David F. Lewis - National Louis University SROI Policy Advocacy

National Louis University Digital Commons@NLU Dissertations 12-2014 A Policy Advocacy Dissertation to Increase Transparency and Accountability through Social Return on Investment Analysis David F. Lewis National-Louis University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.edu/diss Part of the Educational Administration and Supervision Commons, and the Educational Leadership Commons Recommended Citation Lewis, David F., "A Policy Advocacy Dissertation to Increase Transparency and Accountability through Social Return on Investment Analysis" (2014).edu/diss/108 This Dissertation - Public Access is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons@NLU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons@NLU. For more information, please contact digitalcommons@nl.

A Policy Advocacy Dissertation to Increase Transparency and Accountability through Social Return on Investment Analysis David F. Lewis Educational Leadership Doctoral Program Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements of Doctor of Education National-Louis University Graduate School National College of Education National Louis University December 31, 2014 Abstract The connection between the funding of public schools and student achievement is complex. Facing dwindling revenue streams, schools and the communities they serve must begin to assess how effectively and efficiently school systems are utilizing federal, state, and local taxpayer resources. As seen in the previous program evaluation and change leadership projects, the Social Return On Investment (SROI) methodology provides a framework that yields a statistically reliable vehicle for doing so that garners trust through transparency.

Toward this end, this document advocates for school districts and their boards of education to incorporate the SROI analysis as an essential element of their ongoing district-wide evaluation process. i Preface As presented in the previous section of this dissertation, the complete Social Return on Investment (SROI) analysis methodology follows seven stages. When I learned that the second of these stages is the development of a theory of change based on both qualitative and quantitative data elements, I saw that this step in the methodology inherently lends itself to the Policy Advocacy Document. This then became the focus of this section of the dissertation.

This study gave me the opportunity to get firsthand experience in gathering and analyzing qualitative and quantitative data in the spring of 2012. My hope was that it would provide important financial information in terms of the costs and benefits of our instructional efforts. I furthermore wanted it to provide baseline information to drive our future district program planning efforts. It was a beneficial lesson in learning various publics’ expectations of what educational goals were important to them.

It also gave me insights into how such financial analyses might help enhance public understanding and faith in what schools are doing and achieving – and the degree of success realized. I learned through my surveys of recent graduates, educators, parents, and community members their perceptions and beliefs concerning the district’s curricular and instructional programs and the effectiveness of the district. I learned the importance of public engagement in these very important schooling and financing issues and how helpful such involvement can be to school district improvement. In essence, it gave me critical insights into how complicated and important critical data-driven decision-making is.

ii Finally, I feel it is important to note that I left my position in the school district that is the subject of my dissertation to assume my current role as Superintendent of Education in Columbus, Georgia during this part of my doctoral program. Therefore, this section details what I did, what my former district’s conditions were at the time, and what I had hoped to achieve while I was there. As a result, this section is based on what was and what might be, in the district where I was. Regardless, my study has important implications as I address similar challenges in my current school district and my policy proposal will focus on it.

iii Table of Contents SECTION ONE: VISION STATEMENT………………………………………………. 1 Introduction to the Problem…………………………………………………………… 4 Critical Issues………………………………………………………………. 5 Recommended Policy and Envisioned Effect…………………………….…………… 9 SECTION TWO: NEEDS ANALYSIS………………………………………………… 10 Moral/Ethical Analysis………………………………………………………………. 11 Education Analysis…………………………………………………………………… 12 Social Analysis……………………………………………………………………….

16 Economic Analysis…………………………………………………………………… 17 SECTION THREE: ADVOCATED POLICY STATEMENT…………………………. 20 Goals and Objectives of the Policy…………………………………………………… 20 Stakeholders Related to the Policy……………………………. 23 Rationale for the Validity of the Policy………………………………………………. 24 SECTION FOUR: POLICY ARGUMENT…………………………………………….

29 SECTION FIVE: POLICY IMPLEMENTATION PLAN……………………………. 40 Developing a Theory of Change……………………………………………………… 43 Identifying Inputs………………………………………………………………………43 Valuation……………………………………………………………………………….44 Calculating the SROI………………………………………………………………….45 Verification and Reporting ………………………………………………………….46 iv SECTION SIX: POLICY ASSESSMENT PLAN……………………………………….51 SECTION SEVEN: SUMMARY IMPACT STATEMENT…………………………….57 v List of Tables and Figures Table 1. Skill Comparison……………………………………………………………… 42 Figure 1.……………………………………………………………… 46 vi SECTION ONE: VISION STATEMENT As a long tenured practicing educational administrator and sitting superintendent, I have come to value the pragmatism of job-embedded practices and processes that prove beneficial in enhancing my professional life and work. In my first document, a Program Evaluation Proposal, I identified and studied a new concept for assessing the social return on school investments.

My second, a Change Leadership Plan, involved the development of a change plan to put into practice the use of a system to demonstrate in some way the impact of K-12 school investments in terms of societal gains. My third document focuses on policy advocacy. Whitehead (1929) observed that, “Education is the acquisition of the art of the utilization of knowledge” (p. With this in mind, the development of my Policy Advocacy Document affords me the opportunity to meld systems theory with practical administrative procedures and processes relative to instructional delivery models and reflective practices as a means of supporting and promoting reform (Forester, 1981).

My policy advocacy proposal is informed by research-based arguments and reflective policy insight as well as analysis of related administrative and legislative requirements germane to the advocated policy. In addition to the need for the advocated policy to be practical and workable, it is imperative that it be socially, economically, and politically substantive as well. My vision is to advocate a policy “to produce the utilization of knowledge in determining what should be” (Browder, 1995). Toward this end, Wagner (2006) outlines a framework for a systemic change process that helps to identify the “As Is” or current condition to be addressed and methodically leads the process through the change that must be achieved in order for the “To Be” or desired state to be realized.

Clearly, the facilitation of this systemic change process serves 7 as the genesis for educational policy advocacy and subsequently my policy advocacy document that examines the educational, political, social, economic, and moral/ ethical aspects of what I am proposing. This then directs the paradigm shift and policy changes that should occur to realize the enhanced and desired outcomes. This model encourages and promotes moral leadership through reflective practice and is action and outcome oriented rather than passive and theoretical in nature. For the reasons above, I have elected to use the policy advocacy document framework, as outlined by Browder (1995), as the vehicle for completing this document.

It will serve as the framework for my advocacy initiative, which is predicated on the recommended development of local school board policy to include a Social Return On Investment (SROI) analysis as an ongoing component of my the school district’s program evaluation process in determining its overall efficiency and effectiveness. In most communities and states, school districts are facing increasing educational challenges and dwindling resources that make the proper assessment of both costs and effectiveness necessary elements of any serious evaluation process. Having completed a baseline SROI analysis as detailed in the Program Evaluation Proposal facet of my dissertation, I have learned first-hand the value and benefits associated with this process which leads me to advocating the incorporation of this analysis in the evaluation of the district where I currently serve as the Superintendent of Education. Furthermore, once validated, this protocol could then serve as the basis for similar policy advocacy efforts at the state and national levels.

Consistent with the Policy Advocacy Document framework, my document is formatted in seven sections. The first sections provides an abstract containing background information and justification for the perceived need for policy development pertaining to the inclusion of an SROI analysis as part of a district’s overall evaluation process. I will address the general goals, 8 questions, and factors associated with conducting an analysis of this type. This section also will include recommendations for the use of the results derived from completing the analysis.

In the second section, the topic and its context are defined more specifically in five disciplines: moral/ethical, education, social, political, and economic. A review of each of these areas will garner additional insight that I will use to shape policy development and advocacy. Likewise, it will clarify further the validation of the analysis methodology. The third section will provide definition with respect to what the policy is advocating.

This will include the specific goals and objectives that it supports such as, whose needs, values, and preferences are represented in the policy. Furthermore, it will establish the basis for determining the goals and objectives the policy aims to achieve. A policy argumentation section follows. I will present the pros and cons on the merit of the advocated policy, consider research findings, public and professional opinions, and other relevant factors.

A policy implementation plan also will be needed to justify that implementation of the advocated policy as being practical and feasible. I will describe how I intend to implement my advocated policy, if adopted by our school board, and provide a detailed plan of activities I will conduct in accordance with Social Return on Investment methodology. The final sections of my document will include a policy assessment plan and a policy impact statement. I will describe in my assessment plan how the SROI analysis will be validated, how I will hold the district accountable to our constituents, what the theory of change entails, what progress monitoring and evaluation tools I will use to measure outcomes, all of which I will complete in full transparency in accordance with SROI methodology as part of the implemented policy.

The policy impact statement will be reflective in nature and contain all aspects of the completed document. 9 Introduction to the Problem This policy advocacy facet of my dissertation is the culmination of a three-year effort to study the utilization of Social Return on Investment (SROI), a type of social accounting, as a means of determining the efficiency and effectiveness of public educational programming. In the private sector, efficiency and effectiveness are typically measured by the benefit or profit received in exchange for the effort or money expended. However, the benefit or impact of public entities is not measured easily by revenue and profit.

Therefore, the SROI analysis provides a framework that fulfills this void. Relative to public schools and school districts, the academic achievement and related outcomes a school or district produces can be assessed, when controlled for factors beyond their control that are known to have an adverse impact such as students living in poverty. The topic of efficiency and effectiveness of public education should be more important than ever. Educational leaders and school boards throughout the country are being required to produce better results in the face of stagnant or declining resources.

This is evident in the results of a Rasmussen Public Opinion Poll which cited: “Voters overwhelmingly (72%) believe that taxpayers are not getting a good return on what they spend on public education: (April 27, 2011). However, all too often these claims are not based on solid, factual evidence. “At least part of the blame for this situation may reside in the fact that cost evaluation is still not widely understood among policymakers or even among educational evaluators” (Levin & McEwan, 2001, p. Critical Issues Public and social sector organizations are routinely faced with foundational questions as to their worth or value to the community or society as a whole: What impact are they having? What is the relationship between their impact and the programming they provide? How well is 10 the organization achieving its mission?