C.C.I.S.D. Public Hearing Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (F.I.R.S.T.)

F.I.R.S.T. All Texas school districts graded on 24 indicators of Financial Integrity Possible Ratings:  Superior Achievement (75-85 points)  Above Standard Achievement (65-74 points)  Standard Achievement (55-64 points)  Substandard Achievement (less than 55 points) The C.C.I.S.D. Score: SUPERIOR ACHIEVEMENT

F.I.R.S.T. We are required to have a Public Hearing and indicate the district’s performance on each of these 24 indicators. We have grouped these indicators into four general areas: 1.Fund Balance and Cash Reserve Status 2.Accuracy of Data and Audit Results 3.Prudent Spending and Operations 4.Items Unrelated to Financial Management

F.I.R.S.T. We will present C.C.I.S.D.’s score on each of the 24 indicators. We have put the indictors into ‘layman’s terms’ so that it is easier for everyone to understand. The report with the actual wording (in accountant speak) is available as well.

Fund Balance and Cash Reserve Status (Indicators 1,2,15,16,17,21,22,23, and 24) 1.Did the district have funds set aside for a ‘rainy day’ (fund balance)? 2. Did the district have assets? 15. Did the district stay within its budget? 16. Did the district have enough funds to finance the construction projects it undertook? 17. Did the district have enough funds in the fund balance to cover any overpayments it might have received from TEA? (Did NOT spend next year’s money this year) YES

Fund Balance and Cash Reserve Status (Indicators 1,2,15,16,17,21,22,23, and 24) 21. Was the district’s fund balance the right size? (Not too big (over $41.51 million) or too small (under $13.84 million) 22. Did the district maintain the fund balance and not “use it up”? 23. Did the district have enough cash in the bank and investment revenue? 24. Did the district earn at least $20 per student from interest and/or investments? (using the reserves wisely?) YES (CCISD’s was at $27.67 million) YES YES (CCISD earned $ per student)

Accuracy of Data and Audit Results (Indicators 3,4,5,6,9,11,and 12) 3. Did the district pay its debt on outstanding bonds? 4. Did the district file its audit on time? 5. Did the audit reflect that the district had adequate reporting and financial controls? (Did NOT need to correct procedures and/or controls) 6. Did the audit indicate that the district able to properly account for its use of public funds? (Did NOT have any major weaknesses in internal controls) YES

Accuracy of Data and Audit Results (Indicators 3,4,5,6,9,11,and 12) 9. Did the district’s financial PEIMS data match up to the audited data at least 97% of the time?*** 11. Did the audit indicate that the district complied with federal, state, and local laws, rules, policies, and regulations? 12. Was the district fully accredited in respect to financial management? (Did NOT have TEA take over due to fraud or other financial problems) YES (CCISD matched %) YES

Prudent Spending and Operations (Indicators 8,10,13,14,18,19,and 20) 8. Was the district able to collect at least 98% of the taxes that were owed to it (including delinquent taxes)?*** 10. Were expenditures on debt (not counting EDA/IFA) less than $250 per student 13. Did the district spend at least 60% of its operating budget on instruction (NCES definition)?*** 14. Did the district spend at least 65% of its operating budget on instruction (revised TEA definition)? YES (98.83% of taxes owed were collected) YES (CCISD spent $ per student on debt)  No (CCISD spent 59.42% on NCES instruction; lost 1 point) YES (CCISD spent 66.6% on direct instruction)

Prudent Spending and Operations (Indicators 8,10,13,14,18,19,and 20) 18. Was the district’s Administrative Cost Ratio less than 12.5%? Since 80% of school district funds are personnel driven, the State included the last two indicators since they have a major effect on our financial well-being. 19. Did the district have an acceptable number of teachers for a district our size? (not too many or too few…between 358 and 605) 20. Did the district have an acceptable number of employees for a district our size? (not too many or too few…between 562 and 1,158) YES ( CCISD Administrative costs were 10.32%) YES (CCISD had 551 teachers)  No (CCISD had 1,198 employees; lost 1 point)

Items Unrelated to Financial Management (Indicator 7) 18. Was the district’s Academic Rating better than Academically Unacceptable? YES (CCISD in was Academically Acceptable

F.I.R.S.T. All Texas school districts graded on 24 indicators of Financial Integrity C.C.I.S.D. passed 24 out of 24 Indicators and scored 83 of a possible 85 points in to achieve a Financial rating of: SUPERIOR ACHIEVEMENT

Other Required Information for  Superintendents’ contract (on web page)  Reimbursements/expenses made by CCISD to Superintendent and Board- Total of $56, (detail on web page)  Dr. Cameron Sept 07 to Aug 08 $ 19,  Mrs. Manning Sept 07 to Aug 08 $ 13,  Mr. Powell Sept 07 to Aug 08 $ 5,  Mr. Weiss Sept 07 to Aug 08 $ 4,  Mrs. Wessels Sept 07 to Aug 08 $ 3,  Mr. Copeland Sept 07 to Aug 08 $ 1,  Mr. Wilburn Sept 07 to Aug 08 $ 4,  Mrs. Faison Dec 07 to Aug 08 $ 4,098.94

Other Required Information for  Superintendents’ Compensation from other entities- Total of $10,000 (detail on web page)  Value of gifts made to Superintendent/Board by CCISD vendors- Total of zero dollars  Board member business transaction w/CCISD - Total of zero dollars

C.C.I.S.D. Public Hearing Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas (F.I.R.S.T.)