Consultants tell Flint board to ‘stop the bleeding’: proficiency and growth lag; trustees back urgent turnaround plan

Consultants presenting to the Flint School District Board said the district must prioritize raising student proficiency and tighten alignment between board goals and measurable performance indicators.

Wendell Green, founder of Green Education, and Tracy Davis of the Urban Superintendent Collaborative summarized three months of site visits, classroom observations and data analysis. They told trustees their review focused on aggregate (district‑level) and disaggregate (school‑level and subgroup) measures of proficiency and growth, and on whether board performance indicators align to the district’s stated cradle‑to‑career strategic priorities.

“Flint schools have so many needs for sure,” Green said as he introduced the scope of the review and findings. Tracy Davis emphasized the technical distinction she used in the presentation: “MAP data drives instruction. M‑STEP data is only . . . given once a year to determine if kids are proficient at the end of the year.” She told the board that both internal growth measures (NWEA MAP) and annual state proficiency (M‑STEP) are necessary but serve different purposes for planning and accountability.

Key findings presented to the board included:

- District proficiency and growth remain well below state targets in multiple schools, with math proficiency notably low. Consultants presented year‑over‑year charts showing limited movement toward state proficiency targets in 2022–23 and 2023–24 in several schools. They recommended the district focus initially on moving students from “partially proficient” to “proficient.” - Growth counts heavily in the state accountability model; middle‑ and high‑school performance disproportionately influence school index scores. The consultants recommended prioritizing interventions in grades and schools that most influence the index. - Gaps in alignment between board KPIs and measures used by district staff. Davis said several board performance indicators do not currently measure cradle‑to‑career outcomes where the plan calls for them, and urged clearer, measurable KPIs. - Positive indicators and existing work: the consultants and district staff identified specific schools and programs with progress, and praised district efforts to direct grant dollars to instruction rather than charging everything to the general fund and later reallocating.

Trustees reacted strongly. Board President McNeal and several trustees used words such as “stop the bleeding” to describe the urgency of reversing multi‑year declines in proficiency and enrollment. Several trustees who attended the consultants’ site visit in Mississippi said the districts they observed had clear systems for coaching and daily instructional routines the board wants to replicate.

Green and Davis described several candidate actions for immediate implementation: focused, high‑dosage tutoring for students just below proficiency; strengthened PLCs with biweekly action steps aligned to NWEA results and student work; expanded coach‑led instructional walks with feedback loops; and increased use of targeted grant funds (ESSER, Title I, 31a) for direct instruction, not general‑fund backfill.

No contract was voted on during the presentation. Trustees asked consultants to submit formal proposals and indicated they would accept proposals routed through superintendent Jones and staff; a board member said the board expects to see potential contract language and cost estimates for consultant support in follow‑up communications.

The board indicated broad support for pursuing the consultants’ priorities and directed district staff to incorporate the findings into the upcoming academic and grant planning timeline.