REPORT OF THE

TASK FORCE ON

SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE EFFICIENCY

Adopted November 7, 2006

Dr. Jo Pettigrew, Chair

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction.................................................................................................. 1

Task Force Members................................................................................... 1

Mission Statement....................................................................................... 2

Review of Previous Task Force Information........................................ 3

Task Force Presenters................................................................................. 3

Findings and Recommendations............................................................. 4

Reservations Concerning the “65 Percent Solution” Proposal................................. 4

Overview of Findings and Recommendations Concerning Administrative Reorganization and Consolidation............................................................................................................. 5

Recommendations........................................................................................................... 6

Conclusions................................................................................................... 8

TABLE OF APPENDICES

Appendix A .... Legislation Creating Task Force, Excerpt from HB 1021 (2005 Session).............................................................................. 9

Appendix B Legislation Appropriating Funds for Use of Task Force, Excerpt from HB 1020 (2005 Session)..................................... 12

Appendix C Statutory Definition of Administrative Services Costs 13

Appendix D Task Force on School District Administrative Reorganization and Consolidation Progress Report, December 31, 2004 15

Appendix E Comparative Data for Oklahoma and Surrounding States 16

Appendix F School Consolidation Assistance Fund................... 17

Appendix G Requirements for Training of School District Treasurers and Encumbrance Clerks, Excerpt from SB 668 (2005 Session) 20

Appendix H Statutory Duties of School Treasurers..................... 22

Appendix I Draft Legislation Authorizing the Department of Central Services to Administer a Self-Insured Group for School Districts........................................................................................... 26

Appendix J ...... Education Service Center Recommendations from Greg Gibson, President, Gibson Consulting Group.................. 29

Appendix K School Performance Review Program..................... 31

Appendix L Comparison of Administrative Costs to Expenditures: 2004-2005 School Year........................................................... 33

REPORT OF THE TASK FORCE ON SCHOOL DISTRICT ADMINISTRATIVE EFFICIENCY

Introduction:

Created in House Bill 1021 (see Appendix A), and appropriated funding in House Bill 1020 (see Appendix B) of the 2005 Legislative Session, the Task Force on School District Administrative Efficiency was directed to:

1. Determine how school administration and operations may be made more efficient through administrative reorganization and consolidation;
2. Review and analyze data collected by the State Department of Education from school districts of administrative services costs as defined in Section 18-124 of Title 70 of the Oklahoma Statutes (see Appendix C); and
3. Make recommendations to the Legislature by December 31, 2006.

Task Force Members:

Task Force members were appointed by Governor Brad Henry, President Pro Tempore of the Senate Mike Morgan, Speaker of the House of Representatives Todd Hiett, and State Superintendent of Public Instruction Sandy Garrett. Members and their appointing authorities (noted in parenthesis) included:

1. Dr. Jo Pettigrew, Chair, Education Consultant and Retired Executive Director of the United Suburban Schools Association (Governor);
2. Mr. Floyd Gibson, Retired School Superintendent (Governor);
3. Dr. Barry A. Knight, Professor Emeritus, Rogers State University and California State University, San Bernardino, and Certified Public Accountant (Speaker);
4. Ms. Jackie McGolden, Teacher, Fairview Public Schools (President Pro Tempore);
5. Ms. Keven Rondot, President, Oklahoma Parents and Teachers Association; (Superintendent of Public Instruction);
6. Mr. Jim Smith, Superintendent, Elmore City-Pernell Public Schools (Speaker); and
7. One unappointed member (President Pro Tempore).

The Task Force convened for its first meeting on October 13, 2005 and held 13 meetings through November 7, 2006.

Staff Assistance for the Task Force was provided by:

• Kim Bishop, Staff Attorney, House of Representatives;
• Kim Brown, Legislative Analyst, Senate;
• Jeremy Geren, Fiscal Analyst, Senate;
• Shawn Hime, Asst. State Supt., Financial Services, State Department of Education (SDE);
• Karen Johnson, Admin. Asst., State Aid Section, SDE;
• Lu Norman, Executive Director, Financial Accounting/OCAS, SDE;
• Lealon Taylor, Chief of Staff, SDE; and
• Melinda Wolfe, Asst. to Chief of Staff, SDE.

Mission Statement:

The Task Force adopted the following as its Mission Statement:

The Task Force will study and review existing programs that have proven to affect school district administrative efficiency. The Task Force will interview and hear administrators from large, small, urban, rural, and out-of-state districts to determine administrative efficiency within a broad spectrum of school districts. The Task Force will study and review prior task force information and any other information that may be available to result in final recommendations to:

1. Define acceptable school district administrative costs;
2. Recommend ways to improve, reduce, or maintain acceptable administrative costs without reducing the quality of services;
3. Find out if and how more money can be put in the classroom with a smaller percentage going into administration; and
4. Agree upon and recommend innovative programs and ideas that not only will improve administrative efficiency, but also that will improve operational efficiency of Oklahoma school districts.

Problem:

• Define school district administrative costs
• Determine, if possible, current school district administrative costs
• Discover ways in which school districts can reduce or maintain administrative costs
• Determine what impediments exist to lowering administrative costs and, further, determine if these impediments can be removed or changed

Solution:

• Study ways in which school districts can reduce administrative costs (or reduce other nonclassroom costs)
• Recommend removal of legislative roadblocks which impede administrative cost reduction
• Possibly suggest other legislative action which could reduce administrative costs
• Suggest (or recommend to require) training for school administrators and business managers in methods of administrative cost reduction

 Recognition:

• Recognize and praise school districts which have already demonstrated exemplary management of administrative costs.

Review of Previous Task Force Information:

During the 2003 legislative session, the Task Force on School District Administrative Reorganization or Consolidation was created. Outside consultants were retained to conduct research for use by the task force in arriving at its recommendations. The consulting contract was granted to Dr. Michael Metzger, Director of the Oklahoma Policy Research Center and Professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Central Oklahoma (UCO). Dr. Metzger collaborated with Dr. Stephen Smith, Professor of Economics, Rose State College, Dr. Larkin Warner, OSU Regents Professor Emeritus, and Dr. Sue Lynn Sasser, Assistant Professor of Economics, UCO.

The objective of the consultants was to assemble, interpret, and distill all of the relevant available evidence, in all of its various forms, and translate these into potential tax dollar savings and student performance gains, for school sites, districts, and the state as a whole. However, the contracting consultant passed away prior to completion of the final report and the task force submitted a progress report to the legislature (See Appendix D). That task force expired on December 31, 2004, and no final report was ever issued. With the permission of Dr. Warner, the current Task Force reviewed the draft reports prepared by the consultants engaged by the previous task force. Dr. Warner also graciously provided an extensive amount of supporting literature the consultants had collected. Drs. Knight and Pettigrew reviewed the literature and found it to be very mixed in the conclusions. In addition, much of the literature was dated.

Task Force Presenters:

Task Force members heard presentations from State Department of Education personnel, including Lealon Taylor, Shawn Hime, and Lu Norman concerning present practices, current statistical information, definitions of administrative costs, and other pertinent information. Several outside presenters addressed the Task Force as well. They included:

1. Dr. Randall Raburn, Executive Director, Cooperative Council for Oklahoma School Administration (CCOSA) and Judy Wilkes, Chief Financial Officer of the Oklahoma State School Boards Association (OSSBA), gave presentations on the Buy Board, a group purchasing program available to schools, and the Oklahoma Schools Secure Purchasing Card program;
2. Mr. Robert Buswell, Executive Director, Office of Accountability, provided information on the School Performance Review Program which is designed to help school districts identify ways to streamline operations so as to redirect savings to classroom instruction;
3. Mr. Gene Lidyard, Administrator, Risk Management, Department of Central Services, discussed the possibility of amending state statute to allow school districts to participate in the state risk management program;
4. Dr. Jeff Mills, Superintendent, El Reno Public Schools, made a presentation on administrative cost issues and the unique situation of the El Reno school district;
5. Dr. David Goin, Superintendent, Edmond Public Schools, provided information regarding administrative responsibilities for a large school district;
6. Mr. Kevin McKinley, Superintendent, Bray-Doyle Public Schools, made a presentation on administrative responsibilities for a small school district;
7. Dr. Kirby Lehman, Superintendent, Jenks Public Schools, gave a presentation on student achievement and administrative costs; and
8. Mr. Roger Sharp, Superintendent, Muldrow Public Schools, provided a perspective from a small school district with a relatively low percentage of administrative costs.

Additionally, the Task Force heard from the following out-of-state presenters:

1. Mr. Greg Gibson, CPA, President, Gibson Consulting Group, made a presentation on school district efficiency from a statewide perspective;
2. Dr. Benny Gooden, Superintendent, Fort Smith, Arkansas School District, provided information on “Administrative Expenditures: Essential or Excess – What do data and practice reveal”; and
3. Dr. Zena Rudo, Program Associate, Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL), provided the results from her research on Effective School Resource Allocation.

Findings and Recommendations:

The Task Force decided early in the process to give attention to any findings concerning efficiency and cost-saving practices -- whether directly considered administrative or not.

We also determined that a positive approach (incentives rather than penalties) would probably result in more positive changes than a punitive approach.

Reservations Concerning the “65 Percent Solution” Proposal:

The Task Force has reservations regarding the “65 Percent Solution” proposal, which would require school districts to spend at least 65 percent of their operational budgets on expenditures directly related to classroom instruction. Services that are not included within the definition of “classroom instruction” are a very necessary component of the type of school our students need and deserve and our parents want and need for their children. In order to increase expenditures in classroom instruction to meet the 65 percent requirement, schools would have to decrease expenditures in the following areas: plant operations and maintenance, food services, safe transportation, instructional support including librarians, teacher training and curriculum, nurses, counselors, and administrators.

Upon review of comparative data presented to the Task Force (see Appendix E) on the surrounding states, we found that Oklahoma ranks fifth (out of seven states) in the percentage of current expenditures devoted to instruction; seventh in average salaries of public school teachers for 2003-04; and second with a relatively high student-to-teacher ratio. If Oklahoma’s teachers received $8,258 in additional salary to equal that of Colorado teachers and had a student-to-teacher ratio of 13.9 as in Missouri (rather than our ratio of 16), we believe that the result would be an increase in the percentage of expenditures going to classroom instruction.

The former United States Secretary of Education, Rod Paige, was quoted in the June 27, 2006, issue of the New York Times as stating, “Today, one of the worst ideas in education is coming from conservatives: the so-called 65 percent solution…The most likely outcome is that school officials will learn the art of creative accounting in order to increase the percentage of money that can be deemed “classroom” expenses. More ominously, it will tie school leaders’ hands at a time when they need more freedom to innovate.”

The results of SEDL’s research on resource allocation as presented by Dr. Zena Rudo demonstrated that student achievement does improve when more money is spent in the instructional area, especially when additional resources are provided for disadvantaged students. However, they found no evidence that the 65 percent solution impacts student performance. Dr. Rudo’s research found that successful districts used effective resource allocation strategies as part of a systematic process that aligned instructional goals, reform strategies and resources. She noted that “One size does not fit all. Resource strategies will be unique to each district’s needs and circumstances.”

This point was further solidified when Dr. Benny Gooden stated, “School improvement will be most successful when all resources are aligned to address identified needs. These needs will vary from school-to-school and district-to-district. Local school leaders must have the flexibility to allocate resources as conditions require.”

Overview of Findings and Recommendations Concerning Administrative

Reorganization and Consolidation:

Voluntary reorganization within a school district is particularly valuable in certain situations. Further, reorganization or combining of functions with other school districts or other education entities can also prove valuable and productive. Additionally, if a school district determines that combining with another school district is advisable in order to streamline administrative functions, to improve curriculum, to enhance student achievement, to address declining enrollment, or for other reasons, such a move can be made easier and less expensive due to the availability of incentive funds in the School Consolidation Assistance Fund. With the passage of the Oklahoma Education Lottery Act, five percent of all net lottery proceeds are deposited into the fund. It is anticipated that the fund will have approximately $8 million on hand by the end of 2006. The law was amended in the 2006 session to increase allowable incentive allocations (see Appendix F).

We, as a Task Force, make the following recommendations:

A. Workshops for school personnel – Require specific training for specific job titles. Further recommend Regional Accreditation Officers verify workshop attendance during annual site visits and note accreditation deficiency for schools or districts not in compliance.

1. School plant management – We recommend attendance by central office personnel and custodial staff at workshops on Maintenance and Operations for Public Schools (MOPS), including topics on energy efficient construction.
2. Business workshops - SB 668 of the 2005 legislative session mandated some of this training (see Appendix G). We commend the Legislature for establishing this very necessary training for school district treasurers and encumbrance clerks. We understand from SDE staff that implementation of this requirement is progressing very well. We recommend ongoing professional development in this area be extended to other personnel as well, including superintendents, principals, and other central office personnel.
3. Investment workshops – These workshops are required under current law for school treasurers (see Appendix H). We also recommend attendance of superintendents, principals, and financial personnel at these investment workshops.
4. Best practices for administrative efficiency workshops should be created and we recommend superintendents, principals, and central office personnel attend.

B. Practices districts could consider:

1. Bulk buying (Buy Board for statewide purchasing, countywide purchasing, or regional purchasing).
2. Use of secure, controlled, purchasing card program to save money, improve processes, while providing convenience, flexibility, and accounting controls.
3. Utilize technology and employ more knowledge-based workers with technical expertise in order to reduce clerical staff.
4. Identify possible inefficiencies and ways to redirect funds in order to receive maximum outcomes for each dollar spent.
5. Review district policies and administrative regulations and remove those that are impediments to efficiency (such as complicated leave policies and pay calendars, requirements for excessive approvals, and hard copy documentation requirements).
6. Utilize performance-based budgeting and use five-year performance trends to project future expenditures.
7. Utilize staffing standards such as those developed by the Southern Association for Colleges and Schools, custodial staffing standards by the U.S. Department of Education, meals per labor hour standards developed by Dorothy Pannel in Food Services Management, and include factors on utilities cost per square foot (standards for public facilities).
8. Increase instructional expenditures along with the number of teachers, teacher coaches, team teachers, and instructional mentors.
9. Allocate resources to support student performance as part of an overall systematic process aligned to actual instructional goals and the resources necessary to implement and evaluate those practices.

C. Recognize districts that demonstrate marked improvement or innovative methods in administrative and district efficiency. The State Department of Education is already providing some of this recognition, but we recommend it be expanded so that the public and the Legislature are aware of our public school districts’ efforts to make improvements in this area.

D. Legislation which might be considered:

1. Insuring school district property through the state – amend state law to allow the Department of Central Services, Risk Management Division to administer a self-insured group for school districts that choose to participate (see Appendix I for proposed draft language).
2. Create Education Service Centers (ESC) to provide opportunities for districts to share services such as legislative updates (state and federal), assistance with state data submissions, legal advice, financial advice, technology services, professional development, etc. A hybrid approach could be implemented, whereby some services are provided to school districts at no cost (funded through the state directly to ESCs) and fee-based services could also be provided to districts where the value can be more clearly determined on an individual basis (see Appendix J for further details).
3. For purposes of determining limits on administrative expenditures, amend references to “total expenditures” to include expenditures from only state, county, and local funds (Section 18-124 of Title 70 of the Oklahoma Statutes).
4. Fund a study on resource allocation methods. We recommend the Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL) be commissioned as they have experience with such studies of other states in our region.

E. Recommended State Department of Education actions:

1. Develop/compile list of best practices on efficiency of administrative operations and publish as a resource for school districts.
2. Provide session at annual conference to share best practices of districts.
3. Strongly recommend districts participate in cooperative purchasing programs.

F. The School Performance Review Program administered by the Office of Accountability should compile and publish a cumulative annual report on generic findings and recommendations from completed reviews of school districts to provide a resource of both district practices to be changed and practices to be praised (see Appendix K for current law).

Conclusions:

Upon our review of the administrative costs of school districts as compared to total expenditures, we found, of 540 districts and 12 charter schools, 34 districts and 2 charter schools exceeded the allowable percentages for the 2004-2005 school year. The state average was 3.42% (see Appendix L). The law that limits these costs allows percentages of six, eight, or ten percent depending on average daily attendance (as referenced in Appendix C). As the state average is well below the statutory limit for any size district, we feel the public school districts in this state should be praised for their efforts in keeping administrative costs low and believe that the current limits and penalties for exceeding the limits are sufficient.

We would also suggest that a follow-up study of practices instituted from the recommendations presented in this report would be valuable. A study of which things make administration more efficient or increase student achievement would be helpful as well. Finally, the state and school districts must have better accountability and assessment that enables them to align costs with student and teacher data.

We hope that the recommendations contained in this report are helpful for the purposes for which this Task Force has been charged.

APPENDIX A

Legislation Creating Task Force

Excerpt from HB 1021 (2005 Session)

ENROLLED HOUSE

BILL NO. 1021 By: Benge, Newport, Miller (Ken) and Dank of the House

and

Morgan and Crutchfield of the Senate

<StartFT>An Act relating to schools; creating the Task Force on School District Administrative Efficiency; stating purpose of the Task Force; requiring recommendations by a certain date; providing for membership, meetings, staffing, and travel reimbursement; - - - - - - ; providing for codification; providing for noncodification; providing an effective date; and declaring an emergency. <EndFT>

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA:

SECTION 1. NEW LAW A new section of law not to be codified in the Oklahoma Statutes reads as follows:

A. There is hereby created until December 31, 2006, the Task Force on School District Administrative Efficiency. The purpose of the Task Force is to determine how school administration and operations may be made more efficient through administrative reorganization and consolidation. The Task Force shall also review and analyze data collected by the State Department of Education from school districts of administrative services costs as defined in Section 18-124 of Title 70 of the Oklahoma Statutes.

B. The Task Force shall make recommendations to the Legislature by December 31, 2006.

C. The Task Force shall consist of seven (7) members who shall be appointed on or before September 1, 2005, as follows:

1. One member appointed by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction who shall be a parent of a student in a public school in the state;

2. Two members appointed by the Governor, of which one shall be a business person with professional experience relating to reorganization and modernization of private or public organizations or businesses and one shall be a retired superintendent of an independent school district;

3. Two members appointed by the Speaker of the Oklahoma House of Representatives, of which one shall be employed or associated with a higher education institution in the state with a degree or background in economics, finance, accounting or business and one shall be a person with professional experience relating to reorganization and modernization of private or public organizations or businesses or a retired superintendent of a public school; and

4. Two members appointed by the President Pro Tempore of the State Senate, of which one shall be a retired principal of a public school in the state or a retired superintendent and one shall be a person with not less than ten (10) years teaching experience in a public school in the state.

D. The members of the Committee shall elect a Chair from among the members at the first meeting. If a vacancy occurs in any appointment, it shall be filled in the same manner as the initial appointment.

E. The first meeting of the Task Force shall be held at the call of the Governor and shall take place no later than September 1, 2005. Thereafter meetings shall be held at the call of the Chair. The Task Force shall meet at such times and places as deemed necessary to perform its duties as specified in this section. Staffing for the Task Force shall be provided by the staff of the Oklahoma House of Representatives and the State Senate, and by the State Department of Education.

F. Members of the Task Force shall receive no compensation for serving on the Task Force, but may receive travel reimbursement as follows:

1. Legislative members of the Task Force may be reimbursed for their necessary travel expenses incurred in the performance of their duties in accordance with Section 456 of Title 74 of the Oklahoma Statutes, from the legislative body in which they serve; and

2. Other members of the Task Force may be reimbursed for travel expenses incurred in the performance of their duties by their respective appointing authorities in accordance with the State Travel Reimbursement Act.

APPENDIX B

Legislation Appropriating Funds for Use of Task Force

Excerpt from HB 1020 (2005 Session)

ENROLLED HOUSE

BILL NO. 1020 By: Benge, Newport and Deutschendorf of the House

and

Morgan and Crutchfield of the Senate

<StartFT>An Act relating to education; making appropriations; stating purposes; authorizing certain expenditures for certain purposes; - - - - - ; requiring certain funds allocated for Administrative and Support Functions of the State Department of Education to be transferred to the Legislative Service Bureau; authorizing the employment of an independent consultant; - - - - - ; providing an effective date; and declaring an emergency.<EndFT>

SECTION 38. Of the funds appropriated in Section 9 of this act and allocated in Section 12 of this act for Administrative and Support Functions of the State Department of Education, the sum of Thirty Thousand Dollars ($30,000.00) shall be transferred to the Legislative Service Bureau to contract with an independent consultant as part of the study of the Task Force on School District Administrative Efficiency as authorized in Section 1 of Enrolled House Bill No. 1021 of the 1st Session of the 50th Oklahoma Legislature.

APPENDIX C

Statutory Definition of Administrative Services Costs

§70-18-124. Withholding certain expenditures from Foundation and Salary Incentive Aid.

A. Any school district with an average daily attendance (ADA) of more than one thousand five hundred (1,500) students for the preceding year which expends for administrative services in the 2005-06 school year or any school year thereafter, less expenditures for legal services, more than six percent (6%) of the amount it expends for total expenditures, less expenditures for legal services, shall have the amount which exceeds the six percent (6%) withheld the following year from the Foundation and Salary Incentive Aid for the school district.

B. Any school district with an average daily attendance (ADA) of more than five hundred (500) students but not more than one thousand five hundred (1,500) students for the preceding year which expends for administrative services in the 2005-06 school year or any school year thereafter, less expenditures for legal services, more than eight percent (8%) of the amount it expends for total expenditures, less expenditures for legal services, shall have the amount which exceeds the eight percent (8%) withheld the following year from the Foundation and Salary Incentive Aid for the school district.

C. Any school district with an average daily attendance (ADA) of five hundred (500) or fewer students for the preceding year which expends for administrative services in the 2005-06 school year or any school year thereafter, less expenditures for legal services, more than ten percent (10%) of the amount it expends for total expenditures, less expenditures for legal services, shall have the amount which exceeds the ten percent (10%) withheld the following year from the Foundation and Salary Incentive Aid for the school district.

D. For purposes of this section, “administrative services” means costs associated with:

1. Staff for the board of education;

2. The secretary/clerk for the board of education;

3. Staff relations;

4. Negotiations staff;

5. Staff for the superintendent;

6. Any superintendent, elementary superintendent, or assistant superintendent;

7. Any employee of a school district employed as a director, coordinator, supervisor, or who has responsibility for administrative functions of a school district; and

8. Any consultant hired by the school district.

E. If an employee of a school district is employed in a position where part of the employee’s time is spent as an administrator and part of the time is spent in nonadministrative functions, the percentage of time spent as an administrator shall be included as administrative services. Except for a superintendent who spends part of the time teaching in the classroom, the total amount of time a superintendent of a school district spends performing services for a school district shall be included as administrative services even if part of the time the superintendent is performing nonadministrative service functions and the total amount received by a superintendent from the school district as salary shall be recorded under the code for superintendent salary as provided for in the Oklahoma Cost Accounting System.

F. Each school site within a school district shall take steps to ensure that the administrative costs for the school comply with the expenditure limits established for school districts in this section.

G. Funds withheld pursuant to the provisions of this section shall be distributed through the State Aid formula to the districts not so penalized.

H. For the 2003-04 and 2004-05 school year, school districts shall report to the State Department of Education the costs associated with administrative services for the school district as defined in subsection D of this section.

APPENDIX D

Task Force on School District Administrative

Reorganization and Consolidation

Progress Report

December 31, 2004

Introduction and Purpose

The Task Force on School District Administrative Reorganization or Consolidation was created pursuant to HB 1767 of the 2003 session. The task force was charged with determining how much money can be saved by reorganization or consolidation of the administrative functions of school districts in the state, and the related effects on the efficiency of the restructured functions and academic programs.

Task Force Participants

Mr. Pete Churchwell, Chairman Mr. Mike Mitchel, Vice Chairman

Representative Tad Jones Representative Ray Miller

Senator Kathleen Wilcoxson Senator Penny Williams

Sandy Garrett, Ex Officio Mr. Richard George

Mr. Richard Gorman Mr. Larry Harrington

Mr. Rick Kibbe Mr. Larry Riley

Mr. Mark Shoffit Ms. Terri Silver

Mrs. Mae Stevenson Ms. Ann Weaver

Dr. Joe Siano Mr. Lloyd Snow

Meetings

The task force held several meetings from November 10, 2003 to October 13, 2004. Members heard presentations from State Superintendent Sandy Garrett, as well as other State Department of Education officials, regarding the background and status of the issue to be addressed by the task force. The task force held discussions regarding the best way to approach the collection of data to analyze the possibilities for restructuring or consolidating administrative functions of school districts, and voted at the July 14 meeting to engage consultants to study the issue.

The consultants under the direction of Dr. Michael Metzger, Director of the Oklahoma Policy Research Center at the University of Central Oklahoma, include Dr. Larkin Warner, OSU Professor of Economics Emeritus, Dr. Sue Lynn Sasser, President Oklahoma Council on Economic Education and Assistant Professor of Economics at UCO, and Dr. Stephen Smith, Professor of Economics at Rose State College made presentations of their initial data gathering at the October 13, 2004 meeting of the task force. The consultants are expected to complete their work in March 2005.