Criteria for Ackerman's bonus released
by Erika Owens on Aug 01 2010 Posted in Latest news
On Friday the District released the criteria used to evaluate Superintendent Ackerman for her $65,000 bonus after a judge granted the Inquirer's open records request.
The documents released include:
The letter compares the bonus to compensation other urban superintendents receive and former Philly schools' CEO Paul Vallas' history of bonuses.
The letter also explained why Ackerman did not receive a bonus in 2009:
In June 2009, Superintendent Ackerman opted to forgo any consideration for a performance bonus. While confident and positive about all that the community and School District accomplished together in one year, Dr. Ackerman recognized that the School District's five-year strategic plan, Imagine 2014, was only in its first phase of Implementation. By the mid-point of her second year as superintendent, both she and the community were seeing measurable results. In fidelity to their agreement, Dr. Ackerman respectfully submitted her record to the SRC for review. The Commissioners independently evaluated Dr. Ackerman and awarded her the 20% bonus.
Comments (19)
Submitted by Philly teacher (not verified) on Sun, 08/01/2010 - 15:51.
I read the goals and objectives with interest. The goals are similar to the criteria for performance in any job position - including teachers'. The objectives are similar to the criteria for performance in the classroom/schools. So, let me understand. You are hired to do a job at a salary to which you agree. You do the job - and meet the basic performance criteria. You receive a 20% bonus. Can I look forward to a 20% bonus from the taxpayer next year just for doing my job?
Submitted by Bobbie Cratchit (not verified) on Sun, 08/01/2010 - 16:33.
OK, so she earned 65k. What does she do to earn the additional 325k?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 08/01/2010 - 17:14.
I've had great evaluations. Am I entitled to a bonus?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 08/01/2010 - 17:16.
So wait, she came calling to the SRC for her "bonus" money? LOL. I thought this was about the children? Of course not.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 08/02/2010 - 08:50.
In my somewhat lengthy career, it has always seemed that the ones who are first to exclaim, "I'M HERE FOR THE CHILDREN!!", are also the first to yell, "WHERE'S MY MONEY!??!?!".
Submitted by Adamhadem (not verified) on Sun, 08/01/2010 - 20:27.
$325,000 is a bribe, not a salary.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 08/01/2010 - 20:34.
Some questions:
How did her handling of the West Philadelphia HS "transition" affect her rating on "Keeping SRC informed on issues, needs and operation of school system in a timely fashion?"
Did her attitude toward Heidi Ramirez help or hurt her in the "Maintains a respectful and collaborative working relationship with SRC and SRC and District staff?"
How were her actions in regards to the South Philadelphia HS crisis taken into account with all of her ratings under "Relationship with Community?"
How did the mishandling of the letters sent out regarding attendance figures or the incorrect data in the letters in regards to the teacher contract and retention factor into her rating on #8, "Works to improve good employee morale and loyalty to the organization?"
How has the rotating door of senior-level staff and the constant change of school support / school supervision affected her "Management of employees rating?" Does the fact that district employees are reading about the changes in the Inquirer and on the Notebook and not receiving any official communication about the changes affect next year's rating?
What was her score on any of the financial objectives, especially the long-range plan, given the rumors of a massive budget crisis in SY 2011?
What was her score on the Charter School Approval and renewal objective, given the number of charter schools that are under federal and state investigation?
What was her score on the "Develop and implement a teacher comprehensive recruitment and retention program" given this year's hiring freeze and the reporting of many open positions at the Renaissance schools?
And finally, what is the possible rationale for not making public the SRC's ratings that justify her bonuses? One could argue that, given the criteria for the bonus, that Dr. Ackerman has fallen short in multiple categories.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 08/02/2010 - 08:41.
Very well put!
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Mon, 08/02/2010 - 09:33.
She did not meet any of those criteria ! We met some of those goals and the kids met the others. How about we share that bonus and buy every kid in the system a new backpack? Or maybe a real lunch?
Submitted by anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 08/01/2010 - 21:26.
Part of this bonus was based on goals of responding favorably to events and maintaining respect of the community? Has anyone told the SRC she failed miserably in these areas?
This women is a fake and in time she, the SRC and the politicians who support her will all be exposed. Until then...too bad.
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Mon, 08/02/2010 - 09:36.
She admitted to not even knowing what the rules were for special education learners, didn't she? She created a new postion in her team because she could not keep up with the 20 people a day who needed face to face time with her. How is this meeting any goals??
Submitted by Ms. Chips (not verified) on Sun, 08/01/2010 - 21:53.
so...(arguably) no objectives are met. This seems to be a basis for all dismissals for non performance to be challenged. No wonder this was secreted for so long
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Mon, 08/02/2010 - 09:37.
You are so right. These criteria demand a re-evaluation of her job performance, not a bonus. SOmeone has their plus and minus signs mixed.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 08/02/2010 - 10:55.
Why is it always the people at the top who get these bonuses. Any progress made in the district (and there is little to speak of) is the result of the teachers, staff and students. Ms Ackerman had nothing to do with it. She is a tyrant and a bully who cares only for pr opportunities. Talk to the teachers who are looking for jobs and placements after she turned over her least successful schools (thus raising her numbers) If she truly cared about the children and the district she would never have asked for a bonus. She is extremely well paid for doing her job. Why the bonus. Isn't she expected to perform her duties and move the district forward? I can't understand why she gets a bonus for doing what she was supposed to do. As a district worker I have already started spending money from my pocket so that my students will have what they need when the year begins. School budgets are getting cut so that there are bare bones programs and supplies. Staff is cut and classrooms are crowded with little help. A bonus for Ms Ackerman is a slap in the face to the people who are working hard every day and just getting by, in the district and in the city.
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Mon, 08/02/2010 - 11:54.
"A bonus for Ms Ackerman is a slap in the face to the people who are working hard every day and just getting by, in the district and in the city."
You are right... very right. we are shopping the staples sales and cheating there to get pens for our children and she is getting EXTRA money for doing her job. It is not fair to the children who are doing their best, the parents who are tutoring their kids when they can and improving the attendance levels of all our children and the teachers who stretch themselves once again to do MORE. But Ackerman got her bonus. Wow. Aren't we proud of her?
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 08/02/2010 - 14:06.
Why was it so important to conceal the criterial for a public servant's bonus that time and money had to be spent in court to reveal it?
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Tue, 08/03/2010 - 10:01.
Because it was not something that should have happened. Look at the amount of money and what is going on in our schools. That money could have helped so many children in so man y other ways. Why should it be public knowledge that her own statements contradict the reasons she got the bonus? She should be ashamed.
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 08/02/2010 - 20:49.
In a struggling district like Philly, it is ungracious and insensitive of her to accept a bonus, even if the District was wacked enough to offer it. I would expect her to say something like this: thanks;I've tried hard, but I won't accept a bonus until ..... Until then, I'll donate my bonus to the District's ??? fund.I just don't get Ackerman. No modesty; no respect for the kids and families in the District.
Submitted by Meg (not verified) on Tue, 08/03/2010 - 10:03.
.I just don't get Ackerman. No modesty; no respect for the kids and families in the District.
Add that there is no respect for the teachers or staff, too and you get Ms. Ackerman perfectly.
Post new comment