yee. we have already defined the value of art and music, and we have an arts education master plan. the charge is to implement the arts education master plan. that is how they are spending their money. it is based on a master plan we approved that puts measures in place on what it is a child needs in order to receive a well-grounded education, including the arts. i am ok with all of that. we as a board have said give the money to the schools. let them choose how they want to do violence prevention and learning support services. we have left it up to the schools to decide how they use those dollars. then we go into restorative justice. that is a board priority. that is over baby we own. we want you to put the money

there. it is clear what the value is of restorative justice. when i think of the academics support pieces and assessment system, those all speak to our college curriculum, and the way in which we are looking at the delivery of these services to our students. family support and translation is a board priority. those are not even up for grabs. for the first time, we have given you guys some dollars for infrastructure. you've always been a little challenged in the way in which we support the folks that represent us on the committee, and the time the put into that. there was two years of development. just coming in to prop h, we spent the first two years trying

to figure out how to spend this money. we had two years of a lot of money we could go out. the city pulled the trigger and the moneys were different. we have taken the luxury to use those monies to offset our own budget. two years of development, two years of good times, two years of change in spending, and we want to do an evaluation. that is a difficult thing to do, but i get what we have to do that so we can prove to voters this was worthwhile for our students. we have to slice it up and really measure. that is up for grabs. but clearly, it has benefited our district in ways, because we can look the other districts across the country and see the challenges they have had because

they do not have this money to do the things that are needed throughout the nation. i want to note the data that is available for us as we measure. you guys collect data based on what is mandatory. there is additional data that comes through. but until you know what kind of data you need to collect, because the valuation is necessary, you are not asking the right questions. which brings us to how we measure quality. i think we all measure quality differently. but we need to have that conversation. how do you measure the kinds of things we are actually providing for our students? it is a much larger question for us to ask. i am not opposed to going to the outside for our evaluation. if we need to go and think about

raising private dollars to help us to the evaluation from the outside so we are thinking differently about it and not just trying to give what we are accustomed to outputing, and looking at how -- the impact of our kids have based on what we normally do, i am willing to raise that money. having a pair of eyes from the outside looking in could make a difference. we have changed our spending pretty regularly over the last few years because of the budget challenges. i feel strongly, with my colleagues, that we absolutely need to do and a valuation, and we needed to start it yesterday. we anticipate going back to the voters in 2013. as we are looking at six years of work we have done, i think we

probably could conjure upper -- conjure up a look at the programs we have focused on, having the impact we expected to have. that is the way i am looking at this. some of this is basic services that kids should have, that our kids should have, as a student, as a rite of education in a public school setting thank you. -- setting. thank you. commissioner fewer: i want to mention that the time line on this is quite crazy. as commissioner mendoza said, we will have to go back to the voters. the more impact we can show, and i think we can -- i just want to say it is not -- when i was on the cac and we said "let's fund

an evaluator," it was clear we wanted to find and evaluate to the could show us the impact these services have. if you increase librarians in elementary schools, how many more children have access to elementary school library stacks what impact does that show, that teachers respond in saying this has made a significant impact on reading? that is the type of evaluation i think we are looking at, because that is the kind of evaluation of those of us to send our kids to public school and are in our public schools -- we know these things are important. but we have to go back to the voters, the kind voters of san francisco. we have to be able to show them that for the last five years

this is what would happen if we did not have. i think when we set this position to be -- we did not ask for this person to write a report of this type. what the cac said clearly was that we wanted to do the evaluation. every year, we are asked to make recommendations, but we have no basis in which to make those recommendations. we kept making the same recommendations over and over, not knowing if we would see it -- we could hear reports from the managers of the library, arts, and music programs, but

not see the impact or hear from a variety of people. for example, how many less injuries have we had on our football field now that we have replaced them? this is the type of impact we want to be able to tell voters, because this is not a small chunk of money. this is a big chunk of money. it is used to operate business as usual, but make no mistake. we do not have this money. it is not business as usual. it is business that is going to be a very sad business to be in. we can say that we have different views of evaluation, and we need to clarify that. but originally, and i was actually part of the cac hiring

committee, and was very clear about what the cac wabted -- wanted from this, and we wanted to be able to tell the board but we give these recommendations based on these impact reports we have received. we think these are sound recommendations. i know commissioner wynns says this is just a proposal to give to the board of supervisors. i want to be able to say to them this is a very sound proposal. you know what? this money has the greatest impact for our children in san francisco and our public school. if i am harsh on this, it is because we are running out of time. we are approving the 2011-2012. we have one or two years to get this information. when people say to me as a board

member, "why should we support it," everyone of us want to be able to say to them "this is important because we have $30 million." i think the city has been extremely generous with us. is this what all schools should have? absolutely. but when we go back to the voters, it is good to be a hard time for the voters of san francisco in general. i want to be able to say in good conscience that the money has been well spent and that the school children have really benefited from it. i want to see how. when you talk about the arts, that has great impact on the education of our children. but we also want to be able to say there is more exposure to

art. how many more students have we reached? how many more teachers have refunded? how many more students have had exposure to art that we did not have before? those are the kind of things we want to hear, not only for us to make a sound proposal to the board of supervisors, but also for us to defend this spending of precious funds and to say this is really important to the 55,000 public-school children of san francisco. you mentioned something about that you can only do so much, that you cannot go further because of what? >> i am also going to agree with commissioner yee, who did say there are different levels of this evaluation. there are different components of the evaluation. i want to be accountable just for myself. as the department of research,

planning, and accountability, we received over 200,000 performative assessments. what have we done with them? i cannot show that 100 more children have become proficient because of that. what i can show you is that today, what we found from that thing is a data system that gives every teacher access to student-level data. we can give you the number of teachers every minute of the day who get on to a date to director and access what information. that is accountability -- to data director and texas what information. that is accountability. we emphasized mapping academic progress. there were 17,000 in math and 12,000 students who had taken maps. at the end of the year, the

students who took maps -- did they do better? i will be able to tell you. it is a growing process in evaluation. we have funded maps and data collection. both initiatives have had impact. that is from one programmatic point of view. again, i do not have a student outcome data to show you right now, but there is process information to give you. in the same level, if you go through the student support services program, they do have a lot of the outcome measures they can share. when you said injury, for instance -- the afflicted question we could answer, as long as it was something i could go back to the student information database and check for. but something like injuries -- the program itself has to collect that information and

submit it to us. they themselves have to design that as a program called. we have to put as a district pressure on the accountability towards our programs, with definite guidance around showing student impact. >> i think the information and are trying to get to is to justify $35 million every year. i know that student support services collects, probably, the data. [laughter] president mendoza: anyway. commissioner fewer: kevin, no one is going to beat you up here. the collection is a good example. how many teachers have used it? how many have said it hoped

their instruction or helped them? that is the kind of information we want. i believe mr. truitt collected some of that day to himself. why don't we have it? >> there is a lot of stuff here from all these different programs, and they are working incredibly hard, and we are a little bit confused. we are hearing questions about the data you are requesting. we are sitting back there saying, "we have done that. we have it right here. there is all the wellness' data. they come to me with their plan." the have to ask themselves how this proposal answers the needs described and how the alliance to strategic plans. what are the outcome measures? we have things like 80% of the students felt heard and respected by at least one other student in the group. this is well mistake to we have

had. i have measures here from athletics, which also reports to me. they will say the lack of equipment for school teams -- the safer environments at athletic events measured by the number of incidents occurring in relation to the total events. i have this going back to 2005. these kind of data things -- there are tons of measurements we have been looking at over the years. program managers back here have submitted these documentations to us, to me and their fiscal managers. one of the first things we ask is how you know it is having an impact. how the universe is having an effect? -- how do you know this is having an effect?

there is a measure of student leaders over the years that have increased that have had few resources. i have all this data. that is part of what we are asking for. i know the managers running these programs have worked really hard to submit this as part of their plan. we have had those conversations. on behalf of the rest of the stuff that are submitting their plans, i had to say that. >> i want to thank the associate superintendent. it seems to me, with the position of the board, that perhaps a good plan would be for us to regroup as staff and do an assessment of what data we have and bring that report to you so you have copies of that data so you know what we have collected so far, so you know what we have done and a timeline for developing the data.

commissioner >> the connection to student achievement to joyful learners. that connection is what i'm missing. i'm not asking for more data. i'm asking for that connection. >> there's a lot of hard work and impact. how is this making a difference to student achievement, joyful

learners and the access. >> creating something that is lay person friendly. back if you could imagine a not necessarily just to gloss over the things that haven't gone that sort of gives an honest

piece funds have by reams of more detailed data. bother. what richard said is exactly right. we have a lot of that in place. we don't have all of it in place. our intuition i'd say, i speak to the staff in saying similar to president mendoza's comments. we think these have been very

beneficial. we need to sin that size it. the lort in the various types of audiences and want a lot of information and more of a sense and a summary level. we'll work on building all of that. >> thank you. we have staff programs looking at this data.

we have voters looking at their own stand point. to come back here with an evaluation plan in march. a much longer term plan than this. i would ask that we increase the budget that is at 105 to 200,000. this is not how i like to do business to come up with things

at the last minute. i pressure comment about the budgeting process and how this is not appropriate or fair. i'm asking for the flexibility to be able to do this. i haven't even had a chance to consult about what that would ta take. that is my request frment . we need to ask the board about that? >> related to what you just said regarding the four audiences.

i'm in agreement. many of the breath of those folks are korvered in the cast. representatives of us come from across the city. we appoint people to really create add diverse mix. part of even thinking about trying to appease or have a discussion that reaches the broader audience, the board of education, supervisors, voters plus staff, i have to emmrfloor you to take this in a different meeting. they are there to use the sounding board as a resource.

that's the reason why we made these appointments. i'm looking at other board members trying to fit in something you are missing with my appointment. i believe maybe with the exception of the commissioner appoint y as a full compliment. i employ you in some of what you ever trying to do. i don't believe from my listening to them that they are as fully engaged in this process as they desire to be. >> on the amendment, you are questioning -- what's the difference between what you are on and what you are asking for. to please adjust that to simply

say program evaluation that this is going to be saying this is on the plan staff will bring back to you in march. what area will get decreased. reserve fund. >> this is going to be pulled out of the reserve fund. >> yes, sir. let's run that through can you repeat the amendment. i'm sorry, commissioner? i'm asking her to repeat what it is first so we are clear then we'll go with a motion. >> i am not clear on the amendment. i'm terribly sorry. >> can i make the motion. i think i know what he said. correct me if i don't state this correctly. i'll move that we amend the spending plan as presented to

the board and change under other general use, program evaluator, which is currently at $105,000 to program evaluation. increase that amount to $200,000 and correspondingly decrease the fund by $95,000. thank you roll call, please. >> roll call. unanimo unanimous. you are now given the resources to do what the board has asked. we need to do a second and a

motion. i need a motion and a second, please. >> i have a clarification. the piece is coming back to the board in a few mos? >> we are being asked to approve the proposed spending plan in front of you as amended we'll go back in march with that plan >> did i get a second? >> i'll second. >> thank you. what you are doing is

>> six ayes. thank you. we'll look forward to hearing from you in a couple of moths. next item is i, board member proposals. none tonight. item j, request to speak regarding general matters. gefrl speakers have requested to speak on this. when il