Does that reduce our dependency on other programs? Um because right now, as you talked about high frustration, Dr. Reed, I've been hearing from the principals in my region where they are having high levels of frustration because they are unable to hire whom they are describing as highly qualified experienced individuals who speak exactly to what you just talked about. An experienced principal, I'm sorry, an experienced teacher is a different beast in terms of impact than a new teacher. And if they're unable to hire experienced personnel because they have to leave room for Teach For America teachers, which you know what my thinking

068is about their training um as well as ambassador teachers, should we be reducing those numbers given that now we have increased retention? Should we be reducing our our dependence on those other two initiatives, which we needed when you got here? We needed to turn every stone. Thank you for the question, Dr. Anderson. I would start by saying that even previously when FCPS had exorbitant numbers of vacancies, these programs are not staffing solutions. And in fact, J-1 exchange visitor visa programs like Participate Learning are not branded as staffing solutions. They're meant to increase global exchange uh in a school division or in an organization. Cultural exchange uh within so that our students, so that our staff members, and so that our families have access to that level of exchange so that we can have a supported,

069global, diverse, and adaptive workforce. Uh and so that that knowledge can be taken back in a period of 3 to 5 years. So, saying all of that to say, it's a matter of making sure that our workforce is representative of and reflective of our overall student population. As it relates to hiring highly qualified, highly effective educators, know that that is happening. We're hiring some of the best educators in the country, not only from these programs, but also from our colleges and universities who are graduating these amazing programs, from teachers who are coming from other school divisions, not only within this region, but around this state and nationally, who are wanting to come work in FCPS. 1,000 to 1,200 uh teaching positions that I'm anticipating that we're going to be hiring for the '26-'27 school year,

070it's far lower than what we've seen in the past, but it's still not insignificant. We're hiring, we've been hiring since January. We want to make sure that, bottom line, all of our kids have access to a high-quality, high-impact educator or other professional. I appreciate that, but I'm not sure that my question was answered. Um if principals are being told that you cannot hire a person who is who's an experienced teacher coming from another division because they have to first place TFA teachers who've had weeks of preparation, that to me, it's not an equivalent um it's not equivalent, and I don't think that should exist, and that's what's causing a lot of frustration. And I know that we have a contract with both TFA and with ambassador teachers. So, in the in the um space that

071we're in, where we're having greater retention, should we be thinking about reducing those contract numbers so that principals are not feeling that high level of frustration that I'm hearing about right now from multiple places and I will also say this, I appreciate the fact that we are wanting to have a diverse workforce. But where these where these individuals are being placed more and more are just the title one schools because if I'm incorrect if I'm just please tell me is in the TFA contract to place those teachers in title one schools and these are the least experienced, the least prepped individuals that we're placing with our most vulnerable and neediest students. So Dr. Anderson, I would start by saying that the pressure that you're probably hearing from principals is not isolated to these programs because

072of what we've had to do to right-size our workforce, we've had to reassign hundreds of staff members as Dr. Reed has shared. So the pressure that you're hearing and the pressure that people are experiencing is not isolated to these two programs where we're recruiting exactly 30 Participate Learning teachers and exactly 20 or 25 Teach for America teachers. It's the hundreds of internal staff members for whom we've tried to preserve their salary, their benefits and their union negotiated pay raise. That's where a lot of that pressure is coming through. As it relates to external hiring and hiring others, we do continue to hire. We continue to direct and advise principals to refer those candidates to our human resources team so that we can keep an eye on them so that we can make sure that they're

073slotted for the 26-27 school year, but we've also had to be thoughtful about our internal people to make sure that they were reassigned and to make sure that we met our contractual obligations to them and that they had a job for the 26-27 school year. I anticipate that next week more and more of that hiring for people who we've held as early hires or for people who have been given early contracts, that's going to kick up over the next week. It has been kicking up, but we had to prioritize our internal staff members. It's not isolated to those two programs. And and I hear you, but I am going to also respectfully disagree. That's not the concern that I'm hearing. And Dr. Reed knows I've been very supportive of the fact that she's been trying

074to right-size. Um we are holding steadfast to the formulas. We're we're trying to trim where we are able to. If that means being holding schools to the formula, great. If that means holding space for individuals who are already in our system, I mean, I've I've been through that hundreds of times in my career, but that's not the point that I'm raising here. But I'm going to pause here and ask my next question. Um the Board of Supervisors had identified three different buckets of uh of dollars. The 11.4 for the school debt transfer, the 7.5 for capital construction, and then the 4.9 for the after-school programmings. Help me better understand where the 11.4 and the 7.5, how is this weaved into our um budget here? Well, you can see the 7.5 has been woven into the

075That's what we're pausing. Thank you. >> So, um because we need the 7.5 for other things. More, I guess. We certainly needed the 7.5 for maintenance, but it is what it is. And the debt service traditionally had been funded outside the general transfer as well, as my understanding. Ms. Burden, do you want to clarify where that landed in all of that? The the debt service has always been an additional thing on top of what the operating The what was different this year is dedicating the 7 and 1/2 million and the 4.9 for middle school after-school programs outside of the operating fund. Did I ever get an answer to my inquiry because I sent a question to you to go to the Board of Supervisors regarding why we are doing this this way this year? Um,

076they're still working on the responses um that school board members asked. Well, I know we got a couple in today. We should you know, hopefully we'll get the majority of them answered very shortly. Thank you. I still have a couple more questions so we'll go back to this. >> Ms. Meron. To follow up on the conversation about teachers and how they're placed, I'm remembering during COVID we had a teacher happen to be a we had a teacher and she had to leave because she had to take care of a ill family member. So, she was dismissed with prejudiced which means that she would have a harder time coming back in. And then months later we were in dire need of teachers just like her. So, she contacted me and we looked at the regulations together

077and the regulations were adjusted to allow such a person who had left during these dire circumstances once in a million years and I wonder if this is one of those opportunities too. Again, not that we are flushed with extra teachers, but I certainly would want to prioritize having you know, licensed experienced teachers ahead of Teach for America staff members or Participate Learning because even if it's one in 25, if that's your kid, you want your kid to have the best teacher. So, I think we need to do more around that and I I wanted to raise that because we did adjust the regulation for the times back then. So, I want to be really clear that our Participate Learning teachers are exceptional experienced teachers. These people uh have to minimally have at least 3 years

078experience. Many have seven or more. Excuse me? Eight to Many of them have eight to 10 years of experience. Over 16,000 global educators apply for about 700 positions. So, the best of the best are selected. We've had several of our Participate Learning educators nominated for Teachers of the Year in their regions. These are not I I don't want any Participate Learning teachers who are watching this evening to walk it to have any other belief other than they have my full confidence and these are strong experienced educators. It is true that a couple years ago we had a I think there were several Participate Learning Educators that we did have to ask to not continue. At that recruiting issue was addressed and we have not had that situation since. So, I just want to be clear

079that we've got a lot of educators working really hard and I know we all understand that. So, the Teach for America candidates and teachers do have less experience. However, some of our senior leaders even are former Teach for America alum. That's a great program that provides strong mentoring outside even our mentoring. So, um I I do believe uh that um we would not leave an educator in front of students that isn't going to do exceptional work with our students. So, I just want to be clear about that. >> Thank you for clarifying and I do apologize that I misunderstood that because no I mean I have heard wonderful things about Participate Learning teachers and I've long admired Teach for America. But, having someone who did it 20 years ago being a leader now is different

080again than having that teacher in this day and this time. So, happy to have all these resources but just want to keep prioritizing as many experienced teachers as we can. And again, just want to touch on the regulations, you know, things can be changed to meet the times. So, I I also just want to underscore that this is the second year in a row the the superintendent and the school board I'm assuming we're going to decide this are now going to halt buying new curriculum. Last year it was social studies. This year it's math. So, I happen to be on a meeting last night and there was a discussion about well, you know, the schools are fully funded and the amounts not you know, it's the same. Well, yeah, the schools are fully funded per

081what was given what is being given. But what are we losing? Well, we're losing new curricula. We're losing teaching kids the better ways to, you know, to do math. We're doing great, I know. And but see, that's also the problem. We're We continue to show our amazing school division and our staff, and we even even had that great handout during all the musicals, but we tout the success, and at the same time, as you've said, Dr. Riley, we're cutting to the bone. And we know that our staff just can't keep turning out, and I feel that's attention. And um I I do think we could be better about, you know, like Ms. St. John Cunning said, not talking about adjustments, talking about cuts. Like let's be real about what these things are. I think that

082vocabulary matters. I um on another subject, I had asked for information about the amount of annual operating funds that was being moved towards facilities for major maintenance. And last year there was a nice uh chart about that, and I would would love to know where that stands, please. Yes, ma'am. I know Eric was working on that, and um Lee? Mr. Gordon's not here. Yeah, I I I don't know what chart you're talking about, but I can tell you that, you know, we had increased the major maintenance funding in the fiscal 27 budget by 3 and 1/2 million. And so, this 7 and 1/2 million that we're going to use for the operating fund instead, um is really only a reduction of 4 million because we had already built an increase to major maintenance into the

083operating fund um previously, with superintendents proposed. So, we continue to move money to repair HVACs and maintenance and floors and ceilings from the classroom instruction to maintenance because of the cuts that we're having to resolve. Yes, ma'am. That would be correct. Yes. Thank you. One thing I'd like to do is be really uh communicate that a lot more clearly. I think it's important for setting up our work to better manage our facilities and receive the support that's needed from the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Frisch. I think I may have confused things a little bit here when I asked about like if we get extra money and distinguish [clears throat] between um one-time or recurring. The point I was trying to make is that we have itemized these cuts uh that may be fundable based on

084what we get from the state, but we won't know for sure and correct me if I'm incorrectly stating things here. We won't know for sure until we know exactly how that money is being given to us. And um the second part of my question was what if we get more than we've asked for and your response was we'll have to see the structure that money comes in and then also be mindful about the next year's potential budget challenges. Did I encapsulate that properly? Yes, sir. Okay, because I think I muddled the water there and led to some confusion. Um I got one email about it already. So um Ms. Marin's comments about thinking on the regulations that I recall the the there were several educators that reached out after after COVID. One [clears throat] of

085the things that I believe this is Virginia code when a teacher retires because of VRS uh uh they have a 6-month break before they can return but only to positions that are critical shortages if I'm not mistaken. Um Sorry, it is a 1-month 60 days and if they are licensed to teach a position that falls under their critical shortage provision um which changes every year video we put out a new list. We do have the ability to um hire them back and that's reviewed on an annual basis as that list can change. And I think the reason for that is because of peculiarities with how VRS works, uh if I'm not mistaken. Perhaps one of our legislative uh program initiatives next year should be re-looking at how that's assigned so that we do have greater

086flexibility for hiring experienced educators who want to return to the profession. I have talked to uh over the years many people who retire and then want to come back soon after. Um sometimes retirement doesn't hit the same way that it it than being in a classroom full of kids, right? Um we by no means should be, you know, uh helping teachers reach their retirement only to find that they have to come back to teaching because they have no other choice. But if they want to come back to teaching, we should be doing everything that we can to make that possible. So, I'd be interested in in looking at our legislative program to see if there are things at the state level that preclude us from doing that. And if at the regulation level is there

087anything that precludes us from doing that? We've straightened out a lot of the issues we had with um bringing on experienced educators for substitute teaching. Perhaps we could take the same kind of focused attention to folks who want to return to the profession even if it's only for a couple years because you know, being at home or whatever they've decided to do in retirement isn't scratching the itch that they that they want. I agree and anyone out there listening uh who's an experienced educator who's thinking about coming back, uh please log on >> [laughter] >> and fill out an application. We would love to to have you back. So, yeah. Thanks. Okay, for for round three, uh Dr. Anderson. Thank you. As you were talking, I I heard lots of terms that I liked, which

088was, you know, which pretty much um results in, you know, pinching pennies, making sure that we're being as frugal as possible, and thinking for next year, not just living in the moment. And I would be remiss if I didn't share with you I got more than one question um since that article came out and had been approached by a number of teachers who smarted over the the doctoral program investments that we are making, that is being made by the division. Um the primary um comment has been these are individuals who already make significant amounts of money. Why are we investing further into their education? So, please provide an answer to those folks. >> Sure. I think over the last 5 years we've had 8,000 staff benefit from tuition-related and tuition-based programs. It's a key retention

089strategy. Um investing in um the uh education of staff is a strategy used across all uh sectors. The government uses it, uh industry, and educational institutions. Um I think Deloitte's recent research showed that for every dollar invested in higher education for educators um or staff across the board, it's a $1.29 ROI and increased uh efficiency, uh productivity, innovation. So, there are really strong reasons why that's important. Uh Dr. Ponce and um the team put together a an opportunity for staff to apply for that experience, and it's my understanding that GMU has uh reduced rates. Some of the funds are grant-funded, um but it is part of our tuition-based program uh for all staff, and it's a program honestly, the program and the like types have been in place in Fairfax County for I don't know

090Marty, what? Two, three decades? It's uh this has been a long-standing tradition. It just happens to be a different partnership with GMU versus ACC partnership or other master's program partnerships that have been with uh University of Virginia, UVA, and so forth. Uh but the team that worked on this, I know, looked at um where we could get the strongest partnership for the most reasonable amount of money. And there's also um I believe an ask for staff to stay following the degree, which is unique to this particular cohort, as well as all of the doctoral um projects um are going to be uh based within the school division and based on closing achievement gaps. So, that will again focus our leadership in areas that are critical uh to look at. And um I don't know, Mr.

091Smith, if you want to add anything to that. Uh we're actually, at the end of the day, looking to have some type of cost savings because we won't have to lose more people um at the principal and above level. This was available for principals and above, I think, or maybe assistant principals. I don't recall, but it was building leadership and up. Um but uh we're hoping to really reap benefits of the increased opportunities. But as I said, over the last 5 years, I think it's been about 8,000 staff when they ran the numbers. But Marty, I I don't know how I follow that. So, I I think you hit all of the key areas. Uh this was a question yesterday at our superintendent's advisory committee meeting with with teachers. And uh I shared that it

092is part of our portfolio professional development options that we offer our employees. And those 8,000 employees have taken advantage of that uh through the tuition reimbursement and or having their uh alternative path to uh certificate certification and licensure for administration paid for. This is yet another aspect of that. Thank you. It is definitely at the principal level or above cuz I saw that in some of the documents that you shared, which has been another question that may have been raised yesterday with teachers. Teachers [clears throat] don't have access to the doctoral program? At this for this cohort, no. There may be future cohorts that they will. Teachers do have access to these at the ACC program already? I'm trying to recall the different titles. >> to the ACC cohort and teachers have access to reimbursement

093or stipend toward national board certification. There are a variety of uh programs that are available. >> ACC? I'm sorry. It's the alternative certification cohort for our individuals who are looking to become administrators through alternative paths. Is there a path for teachers to receive advanced degrees instead of the certifications through our programs? That I don't have an answer for right now, but we can get an answer for you. Yeah, plus we're building like we're building some of those programs out because I think we've cut back on travel, we've cut back on other conferences because we felt like it was more important at this point to be very focused on the money that we are spending for professional development that they're really going to benefit our students here in Fairfax County. So, I think we're looking at

094different types of cohorts for educators, for our operational staff. We've done significant upskilling. Um Mr. Solomon, I know, do you want to talk a minute about the Avanta program for our operational employees, which has enabled them to get teaching licenses? Absolutely. So, we targeted 100 employees who are considered underemployed, meaning they have the skills to do higher level work, for example, a bachelor's degree, experience working in classrooms such as an instructional assistant, all of those things, but they don't hold a valid license in the state of Virginia. So, we actually paid for 100 of them to come into compliance and to get their license through the iTeach program, which is an alternative route to licensure, to move from those instructional assistant positions, office assistant positions. >> about that last year because I had that case

095at Columbia Elementary. That was exactly what you've described. And in addition to that, our office of professional learning partners with George Mason University to offer an introduction to special education courses so that people who are interested in becoming provisionally licensed in special education, who already hold a bachelor's degree, who can pass the special education Praxis have an opportunity to do so also at no cost. Um thank you. So, you mentioned that uh there is a requirement that they would stay. Can you say a little bit more there? Mr. Smith, you can clarify. I was not directly involved in I I and I wasn't directly I believe it was 3 years uh for individuals who are required to stay after they receive their doctorate. So, the program itself is 3 years and they have to remain

096an additional 3 years. So, we're essentially getting a con- a confirmed 6-year commitment. Correct. Okay, thank you. Um What's my train of thought here with my other Oh. One of the questions that I had is you talked about this I I think initially I was expecting that this would be grant dollars or Title II dollars, which I think makes sense for professional development, but some of this is coming out of the closing the achievement gap um fund. How much is in that fund currently? >> we're taking this year about 30,000 out of that fund and >> Uh 46. It's uh 46 equally across the three. And what is the balance of that fund currently? That's something I don't think we've actually charged everything to it for this year because a lot of our math expansion

097work into the elementary and our second language math courses have not yet been moved over. So, I don't know that we have a final number at this point, but we can get that to you. Could that be provided before we vote on this next week? Okay, thank you. Um When you're talking about the multi-year budgeting Excuse me. I lost my train of thought here. When you talk about the multi-year budgeting, which I think is great, how do we make that work here in a transparent manner? Um are we going to continue with some of these things that you've listed as places where we're making adjustments or cutting um or the other document or the other um areas that you identified in the Friday letter to us? When you said some of these things may not

098be good for us right now just because we've always done them, which I very much agree with. I just want to get a better understanding of what that process could potentially look like. I'm not sure I understand the process for what. I For some of these things >> Okay, let me simplify it a little bit. In your prior district, how did multi-year budgeting work for you? Well, we wrote a four-year budget. So, we understood but we were our own taxing authority. And here in Virginia, there's this [clears throat] um Well, it's an annual drama cycle that I think is exhausting and I think that um you know, we're we're here and so I I don't think that uh multi-year budgeting necessarily is functional in Virginia for us because we're not our own taxing authority as

099a division. Having said that, I think we can anticipate um this is the first time Fairfax County has had multi-year collective bargaining agreements, right? So, we know we can predict what we have as a commitment to our um staff based on those bargaining agreements. So, we know we've got to at least fund that. Um so, as we project those costs and think about uh any major changes in the budget and the VRS uh contribution contributions will be a major change next year year over year as I've foreshadowed. Um this is one of the few years we're able to sort of look ahead. And I'm going to share with you that one of the reasons we're able to do what we're doing tonight is because we could look ahead a year ago. After last year's budgeting,

100which was we had to make a budget, I had to bring you a budget book we had completed bargaining a year ago. This year, I knew at the end of last year, a year ago at this time, I knew exactly what that collective bargaining agreement was going to be. So, we knew looking forward our our level of flexibility, which is why we had zero flexibility throughout the year because we're tracking very closely where we have to be cuz we know. And next year we know. Now, we're going to bargain again after 3 years, so then we're going to be back in the space of not knowing, right? But we do know for 1 more year, so that does it it does affect, I think, how we need to look at the budget. Um whereas maybe

101we haven't had that opportunity in a while as a division or a Commonwealth cuz we haven't had multi-year contracts. Thank you. Um just two last things um just an ask for information, can I get the cost of the TFA contract um as well as the Participate Learning contract? If you could just bring that back up. Thank you. >> can, and I want to say that there we for the Participate Learning pay the same per staff member whether we're hiring them from Participate Learning or not and same with TFA. So, So, there's not a note there's not an an additional fee like some sort of administrative maintenance fee. >> baked in is my understanding. Mr. Solomon, do you want to confirm that? Absolutely. For Participate Learning, while we do pay a fee, we don't pay the

102cost of their benefits. We don't pay the cost of certain contributions that are coming out all of those different things. So, we have a cost savings for our Participate Learning teachers. For our Teach For America teachers, the cost savings is in the professional development, the extensive professional development that they're receiving. And what is the fee for that contract? I'll connect with Ms. Burden. Okay, thank you. And also the fee for Participate Learning. One of the things that you talked about since I have like 12 seconds left that you talked about is diversity of our workforce. How do you view this? Are you looking at it holistically across the division? Are you ensuring that each school building is diverse? Because I know that had been a conversation when we first got on the board because we

103had some buildings in which the teaching staff is pretty homogeneous. I think that's a great and fair question. We look at it both as a division across the board and school by school. And I'll share what I've shared previously when you've asked this question and when Mr. Moon has asked this question, we've made incredible great strides year-over-year by increasing the population of our BIPOC teaching workforce and at the same time we have a long way to go as it relates to our Hispanic population and our Asian population. That was my time. Mr. Moon and then Ms. Meron. Okay, quick comment on the uh >> [snorts] >> Participate Learning's ambassador teacher program. For such for a a few teachers we do have, my understanding is that we do pay Participate Learning Learning certain amount of fees.

104However, as you say, Dr. Lee, we don't pay for their retirement. We don't pay for their health benefits. For the first two years, we don't even pay for their uh employers portion of a social security. That's how this is cost neutral, basically. But that's based upon tax treaty between the nations they come from and and our country. So, it's a cost neutral is my understanding. Secondly, I they go through really rigorous process. >> process. And uh I think you mentioned couple of numbers, but I think I think the percentage of learning they get about 25,000 applicants for 500 spots throughout the country. And we get like we get 30 positions out of that. So, with that said, I have a question regarding a 1,200 teachers who are still hiring versus 97% retention rate. I think

105still when you say we have a 16,000 teachers and we hire 1,200, that's like a 7.7%. If a 97% of retention rate, I don't know how to reconcile those differences. The thing that I would keep in mind, Mr. Moon, is and really quick as it relates to hiring 1,200 teachers, that's over the course of an entire hiring season, basically from if you want to think of it this way, October all the way until the first day of professional development. So, there are not 1,200 vacancies at this specific time. When we go throughout the hiring season, we will likely have hired between 1,000 and 1,200 teachers. As it relates to what that actual retention rate is going to be, it remains to be seen. Generally, I look at retention on October 1st every year and look

106at it year over year. 97% is intention. 97% of our school-based staff indicated that they intend to return for the 2026-2027 school year. We'll see what those actuals end up being, but that 97% intention rate is incredible and it's indicative of the fact that our retention rate for our teaching workforce and for our other populations of employees is likely to increase next year. Okay, thank you. That's what I have. Ms. Meren? Yeah, I wanted to just touch on this facilities and that tie between the schools and the county. So, at a recent meeting I mentioned the Friday night lights and again I was reminded I was there again at Langston Hughes this past Friday and tons of lights on the field, the stadium lights on, cars on the on the um concrete and asphalt. And

107we know that our facilities are being used outside the instructional day and we just cannot keep moving money from instructional to operational. Like we just can't. And I think about Dr. Reed your strategic plan and how you've set these goals and we are achieving them, whether it's in literacy and readiness. How do we get to a place where we're doing that with our money? While we might only have an annual budget because of law, certainly like with collective bargaining we've seen we can lay out, right? And they'll adjust, but you know, being beholden to all of these bodies that do their own thing and honestly are not collaborating to be efficient, like we need to do our own thing to be most efficient. So, that's one idea, like a strategic plan for our funding. To

108find the funding, to figure out how to get our facilities use more in check. I also want to mention someone else a colleague mentioned, you know, we had met with the Board of Supervisors at a joint meeting on February 24th and I had raised some questions about the um collaboration with county and parks. We asked about parking areas to accommodate our buses instead of leasing. We had talked about, you know, I'd wonder about the cost of SAC programs. So, we met on February 24th. The questions were sent from your office, Dr. Reed, over on March 11th and we still don't have the answers. So, the local funding body, the Fairfax government, if they're if they can't respond to our request for information, not even in 2 months, to help the school division to identify savings,

109I just want to recognize that we are trying to do the best with the least amount of authority here. So, I I think these reductions, these cuts on slide seven, um, are the least worst, but we need to keep elevating that we are making these cuts, and we need to do better with every single dollar that that serves our residents. And Ms. Dixon? So, um, I have a couple of questions. One is about our central office budget. Um, what is the percentage of central office budget as compared to the entire FCPS budget we have and as compared to the other, um, district in the in the area? We don't The only counts The only thing analysis that we do as far as school-based versus non-school-based is the position count that is in the Weeby Guide,

110and that's a Fairfax construct. Nobody else calculates that. They only calculate it because we asked them to as part of the Weeby Guide, and and we take the lead on that. Um, so we we don't even We don't We don't have a calculation of what the actual dollars are. I mean, you know, I can tell you that we generally have the largest percentage of uh, school-based employees at about 93%, and so as you would imagine, we have the least amount of non-school-based positions at about 7%. Um, and of course, you know, we we have some economies of scale because we're larger than everyone else, but be that as it may, we still have the largest percentage of school-based employees. But as far as having dollars tied to that, we don't have employees in our, you

111know, HR systems or financial systems categorized as school-based or non-school-based cuz it's really for a single purpose in the Way You Guide. Um I I believe we have the lowest ratio for management position. Is that correct? That is correct. Um we Mr. Um Fisch asked this question uh from the dais on Thursday night and we had done a calculation of that of the leadership teams at all of the surrounding divisions that participate in the Way You Guide and Fairfax runs at 1.1% and the other divisions around us run 2 to 4% in the percentage of leadership as to of total employees. Okay. Thank you. I also had that question about ACE program and um I I think the the budget for that is 1.396 in our budget and uh I believe it's a self-funding program

112or is it uh because we do collect uh you know, tuitions and like you know, fee uh or is it like we have to fund it from uh FCPS operating fund? We do have a supplement that is provided to the ACE program. Um you all wouldn't be necessarily aware of this, but the uh OAG did a report several years ago and basically couldn't find any adult and community education programs in the United States that were uh completely self-funded. Um so, we have been supplementing the ACE program as long as I've been here and that's I'm in my ninth year now. Um the ISD program scrubs their budget and provides the funds to shore up the ACE program and we also are required to provide a match to the ESL grant that provides English services to

113adults in the community. Uh we we a grant for that, but there is a local match and that is something that we provide from the operating fund for ACE. So, you know, from the logic from the supervisors, because middle school after school program is a school program, it should be funded by school, and that's the whole reason they added it to our transfer. Should be ACE be their budget as if they are after This is not K-12 uh education part of it of that. Any I don't know. It's not a question. I think I just uh wanted to I I not for you, Ms. Burden. I don't want to put you on the spot. I I think Mr. Moon want to say something. I'll I'll stop here. >> As a liaison to uh ACE Advisory

114Committee, just one one thing that I want to point out is there has been This has been an ongoing debate uh for over as long as I remember. As long as the a uh former state delegate Ken Plum, who used to be our director of ACE program with us while serving the General Assembly when and he was constantly being criticized and then attacked by some other folks on different political persuasion. So, there's been an ongoing debate, but but ACE program is statutorily required. It's in the Virginia statute. So, you might all want to take a look at that. I don't have code citation to give you, but I can give you, but it is in the statute. With that said, I'm be heading out to uh W.T. I see C.K. C.K. Wilson High School's program.

115So, >> [gasps] >> forgive me if I depart. Thank Thank you, Ms. I'm I'm actually uh I don't see anybody else speaking want to speak, Ms. Uh Dr. Anderson? Okay. I I did have one last uh point about uh Well, in the presentation is a doc I'll just mention the page number. I didn't understand this pretty well and I wanted to just get knowledge. I think this is for me. The grant and self-supporting program fund is increased by 1.1 million and nine positions over the 2027 advertised budget. Could you speak to that? I'm I think it's simply grant increased grant awards that because everything in the grant fund except for the summer school program, which is a subcomponent of the grant fund unless there's a local match requirement that it's all funded by grant funds

116and that's what's funding the increases that are in the item tonight. So this is basically grants we receive Okay, so it's not the money coming from our operating funds. Okay, all right. Thank you. Dr. Anderson. Just more of a process question because we're adopting this next week. There's not going to be a state budget in place. When will we have that conversation once that state budget is in place? Normally any changes that we make to the budget or revenue that's received that was not anticipated at the time the budget was adopted is done at the next quarterly review at one of the quarterly reviews, which would be year-end or mid-year, which is a December and March. We do three quarterly reviews and that is the only opportunity we have to add to the budget and

117so any state revenues that come in after the adoption there'll be a recommendation made at a quarterly review. Sure. And are we still doing our year-end in July or we're presenting it in July and voting in in early August the way that the Board of Supervisors does it or have we wrapped it all up in July? I believe we have two meetings scheduled in July this year, so we would hope to present the item as new business at the first meeting and you know, and do a presentation for it and then with approval at the next meeting in July. And Madam Chair, if I could correct something um for return to work, Mr. Frisch, if you are retiree, it is 30 days if you're being hired as an hourly employee not full-time. But if it

118is one of the critical shortages, you are correct. It is a 6-month wait period before. And by that I mean, if you're a physics teacher and you retire and we need a physics teacher, 6 months later, you can come back as a full-time physics teacher and still continue to get your pension. Why 6 months? I cannot explain VRS >> We need to fill this position in 6 months. I mean, it doesn't seem very urgent. Yeah, critical would you'd seem that critical would mean critical. So, we'll talk about it more in February for the legislative program. Okay, thank you for this robust conversation everyone and at this budget committee of the whole meeting is adjourned at 6:50 p.m.