Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Staffing Model topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Hamilton County staffing review shows unusually high school-based student supports

Hamilton County Schools Board of Education · April 7, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A staffing analysis presented to the Hamilton County Schools board found roughly 93% of budgeted positions are school-based and that the district staffs more non-academic student-support roles (social workers, counselors, student support coaches) than peer districts; board members pressed for follow-up data and ROI analysis.

A consultant presenting an Evergreen staffing review told the Hamilton County Schools board that about 93–93.7% of the district’s budgeted positions in the study are school-based, a higher share than peer districts.

The presenter, Scott, walked trustees through a chart that used color and band length to show differences between Hamilton County and comparable districts, emphasizing that “red only means that you’re outside of your peers,” not that a category is inherently bad. He flagged school-based non-academic supports—social workers, counselors and student support coaches—as the largest variance, noting counselors are “close to the industry standard” for student-to-counselor ratios.

Board members asked for more detail on where peer districts allocate staff. One asked why Metro Nashville showed 86.5% in-school positions and how Shelby County allocates the remaining share; Scott said he would follow up with the specific coding and locations. Trustees also pressed whether differences could reflect coding choices— for example, some districts label intervention teachers as classroom teachers while others do not—making apples-to-apples comparisons difficult.

Several trustees raised personnel concerns tied to changes in the staffing model. Mrs. Thomas asked whether student support coaches had been moved from base positions into flex or strategic slots, and worried staff who took those roles might lose job protections: “If you don’t have a position, you don’t have a job,” she said. Dr. Brown and the presenter said most student support coaches are licensed teachers and that HR will assist transitions; staff committed to providing a school-by-school breakdown showing which schools flexed positions.

The board discussed next steps. Scott said phase three of the study will include a functional analysis of job descriptions (managers, coordinators, coaches) to identify overlaps and inform potential consolidation. Trustees asked staff to return with a before-and-after ROI comparison that links prior investments to outcomes such as achievement, growth and graduation metrics.

The board did not take formal action on the staffing review at the meeting; staff said they will supply more granular coding, a breakdown of which schools flexed positions, and ROI materials in a future packet.