The Final Report - Malcolm Shabazz City High School, Madison WI

APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY (cont.)#6 Core to Corporate- Identify requirements- Level of service provided (requirements being exceeded)- Alternatives for service delivery#8 Competitive Grants- Length of grant (years)- Level of revenue- Partially or fully funded- Required in-kind matches- Required/anticipated continuation of service once grant lapses• Conducted a survey of principals to gather their perspective on the relativeimportance of select functions and the priority they place on functions and programs.• Reviewed state statutes relative to mandated functions to determine whethermandates were being met and/or exceeded.• Development of potential cost savings through managed abandonment ofservice/program/staff reductions.REPORT FORMATVirchow, Krause & Company, LLP is pleased to present MMSD with the results of the functionalanalysis.The report's format should assist the District in addressing issues relative to the overallbudgeting and functional analysis process. Before presenting our findings, we wish to thank allthose who participated for their cooperation, time and involvement. We received a high level ofcooperation from all those contacted regarding this review.This report, by its nature, focuses on decisions around budget reductions and does not focus onthe many strengths of District’s operations, systems, and procedures. We understand that theDistrict is committed to maintaining a quality education and are confident that this analysisfacilitates that commitment.The body of the report opens with an overall discussion of the budget and expenditures of theDistrict, designed to provide an overview of the fiscal environment. This information sheds lighton the nature of the fiscal constraints facing the District and is a backdrop against which thedecision items should be viewed.The next section, mandate analysis, provides information on mandated functions and subfunctions,identifying current requirements and (where possible) anticipating upcomingrequirements. The District’s level of service is then compared to the mandated level. Caseswhere a material difference existed between the required and actual levels of service resulted ina decision item.Virchow, Krause & Company, LLP Page 6March 11, 2002