Schools opt for new info system

Kalispell schools will be better equipped to track student data next year.

The Kalispell school board voted 6-2 at a special meeting Thursday to purchase a new student information system. The system will replace the district's current program, Schoolmaster, which Kalispell Public Schools has used for 15 years.

The board accepted a recommendation from a committee that heard proposals from companies that provide student information systems.

Trustees Anna Marie Bailey, Brad Eldredge, Alice Ritzman, Tom Clark, Ivan Lorentzen and Frank Miller supported purchasing a system from Pearson PowerSchool. Joe Krueger and Rob Keller opposed it.

One of the primary components the committee was looking for was a system with a data warehouse and data analysis tool, said Assistant Superintendent Dan Zorn, who co-chaired the committee with Rich Lawrence, the district's information technology director.

"That's a key thing for us to be able to do the things we want to do," Zorn said.

Schoolmaster helps teachers report information such as grading and attendance, but it lacks a data analysis component.

Having that capability will allow teachers and school officials to track individual students, groups of students and classes through their school careers. Officials say the new system will provide more accurate and more easily accessible data.

Trustee Brad Eldredge has pointed out at past meetings that having such information readily available will better allow the district to make data-driven decisions.

A committee heard proposals from two companies, one of which does not offer a data analysis tool, Zorn said. Infinite Campus recommended the district find a third party to provide that service.

The committee recommended the board approve the PowerSchool proposal. It was more expensive than Infinite Campus, but did include the analysis piece the district was looking for.

Of 14 committee members, 11 favored purchasing the company's basic software plus the data analysis tool, two voted to accept PowerSchool's base bid only and one wanted to reject both bids, Zorn said.

That lone committee member, whom Zorn did not name, was not the only person in the district who supported rejecting the bids. Many high school teachers emailed school board trustees asking them not to purchase a new system and instead use the money to alleviate budget cuts.

The $183,404 earmarked for the system, $67,000 of which comes from high school coffers, could not be used directly to save programs and positions facing cuts next year. The one-time-only money the district will use for the system was budgeted for in the 2010-11 general fund budget. There also is $35,000 available in federal stimulus money.

The district could have put that money into its building reserve fund, which would free up some general fund dollars that would otherwise be spent on building reserve projects.

Voters in March rejected the high school district's $6 million building reserve levy request, which would have given the district money for building repairs, safety upgrades and technology needs for five years.

While trustees have agreed not to pay for building needs except for emergencies as long as the high school district lacks a building reserve levy, some technology needs cannot be ignored.

Officials estimate necessary technology expenses, including the district's phone and Internet services, will cost about $188,000 a year, money that must now come from the general fund. That brought the high school district's 2011-12 general fund deficit to about $700,300.

The district will use $309,000 in one-time money to alleviate the shortfall, but the district still must make nearly $400,000 in cuts to balance the budget.

"I'll be the first to admit this is terrible timing [to purchase a student information system] ... it's absolutely the worst," Lawrence said. "But is there a need? Definitely."

At the elementary level, the new system will give teachers a more efficient grading module, he said. High school teachers will be able to access real-time student achievement data for the first time.

This is the district's only opportunity in the foreseeable future to get a new system, Lawrence added. "I don't know when we'll get another shot."

Before the vote, some trustees questioned the wisdom of purchasing an unfamiliar system. Committee members had talked with employees in Helena, Great Falls and Bozeman schools, all of which use PowerSchool and gave the company positive reviews. But none of those districts use the company's data analysis tool.

"My concern is, are we going to get what we're looking for?" trustee Frank Miller asked.

Trustee Ivan Lorentzen wondered whether the district might be able to get a refund if the system did less than claimed. Kalispell Public Schools lost money a decade ago when a company failed to deliver what it had promised.

"Can we recoup some of these funds?" Lorentzen asked. "I'm a little gun-shy about this, especially at this time."

The district can ask about a guarantee when it enters into contract negotiations with the company, Lawrence said.

"I have a feeling they'll balk at that, but it doesn't hurt to ask," he said.

Those negotiations also will give the district a chance to ask for a lower price tag. PowerSchool's proposal includes a $176,529 cost for the first year and $34,375 every year after that.

That's about $12,000 to $13,000 more than the district pays annually for Schoolmaster, but it includes the data analysis piece Schoolmaster lacks. And Zorn said the company intimated it might be willing to lower those costs.

"How much lower, I don't know," he said.

Lawrence said he anticipates running PowerSchool alongside Schoolmaster probably through the fall 2011 semester, while the district transfers existing data to the new system. The district will have the summer and fall to train its IT personnel and its teachers in PowerSchool.