Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum

Releases & Statements

**For Immediate Release**

November 13, 2008
Contact: Sarah Krauss
212.669.4193; 917.541.0936
Release #: 040-2008

PA Gotbaum: IBO Report Reveals DOE Spending More Than $350 Million on Accountability Initiative Since 2006 Launch

Read the Report

MANHATTAN- At the request of Public Advocate Gotbaum, the New York City Independent Budget Office (IBO) conducted a review of the spending associated with the Department of Education’s (DOE) Accountability Initiative, including the costs of school evaluations, information technology, contracts with vendors, and personnel. According to the IBO review, the DOE has spent or will spend $352.2 million from Fiscal Year 2007 through Fiscal Year 2009 on the Accountability Initiative.

The Accountability Initiative was officially launched in April 2006 as part of the Bloomberg administration’s Children First reform program. The purpose of the initiative is to hold principals responsible for the academic progress of every student in New York City public schools as demonstrated primarily by standardized testing.

Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum said, “I want to thank the IBO for giving the public its first glimpse of the financial impact of the DOE’s Accountability Initiative. Accountability in our schools is important, but it is also important that we spend wisely. At a time when schools are being asked to cut tens and, in some cases, hundreds of thousands of dollars, the DOE is pumping hundreds of millions into high-stakes tests, controversial school progress reports, a computer system that is still inaccessible to most principals, teachers and parents, and highly paid central staff. In light of the fiscal crisis, the DOE must reevaluate the Accountability Initiative from top to bottom and assure New Yorkers that it is cost effective and producing real results in the classroom.”

The IBO report shows that from FY07-FY09, the DOE has spent or will spend:
    - $73.7 million on ARIS (Achievement Reporting and Innovation System) and laptops
   - $61.0 million on Central Costs
   - $52.7 million on Periodic Assessments 1
   - $45.5 million on School Success Grants
   - $37.4 million on School Support Organizations
   - $32.3 million on School Based Personnel
   - $24.2 million on School and Principal Bonuses
   - $15.6 million on Quality Reviews by Cambridge LLC
   - $6 million on Learning Environment Survey
   - $3.8 million on Progress Reports

The total cost provided in the report is based largely on information provided by the DOE. The report, however, notes the following: “Accountability requires the use of internal staff, external vendors, software and other assessment projects, not to mention the use of pilot programs to test the utility of a product or service. This makes it difficult to pin down the overall single cost of the accountability mission.”

The Office of the Public Advocate considers the total provided by the IBO a conservative estimate and points to several additional potential costs. For example, the Office of the Public Advocate calculates that $43 million remain on the contracts listed in the IBO report; the IBO did not include these costs in its total. In addition, the IBO indicates that it “has not estimated the long term maintenance and upgrading costs for either ARIS or the laptops but these costs will be recurring for as long as ARIS is used.” The IBO also notes that “much of the $104.7 million in projected spending this year would be ongoing and make the initiative a significant expenditure in years to come.”

In addition, it appears there have been cost overruns on the DOE’s Learning Environment Survey project. According to the IBO report, the DOE’s contract with KPMG for the survey is worth about $3.3 million and set to expire in FY10, but the DOE has spent approximately $6 million on the project through FY09. The DOE has failed to address this discrepancy, despite repeated attempts requests for clarification from the IBO.

Public Advocate Gotbaum added, “True to form, the DOE was not as forthcoming as it should have been about the true costs of the Accountability Initiative. This is why my Commission on School Governance recommended that there be independent oversight of the DOE, so that they are required, like every other agency to provide clear and accurate information about their spending. That to me is the real problem here. Without transparency, real accountability does not exist.”

Additional information about the DOE Accountability Initiative can be found at: http://schools.nyc.gov/Offices/mediarelations/NewsandSpeeches/2005-2006/04112006pressrelease.htm

1 The IBO identifies $52.7 million in spending on periodic assessments but does not include these costs in its total for the Accountability Initiative because the DOE argues that the assessments are not part of the initiative. The IBO points out, however, that “the periodic assessments are carried out by the Office of Accountability.” In an op-ed dated September 2, 2007, Schools Chancellor Joel Klein said, “[W]e are introducing the most advanced accountability tools in the country which will allow us to measure student learning, school by school. We are already collecting detailed information about student learning. This year, we will provide schools and families with progress reports, periodic assessments, quality reviews and survey reports, as well as intensive training in the use of these tools.”
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/2007/09/02/2007-09-02_this_year_our_schools_must_pass_the_ulti.html

###