Key Findings in Lobato v. State Trial Court Decision

Importance of Public Education

Public education is one of if not the most important functions of Colorado state government. It is critical for individuals, business, and society that we have a well-educated populace . . . In order for Colorado to build a strong and competitive economy, all students must have the opportunity to obtain a quality education.[1]

Spending on education should be viewed as a public investment, yielding a stream of benefits across decades.[2]

The benefits of certain education reforms that have been proven to increase achievement, such as class size reduction, preschool expansion, and teacher salary increases, significantly exceed the costs, thereby justifying investment in these reforms today rather than paying the fiscal and social consequences of inadequate education later. By failing to make sufficient investments in these and other effective educational interventions, Colorado is trading short run budget savings for potentially much larger long run economic burdens.[3]

Education Reform Legislation

The public school finance system has failed to respond to the increasing resource needs driven by standards-based education. Successful implementation of standards-based education demands additional resources, including resources for extra educational time with students, additional staff to ensure appropriate class sizes, additional interventions for under-performing students, and professional development.

Successful standards-based reform needs to be accompanied by alignment of the curriculum, new instructional materials, development of new assessments, and substantial professional development for teachers, administrators, and support staff. Schools have to reorganize the way they use tools, such as computers, to get different outcomes. It is hard to imagine that a district could implement all that is required for standards-based reform without additional financial investment . . . If these resource requests are not met, there will be an impact on the quality of instruction in the classroom and assessment results.[4]

Public School Finance System

The uncontested evidence establishes that the Public School Finance Act (PSFA) statewide base per pupil funding and factors when created in 1994 and as adjusted in every year since then are not now and have never been rationally related to the costs of providing the educational services mandated by the standards-based education system or any other measure of educational quality.[5]

In order to determine whether the State adequately funds a particular program, it is important to know how much that program costs. Nevertheless, Defendants have not conducted a study to determine the cost of funding all public education programs set forth in statute and regulation.[6]

The “costing-out study” performed by Augenblick, Palaich and Associates establishes both that (1) school funding can be analyzed and quantified by rational methods and that (2) the existing finance system is so profoundly underfunded that it cannot be considered rational or adequate. Under the successful schools model, Colorado school district general operating budgets are underfunded in the gross amount of $1.35 billion to $1.94 billion per year. Using the professional judgment model, which is a more accurate reflection of the costs of implementing the post-CAP4K system, general operating budgets are underfunded between $3.58 billion and $4.15 billion per year. These computations are comparable in dimension to former CDE assistant commissioner Voretta Herrmann’s estimate of gross operating underfunding of $2.8 billion per year.[7]

There is not one school district in Colorado that is sufficiently funded. This is an obvious hallmark of an irrational system.[8]

The problem has been compounded by the fact that Colorado and virtually every school district have experienced significant demographic changes, particularly in the number and concentrations of English language learners, ethnic minorities, and children of poverty. The number of children with severely disabling conditions has also grown . . . The educational achievement requirements for these students are the same as for general education students, but the cost to achieve proficiency and growth requirements among these students is much higher. This represents a major source of additional expense that has not been taken into account in the finance system.[9]

State level budget cuts in the last two years have reduced overall school funding by nearly one billion dollars . . . Current economic conditions, however, are not the source of the school finance crisis. They have made an unworkable situation unconscionable. But Colorado’s history of irrational and inadequate school funding goes back for over two decades.[10]

Failure to Provide Necessary Services, Programs, Materials, and Facilities

Due to lack of access to adequate financial resources, the Plaintiff School Districts are unable to provide the educational programs, services, instructional materials, equipment, technology, and capital facilities necessary to assure all children an education that meets the mandates of the Education Clause and standards-based education.[11]

Rural and urban poverty School Districts are unable to hire, compensate, and retain effective, highly qualified teachers and administrators; to provide the curriculum, technology, textbooks, and other instructional materials necessary to meet student performance expectations; and to construct, maintain, renovate school buildings and facilities. Many of these School Districts are relegated to obsolete textbooks and materials, lack of necessary computers and internet connectivity, and dilapidated and unsafe classroom and other facilities.[12]

The impact of irrational and inadequate funding is not, however, limited to rural and urban poverty School Districts. The Court finds that all School Districts are unable to provide the early childhood and kindergarten programs that are critical to student achievement. All School Districts are unable to provide the classroom time, professional training, and instructional interventions that are critical to meet the expectations of CAP4K, the Education Accountability Act, and SB 10-91. All School Districts are unable to provide the classroom time, professional training, and interventions critical to the education of under-served student populations, including students at-risk of academic failure, non-English speaking students, students with disabilities, students of minority racial and ethnic heritages, students of low-income families, and gifted and talented students.[13]

These problems are not attributable to inefficiency or inability at the school district level . . . In short, the School Districts have the knowledge necessary to improve performance and meet the constitutional and statutory standards, but they are prevented from doing so by the deficiencies in the school finance system.[14]

Relationship Between Funding and Educational Quality

Unquestionably, additional financial resources appropriately applied can improve student achievement, which, under the standards-based system, is the ultimate measure of the success of a thorough and uniform system of public education.[15]

Even Defendants’ lead expert witness, Dr. Eric Hanushek, acknowledges that, “money certainly matters”; he testified that if a school district in Colorado efficiently spends its money, additional funds for education could lead to higher student achievement.[16]

In states that have undertaken major school finance reforms, studies have found that those investments radically changed the trajectory of achievement and reduced the size of achievement gaps as a function of those reforms.[17]

At trial, there were countless examples of instances in Colorado schools and districts in which additional funding for particular programs or interventions resulted in measurable achievement gains.[18]

Colorado Student Achievement

As a state, we are not educating our own children so that they will be competitive . . . Colorado is losing ground in education as compared to other states and countries.[19]

Colorado students are not meeting achievement standards, including proficiency on assessments, high school graduation, and postsecondary and workforce readiness. Approximately 400,000 students in Colorado are below proficiency on CSAP tests. In 2009, over 25% of Colorado high school students did not graduate with a diploma. In addition, Colorado has one of the widest achievement gaps in the United States. There is roughly a thirty percent gap in Colorado between white and minority students and high-income and low-income students with respect to achievement on standardized tests.[20]

Twenty-nine percent of high school graduates in Colorado require at least one remedial course to attend post secondary education institutions. At some Colorado colleges, more than fifty percent of incoming students need remedial coursework . . . The high remediation rate in Colorado indicates that kids are not being adequately prepared for post-secondary education.[21]

Special Student Populations

Additional investments in intensive, high quality preschool education and full-day kindergarten could make a significant contribution toward closing the large educational achievement and attainment gaps in Colorado . . . The costs of school failure are ten times more expensive than what it would cost to address the problem at the front end with high quality preschool and full-day kindergarten programs for all eligible children.[22]

The amount of funding for special education in Colorado is insufficient . . . By placing the burden on local districts to fund the majority of special education costs, Colorado is abdicating its responsibilities under special education law to assure that FAPE [free appropriate public education] is provided to all students with disabilities in the state . . . As a result, the needs of all students with disabilities are not currently being met in Colorado.[23]

The State’s gifted and talented allocation is insufficient to provide adequate gifted and talented programs and services for GT students.[24]

There is insufficient funding in Colorado to provide the types of effective instructional and support programs for English language learners (ELLs) mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act, supported by research, and recommended by CDE in its own guidebook so that ELLs can meet language acquisition and state standards . . . It is arbitrary and irrational to provide only two years of funding for ELL instruction.[25]

Capital Construction

Colorado’s system for funding capital construction is broken. In Colorado, capital construction is left almost entirely to local school districts with little or no state assistance . . . Relying on local district finding is inequitable, is inadequate, and has produced an enormous backlog of school capital needs across the State, resulting in serious health and safety problems in school buildings across Colorado.[26]

The recently adopted BEST program provides limited assistance, but is not sufficient to overcome generations of statutory underfunding. The deplorable conditions of numerous rural schools bears witness to this proposition.[27]

Technology

School districts in Colorado do not possess the necessary technology and resources to provide a thorough twenty-first century education. No school district has adequate technology to fully implement and sustain the new state academic standards.[28]

Thorough and Uniform

A thorough and uniform system of public schools must assure that all students graduate with the knowledge and skills necessary to (1) participate effectively as citizens of Colorado and the United States; (2) engage productively and competitively in the workforce; and (3) be successful lifelong learners.[29]

A school finance system that fails to provide funding sufficient to establish and maintain a thorough and uniform system of free public schools violates the Education Clause.[30]

The Plaintiffs have proved, indeed, it is essentially undisputed, that the PSFA bears no rational relationship to providing funding sufficient to successfully implement the standards-based education system developed by the General Assembly . . . The Court concludes that the entire system of public school finance, including the PFSA, categorical programs, and capital construction funding, is not rationally related to the mandate of the Education Clause.[31]

It is not this Court’s function to determine at this time the amount necessary to provide adequate funding for public education. However, the Court does find that public education is very significantly underfunded and that any legislative response of necessity must address the level of funding necessary to meet the mandate of the Education Clause and the standards-based system and should provide funding consistent with that standard.[32]

Local Control of Instruction

A system of public school finance that fails to provide sufficient financial resources to the school districts to permit local boards of education to provide the services, instructional programs, materials, and facilities necessary to meet the substantive mandate of the Education Clause violates the Local Control Clause.[33]

Local control does not exist due to irrational underfunding of public education.[34]

The State’s Case

The State introduced testimony from several members of the State Board of Education and other witnesses for its case-in-chief. However, the Court notes that much of the State’s testimony actually bolstered Plaintiffs’ arguments in this case, and certain other contrary testimony lacked factual support . . . Although some of the State’s witnesses’ testimony could at first blush suggest support for the State’s case, much of that testimony was questionable.[35]

Dr. Hanushek’s analysis that there is not much relationship in Colorado between spending and achievement contradicts testimony and documentary evidence from dozens of well-respected educators in the State, defies logics, and is statistically flawed. Dr. Hanushek’s analysis relies on median growth percentiles rather than proficiency levels, which are not a straightforward measure of achievement . . . Moreover, Dr. Hanushek’s analysis relies on the existence of huge inefficiencies within school districts. However, after over 180 depositions and the production of hundreds of thousands of pages of documents, including budgets from almost every school district in the State, the State has been unable to point to any specific inefficiencies or waste in the school districts involved in this case or in any school district in the State.[36]

The limited number of schools and school districts cited by Defendants’ witnesses as successful received additional funding above per pupil operating revenue and/or has not yet met state standards and requirements.[37]

Conclusion

The Court concludes that the Colorado public school finance system is not rationally related to the mandate to establish and maintain a thorough and uniform system of free public schools. On the contrary, the public school finance system is irrational, arbitrary, and severely underfunded. This results in the denial of the rights of the Individuals Plaintiffs guaranteed by Article IX, section 2 of the Colorado constitution and the rights and powers of the School Districts pursuant to Article IX, sections 2 and 15.[38]

Remedy

The finance system must be revised to assure that funding is rationally related to the actual costs of providing a thorough and uniform system of public education. It is also apparent that increased funding will be required.[39]

Defendants are enjoined from adopting, implementing, administering, or enforcing any and all laws and regulations that fail to establish, maintain, and fund a thorough and uniform system of free public schools throughout the state . . . Defendants are further enjoined to design, enact, fund, and implement a system of public school finance that provides and assures that adequate, necessary, and sufficient funds are available in a manner rationally related to accomplish the purposes of the Education Clause and Local Control Clause.[40]

The Court stays the enforcement of the injunctive relief to provide the State with a reasonable time to create and implement a system of public school finance that meets the mandates of the Education Clause and the Local Control Clause. This stay shall continue in effect until final action by the Colorado Supreme Court upon appeal of the Court’s decision. If appeal is not perfected to the Colorado Supreme Court, the Court shall review the stay . . . no earlier than the conclusion of the 2012 legislative session. While this stay is in place . . ., the present financing formula and funding may remain in effect.[41]

First of all, I want to convey our most sincere thanks for all you did to support Proposition 103.  We are truly awed by what you accomplished over the past few months, exceeding expectations every step of the way.

Although we are disappointed with the outcome of the election, we couldn’t be more proud of the ground we have gained and the progress we’ve made as public education supporters.

Over the next few weeks, a lot of people will be analyzing what Tuesday’s results mean.  Our guess is that most of them will miss the real story of Proposition 103.

The real story of Proposition 103 is public education supporters throughout the state working together, gaining a new voice in Colorado politics, and refusing to accept the conventional wisdom that “there’s nothing we can do” about continuing cuts to education.

It’s the story of dedicated volunteers — like the rural school board member who gathered 100 signatures in a town of 800 voters and the St. Vrain parents who collected 5,000 — putting an initiative on the ballot when few thought it was possible. It’s about a statewide conversation about taxes and the need to invest in education that never would have happened without an initiative on the ballot.

It’s the story of cutting-edge technology that made it possible for hundreds of Great Ed readers from every corner of the state to contact tens of thousands of voters to gain their support for Proposition 103.  And it’s the story of the hundreds of thousands of voters who ultimately heeded the call and voted YES.

That’s why, regardless of the outcome of the election, we knew weeks ago that the Proposition 103 effort would represent a long-term win for Colorado’s students and economy. Each of these accomplishments is a critical building block for future success — and it’s already time to put them to work!

Without the additional revenues that Proposition 103 would have provided, the need for advocacy on behalf of Colorado’s children is greater than ever.  Yesterday, Governor Hickenlooper unveiled his 2012-13 budget that cuts $160 per pupil ($350 million below what the current School Finance Act requires) and reduces higher ed funding by $60 million!

Will you join us in a pledge to keep fighting for Colorado’s students? We need to send a clear message to state leaders that, as parents, grandparents, educators, businesspeople and citizens, we are going to keep fighting for a bright future for Colorado students until that mission is accomplished.

We can’t let up now. Colorado’s kids are depending on us to stay focused and engaged for their future.  Thanks to Proposition 103, we are more ready than ever for the battle.

So are you in?

Thanks, once again, for all you did for Proposition 103 and for Colorado’s students, schools, colleges and universities.

Sincerely,

Lisa Weil
Policy Director
Great Education Colorado

For over eight years, with your help, we have been telling the Colorado State Legislature that funding for our schools is insufficient.

Even before the cuts of the past three years, public school supporters like you made their voices heard at press conferences and legislative hearings, and through petitions, letters and phone calls to legislators, telling them that our schools simply don’t have the resources necessary to provide the quality education that every child needs to succeed in the 21st century.

Today, we wanted you to know that another important voice soon might be added to that  chorus: the state courts.

Here’s why. On August 1, the trial in the case of Lobato v. State of Colorado will begin. The plaintiffs in that case — numerous school districts and parents from throughout Colorado — will prove that Colorado’s school finance system fails to meet the standard in our state constitution: “a thorough and uniform system of free public schools.”

What does thorough and uniform mean?   As the court put it, it’s been largely defined by the legislature’s “comprehensive system of educational goals, methods, and measures, all of which it requires school districts to implement successfully.”

What are the plaintiffs asking for? A declaration by the court that the current school finance system is completely unconnected from the mandates the legislature has created (e.g., CSAPs, accountability systems, mandated outcomes, etc.), and is therefore not “thorough” or “uniform” as required by the constitution.  The court would give the legislature an “appropriate period of time” to bring the state in compliance with the constitution.

That’s when the court would add its voice, telling the legislature to make the school finance system constitutional.

And that’s when the voice of public school supporters from around the state will be more important than ever, ensuring that legislators do their job of providing a constitutional school finance system that serves every child.

We wanted to let you know about this important case, and to provide you with ways you can stay informed about and support this critical effort:

1)   Click here to read weekly updates and breaking news about the trial.
2)   Click here if you would like to attend the kick-off press conference on Sunday, July 31 at 10:45 on the West Steps of the Capitol. (Please RSVP, as it will help with the unique plans for this event); and
3)   Follow (and comment on) the trial on Twitter at #lobatocase.

Colorado has made great progress in setting higher standards for schools, teachers and students, and mandating improvements in individual learning for children who learn differently, in different languages, and with special needs and talents.

Matching resources with those mandates isn’t just a good idea. It’s the law.

Thank you for taking the time to learn about the Lobato case and for all you do for Colorado’s kids, schools, colleges and universities.

Sincerely,
Lisa Weil
Policy Director 
Great Education Colorado

And this is before the deep cuts started in 2009 . . .

The falling red line on this graph shows how Colorado’s per pupil funding compares to the national average from 1972-2009.  (This is an update of the chart Great Ed has used in presentations for two years).   It shows that, as of 2008-09 (the most recent data available), Colorado spent $1,809 — or almost 18% — less per pupil than the national average, a drop of more than $400 in two years.  This new data shows Colorado falling back down to 40th in per pupil spending, and 49th in the percent of our wealth we commit to K-12 education.

How did we get here?  The downward trend started with the Gallagher Amendment in 1982 and deepened with the passage of TABOR in 1992.  Even with a slight increase following Amendment 23, Colorado continued dropping to new lows relative to the national average.  In 2007, Colorado was $1,397 below the national per pupil funding average.

The bump in 2008 is misleading; it reflects some one-time spending (for example, the state started moving toward fully funding full-day kindergarten), as well as funds that were spent to merge the Denver Public Schools pension system into the state Public Employee Retirement Administration (PERA).   With those one-time dollars out of the equation, Colorado fell to the new low of $1,809 below the national average.

And now, with a bit more detail . . .

In the 1980s, Colorado invested more per student than the national average, even during the energy bust.  In 1982, Colorado voters passed the Gallagher Amendment (the vertical green line on the graph) – which started eroding the local property tax base by continually reducing the assessment rate (the percent of the value of a home that is taxed).   From 1982-1992, school districts were able to somewhat stabilize local revenues by floating mill rates up.

In 1992, the voters passed TABOR (the vertical orange line), which took away the ability of districts to float their mill rates without a vote of the people and limited the state’s ability to backfill the hole left by declining property tax rates (because of a 6% spending limit imposed on spending from the State General Fund).  The result: Colorado’s tangle of restrictive budget laws prevented the legislature from even keeping up with inflation in per pupil funding.

The good news is that in 2000, Colorado voters passed Amendment 23 to plug hemorrhaging P-12 budgets (the vertical purple line).  Estimates indicate that if Colorado did not pass Amendment 23, average spending per student would have dipped down an additional $500-1,000.  At the time it passed, Amendment 23 was intended to be a floor and not a ceiling.

The bad news is that since 2000, the legislature treated Amendment 23 as a ceiling.  More bad news: Amendment 23′s annual mandated per pupil increase of the Consumer Price Index + 1% failed to keep up with the steeper inflation in the kinds of things that school districts buy like health care, pensions, and energy.

And the worst news, not yet reflected in this chart, is that, starting in 2009, the legislature reinterpreted Amendment 23 in a way that allowed deep cuts to schools.  As a result of that reinterpretation, schools are currently being funded at a level $774 million below what the proper interpretation of Amendment 23 requires.

Despite opportunities to intervene, the legislature has not provided leadership or creativity to stop these short-sighted and irresponsible cuts to education.  Only the Bright Colorado Initiative stands between Colorado students and another round of multi-million dollar cuts.

The ‘Bright Colorado’ Initiative Summary

Printable one-page Summary of “Bright Colorado” Initiative

Printable double-sided wallet cards explaining the Initiative (Print using Avery Templates Laser Printer #5877 or Inkjet Printer #8871)

Colorado vs. the National Average K-12 Education Per Pupil Funding Graph

Ways to Take Action:

Schedule a Presentation at your first PTA Meeting, or the church or community group you belong to.

Show your support for Colorado students by attending one of both of the following Press Conferences:

Sunday, July 31 – Lobato v. State of Colorado Press Conference

Time: 10:45 AM

Location: West Steps of the State Capitol (200 East Colfax Avenue Denver, CO 80203)

Click here to RSVP.

Join other public school supporters at a press conference in support of the plaintiff parents, students and school districts in the Lobato case, which will begin at on Monday.   The press conference will include a unique visual that illustrates how Colorado funds its schools compared to the natonal average.  (If you are interested in participating in that visual, contact us at 303-722-5901).

In the trial, the plaintiff (represented by nonprofit law firm — and Great Futures Coalition member — Children’s Voices) are challenging the current system of school finance as unconstitutional.

Monday, August 1 -”Bright Colorado” Initiative Petition Delivery & Press Conference

Time: Meet at 12:30 PM

Location: Public plaza at the NW corner of Colfax and Broadway in Denver.  We will be walking two blocks from the press conference to the Secretary of State’s Office.

RSVP to casey@greateducation.org or call 303-722-5901.

Join other parents, kids, and education supporters to deliver all 115,000+ “Bright Colorado” Initiative petition signatures to the Secretary of State’s Office.  Kids are welcome and we are also looking for wagons to wheel the petitions.

That’s what we were thinking about when we began planning our “Inaugural Great Education Colorado Luncheon” and had to make the decision: Who should be the luncheon honoree?

The answer was easy and obvious: Cary Kennedy.

Action, leadership, creativity, and passion.  When it comes to public education, nobody embodies those attributes better than Cary Kennedy. Her accomplishments are remarkable: spearheading the successful citizen initiative in 2000 to reverse school funding cuts; crafting innovative solutions to Colorado’s budget knots; and designing the Building Excellent Schools Today (BEST) program, under which dozens of crumbling, unsafe school buildings throughout Colorado are being renovated and replaced.

Cary Kennedy has been a champion for public education like no other. We hope you will join us on September 21 to say thank you to Cary for all she has done, and all she will do in the future for the benefit of our students, schools, colleges and – as a result – our state and our economy.

Cary Kennedy has been a champion for public education. When it comes to public education, nobody embodies action, leadership, creativity, and passion better than Cary Kennedy. We honor Cary for her remarkable accomplishments: spearheading the successful citizen initiative in 2000 to reverse school funding cuts; crafting innovative solutions to Colorado’s budget knots; and designing the Building Excellent Schools Today (BEST) program, under which dozens of crumbling, unsafe school buildings throughout Colorado are being renovated and replaced.

Read the letter from Great Ed Executive Director Liane Morrison about why we honored Cary Kennedy.

Honorary Chairs

Governor John Hickenlooper
Former Governor Bill Ritter, Jr.
U.S. Congresswoman Diana DeGette
Lt. Governor Joe Garcia
Former Lt. Governor Barbara O’Brien
Former Lt. Governor Gail Schoettler
Representative Tom Massey
The Honorable Terrance Carroll
The Honorable Andrew Romanoff
The Honorable Elaine Gantz Berman

Event Chairs

Liz Adams
Libby Bortz
Linda Campbell
Jamie Sarche

Click here to tell us you want to find a petition to sign.

Click here to print a double-sided business card-sized wallet card (Avery Template Laser Printer #5877 or Inkjet #8871)

Great Education Colorado is endorsing the Heath Ballot Initiative Proposal.  The proposed citizen’s initiative would restore state income, corporate and sales taxes to their 1999 levels for the benefit of education:

• Corporate income tax and personal income tax rates would increase from 4.63% to 5%.
• The state sales tax rate would increase from 2.9% to 3%.
• The initiative would raise an anticipated $532 million per year.
• The new funds would go toward preventing further cuts to education — preschool through higher education – and, depending on the economy and recovery, could begin restoring funding for some of the devastating cuts of the past three years.
• The new rates would be in effect temporarily for five years, beginning in January 2012.

Context:

• Without ballot action, it is anticipated that P-12 will face a fourth year of deep cuts in the 2012-13 school year and higher education will continue to experience significantly diminished state funding, resulting in higher tuition, reduced financial aid, and possibly even closures of colleges and departments.
• While this initiative will not reverse the cuts schools and colleges have endured over the past four years, it will help to prevent or minimize future cuts.
• This initiative provides the ONLY opportunity available to stop deep cuts in the 2012-13 school year.
• The proposal simply restores tax rates to 1999 levels.
• The proposal’s five-year limit is intended to ensure that the initiative cannot be viewed as a permanent solution to public education funding.  This initiative is like a tourniquet that will prevent more irreparable cuts while providing a few years to build consensus on long-term fiscal reform.

Ballot Requirements:

• More than 85,000 valid signatures of current registered voters must be submitted by August 1, 2011.
• That will require between 130,000 – 150,000 total signatures to be collected.

POSITION: Metro Field Coordinator

RESPONSIBLE TO: Coordinator of Research & Community Partnerships and Great Ed senior staff

SUMMARY:

This position will staff existing Great Ed chapters and assist in developing new chapters of supporters in the Denver metro area, which entails:

-  coordinating and attending chapter meetings;
-  volunteer recruitment, and collaboration with local volunteer chapter leaders;
-  producing/tailoring requested materials for chapter presentations;
-  coordinating chapter-specific newsletters, communications support and
online tools;
-  maintaining and coordinating schedule for chapter presentations;
-  providing staff support for local chapter events;
-  coordinating events/meetings with Great Futures Coalition partners.

In conjunction with Great Ed staff and Great Futures coalition partners:
-  identify leadership and key volunteers for a Denver chapter;
-  create and implement field plan to maximize outreach (meetings, events, presentations, etc.) to expand education and impact in Denver.

Finally, work with Great Ed Coordinator of Research & Community Partnerships to create a budget for chapters and chapter development.

QUALIFICATIONS:

• Bachelor’s degree
• Demonstrated experience in field organizing in various and diverse communities
• Demonstrated abilities to assess needs, plan strategically, implement a strategic plan, and evaluate implementation of programs
• Excellent written and verbal communication skills; Spanish bilingual ability preferred
• Facility and creativity in use of social media
• Quality attention to detail
• Ability to organize and manage multiple tasks simultaneously
• Ability to work flexible hours with occasional weekends and evenings

JOB DETAILS:

• Part-time contract position – 20 – 25 hours per week
• Compensation dependent on experience; up to $2,500 per month

Background: Great Education Colorado is a state-wide, nonpartisan, nonprofit focused on improving public education through wise and increased investment in Colorado’s schools, colleges, and universities.  Great Ed is based in central Denver, and works with education supporters across Colorado.

Three formal Great Ed chapters exist in the metro area, with at least two-three more in various stages of development. Great Ed Chapters consist of volunteers who organize locally to inform and engage their community in education investment and improvement issues.  Formed in January 2010, the Great Futures Colorado Coalition is a diverse and growing coalition of over 30 organizations – staffed by Great Education Colorado – that advocates for implementation of, and adequate funding for, an education system that will prepare all children for success in the 21st century.

Pertinent websites:

www.greateducation.org

www.greatfuturescolorado.org

http://www.facebook.com/GreatEducationJeffco

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Great-Education-Colorado-Douglas-County/111417952245581

Please send resumes and cover letters to info@greateducation.org by April 28, 2011.

Great Education Colorado does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, gender, national origin, age, sexual orientation, physical handicap, weight/height or medical condition.