Page 7 - REPORT Brinkman 1-MAY EDU Roundtable

The group highlighted these as the most interesting from the points above:

• Improve / add before and after school programs.
• Address when core need issues (food / health) are impacting readiness / ability to educate.
• Change the funding model to balance better across districts and schools.
• Incent teachers to areas with more disadvantaged youth.
Of the ideas put forward, there is some analysis (and perspective from Rep. Brinkman):

• Rep. Brinkman was surprised this area was the #1 concern by far of participants. He appreciated
the insight.
• For all that is done for the disadvantaged across state and federal programs, it seems it all too
often ids not working. The goal should be independence (not dependence).
• After long thought, Rep. Brinkman believes the #1 goal is to actually reduce the # of people who
are disadvantaged. That is the only sustainable long term solution. So, maybe vocational
education for PARENTS of disadvantaged so they can fill one of the 300k skilled trades jobs in
Ohio not being fulfilled today.
• Also, Rep. Brinkman believes new, better paying jobs for the disadvantaged families of Ohio is
also critical. This means being more competitive as a state for more investment.
• Finally, the Opioid crisis (#4 priority in the constituent survey) is part of this. It is accelerating
the issues.
• In the mid to long term, we need to address why people are disadvantaged. In the short term,
we need to treat the symptoms (ex: hungry kids showing up at school) as best we can. In the big
picture, it is critical that we address the core causes vs. the symptoms.
• School funding is an ongoing issue. The economic vitality of the state to the county / local level
is the #1 way we can address this. Otherwise, we end up on a race to the bottom. The state
needs to play a role in assuring every child in Ohio has access to a good education but we also
need to make sure parents of children in Ohio have access to a good job and the skills needed to
succeed.

Priority setting
After exploring ideas in all three selected areas, we prioritized them by allocating “investment” in each.
Each participant had $16k to invest in three “chips” ($10k, $5k, $1k) they needed to allocate to each of
the three areas. The results in $k invested and how many participants picked a given area as their top
areas is as follows:

Page: 7 DRAFT © 2017 Chorus Consulting