Marion Hoyda retired in 2011 after serving as superintendent of Community Consolidated School District 146, which includes parts of Tinley Park, Orland Park and Oak Forest.
Most board members are knowledgeable about annual district financial audits. The auditor’s team requests specific information from the district business office and analyzes it against generally accepted accounting principles. Once the review is complete, the auditor’s team creates a report that typically is presented directly to the board.
A financial audit may result in recommendations for improvements, and the board should use the audit to hold the administration accountable for implementing them. The financial audit, while required by law, is accepted as a positive business practice for governmental entities.
Wise boards and administrators pay attention to the audit and its findings. Because this practice is so thorough and informative, Community Consolidated School District 146 in the south Chicago suburbs extended the process to review each department within the district office while I was superintendent.
The board supported these audits as a means to validate the strengths of each department and determine priorities for changes that could be planned, budgeted and implemented over a period of months and/or years. Consultant teams provided guidance and worked collaboratively with District 146 administrators and/or board members to determine the desired outcomes of the reviews and to develop the scope of the project, which included:
• Issues to be addressed and their current status;
• Probable time period for completion;
• Methods (e.g., on-site inspections of materials, interviews/meetings/focus groups with selected staff, etc.);
• Audit costs (overall project amount, per hour payment or a combination); and,
• Reports (e.g., executive summaries, recommendations, presentations).
As an example, the technology audit included a review of equipment, connectivity, security, core application performance and support services. The consultant team conducted its review through analysis at the district office and within each individual school.
The final report included recommendations of high, medium and low priority, accompanied by a time frame and cost for their implementation. These recommendations, and the way they were organized, served as a planning tool for the board and administration.
The audit recommended that the district develop a life cycle for network switches and routers, purchase wireless laptops to replace desktops, establish a wireless environment and implement a work order processing system to support the needs of IT staff. The audit helped generate action plans for improvements that were included in budgets for the tech department’s five-year plan.
It is important to note that the board and administrators may or may not agree with the audit findings and recommendations. For example, the tech consultants indicated that implementing a wireless environment was a low priority. However, in District 146, it became a high priority in order to enhance the teaching and learning environment for faculty and students.
The schools and administrative offices ultimately became wireless as part of a three-year plan. We credit the audit for nudging us to think more proactively about the purpose of wireless environments, but the district leadership team determined its priority for students and their learning.
Here are some sample areas and topics for departmental reviews to help determine if your district should conduct additional audits:
Operations and maintenance : Staffing levels, custodial schedules, levels of cleanliness, supplies, training, equipment, maintenance programs, grounds staffing, energy management and work order preventative maintenance;
Human resources : Technology payroll integration and reporting capabilities, procedures/ functions and processes, and resources/policies and administrative regulations;
Special education : Level of specificity of learner goals and objectives in IEPs, analysis of the district’s pre-referral and referral process, the continuum of services for students, assessments available for classroom teachers and professional development needs;
Curriculum : Student performance data from standardized tests and classroom-based assessments, state mandates, professional teaching standards, curriculum standards such as the Common Core State Standards and technological resources; and,
Business office : Office structures and job descriptions, documented policies and procedures for financial management, technology support for financial management and budgeting, and assessing the district’s general accounting functions.
Using the results
Each audit provided recommendations that resulted in improvements. The operations and maintenance audit presented information about custodial equipment, training and benchmark cleanliness levels that impacted new purchases, scheduled trainings for custodians and staffing levels. The human resources audit resulted in developing strict controls for information placed in personnel files and the technology was upgraded.
The special education audit was designed with this focus: “How do special education processes and procedures support student academic and social/emotional and behavioral performance?” The audit had several parts that included face-to-face interviews with randomly selected faculty, focus groups with paraprofessionals and an analysis of student IEP plans.
The consultants maintained the confidentiality of responses for the interviews and focus groups, and the consultant team identified recommendations based on those responses.
For example, they requested the district define “inclusion” and “continuum of services.” Because we were committed to all students meeting or exceeding on state tests, the audit also studied the level of specificity of students’ IEP goals, and the consultant analysis resulted in training for faculty in writing specific, measurable goals.
Under what circumstances might a board want to conduct such reviews? Departmental audits may benefit an administrative team just beginning their leadership positions as well as boards that have a number of newly seated members. They also can benefit a board and administrative team if one particular department needs assistance in developing meaningful and manageable goals.
Superintendents may want to develop a schedule of audits to be completed over a five- to seven-year period indicating when a department is scheduled for review. They may recommend rescheduling an audit based on specific circumstances. In other words, flexibility is a realistic expectation.
Board members and administrators should discuss the possibility of departmental audits as a normal business practice. These reviews do result in extra work for staff, so they need to be manageable. Multiple audits within the same time period could be disruptive. The board, superintendent and other administrators should discuss the audit questions, areas of focus, time periods for completion, and the ways in which the audit recommendations will be communicated.
In so doing, a shared understanding of expectations emerge and the audits provide districts with information to help develop strategic plans and departmental plans in productive and purposeful ways.