Deriding the School Board and LCPS administration for inefficiency and waste is a popular pasttime among many of Loudoun's citizens. Not a week goes by when I don't read or hear from somebody about it, and about once a month someone suggests ominously that all LCPS needs is a good audit to finally expose parade of financial skeletons.
And so it would seem that a comprehensive year-long look into LCPS operations (PDF, 1.8MB) would be noted with great interest, yet the community seems to have met the oft-cried for review with a big yawn. Of the five local newspapers that I read regularly, only two (Washington Post, Leesburg Today) carried articles about it. A third (Loudoun Times Mirror) covered it in a blog post. I encourage you not to satisfy yourself with the articles. Read the report's 10-page executive summary. Those reporters who did write about the study focused on the net $2.2 million in savings that the study's authors estimate could be saved over five years if all of their recommendations are implemented (most of which would actually require changes by the Board of Supervisors to the land use approval process and not by LCPS).
The study includes a long list of commendations but also a number of solid recommendations. Much of the first chapter (Administration) focuses on how the School Board can improve, and they are sensible recommendations. This report will help us to improve if we can avoid getting bogged down in day-to-day worries to focus on long-term strategies, and I look forward to a further review together with my colleagues.
Ultimately of course, LCPS and the School Board answer not to the experts who conducted the study, not to the state government that oversaw the study and not to the national media who rank LCPS among the best. We answer to the people of this community, and the conclusions of this study are just more information that you can use to assess whether LCPS is meeting the challenge given to it by the community it serves.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
LCPS Efficiency Study Released
Labels: Administration, Budget, Studies
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)

4 Comments:
John, just so you know the Loudoun Times-Mirror had it in the paper too! Page A15 on Aug. 20 :) - Liz
The single largest cost savings in the entire report seems to have been taken directly from staff estimates, with absolutely no scrutiny or review.
How does Loudoun's acquisition methods and costs compare with those of its peer jurisdictions? Isn't that a critical part of the methodology of this report?
Liz, with respect for your excellent work as a journalist, what LTM did print was your blog post, which was little more than some bullet points from the report. A blog post in print is still a blog post.
Here it is as a blog entry.
Dan, the Efficiency Report compared everything it studied to peer jurisdictions. I provided links, I'd encourage you to read the report itself. We just got it less than 30 days ago, we haven't had a real chance to fully digest what it says, much less expand on its research or delve into its conclusions. Please read through it and let me know what you think.
Post a Comment