1. Performance Pay in Arizona
Marana Unified School District
Tucson, Arizona

2. Marana Unified School District
Located in south central Arizona
16 miles northwest of downtown Tucson
550 square miles (rural and urban)
More than 12,200 students
15 Schools & 2 Alternative Programs
5 Title One Schools
5 A+ Schools
3 National Blue Ribbon Schools

3. The Beginning: Spring 2001
MEA and Administration met and agreed on a process for developing policy
Design Team was established
1 teacher from each school
1 administrator from each level
Elected Chairperson
District provided clerk for group
The meetings began!

4. Definition of Teacher
District Administration defined “teacher” based on the Attorney General’s opinion published on June 21, 2001: “The teacher compensation increases through CSF are not limited to traditional classroom teachers. Certificated teachers, certified teachers, and others employed to provide instruction to students on matters related to the school’s educational mission are eligible for the increases in compensation.”

5. The Process used for PBP Policy Development
All day training for team members
Provided same information for all
Developed common vocabulary
Clarified our roles and responsibilities
Established climate within the team
Built consensus on guiding principles

6. Guiding Principles
The plan should be one part of a total District effort to improve instruction and enhance student achievement throughout the District.

7. Student Achievement Pupil Progression Plan Curriculum Management
Team
Performance
Pay
Student
Achievement
Staff Development
Report
Card
Teacher
Evaluation

8. Guiding Principles, continued
The policy should encourage cooperation and collaboration among teachers at each school and throughout the District.
All eligible teachers should have the opportunity to qualify for performance pay, even if the area or level they teach is not the specific area targeted for improvement.
The policy should establish guidelines, but allow for some flexibility for each school to select a goal that is appropriate for their learning community.

9. Guiding Principles, cont.
All certificated employees at a site should be involved in selecting goals for the site.
Every effort should be made to develop a District PBP Policy that allows the money available to go to teachers who are eligible to receive performance pay, keeping the costs required for administration and implementation to a minimum.

10. Performance-Based Pay Plan Structures
Knowledge/Skills
3-5 years to develop
Individual performance
Requires a year to qualify
Extensive teacher evaluation
Bonus payment or regular salary
Group/Site-Based
3-6 months to develop
Group performance
Building/Site plan
Student assessment
Bonus payment
No pre-qualification
Initially, we were not sure which way we would want to go eventually, but opted to go with Site-Based plans to get the money to teachers the first year.

11. What is performance-based pay?
Performance-based pay is a type of contingency pay arrangement in which an employee can earn additional compensation for attainment of a specified goal or goals. The goals are clearly stated and developed with input by those affected. The goals can be individual, group, school site, or district level.
CLICK until title shows
Proposition 301 intentionally does not define performance-based pay. Therefore, one of the first things we
we needed to do was develop an acceptable working definition for our purposes. A review of the literature yielded:
CLICK Discuss
At this time there is some disagreement as to the legislative intent for this money. That may change. For now, at least,…
CLICK
Local Governing Boards have the authority to determine what constitutes adequate performance for the increase in pay. If this changes, we’ll make necessary modifications in the Bridge Plan.
CLICK to title of slide 4
Attorney General’s Opinion, 2/15/01: “…school district governing boards were given the sole authority to determine the factors upon which Classroom Site Fund teacher performance increases could be based.”

12. Performance-Based Pay Bridge Plan Policy
Once we came up with the Bridge Plan, I went to each school and presented the plan to provide consistency.
NEXT SLIDE

13. Payment of Performance-Based Compensation 2001-2002
Two payouts:
Mid-year: December or January
Near end of school year
We had two payouts of the money allocated for Performance Pay during the first year.
CLICK and discuss: stop clicking after money appears.
Teachers who work less than full-time for the entire school year will have amounts prorated: part-time, late hires, etc.
Itinerant teachers will need to select a building in which to participate in the two components in order to be eligible for this additional compensation.
Teachers who are in Component 3 of the Teacher Evaluation System are NOT eligible for performance-based pay.
District will know estimates for next by April 15 of this year.
We have developed guidelines that allow for all money that comes in during fiscal year to be paid to teachers next school year.

14. Site-based Performance Pay Plans 2002-2003
Review all available student achievement data.
Select one area that coincides with Arizona Academic Standards for improvement.
Develop a Performance Pay Plan that:
Includes timelines, tasks to be completed, and identifies group responsible for task completion
Involves all teachers school-wide
Has been approved by a majority of teachers at the site

15. Site-based Performance Pay Plans, cont.
Submit Plan to PBP Design Team for approval
Implement Plan
Submit Summary and Evaluation of Site Plan to the Design Team no later than May 1

16. 2002 AIMS Reading Scores By Grade Levels

17. 2002 AIMS Writing Scores

18. 2002 AIMS Math Scores

19. Payment of Performance Pay 2002-2003
One lump sum payment in May or June to all eligible teachers
Equal amount for each full-time, fully eligible teacher, as defined by the Attorney General
Amount prorated based on time employed under a teaching contract

20. Eligibility Issues
Teachers must participate in the development and implementation of the Performance Pay Plan and provide instruction on a regular basis to receive the maximum amount of performance pay allocated per teacher.
Teachers with Emergency Certificates are eligible for PBP.
Substitute Teachers are not eligible for PBP.

21. More Eligibility Issues
Performance Pay is prorated proportionate to the amount of time employed under a teaching contract for teachers who work less than full-time.
Teachers on loan outside the District and teachers on full-time release from their teaching assignment are not eligible for PBP.
Teachers who are in Component 3 or Component 4 of the Teacher Evaluation System for any portion of the year are not eligible for any PBP for the entire year.

22. Even More Eligibility Issues
Teachers must work a minimum of 45 teacher report days or fulfill the terms of their teaching contract to be eligible for performance pay.
Performance pay will be prorated for absences unrelated to professional responsibilities in excess of 20 days per year. (Certain exclusions apply.)

23. Performance Pay Design Team
Each full-sized school elects a representative for a three-year term.
Staggered schedule has been developed for rotation of elections with five schools electing their representative each year.
Representatives may be elected to consecutive terms.
Representatives receive a stipend of $2000 per year.
Chairperson is also a school representative and receives an additional $2000 per year.

24. Advantages of MUSD’s Policy
Designed and managed by teachers, in cooperation with other stakeholders
Contributes to a positive school climate and a culture of working together to enhance student achievement
All teachers are involved and eligible for performance pay
Minimal cost required for management of the program---the money goes to teachers, as intended

25. Disadvantages Of MUSD’s Policy
Same dollar amount for all full-time, fully eligible teachers
DAPs need major revisions---do not evaluate the same performance objectives from one year to the next
AIMS continues to evolve

26. Current Endeavors This year we are:
Addressing additional eligibility issues
Revising payout timelines
Developing provisions for schools labeled “underperforming” or “failing”
Developing ongoing Policy instead of Phase III
Continuing efforts to communicate complexities of performance pay to all constituents

27. Concerns Changes in composition of MUSD’s Governing Board
Legislative interference
Possible decrease in money available for Classroom Site Fund as a result of the economy and “overpayment” of CSF amounts to school districts in the first two years
ESEA and AZ LEARNS methods of evaluating schools are not currently congruent, thus sending mixed messages to stakeholders.

28. When dealing with teacher compensation paradigms . . . . . shifts happen!