Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
Good afternoon, everybody. Good afternoon. The beauty of the weather and the attendance
at these sessions are always at inverse proportion to each other. And we have a pretty focused
topic today, so we had a feeling we would get only those of you who are most interested
in talking about our comprehensive centers. And we're glad you came and are looking forward
to hearing your comments. My name is Massie Ritsch. I'm the Deputy Assistant
Secretary for External Affairs and Outreach. We are doing what is one of our periodic forums
for stakeholders here at the Department, but we are doing things a little differently today,
in that we will do very little talking up here, and we hope that the talking will come
from you in the audience, that the ideas, the comments, about our network of comprehensive
centers will come from you. If you have not done so already and would
like to sign up to speak, you can do so at the table at the back of the room, though
I have a feeling we will get fairly loose with the format once we've got those speakers
from the list through, and we will have some time for anyone to come to the mic and talk.
We have just a couple of other housekeeping items. We have been getting some questions
about the FY11 budget. The continuing resolution was passed almost a month ago, 30 days ago
nearly, and we owe Congress tables of how we plan, within the fairly limited discretion
that we have, to divide those funds across programs. Those final tables are due to Congress
on May 15th, and our intent is to deliver them at the end of this week. We expect they
will become public early next week. We, again, feel like in some instances we
had very limited flexibility on how to divide the funds across our programs, and I think
there has been a bit of exaggeration about how much flexibility we have, given the limitations
of the funding levels in the statute. But we will make all of that clear next week.
One key success in this year's budget was increasing the funding for Pell grants by
$5-and-a-half billion, which means that more than nine million students will continue to
receive Pell grants up to the maximum of $5,550, and that nine million students, by the way,
is an increase of three million students receiving those grants since President Obama took office.
So it has been terrific we have been able to offer that resource to college students.
We have also received funding for a number of the President's key priorities, Race to
the Top, Investing in Innovation, Promise Neighborhoods, $700 million for Race to the
Top, $150 million for Investing in Innovation, or i3, and $30 million for Promise Neighborhoods.
So we are delighted we will be able to continue those programs, and we will have more information
on how we plan to do so soon. And just as importantly, we are pleased that
funding was maintained for key formula programs like Title I and IDEA.
I wish I could tell you more, let you in on what would be a fairly closely held secret
given the size of our audience today. But unfortunately, your attendance does not get
you that particular benefit. I'm sorry (Laughter). But we will, once we sort out the remaining
things we need to decide, we will make clear those details very soon.
We are webcasting today, so there may be someone outside with their laptop enjoying the sunlight
and watching the forum at the same time. Hello to our audience tuning in by USTREAM.
Our cameras are all focused up here, so once public comment starts it will become a bit
like a radio show, in that you will hear the commenters but not see them. I assure you,
USTREAM audience, they are all very attractive people
(Laughter) and you are missing out, really, by not being
here and seeing them. So just know that that's how we're going to do that.
Today our focus, as I said, is more on listening than on putting out particular information
from our side. We are seeking your input on the technical assistance offerings of our
comprehensive center network. Currently, the Department funds 21 comprehensive centers
to provide technical assistance to state education departments across the country. We are here
today to talk about what that needs to look like in the future in a way that benefits
states and districts and local schools. It is an ideal time, a perfect time, to be
talking about this, because these centers were created to help support the implementation
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, and most recently known as the No Child
Left Behind law. As we look to reauthorize and make changes
to that law, naturally we want to make sure that our assistance our technical assistance
network -- stands ready to help states and districts and schools adjust to whatever changes
Congress sees fit to make. So it's a good time to be having this discussion.
We have leaders from our Office of Elementary and Secondary Education here to take your
comments as they begin this process for establishing parameters and topics for our technical assistance
network. We are also taking written comments. There
is an area at the back of the auditorium where you can leave those on your way out, or you
can e-mail them to Alisha Scruggs in our office, and you can get her e-mail address from the
back of the room as well, if you are interested in doing that.
To kick things off, though, for our discussion on comprehensive centers, I want to turn the
microphone over to our Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education, Dr.
Thelma Melendez. Thelma? It's always difficult to follow Massie, you
know. He always well, the nice part about it, is that he always puts a smile on your
face. Anyway, I wanted to come up and welcome all
of you to the Department of Education, and I am very glad that you are able to join us
today. Thank you for all of your work and your leadership in the field of education.
We at the Department are thrilled to consider you partners in our work.
Today's meeting is a critical part of the Department's reform efforts, as we are here
to discuss the delivery of support and technical assistance through our regional comprehensive
centers, as Massie described. You know, Secretary Duncan has challenged
all of us in the Department. He said that he really wants us to move away from being
a compliance-driven bureaucracy more to an engine of innovation. And so in the Office
of Elementary and Secondary where we all work, and where the comprehensive centers reside,
we have taken this challenge very seriously. In the last two years, we have worked together
as a team to really redefine how we provide technical assistance. We have you know, it's
not the work that the media really finds interesting -- but it's the hard work that is done behind
the scenes. We, in the office, have worked very hard to
build our own internal capacity, so that we can support the grantees to do their work
in a much better way, really with the goal of improving student achievement.
The comprehensive centers have played a very important role in this, and, you know, it
has been a little frustrating because they have adjusted as much as they can. And as
Massie described, the work has changed, and there are new areas that we need to support.
The comprehensive centers have been very much a partner with us, especially around the School
Improvement Grants (SIG). And I don't know if many of you are aware, we just have completed
two conferences around SIG, and we have two upcoming conferences in the next few weeks.
But the comprehensive centers have been very vital to that work and very important. And
so as we hear from you today, we would love to hear you tell us how these centers can
deliver services differently and how they can work with us and the Department to ensure
that all grantees states, school districts, and schools are better able to meet the President's
goal for 2020. So with that, in the spirit of that, we look
forward to hearing from you on how we can do a better job, how the comprehensive centers
can help the people that you represent, the stakeholders that you represent, do the important
work, and so we look forward. We have a wonderful panel. We have Dr. Harris,
Dr. Grant, and Dr. Walter. It sounds like a medical group. And they are all here to
hear and to listen. So, again, thank you for taking time out of
this beautiful day to join us in this very important work our children. So thank you.
Thank you, Thelma. We do have a panel of from our Office of Elementary
and Secondary Education to take your comments. To set the context for the discussion, though,
I wanted to turn things over to our coordinator of the Comprehensive Centers Program, Fran
Walter, who is over here joined by Liz Grant and Carl Harris. Fran?
I am going to just take a very brief couple of minutes to give you an overview and kind
of set a context for what we are doing here today.
First of all, let me thank you all for coming. This is a program that I have been working
with for the last four and a half years, and it's a very important program, and as Dr.
Melendez said, in OESE in terms of being one of the only one of very few programs -- that
is funded by the Department specifically to do technical assistance for other people.
A lot of the grants that we do in OESE are really given directly to people who are doing
the work. A lot of comp center money goes to people who are helping other people do
the work. And so in that way, it is an unusual program and one that really has a lot of attention
paid to it at various times, especially when we are getting ready to re-compete.
And so that's the first context setting that I want to make. We will be running a competition
for what we are calling the new centers, a new iteration of the centers, in early 2012.
And so in preparation for that, the Department is trying to do as much outreach as it can
to talk about not only how to improve, but also what currently works with the system
that we have. Most of you probably know that comp centers have been around for a very long
time, but in 2005, when the bill that authorizes them was reauthorized, the Department at that
point took the opportunity to really radically change the structure of the comp centers.
Probably primary among the changes was that they were directed to work directly with state
education agencies to help build their capacity to do the work that they do to support districts
and schools. There were other changes made as well, but that's the one that seemed to
have had the most implications for service of all of the changes that were made.
So as we look to 2012, our statute calls for a very formal process of getting input, which
are called the Regional Advisory Committees. And some of you I'm sure are aware of those
either from the past, when they were done in 2005, or you might know of the Regional
Advisory Committee structure that is coming up now.
What happens with that is that the Secretary authorizes approximately 10 to 15 people per
region there are 10 regions that we consider throughout the country that are not exactly
the same as the comp center regions. And in each of those regions, operating under the
Federal Advisory Committee law, which requires, as you know, open meetings, etcetera, etcetera,
each of these committees will conduct a need-sensing in their region. What are the educational
needs of the region? And how might those needs be best addressed?
And so that formal process is beginning. On May 23rd, there will be an open meeting at
the Crystal Gateway Marriott in Arlington. And if you want to know anything more about
that, you can certainly contact me. My cards are on the table in the back.
There was a Federal Register Notice published yesterday that gives all of the complete information.
But as that process is going on, it has been really Dr. Melendez's desire and the Department's
desire to get as much input as we can on the comp centers, on the program, what works,
what needs improvement, what would be an ideal structure, and so this is one of what we are
anticipating will be a number of additional outreach events that will take different forms,
but will really all be focused on the same thing, which is getting the people who are
shaping the program for 2012 to have a really good understanding of what the field thinks
would be helpful and useful. So that's our purpose today, to hear from
you. You probably have done this many times; I haven't. But my understanding is that we
won't engage in dialogue with you. I hope you know that we take your comments seriously.
They are being transcribed. We will definitely have them in the mill as we go through what
we are trying to design as the program. But if you have any specific questions as we go
along, I think any of us would be happy to answer them.
Thank you. Thanks, Fran.
So, folks, if you did want to give us your input, we are moving to that portion of the
forum now. We got sign-ups from a couple of you at the beginning, but if you did not sign
up, we certainly will be able to accommodate you, I think, in the time that we have today.
We've got microphones that we have now moved, so that I believe we will be able to show
your handsome and pretty faces to the world, here and here. And so just come to the one
closest to you. We will try and limit our comments to, you
know, a few minutes, you know, 15, 30, 40 minutes, whatever. (Laughter) No, we'll let
you know when we would like you to wrap up, but try to keep it to four or five minutes
would be good, or less. Microphones here, and here. And I wanted to call on Gene Fisher
from Parents Across America, who is right here conveniently on the front row.
I would like to thank you for holding this forum. I am Gene Fisher. I am representing
Parents Across America. My comments are not specifically directed
on the comprehensive centers, but are more broadly focused on the whole effort at NCLB
reform, if you will indulge me. We have developed a blueprint for NCLB reform
that emphasizes the need for smaller classes and more parental involvement. And we are
also advocating an about-face from the current regime of privatization, competition for resources,
school closings, and high-stakes testing. We believe that where these policies have
been tried for example, in New York City and Chicago they have failed to improve schools
and opportunities for children. Our proposal to revamp NCLB was recently featured in The
Washington Post, the Answer Sheet column specifically, and endorsed by the Save Our Schools March.
We would like to meet with Secretary Duncan and all of you to present our proposals for
reform. We have strong differences with the policies that are now being imposed on school
districts throughout the country, which leave out parental perspective and the need to focus
on improving classroom conditions. A face-to-face meeting will enable us to more
constructively discuss our concerns. We are also very fearful that the common core curriculum
and their assessments, as well as the computer-based systems required to implement them, will be
hugely expensive and risky. These mandates will lead to even more standardized testing
causing cash-strapped states, cities, and school districts to lay off teachers, increase
class sizes, and slash valuable programs and services to the bone.
Many testing experts themselves say that the results will be uncertain in terms of reliability,
validity, and are unlikely to encourage the sort of higher order thinking and creativity
that is needed instead. We hope that you can speak to these two issues, and we also hope
you will meet with Parents Across America to provide answers regarding the cost to us
of this new testing regime in terms of time and money.
I want to thank you for allowing me to appear before you today. The leadership of Parents
Across America looks forward to continuing the dialogue with you and Secretary Duncan.
And before I leave, I just have to give a shout-out here to Alisha Scruggs and Kim Morton,
because I had to call them about protocols regarding the presentation of statements,
and what have you. I got a return phone call within 15 minutes, and I really appreciated
that. So I want that duly noted. All right. We do try to be responsive.
Good work deserves to be recognized. Thank you. We agree. And particularly as it
relates to teachers, good work deserves to be recognized as well.
Thank you. I take it you have nothing to say about the comprehensive centers, though.
That is correct. (Laughter)
Okay. We appreciate the other comments. Thank you for indulging me.
Consider yourself indulged. All right. Someone I know has something to
say about comprehensive centers, Jim Kohlmoos, Knowledge Alliance. Jim?
Doctor, doctor, doctor, and, Massie, I don't know what you are, but
Never will be a doctor. Rarely actually see doctors, which is probably not That's good.
A good idea. Thank you for having this gathering. And I
know the last time we went through this process we didn't have a stakeholders forum on the
comprehensive centers. And I think it's a really important conversation to have with
all of the folks here and beyond. I do have written comments that I will pass
in or turn in, but I would like to make a few comments to highlight what our thinking
is at Knowledge Alliance. And I will say at the outset that a number of the parent organizations
of the comprehensive centers are members of our coalition.
The first thing I would like to do is take sort of a step back and try to understand
better the entire infrastructure of technical assistance within the Department of Education.
We think that there is a need to look at the total picture of technical assistance and
how it is delivered. And it not only includes the comprehensive
centers, but the equity resource centers, the resource centers for special ed, and a
number of others the Race to the Top technical assistance network, and, to a degree, the
regional education laboratories, too. So there are a vast number of programs that participate
in technical assistance, and they should be viewed as an overall infrastructure, and potentially
a real system. We think that this infrastructure should be
driven by three basic principles, what we call the new three R’s rigor, relevance,
and responsiveness. First of all, for rigor, the guidance that is passed on through technical
assistance should be based upon knowledge generated through rigorous research in accordance
with the standards of scientifically-valid research.
A second principle is that the technical assistance topics should be relevant to the most pressing
needs at the state and local levels, but also reflect the priorities of the Department of
Education. So there is a little juggling act going on there.
Third, that the services that are provided through technical assistance need to be responsive
in terms of timing, of format, of usability, and also lead to the expansion of the capacity
of the end-users in applying rigorous research-based knowledge to their particular problems.
So the comprehensive centers are a part of this infrastructure, and, when looked at,
each of the programs within that infrastructure, each of the technical assistance streams within
the infrastructure, are focused on usually a different set of purposes and goals.
The comprehensive centers as outlined in the authorizing statute -- the comprehensive centers
are supposed to focus on the implementation of ESEA. And so in that frame I wish to offer
six recommendations. The first recommendation is to focus on building
and rebuilding capacity. And as I say "rebuilding," everybody knows about the “new normal”
that Arne Duncan has been talking about, and a lot of people have been talking about it
for quite some time, and that the capacity at the state level in terms of human capital,
management, structure, funding, knowledge, is all in a state of turmoil right now.
And we believe that the comprehensive centers could play a significant role in not only
adding to state-level capacity, and, by extension, to LEAs, but also to help these new entities
rethink and reengineer the capacity that they currently have within the context of the “new
normal.” So that's Recommendation Number 1.
Recommendation Number 2 is to really facilitate and broker the use of research-based knowledge.
As we are seeing with the further development of a number of different evidence-based initiatives
in the Institute for Education Sciences and elsewhere, and the Office of Innovation and
Improvement, there is a growing body of knowledge about what works and what doesn't work.
And we think that the comprehensive centers should be intricately and intimately involved
in the facilitation of the use of that knowledge as it plays out. And at the very same time,
as a broker of knowledge, the comprehensive centers should be positioned in the field
to collect new ideas and new knowledge that are generated through practice, and that have
a reasonable evidence base to them. We think that it is in this regard -- it is
really important to take a look at the new, innovative approaches that the Support and
Innovation Unit is now developing for Race to the Top technical assistance, and those
lessons should be applied to the whole network concept in the facilitation of knowledge use
for the comprehensive centers. The third recommendation is to continue to
work with and through states. Since ESEA is really focused, at least at the start, through
state education agencies, the comprehensive centers' work should be focused there as well.
However, we do believe it is really, really important to once stopping through the state,
or working through the state -- to be able to work down into the school districts and
other systems of support that might exist within the states, such as institutions for
higher education. A fourth suggestion and this is more of an
internal recommendation is to try to create a seamless network of technical assistance
within the Department of Education. The field is confused about who to turn to, when to
turn to it, and how to get in touch. And we think that there is a real strong need
for coordinating the different technical assistance providers as described in the infrastructure,
and also facilitate an online system of coordination, so that the duplication of effort is reduced,
and that knowledge is further leveraged through an online system.
And I think there has been a lot of conversation about a new way to coordinate all of these
different streams, and I think that should be a high priority in the overall management
of the technical assistance operation for the comprehensive centers and for all of the
technical assistance providers within the infrastructure.
A fifth recommendation is to focus much attention on the greatest needs at the SEA level, as
we described before, and also balance with the national priorities that the administration
has identified for ESEA. And this is kind of a tender place to be, because there is
this balancing act that needs to occur. What are the needs of the states? How do you
respond effectively in a customer service fashion to the needs of the states, but at
the same time drive the priorities of the administration, particularly during a period
of reauthorization of ESEA? And I think it requires careful management
and negotiation in trying to identify these needs through the RAC process, the Regional
Advisory Committee process, as well as through some of the features and ideas that have been
generated through the administration's blueprint. I would also say that there needs to be some
agility in being able to adjust and adapt these topics of concern simply because people
change, administrations change, the world changes, and so must the comprehensive centers
be agile enough to be able to change as the times change and the ideas change moving forward.
And, finally, as is sort of suffused through all of our recommendations, is to take full
advantage of state-of-the-art technology and social media, that the comprehensive centers
could be a crown jewel for the use of technology in delivering unique ways of technical assistance.
And I reflect back on the National Education Technology Plan and how it called for learning
powered by technology. Why not have technical assistance powered by technology as well,
and look for new and different ways to deliver a seamless series of technical assistance
experiences and also generate a dynamic relationship with the intended customers.
So I am happy to talk some more about this stuff, if you want. And thank you for giving
me the opportunity. Thanks, Jim. Next up, Kathy Whitmire, National
Center for Learning Disabilities. Not here, okay. Anyone else who would like to make a
comment? Come on up to the microphone, sir. This one is probably your best choice right
here. I don't come with a prepared speech, but....
That's all right. Let us know who you are and who you represent.
My name is Martin Apple. I am President of the Council of Scientific Society Presidents.
The comprehensive centers are essentially technical assistance centers. The purpose
is to deliver knowledge in a way that is effective. It doesn't really matter what that particular
knowledge is, and the question of effective means you have to be able to measure an outcome.
If you can't measure outcomes, then you haven't determined in fact that you have made progress.
What should be their essential role? If we look at the future of what the nation needs,
the question is: are you addressing it through these comprehensive centers and this technical
assistance? The nation needs a set of graduates who are
prepared for jobs that do not now exist, in industries that do not yet exist, taking on
problems that have never yet been defined. That means that what we are developing a workforce
that is not learning to do a job, but learning is the job.
If we are succeeding at doing that, in the process of making these comprehensive centers
to deliver that assistance, so that results can be measured, I think we will be making
enormous progress. And if we fail to do that, even if we achieve something we think is progress,
we will be still slipping behind the world. So I hope we will pay attention to that.
Thank you very much. Thank you. Are there other comments? Feel
free to come up to the microphone. Yes, ma'am. I'm Marilyn Muirhead, and I'm currently working
at a comprehensive center. And I would like to ask that there be an emphasis put on systems,
and that the work that we do really is about systems change, not about individual changes.
You know, we have been charged with building capacity, but we really have to build the
capacity of the system to make the kind of changes necessary to improve instruction at
the classroom level. So to me emphasizing systems and emphasizing capacity building
would be the way to go. Thank you.
Thank you. Other folks who would like to make a comment?
Yes, sir. Gumecindo Salas from the Hispanic Association
of Colleges and Universities. And we represent well over 280 Hispanic-serving institutions,
and you probably know that those institutions enroll 25 percent or more Hispanic students.
We are very much concerned, in terms of modification in some ways, of the comprehensive centers.
We too often get accustomed to or focused on the processes for conveying information
between the states and the school districts. But I think we need to begin looking at ways
in which we can do a better job of assisting teachers do a better job of communicating
with our students. We have just finished a census for 10 years,
and we have seen some dramatic changes in our population that are going to continue
to grow for the next decade, or certainly for the next generation.
We used to talk about students from other countries, from Latin America, concentrated
in certain parts of the country, in the southwest and the west. That no longer is the way in
which our population is expanding and growing. We have populations scattered throughout the
country, and many of the parents come with a minimum amount of education and training
in their own language, let alone in the second language which they are learning now. And
the same is true for many students who come from impoverished or poor communities and
other countries and have very little experience in the educational process. Many of them have
had very, very limited education. So, they are placed in classrooms in which
teachers do their best to try to reach out to students and provide services, but many
of the teachers have not been trained to be able to understand learning methods and learning
styles. We really would like to see the comprehensive
centers spend a little bit more time in working with the school districts that have a large
number of young people that need help in adjusting to different learning styles and different
populations with different languages. That is the first thing.
The other thing is that I always say is that one of the things that makes agriculture so
powerful in the United States --- as a model of agricultural production and food production
has been the concept of extension education. And I really think that we need to be looking
at that model and the way in which our comprehensive centers can help schools learn how to reach
out to those communities, to the parents, to see how we can help them learn, to learn
how to help their children learn. We can no longer just look at the schools
as a system that opens up for a few hours during the day, with very little contact with
the parents in helping them learn. And maybe look at new models because many of the parents
now have a number of youngsters in school and are having to work two and sometimes even
three jobs. So there is very little communication, in
many cases, with the children themselves, and actually no communication at all with
the schools, because there is a lack of effective communication, both from a language and also
understanding how the system functions. So I would like to see we would like to see
-- the comprehensive centers really begin looking at education beyond the classroom,
beyond the school district, but looking at it in the community, and really talk about
making schools a community school, not just making it in language a community school,
but making one in which there is actually something going on in the community, and maybe
even going back to the time in which we had teachers visiting parents.
We need to find a way in which we have better communication for training individuals beyond
the teachers to work with these communities. We hope that that will be effective.
We have our ESEA and our No Child Left Behind policy document. We have had it already for
three years. We are hoping to be able to finish it. I think we will have to go back in January
hopefully that to reduce some things. But we really think the comprehensive centers
are key. We would like to see them take a more outreach extension role in being able
to reach communities that have had little experience with the education experience in
K-12 education. Thank you.
Thank you. Additional comments? Yes, ma'am. Hi. My name is Jana Martella. I am Executive
Director of the National Association of Early Childhood Specialists in State Departments
of Education. I would like to kind of extend the remarks
from the gentleman from Knowledge Alliance about systems thinking, and to use anecdotal
evidence of the need for comprehensive technical assistance across categories of programs,
particularly those serving young children. A week and a half or so ago all of the early
childhood programs and their state directors gathered here in Washington, and at that meeting,
particularly the larger early childhood programs – Head Start and the child care programs
-- there were a number of their technical assistance providers in the room. But among
the early childhood specialists, actually they weren't keenly aware of their TA providers
within the Department of Education. So I would just remark that kind of extending
the “K,” as the administration has so ably done so far, down to “P,” within
the Department of Education, is something to consider and to think about.
The other thing that I would urge you to consider, in terms of systems thinking, is whether the
borders of the regions across programs actually are contiguous, and that could be helpful
for regional meetings, etcetera. I will include other options within my submitted
remarks, if that's okay. Great. Thank you.
Others? No sign of Kathy yet? Okay. We can take written comments from you guys. Going
once, twice. (No response.)
All right. Well, the good news is we are going to end early today, which gives you a little
more time in your day. But I did want Dr. Carl Harris, our Deputy Assistant Secretary
in the Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, to close things out for us. Carl?
Good afternoon. Thank you, Massie. I want to do two things before I close this out.
First, I'd like to recognize Massie and thank him for taking the leadership to provide this
forum for us to have this discussion today. So thank you, Massie.
And then, the other person I would like to recognize is Janelle Leonard, who is in the
back. And Janelle is our Program Director. She provides leadership and oversight for
our comprehensive centers, so thank you for being here also.
And then, I want to thank each one of you for being here this afternoon. Although many
of you did not speak, by your presence here today it sends the message to us that the
comprehensive centers are important to you, and that they are important to the work that
you do each and every day. So I hope that you will continue to find ways
to let us know how we can continue to improve the support systems that we have in place
for our states and for our districts. As our Assistant Secretary, Dr. Melendez,
mentioned in her opening remarks, technical assistance is the focus for the Office of
Elementary and Secondary Education, as it is for our entire Department. We constantly
and continuously seek ways that we can improve our delivery methods and how we support our
states, and how our districts get support, so that they can effectively support their
respective schools. We know that our states and our districts
look to our comprehensive centers for the type of support that we are providing, and
so we want to make sure that that support is effective, that it is measurable, that
we have a way to determine whether or not we are making progress, and that we can see
that progress over time. So I want to thank each of you for sharing
your thoughts, for coming here this afternoon and being part of this discussion, and encourage
you, as I mentioned earlier, to stay connected with this process as we look to how we will
restructure these support facilities for the next coming years.
So thank you for being here. (Applause.)
Thank you, Carl. Folks, we have been transcribing this. So
for colleagues who missed the forum, we will post transcripts and video to our website
likely early next week. I mentioned at the top that we will have our budget tables next
week as well. Again, you can leave written comments here
at the door, or you can e-mail them to Alisha Scruggs at the Department.
We appreciate your coming out, showing interest in this particular topic. We will look forward
to future forums where we can bring in some other topics of discussion as well.
And enjoy the rest of your afternoon. Thanks, everybody.