Fulton County School leaders finalize magnet allotment guidelines, limit new programs and tighten staffing rules

Fulton County Schools Superintendent Dr. Mike Looney told the Board of Education on Jan. 14 that staff had finalized recommended changes to the district’s school allotment guidelines for magnet programs, proposing clearer staffing rules, funding floors for existing programs and limits on adding new programs.

The proposal would continue funding for existing magnet types recognized by the district — International Baccalaureate (IB), Magnet Schools of America recognition and state STEM/STEAM certification — while proposing to end the district’s 3DE (Junior Achievement/3DE) program at Roswell High School. The plan sets specific full-time-equivalent (FTE) staffing allocations: one teacher and a supplement-funded coordinator at elementary schools with magnet identification; a 0.5 FTE coordinator at middle schools; and for a single high‑school magnet program, three FTE teachers plus one FTE coordinator (four FTE total). The staff recommendation also requires those allocated FTEs to be used in the program area rather than flexibly across other school needs.

The changes are intended to ensure district-provided magnet funds are used for the specialized programs they were intended to support. "We want to make sure that the funding the board provides for these specialized programs actually goes to what your intent was in the program to start with," Looney said.

Why it matters: Board members said the district has lacked a single definition of what constitutes a magnet program and no consistent system to track which students participate. Several members urged the district to build accountability and reporting into the new rules so the board and the public can monitor program outcomes and spending.

Key elements of the staff recommendation - Continue recognition and funding for IB at elementary, middle and high school levels; continue recognizing Magnet Schools of America and state STEM/STEAM certification as valid program credentials. The district will evaluate requests for Magnet Schools of America recognition on a case-by-case basis. - Continue to recognize existing district partnerships (including 3DE/Junior Achievement) while clarifying operating agreements: staff said an updated memorandum of understanding (MOU) with 3DE/Junior Achievement is still in development. - Elementary magnet schools with recognized magnet identification would receive one additional teacher position and a paid supplement for a coordinator role (exact supplement amount to come with future compensation planning). - Middle schools would receive a 0.5 FTE coordinator. - High schools with a single magnet program would receive three FTE teachers and one FTE coordinator (four total). If a high school operates a second magnet program, the district will continue support initially but phase down funding over time (for example: year 1 — 3 FTE for first program, 2 FTE for second; year 2 — 3 FTE and 1 FTE), with the district’s goal being to financially support one magnet program per school at the district funding level. - Staff recommended not adding additional magnet programs districtwide for the upcoming year, with the exception of two elementary schools that already maintain state-certified magnet STEAM credentials (Evelyn C. West Elementary School and Woodland Elementary School).

Board concerns and clarifications Board members repeatedly pressed district staff on how success will be measured and how the district will track program participation. Looney said staff will collect enrollment and completer data and report back to the board. He defined a program "completer" as a student who finishes eight Carnegie units in the program’s subject area, and said Magnet Schools of America guidance commonly expects about 20% of a school’s student body to participate in program activities (not necessarily to complete the program).

"We are defining success as for a student to be a program completer in one of these magnet programs — that they complete eight Carnegie units in the subject area," Looney said, adding that the district currently does not have an established database to count completers and will begin collecting that data.

Board members said parents and communities will need clear communication about what the changes mean for local schools, including whether a school retains existing funding if it changes program labels. Looney said existing programs would be "held whole" and that staff revised the proposal to make a minimum funding level $30,000 for existing programs after board feedback.

3DE/Junior Achievement funding Looney said Junior Achievement has committed to provide a check to the district this fiscal year for “a little bit more than $500,000” before June 30 to offset 3DE program costs and that JA has committed to fund the majority of 3DE programming next year, “all but $30,000” according to the superintendent’s remarks. He said that, given those commitments and a continuing relationship with JA, the district expects 3DE to be cost neutral to the board for the coming year but reiterated the allotment guidelines are for one year and will be revisited.

Board members asked for specific protections so coordinator positions could still assist in teaching if needed; Looney said that would require review of job descriptions and he would follow up.

Implementation and next steps Looney told the board the allotment guidelines are a one-year framework and staff will return with compensation specifics for coordinator supplements during the board’s compensation planning cycle. He also said the district will produce reports at the end of the 2025–26 school year on student outcomes and program implementation.

Board members requested: school‑by‑school breakdowns of who receives magnet funding; a return-on-investment or outcome report next year; clear parent-facing communication materials; and use of district data tools (the balanced scorecard) to monitor progress.

Ending The board did not take a formal, final vote on the allotment guidelines during the pre-work session; the presentation was a staff recommendation and the board discussed next steps, requested clarifications and asked for a follow-up report on implementation and student outcomes.

Speakers quoted or cited in this article are included in the article’s speaker list and attributed by full name and role at first mention.