McKinsey Response to RFP

CITY OF BOSTON, OFFICE OF FINANCE AND BUDGET

BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS OPERATIONAL AUDIT / REVIEW VOLUME #1: Technical Proposal Due: November 10, 2014, 12 PM EST Submitted to: Molly Murphy City of Boston Office of Finance and Budget City Hall, Room 608 Boston City Hall One City Hall Plaza Boston, MA 02201

Submitted by: McKinsey & Company, Inc. Washington D.C. Vivian Riefberg, Senior Partner 1200 19th Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 662-3158 [email protected] www.mckinsey.com Navjot Singh, Managing Partner, Boston Office 280 Congress Street, Suite 1100 Boston, MA 02210 (617) 753-2146 [email protected] www.mckinsey.com

This proposal is the property of McKinsey & Company, Inc. Washington D.C. (“McKinsey”) and must not be disclosed outside the Government or be duplicated, used, or disclosed—in whole or in part—for any purpose other than to evaluate this proposal. If a contract is awarded to McKinsey as a result of, or in connection with, the submission of this proposal, the Government shall have the right to duplicate, use, or disclose the data to the extent provided in the resulting contract and subject to the limitations of the Freedom of Information Act and/or the Massachusetts Freedom of Information Act. This proposal contains confidential and proprietary information that is exempt from disclosure under Section (b)(4) of the Freedom of Information Act, 5 U.S.C. § 552 et seq. and/or the Massachusetts Freedom of Information Act. Accordingly, no portion of this proposal should be released without consulting McKinsey & Company. Accordingly, no portion of this proposal should be released without consulting McKinsey & Company. This proposal is contingent on the Parties reaching mutually agreeable terms and conditions and upon acceptance of any limitations described herein.

November 10, 2014 Molly Murphy City of Boston Office of Finance and Budget City Hall, Room 608 Boston City Hall One City Hall Plaza Boston, MA 02201 Subject: Boston Public Schools Operational Audit/Review RFP Response Dear Ms. Murphy: Please find attached McKinsey & Company's (McKinsey) proposal response to the Boston Public Schools Operational Audit/Review Request for Proposal. We look forward to the potential to serve the City of Boston, and specifically Boston Public Schools (BPS). We will help BPS conduct a comprehensive review of the operations of the Department and identify opportunities to improve operations in both the short and the long-term. McKinsey has a deep, longstanding relationship with both the City and leading private, public, and nonprofit organizations in the Boston community. As the world’s leading management consultancy, we have served thousands of clients across the combination of economic development, infrastructure, and operational and organizational transformation challenges. We believe that our extensive experience with large public school systems and numerous large U.S. cities (e.g., New York, Chicago, Detroit) – much of which was led by Doug Scott, the proposed Project Leader for our team – is critical to this effort. In addition, we believe that our nuanced understanding of the City of Boston through Senior Partner Navjot Singh and Partner Jules Seeley (including our work with Mayor Walsh’s 2014 Transition Team) uniquely positions us to help the City of Boston administration and BPS achieve the objectives it has laid out. These include:



Conducting a review of the operational effectiveness and efficiency of the 25 areas and disciplines outlined in Section 4.1.3 of the RFP; drawing on our Education Practice, which is focused on helping large public school systems improve student outcomes while overcoming strategic and operational challenges; and our Corporate and Business Support Function Practice, which is focused on driving administrative and operational excellence and efficiency



Determining whether non-instructional functions are operating efficiently; assessing risks and identifying short-term and long-term savings that can be gained through further adherence to regulations and implementation of best practices. Identifying gaps by comparing findings with regulations and best practices, supported by McKinsey’s extensive experience in having provided similar operational assessments to public school districts and other organizations across the public and private sectors



Examining instructional services to determine whether educational dollars are being utilized to the fullest extent possible, and identifying opportunities to manage costs while improving the quality of education, based on the extensive expertise of our Education Practice



Providing an overview of BPS’ fiscal and operational health for its next Superintendent



Reviewing BPS’ progress toward implementing the recommendations of previously issued reports, studies, audits, and reviews.

th

1200 19 Street NW, Suite 1100 | Washington, DC 20036 | (202) 662-3300 | www.mckinsey.com

McKinsey & Company, Inc. Washington D.C. is willing and able to perform the commitments contained in this proposal. If you have any questions about our technical proposal response, please contact Navjot Singh, the Managing Partner of McKinsey’s Boston Office. He can be reached at (617) 753-2146, or via email at [email protected]. For contractual questions, please contact Contracts Manager Chuck Self at (202) 662-3300, or via email at [email protected]. Sincerely,

Vivian Riefberg, Senior Partner 1200 19th Street, NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 662-3158 [email protected]

th

Navjot Singh, Managing Partner, Boston Office 280 Congress Street, Suite 1100 Boston, MA 02210 (617) 753-2146 [email protected]

1200 19 Street NW, Suite 1100 | Washington, DC 20036 | (202) 662-3300 | www.mckinsey.com

BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS OPERATIONAL AUDIT / REVIEW RFP

November 10, 2014

Table of Contents 1.0

OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS (BPS) SYSTEM....... 1

2.0

OFFEROR PROFILE ..................................................................................................... 2 McKinsey & Company Profile and Background ......................................................... 2 Brief Description of the Nature of the Company’s Business ...................................... 3 McKinsey's Industry Knowledge and Experience ...................................................... 3 Customer References ............................................................................................... 5 2.4.1 Reference 1: Rochester City School District's (RCSD) Spending Money Smartly Engagement, Gates Foundation ........................................................ 6 2.4.2 Reference 2: Gates Foundation / Improving teacher effectiveness and student achievement across several public school districts ......................................... 8 2.4.3 Reference 3: Denver Public Schools / Improving teacher effectiveness and student achievement ...................................................................................... 9 2.4.4 Reference 4: Mayor Walsh 2014 Transition Team Engagement ....................10 2.5 Offeror Litigation ......................................................................................................11 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4

3.0

TECHNICAL PROPOSAL IN RESPONSE TO THE SCOPE OF SERVICES ................12 3.1 “Day 1” Perspectives on Key Issues ........................................................................12 3.2 McKinsey's Technical Approach, Timeline, and Deliverables ...................................14 3.2.1 Audit Areas....................................................................................................17 3.3 Staffing Plan ............................................................................................................19 3.4 Regular Check-ins with the City of Boston ...............................................................23 3.5 Final Report .............................................................................................................23 3.6 Past Performance on Similar & Successful Projects, and Customer References .....23 3.6.1 Offeror Experience 1: Large Urban City Public School System, Department of Education organizational analysis .................................................................24 3.6.2 Offeror Experience 2: Milwaukee Public School System Assessment ..........24 3.6.3 Offeror Experience 3: Urban Midwestern School System .............................26 3.6.4 Offeror Experience 4: Gates Foundation/ Pittsburgh Public School System, Effective Teachers.........................................................................................27 3.6.5 Offeror Experience 5: Mayor Walsh 2014 Transition Team Engagement .....28 3.7 Additional Services ..................................................................................................29

APPENDIX A:

RESUMES .................................................................................................. A-1

APPENDIX B:

CORPORATE AND BUSINESS SUPPORT FUNCTIONS .......................... B-1

APPENDIX C:

MINIMUM EVALUATION CRITERIA .......................................................... C-1

APPENDIX D:

CITY OF BOSTON STANDARD CONTRACT FORMS............................... D-1

McKinsey&Company

Use or disclosure of data contained on this sheet is subject to the restrictions on the title page of this proposal.

i


November 10, 2014

Table of Exhibits Exhibit 1. Detailed Work Plan, Timeline, and Deliverables. .......................................................16 Exhibit 2: Proposed Team Organization. ...................................................................................19 Exhibit 3. McKinsey Key Personnel Skills Matrix. ......................................................................20 Exhibit 4. McKinsey’s CBF 360 Approach. .............................................................................. B-2 Exhibit 5. Focus on Effectiveness is Key to Creating Sustainable Value. ................................ B-3

McKinsey&Company


ii


November 10, 2014

1.0 OUR UNDERSTANDING OF THE BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS (BPS) SYSTEM Boston Public Schools’ mission is to transform the lives of all children through exemplary teaching in a world-class system of innovative, welcoming schools. Boston has a rich history as the birthplace of public education in the United States, and the district is seen as an exemplar among U.S. urban districts, recognized with the 2006 Broad Prize and in our 2010 analysis of the world’s most improved school systems, How the World’s Most Improved School Systems Keep Getting Better. BPS is recognized for its ongoing innovations in improving outcomes for students, such as by instituting a common planning time for teachers in the same subject or grade and establishing annual achievement targets for its students. School systems around the country are under incredible pressure as students’ needs are increasing, funding is not keeping pace with costs, and expectations for performance are rising. Continuing to fulfill its mission will require that BPS make the most efficient and effective use of its resources, including its $900+ million budget, 4,500+ teachers, and 3,900+ additional staff. While its budget has increased over the last 3 years, BPS projected a deficit for 2014-2015 due to increased costs and decreased state funding. This pressure provides the catalyst for BPS to drive improved outcomes for students if it can develop a stronger understanding of its operations, identify opportunities to improve efficiency and effectiveness while reducing cost, devise strategies for their implementation, and then reallocate realized gains into areas that can make the most difference for students. As it continues to serve the community of the City of Boston, BPS has to grapple with several internal and external forces affecting its operations. These include:  Wide variation in school performance. Overall academic performance has improved over the past 3 years with improvements in the overall percentage of students who are proficient in ELA, math, and science. However, elementary school literacy rates have not improved in the last 5 years and improvements in graduation rates have plateaued in recent years. Performance varies widely across BPS’ 128 schools, as evidenced by Massachusetts’ Level 1-5 performance classifications (Level 1 is highest performing, Level 5 is lowest performing). The State has designated nine of the district’s schools as Level 4 or 5 (lowest performing), and a further 54 schools as Level 3, suggesting a substantial opportunity to improve performance.  Enrollment declines. Enrollment has declined modestly in the past 3 years, as we see in many urban districts around the country. These declines are difficult to manage because they are hard to predict, are spread across many schools and classrooms, and adjusting staffing to new enrollment is complex. There is also significant debate as to whether charter schools should be expanded in the City which could lead to further declines in enrollment, and what impact charter schools will have on traditional public schools.



1 2

Persistent budget gaps. Only 13 percent of the public school budget this year is covered by state aid. Fifteen years ago, such aid covered 31 percent of the City's school budget. Interim Superintendent John McDonough identified a $14 million deficit for the 2014-2015 school year due to $60 million of increased costs and a $32 million decline in state and federal funds. 1 Beyond addressing the deficit, there are likely opportunities to improve performance that would require further investments. As an example, BPS is appealing to business leaders and philanthropists to help underwrite a $25 million campaign to attract, retain, and improve the quality of its teachers and principals. BPS has already secured $3 million in commitments from donors. 2

Source:, "School chief: ‘Too soon' to talk layoffs," February 6, 2014, Boston Herald Source: "Charter schools achieving goals that have eluded Mass. for decades," March 20, 2014, The Boston Globe; "Mixed results in Boston," October 6, 2014, Boston Herald

McKinsey&Company


1


November 10, 2014



Increased need for teacher diversity. The school system’s largely white teaching force – instructing a student population that is 87 percent black, Latino, or Asian – has been a sensitive issue and subject of litigation that dates back to the tumultuous days of desegregation in the 1970s. A decline in the number of black teachers in BPS has put the City in violation of a federal court order, prompting officials to step up efforts to recruit and retain more ethnically diverse teachers. 3  Challenges related to collective bargaining and union relationships. BPS has faced challenges in its union relationships and contract negotiations. The Boston Teachers Union has challenged the BPS Administration on performance evaluation and the dismissal process for under-performing teachers. School bus drivers went on strike in October 2013 and at the start of the 2014-2015 school year, over labor disagreements with Veolia, the transportation contractor providing the bus service for the city. 4 BPS is well aware of these challenges and opportunities, and this operational review is another practical step to proactively move forward and identify areas of improvement. McKinsey would be honored to work with BPS to better understand its operations and the opportunities to improve its cost-efficiency and effectiveness to better serve the students of Boston. We will draw on our deep experience and expertise in both education and operations and use our rapid access to leading experts and insights in the fields of transportation, food service, HR, IT, finance, procurement, and facilities to identify opportunities for BPS. Our proposed team members’ extensive experience in education and operations, as well as our longstanding commitment and familiarity with Boston, make us excited to partner with you on this effort.

2.0 OFFEROR PROFILE 2.1

McKinsey & Company Profile and Background

Home office address McKinsey & Company, Inc. Washington D.C. 1200 19th Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20036 Phone: (202) 662-3300 Fax: (202) 662-3175 Federal Identification Number 56-2405213

Boston Office address and contact person information McKinsey & Company, Boston Office Navjot Singh, Managing Partner, Boston Office 280 Congress Street, Suite 1100 Boston, MA 02210 Phone: (617) 753-2146 Fax: (617) 753-2099 Email: [email protected] Type of business organization McKinsey & Company, Inc. Washington D.C. is a Corporation Year company was founded McKinsey & Company: 1926 Boston Office: 1987 DC Office: 1962

Number of years company has operated under this name McKinsey & Company: 88 years McKinsey & Company, Inc. Washington DC: 11 years Number of years company has been in present business McKinsey & Company, Inc. Washington D.C. was incorporated on October 9, 2003, in the State of Delaware

3

Source: Boston seeks black teachers; More diversity is recruitment goal, Imbalance could bring litigation 20 January 2014, The Boston Globe. 4 Source: BPS to expel more teachers; Poor performers plan appeal as firings expand," 24 November 2013, Boston Herald

McKinsey&Company


2


2.2

November 10, 2014

Brief Description of the Nature of the Company’s Business

McKinsey’s history and structure McKinsey is the world’s leading management consulting firm, providing professional services to organizations in the public and private sectors. The Firm was founded in 1926 by James McKinsey, and currently employs more than 9,000 professionals, located in more than 106 offices, in more than 62 countries. The services on this effort will be performed by staff from McKinsey’s Boston Office. McKinsey invented the science of management consulting, and our mission for the last 88 years has been to help our clients achieve distinctive, substantial, and lasting improvements in their performance. We are a trusted advisor and counselor to many of the world’s most influential businesses and public sector institutions. We serve more than 70 percent of Fortune magazine’s list of most admired companies and 90 percent of the Fortune 100 companies. Our Public Sector Practice has completed over 1,500 engagements in the past 5 years for local, provincial, state, national, and international government organizations. Our work spans a broad range of functional topics including strategy, operations, organization, and finance. In our public sector work, we have distinctive expertise in economic development, education, healthcare, public finance, energy and the environment, and defense and security. McKinsey has received overwhelmingly positive reviews from previous government clients. We do this by adhering to the following core principles:  Follow the top management approach, solving the most critical and challenging problems  Use our global network to deliver the best of the Firm to all clients  Bring innovations in management practice to clients  Build client capabilities to sustain improvement  Build enduring relationships based on trust.

2.3

McKinsey's Industry Knowledge and Experience

1. We have deep experience serving K-12 public school districts and school systems across the globe. McKinsey brings perspectives on best practices and approaches from school systems across the globe. We have conducted 40+ school system reviews worldwide and compiled a database of ~600 successful education reform interventions. Examples of past engagements include:  Rochester City School District’s (RCSD) Spending Money Smartly. Rapidly diagnosed and identified improvement opportunities and priority gaps, and presented the RCSD with strong analysis to identify opportunities to allocate resources more effectively in line with the district priorities. RCSD was able to use our findings to close its ~$40 million deficit for the 2014-2015 school year and identify an additional set of operational improvements that freed up ~$15 million to be reallocated toward core academic priorities.  Milwaukee Public School System (MPS) Assessment. Identified opportunities in the district’s noninstructional operations by comparing MPS’ budget, transportation, procurement, and performance management systems against best practices in other districts and developed options for sustained improvements to enable MPS to better meet the needs of its students.  Pittsburgh Public School System. Supported Pittsburgh Public Schools in first year of implementation of teacher effectiveness strategies, including HR effectiveness and IT systems to improve outcomes for students. In addition to our on-the-ground experience, we produce ground-breaking research and publications that are shaping the debate on education system improvement globally. Examples of our widely cited reports include Education to Employment: Designing a System That Works (2012), How the World’s Most

McKinsey&Company


3


November 10, 2014

Improved School Systems Keep Getting Better (2010), and Closing the Talent Gap: Attracting and Retaining top-third graduates to careers in teaching (2010). 2. We have unparalleled experience diagnosing operations and support functions. McKinsey has conducted over 2,000 engagements focusing on support functions (e.g. IT, HR, facilities, finance) in the last 10 years, serving over 1,600 individual organizations in the public and private sectors. Across these functions, we have proprietary tools used to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the functions and a database of over 500 levers for operational improvement. Our Corporate and Business Support Functions (CBF) Practice, led by Jules Seeley in North America, specializes in driving efficiency and effectiveness of these processes. Additional details on the CBF Practice are found in Appendix B. We have over 200 partners and function-by-function experts in this area. In supporting the City of Boston, we will marry this deep functional knowledge with our understanding of major metropolitan public school systems and the City of Boston to deliver an objective perspective on BPS’ current performance and opportunities across the mission areas identified. 3. We bring deep expertise in public sector change management and stakeholder engagement. Our change management approach is based on the largest research program conducted in the field with input from over 1 million employees across 800 organizations and practical experience with more than 1,500 client organizations. Our change management approach includes proprietary tools that are tailored to the public sector. We have completed 600+ change management-focused engagements in the public sector over the past 5 years, helping organizations think through how to realize opportunities identified and drive lasting change. 4. We have a strong record of successful partnerships with the City of Boston, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and related public sector stakeholders combined with the ability to bring an independent, unbiased point of view. Since 2009, we have served ~130 Massachusetts-based clients across a broad spectrum of industries and functions, within both the public and private sectors. Within Boston alone, our work has spanned ~260 engagements for ~90 clients including the City of Boston, with the strongest presence in the banking, insurance, pharmaceuticals, medical products, and high-tech sectors. Examples of our recent partnerships include:  Mayor Walsh’s 2014 Transition Team. We worked with Mayor Walsh’s team to develop a vision for improving Boston’s Inspectional Services Department (ISD), and to set explicit goals and timing for ISD’s permitting performance (e.g., 75 percent of basic permits approved in less than 20 days, which was a key component of Mayor Walsh’s 100-day address). We also identified and outlined eight actions required to realize this vision, including specific operational improvements to the permitting process, as well as organizational and cultural changes for other City departments.  Commonwealth of Massachusetts, IT Capital Investment Analysis and Monitoring. We worked with the Commonwealth to develop a methodology and digital tool (CASE) for estimating the return on investment (ROI) for existing and future IT programs. Since launching the tool in January 2014, the Commonwealth has seen a 2.8x increase in the percentage of projects that quantify ROI (85 percent of projects quantified benefits in 2014 versus less than 30 percent in 2013).  MassInsight. We served the regional advocacy and education organization by conducting an assessment of key industry sectors and their impact on the Boston metropolitan area, as well as overall state growth. We bring this deep commitment to and familiarity with the City as well as a truly independent, outside-in objective view on the operational effectiveness and efficiency of the various departments and operations within BPS.

McKinsey&Company


4


November 10, 2014

5. Deep commitment from Boston-based senior leadership combined with global reach to over 9,000 consultants. Our partner to consultant ratio is 1:6, in contrast with ratios common in the industry from 1:50 up to 1:200. Our partners are deeply involved in developing the deliverables and reviewing all the analysis so that their expertise is applied throughout the effort. McKinsey’s Boston Office was founded more than 25 years ago. Since the Office’s inception, its leadership has made a priority of cultivating strong local ties and helping shape some of the area’s most important organizations. Navjot Singh, the current Managing Partner of McKinsey’s Boston Office, is a member of the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce and serves on its Executive Committee. McKinsey’s other Boston leaders maintain a board presence at the YMCA of Greater Boston, the Massachusetts Audubon Society, the March of Dimes, and the Catholic Charities of New England. McKinsey provides unbiased counsel to leadership of the world’s most influential organizations. This independence, combined with our tools (which provide a factbase against which we identify opportunities), enables us to provide guidance that is objective, trusted, practical, and holds up to organizational realities. We operate as “One Firm” across 9,000+ consultants, 22 industry practices, eight functional disciplines, and offices in 62 countries. While other firms may have a global presence, they often are not able to leverage the same people across divisions, inhibiting true knowledge-sharing, and the full deployment of firm networks. We will fully deploy this “One Firm” approach, for example, to identify experts to interview during our investigation of global best practices in school system operations. 6. We have an impeccable track record of impact to help you with this high-profile engagement. Of all the U.S. Government Contractor Performance Assessment Reports (CPARs) received as of January 2012, 100 percent of Contract Officers wrote that they would definitely work with McKinsey again. Across the six dimensions rated from exceptional to unsatisfactory, 50 percent of engagements were ranked “exceptional” across every dimension, and McKinsey has never received any score less than “very good.” Our work scored above 95 percent in quality of product/service and in management of key personnel. In clients’ free-form responses, leaders typically describe our work as “incredible,” “exceptional,” “always professional,” and “exquisitely sensitive.”

2.4

Customer References

Detailed below are short summaries of our references including client contact information. The full write-ups of example McKinsey-led engagements similar in size and scope to the BPS RFP are in Section 3.6.

McKinsey&Company


5


2.4.1

November 10, 2014

Reference 1: Rochester City School District's (RCSD) Spending Money Smartly Engagement, Gates Foundation

Rochester City School District's (RCSD) Spending Money Smartly Engagement Proposer’s role: McKinsey served as the Prime Contractor with no Subcontractors Client point of contact (POC) Patricia Chief of Staff Name Client contact title Malgieri 585-262-8100 [email protected] Phone Email 6,100 Period of performance Sept. 2013 – Number of employees Sept. 2014 Relevance to the BPS Operational Audit Review RFP Effective Resource Allocation has been a core priority of the Rochester City School District (RCSD) and Superintendent Bolgen Vargas. The persistent achievement gap and academic challenges faced by the system, compounded by recurring deficits spurred the superintendent and his top team to commit to a transformed approach to resource allocation. As a result, the Gates Foundation selected RCSD to be one of seven potential systems to embark on a “Spending Money Smartly” initiative over the past year to ensure that resources are aligned to the strategic priorities of the system. Based on our track record and expertise, Rochester selected McKinsey & Company as their Technical Assistance provider from among a group of leading consultancies. McKinsey provided support to help identify savings opportunities and sharpen RCSD’s strategy to allocate resources more effectively in line with the district priorities. This effort is highly relevant to the goals that BPS has to rapidly diagnose and identify improvement opportunities, understand priority gaps, and present the RCSD with strong analysis to make decisions toward forward progress. Client background/challenge In spring 2013, the RCSD was under significant budget pressures, declining enrollment, and struggling to get traction on its core strategic priorities. Left unchecked, the system was at risk of continuing to take a reactive approach to budget management, making short-term cuts, and not being able to fund core academic priorities. In partnership with McKinsey, Rochester was able to use the analysis provided to take positive action toward closing a significant deficit, sharpening their strategy, and allocating a meaningful amount of time and resources to the district’s strategic priorities. Brief description of our solution McKinsey provided the fact base, diagnostic insights from other systems, and the problem-solving strategy for this project. We trained a newly formed, cross-functional team of high-performing individuals from within the RCSD system. We also helped to build their capabilities in, and guide their process in identifying additional opportunities. McKinsey's Direct observations and analyses • Analyzed RCSD’s budget to identify core spending categories, trends over times, and drivers of major costs • Brought prior experience to bear in order to rapidly assess potential areas for improvement from which system leadership selected areas for further pursuit in the near-term Trained up an RCSD team and helped guide their problem solving process to conduct “deep dives” consisting of further benchmarking, school visits, expert interviews, and analyses to help the RCSD team identify a set of potential next steps to realize identified improvements. Scenario modeling • Developed, in collaboration with the RCSD finance team, a rough five-year financial projection for RCSD in order to identify and prioritize additional levers required to reduce, and eventually eliminate the recurring budget deficit. Scenarios were critical to support conversations with system leadership and the Board.

McKinsey&Company


6


November 10, 2014

Rochester City School District's (RCSD) Spending Money Smartly Engagement • Developed, in partnership with RCSD system staff, multiple analytic models with regards to issues such as transportation and class fill-rates, to serve as a basis for discussions amongst senior leadership Benchmarking • Benchmarked several areas of RCSD’s budget against other comparable peer districts based on size and other demographics • Benchmarked several areas of RCSD’s budget against other major NYC school systems As part of this study, the McKinsey team also worked with system leadership to identify core cultural and organizational changes required to improve performance and capture identified opportunities Client benefit/impact of our work RCSD was able to take McKinsey's analyses to: • Close its deficit for the 2014-2015 school year (~$40 million) • Identify an additional set of operational improvements which freed up ~$15 million to be allocated toward core academic priorities • Sharpen their strategic priorities and identified fundable and sustainable rollout plans for the upcoming academic years • Build long-term capabilities in the area of savings identification, problem-solving, strategy refinement, and execution • Develop an improved strategy development/budgeting process to integrate these two activities to truly “put their money where their strategy is” • Begin a longer-term conversation internally and with the Board to ultimately address the core drivers of the recurring deficit and focus more resources on the system’s priorities • More information on RCSD’s joint effort with McKinsey, is on the website http://smarterschoolspending.org/rochester-city-school-district-nyTimeliness of performance/services provided All services and work products were of high quality, and were delivered on time and on budget.

McKinsey&Company


7


2.4.2

November 10, 2014

Reference 2: Gates Foundation / Improving teacher effectiveness and student achievement across several public school districts

Gates Foundation + 5 Public School Districts (including Atlanta, Pittsburgh, Denver, Tulsa) Public Schools Teacher effectiveness Proposer’s Role: McKinsey served as the Prime Contractor with no Subcontractors Client Point of Contact (POC) John Deasy Former Gates Foundation Name Client Contact Title Deputy Director of Education Former Superintendent of Los Angeles Unified School District (310) 991-8201 [email protected] Phone Email Period of Performance 05/09 to 08/09, Number of employees at Gates:1,211 09/09 to 09/10 Atlanta PS: 3,860 the client organization Denver PS: 14,792 Pittsburgh PS:5,180 Tulsa PS: 6,500+ Relevance to the BPS Operational Audit Review RFP • Talent management assessment: Assessed current policies and procedures for distribution of teachers and end-to-end practices for managing teacher effectiveness • Performance management assessment: Diagnosed current district data systems and ability to support value-added measurement of teacher effectiveness • Stakeholder management: Demonstrated ability to manage complex stakeholder relationships on politically sensitive issues (teacher performance) • Cost analyses: Developed cost analyses of proposals across complex urban schools districts Client background/challenge • The goal of this engagement was to improve teacher effectiveness and student achievement Brief description of McKinsey's solution/services provided • Supported 5 public school districts in developing fact-based, high impact strategies and proposals to increase teacher effectiveness • Worked in partnership with district leadership, principals and teachers to develop vision for teacher effectiveness, create strategies to improve effectiveness from preparation through retention, and created detailed implementation plans, cost analyses, and stakeholder communication plans. • Supported Pittsburgh Public Schools in first year of implementation of teacher effectiveness strategies, including HR effectiveness, IT systems, and teacher practice evaluation. Client benefit/impact of our work • Leveraged further philanthropic funding for districts through submission of clear proposals to improve teacher effectiveness • Helped district leadership, staff, teachers, and principals to set aspirations for teacher effectiveness • Developed detailed implementation plans, cost analyses, stakeholder communication plans, and final proposals Timeliness of performance/services provided • All services and work products were of high quality, and were delivered on time and on budget.

McKinsey&Company


8


2.4.3

November 10, 2014

Reference 3: Denver Public Schools / Improving teacher effectiveness and student achievement

Denver Public Schools / Improve teacher effectiveness and student achievement Proposer’s Role: McKinsey served as the Prime Contractor with no Subcontractors Client Point of Contact (POC) Tom Boasberg Superintendent of Denver Name Client Contact Title Public Schools (720) 423-3300 [email protected] Phone Email Period of Performance 05/09 to 08/09 Number of employees at Denver PS: 14,792 the client organization Relevance to the BPS Operational Audit Review RFP • Talent management assessment: Assessed current policies and procedures for distribution of teachers and end-to-end practices for managing teacher effectiveness • Performance management assessment: Diagnosed current district data systems and ability to support value-added measurement of teacher effectiveness • Stakeholder management: Demonstrated ability to manage complex stakeholder relationships Client background/challenge • The goal of this engagement was to support Denver Public Schools in developing proposals for improving teacher effectiveness and student achievement, to be considered by the Gates Foundation for funding Brief description of McKinsey's solution/services provided • Supported Denver Public Schools in developing fact-based, high impact strategies and proposals to increase teacher effectiveness • Worked in partnership with district leadership, principals and teachers to develop vision for teacher effectiveness, create strategies to improve effectiveness from preparation through retention, and created detailed implementation plans, cost analyses, and stakeholder communication plans Client benefit/impact of our work • Leveraged further philanthropic funding for DPS through submission of clear proposals to improve teacher effectiveness • Helped DPS leadership, staff, teachers, and principals to set aspirations for teacher effectiveness • Developed detailed implementation plans, cost analyses, stakeholder communication plans, and final proposals Timeliness of performance/services provided • All services and work products were of high quality, and were delivered on time and on budget.

McKinsey&Company


9


2.4.4

November 10, 2014

Reference 4: Mayor Walsh 2014 Transition Team Engagement

Mayor Walsh 2014 Transition Team Proposer’s role: McKinsey served as the Prime Contractor with no Subcontractors Client point of contact (POC) Daniel Koh Chief of Staff Name Client contact title (617) 635-4000 [email protected] Phone Email Jan-Feb 2014 230 Number of Period of performance employees Relevance to the BPS Operational Audit Review RFP This project demonstrates McKinsey’s intimate familiarity with the City of Boston. It also gives us considerable context into why neighborhood development is such a critical topic for the City. We performed an as-is/to-be assessment and interviewed stakeholders to understand the key challenges and opportunities. We also performed benchmarking services to understand permitting best practices in other cities. We then synthesized our findings into a clear, recommended vision, and a set of eight actions for the mayor and Inspectional Services Department team to take. Client background/challenge In early 2014, the new Mayor of Boston, Marty Walsh, was transitioning into office. Mayor Walsh’s Transition Team tasked McKinsey with addressing and evaluating two key, front-line issues – 1) the City’s approach to permitting; and 2) the potential consolidation of two major City departments. The team asked McKinsey to identify opportunities to improve a permitting process that constituents viewed as slow, complex, and burdensome, and then to create a clear and actionable plan for improvement. All services and work products were of high quality, and were delivered on time and on budget. Brief description of our solution We conducted a diagnostic of permitting issues and developed recommendations for changes required in order for the permitting process to be a faster, clearer, and easier experience. Our approach consisted of the following five steps: 1. Diagnose current performance. The McKinsey team built a clear baseline of current performance, including time to approval for different types of permits, causes of delays, and stakeholder perceptions, all while gathering insights on the experiences of both applicants and City employees. 2. Identify root causes of issues. To determine the root causes of performance issues, the McKinsey team mapped each step of the permitting process, including the time and resources required at each step. This enabled the team to identify bottlenecks and key issues in the existing process. 3. Compare Boston’s permitting qualitatively to other U.S. cities. The team compared Boston’s permitting process to that of other cities, particularly those with an easy, clear experience. This enabled the team to expand on the potential opportunities for improvement. 4. Highlight potential innovations in government. The team also identified farther-reaching, cuttingedge technologies and approaches that might be applied to City permitting. The team presented the ideas that were most relevant to Boston’s permitting process as long-term aspirational ideas. 5. Develop a perspective on how Boston and ISD should approach revising the permitting process. Finally, the McKinsey team synthesized the ideas for improvement into a set of eight discrete actions and an action plan. Together, the execution of these actions will enable Boston to significantly improve its permitting process and realize the mayor’s vision. Client benefit/impact of our work • Developed a vision with explicit goals and timing for ISD’s permitting performance, underpinning the mayor’s announcement of targets (e.g., 75 percent of basic permits approved in less than 20 days) • Identified and outlined eight actions required to realize this vision, including specific operational

McKinsey&Company


10


November 10, 2014

Mayor Walsh 2014 Transition Team improvements to the permitting process, as well as organizational and cultural changes Timeliness of performance/services provided • All services and work products were of high quality, and were delivered on time and on budget.

2.5

Offeror Litigation

McKinsey confirms that it is not and has not been a party to any litigation in the last 5 years where it was alleged that McKinsey breached a contract with a client/customer for an operational audit or similar services. McKinsey confirms that no government entity has debarred or otherwise prohibited McKinsey from responding to its competitive solicitations within the last 5 years.

McKinsey&Company


11


November 10, 2014

3.0 TECHNICAL PROPOSAL IN RESPONSE TO THE SCOPE OF SERVICES Based on our understanding of the context, objectives, and scope, we have assembled an approach that we believe will best position you to understand the current state of BPS’ operations, previous analyses, and opportunities for improving operations to better serve the students and staff of BPS. We believe this approach has the following characteristics:  Upfront identification of strengths and weaknesses relative to peer school districts, which will greatly help in prioritization of opportunity areas. We will draw on our deep, on-the-ground experience having conducted 40+ school system reviews and our proprietary knowledge and tools on successful interventions in education operations. These findings will then each be considered in BPS’ unique context and prioritized for further examination.  Unique set of tools, frameworks, expertise, and capabilities that have been tested across multiple mission-critical applications in various private and public sector contexts. We will leverage our expertise in operations and serving public school systems to tailor existing tools to your needs (e.g., Excellence in Service Operations, Corporate and Business Support Functions 360 benchmarks).  “Day 1” perspective on the key issues. We come to you with a fundamental set of core beliefs and prior experiences that we will couple with your starting point to form early hypotheses. This will enable us to rapidly focus our effort and move quickly from the theoretical to the practical.  Emphasis on moving quickly by drawing on our deep roster of experts. We will leverage years of experience across 200+ functional experts across various disciplines (e.g., public safety, support functions, finance/HR, change management, public sector, transportation, operations, IT), our extensive Education Practice with experiences within K-12 systems, along with dedicated full-time analysts with backgrounds in operations research to conduct statistical analyses



Partnering and co-creating with you throughout the journey to ensure buy-in and build capabilities. We do not just draw up an answer and hand it over. We work with you to develop practical, reality-tested answers. We believe that a deep partnership between our consulting team and your agency staff uncovers the best information and creates the best solutions that are most likely to be successfully implemented. Through this approach we foster internal ownership that makes the ideas “stick,” which is what ensures there is true impact. We anticipate working closely with the BPS Interim Superintendent and top team, as well as senior City stakeholders throughout the project to get continual guidance and feedback. Focus on pragmatic and rapid improvements. We work hard to develop improvements that are implementable and impactful in the public school system and municipal government context. Independent, senior management perspective. We work hard to make leaders and their teams successful. We tell you the truth as we see it; and we offer advice and counsel completely unburdened by incentives to offer you other services such as staff augmentation, IT systems, or outsourced operations.

 

3.1

“Day 1” Perspectives on Key Issues

As mentioned above, at the core of the approach is a belief that we should start with a strong “Day 1 hypothesis,” given our understanding of the issues commonly affecting U.S. urban school systems as well as our experience in the City of Boston. We find that developing an ingoing set of hypotheses allows us to more quickly “hit the ground running” and hone in on the key issues. These hypotheses are drawn from our experience performing similar exercises at other school systems and reflect an understanding of the typical challenges and opportunities faced by systems like BPS. We start with a hypothesis of places to quickly dig deeply on, while doing a broad scan to test for other areas for prioritization. This approach

McKinsey&Company


12


November 10, 2014

allows our team to quickly assess the current state and spend its time on fully understanding and detailing priority challenges, proposed solutions, and actions that will allow BPS to better meet the needs of its students. Some of our Day 1 hypotheses include: Talent management  There are often opportunities to increase equity and consistency in school staffing to ensure students are receiving what they need. Within districts, staffing levels may vary widely and may not be managed in a consistent, strategic way, even though school-based staff typically represent 65 percent to80 percent of a district’s total budget and are the key determinant in student learning.  Talent management strategies can often be improved to enable the best development of teachers, principals, and other staff and enhance the overall quality of instruction. In many districts there are opportunities to enhance the impact of training, coaching, and evaluation to increase the effectiveness of teachers, principals, and non-instructional staff and provide more rewarding and meaningful development. Academic student support  Special education is often a significant part of a district’s budget (~25 percent), yet these investments do not always yield the academic and social-emotional benefits intended for students with special needs. The achievement gap between students with disabilities and typically developing students is greater than any income or racial achievement gaps. Districts often face challenges in making sure that all students are getting the education they need and deserve and that the entire process of identification, planning, and delivering special education services is aligned to that goal.  ELL supports and staffing can be strengthened to better meet the needs of non-English speaking students and parents. Districts often struggle to meet the needs of ELL students effectively and have opportunity to grow the skills of existing staff to serve ELLs and improve the recruitment of staff with specialization in serving ELLs. Non-academic student support  Clear and measurable performance outcomes can drive greater efficiency and effectiveness improvements in transportation, food service, security, and building maintenance functions. School districts often struggle to deliver these services efficiently and effectively, with varying costs per pupil even across similar districts. Clearer performance measures and accountability to deliver on those measures can drive both cost savings and improvement in service levels for students and staff. Performance management  Improve performance objectives and measurement tools. There are often opportunities to collect and utilize data on key operational and academic indicators more systematically. Many school districts have not developed robust performance management tools and have the opportunity to articulate, track, report, and manage toward clear targets for academic progress and other performance measures. Administrative services  Antiquated administrative processes and supporting systems can drive costs and inefficiencies. Inefficient administrative processes, especially in HR and finance, create an additional burden on school and central office staff. Given limited resources, patchwork solutions have often been added on top of these antiquated processes and systems, leading to additional costs, paperwork, and staff time. Furthermore, ineffective processes can be frustrating to teachers.

McKinsey&Company


13


3.2

November 10, 2014

McKinsey's Technical Approach, Timeline, and Deliverables

Our proposed approach consists of three phases conducted across 8 weeks, preceded by a “Phase 0” of preparation that will ensure we make the most efficient and effective use of our 8-week engagement once the team begins in Phase 1. Phase 1 focuses on doing an overall assessment across all of the focus areas with a goal of identifying priority areas for deep-dives. Then in Phase 2 we will conduct quantitative and qualitative deep-dives on the select priority areas to identify opportunities. Finally, in Phase 3 we will develop short-term and long-term actions for implementation and develop the highlevel roadmap for a path forward. Below is a summary of our approach and a realistic and detailed schedule to complete the tasks described in the scope of services. Please note that these timelines are preliminary, and should contingencies arise they can be adjusted.  Phase 0: Preparation and data collection: Before the formal engagement starts, we will submit our data request and interview request list to the City/BPS, so that beginning on Day 1 of Phase 1, we can begin to conduct our analysis. During this time we will work with BPS stakeholders to: a) collect current documentation, prior reviews, and previous findings/recommendations across the 25 focus areas; b) identify relevant benchmarks and best practices for comparison; and c) have leadership review existing documentation, previous reports and performance reviews to refine our ingoing hypotheses, and identify areas to probe with BPS leadership.  Phase 1: High-level diagnostic (3 weeks). Given the scope of areas to be audited, we will use a proven approach to identify the most important opportunities across each of the focus areas. We will conduct internal and external interviews and focus groups with top leaders and representative stakeholders on the 25 focus areas and disciplines. This will include: a) one-on-one interviews with select leaders in BPS; b) focus groups with staff across instructional and non-instructional areas; c) interviews with the City Office of Finance and Budget and other senior City officials (e.g., School Committee, Office of the Mayor). These interviews and focus groups will be supplemented with findings from the review of existing documentation, previous reports, and performance reviews surfaced during the preparatory phase. In addition, we will analyze available data as needed to get a better understanding of the current operational health of BPS. The objective will be to build a synthesized factbase regarding strengths and opportunity areas, with a high -level list of opportunities to pursue across the 25 functions identified in the RFP. We will then work with you to select a few priority areas to conduct deep-dives and develop opportunities. The deliverables from this phase will be:

– High-level diagnostic across each of the 25 areas including high-level risk assessment, gaps vs. best practice, and overview of BPS’ fiscal and operational health

– Identification of select areas for deep-dive and further opportunity identification – Initial list of opportunities for BPS to pursue 

Phase 2: Deep dive on priority areas (3 weeks). For the areas prioritized based on the potential opportunity, we will conduct further analysis to better understand the issues facing BPS across a subset of the 25 focus areas. This deep dive – depending on topic – could include quantitative analysis of relevant information, process mapping, detailed cost breakdowns, additional interviews with internal and external subject matter experts, department walk-throughs, and identification of best practices from other school districts to leverage. The deliverables from this phase will include:

– Detailed diagnostic findings in priority focus areas that further identifies the opportunity, costs, and challenges

– Prioritization of opportunity areas for further development 

Phase 3: Opportunity Development (2 weeks). The final phase of work will build on the findings from Phases 1 and 2 to identify a slate of potential opportunities to address and a high-level

McKinsey&Company


14


November 10, 2014

implementation roadmap. Specifically, this will include identifying potential opportunities at both a high level across the 25 focus areas, and in-depth for select priority areas. For the priority areas, we will evaluate high-level projected cost savings, identify cross-stakeholder actions required to move the City toward its desired vision for success for all students, and create a list of “key success factors” for use by BPS leadership and the Mayor’s office in order to drive focus on the key opportunity areas. Deliverables for this phase will include:

– Prioritized list of short- and long-term options to address opportunities identified and high-level view of projected impact

– Final Report including supporting rationales, comparison with best practices, and estimates of costs and cost savings associated with the opportunities in prioritized areas. This “broad-then-deep” approach allows us to quickly identify high-level opportunities across the 25 areas then flesh out higher-impact opportunities that present the greatest opportunity for achieving great results for students in more detail. Between each phase, a key checkpoint will occur with City of Boston team members and leadership to align on the priority areas of focus in the following phase. Throughout these phases we will work closely with City of Boston team members to discuss progress and direction.

McKinsey&Company


15


November 10, 2014

Progress review

Team on the ground Phase 0: Preparation and data collection

Phase 2: Deep-dive on priority areas

Phase 1: High-level diagnostic

Duration

Before team starts

3 weeks

3 weeks

Activities

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

Submit data request to BPS including basic data on BPS, copies of policies, procedures, and other materials related to the areas and disciplines to be audited, and copies of previous reports and recommendations Identify appropriate internal and external stakeholders to participate in interviews and focus groups to provide a stakeholder perspective and provide input on BPS’ strengths and weaknesses Begin scheduling interviews and focus groups

Deliverables

▪

▪

Conduct high-level operational effectiveness and efficiency review of the 25 areas of BPS and identify priority areas for further diagnosis – Interview select school and district leaders – Facilitate internal and external focus groups – Review previous reports, studies, audits, and reviews – Review documented policies and procedures – Conduct walk-throughs of select departments – Analyze relevant available data

Overview of BPS’ fiscal and operational health, based on high level diagnostic across each of the 25 areas including high -evel risk assessment, gaps vs. best practice Identification of priority areas for deep-dive diagnostic

▪ ▪

▪ ▪ ▪

For the priority areas, conduct quantitative and qualitative analysis to understand gaps vs. best practices in BPS’ current operations, particularly compared to other school systems. Conduct additional deepdive analysis to assess efficiency and effectiveness in priority areas Prioritize areas with greatest opportunity to develop initiatives for implementation

Interim draft reports and presentations as requested by City Detailed diagnostic in priority areas Prioritization of areas for pursuing opportunity

Phase 3: Opportunity development 2 weeks

▪

▪

▪

▪

▪

For the priority areas, review diagnostic findings and identify short-term and long term actions for implementation Prioritize improvement opportunities based on their ability to improve BPS efficiency and effectiveness in delivering against its mission and strategic goals. For priority opportunities, provide rationale, estimates of costs and cost savings, and realistic and practical implementation guidance Produce Final Report that summarizes all findings, commendations, and opportunities

Final Report including supporting rationales, comparison with best practices, and projected costs and cost savings associated with the opportunities in prioritized areas

Exhibit 1. Detailed Work Plan, Timeline, and Deliverables.

McKinsey&Company


16

BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS OPERATIONAL AUDIT/REVIEW RFP

3.2.1

November 10, 2014

Audit Areas

The workplan will cover all 25 of the required areas and disciplines within BPS. As previously discussed, we will conduct a high-level assessment of each of the 25 focus areas, then prioritize a few areas for deeper analysis based on opportunities identified in the initial diagnostic and our experience conducting similar engagements with other school districts. The assessments will evaluate BPS’ instructional and non-instructional services along four dimensions of operational excellence, as follows:  Alignment with need. Do the services BPS provides drive toward better student outcomes and meet the needs of students/parents/staff/external stakeholders?  Performance management. Are there clear metrics or performance targets in place to assess performance toward improving student outcomes and do staff at all levels regularly use these metrics to refine their efforts?  Process efficiency. Does the process address the student/teacher/staff need in a high-quality, timely manner with minimal additional effort beyond that required to deliver on the need? Do processes work in a manner that frees up teachers to focus on teaching and principals to focus on managing schools?  People and organization. Does BPS have the right structure, roles, and staff to deliver effectively on its services and mission? Recognizing that there are important linkages across many of the 25 areas and disciplines, we propose grouping the areas and disciplines to be addressed into six categories that reflect a related function with BPS. By analyzing the areas and disciplines in groups, we will be able to examine BPS’s current state and opportunities in broad areas of the operation and then focus on specific areas or disciplines that have opportunities for improvement. The proposed groups are:



Talent management. Areas and disciplines that affect how BPS recruits, manages, retains, and develops its teachers and staff A. Personnel policies and procedures regarding compensation and benefits; maintenance of updated job descriptions, ongoing training, and performance evaluation process for all staff (teaching, administrative, clerical, maintenance, and operational) B. Negotiation, implementation and management of union contracts C. Policies and procedures regarding: general staffing and recruiting (for teaching and other professional, clerical, and operational staff); dealing with excess central office and teaching staff; hiring substitute teachers; hiring by principals of school staff; and maintenance of a diverse work force D. Delineation of responsibilities and duties within and between BPS departments, and efficiency of duty assignments E. Policies and procedures regarding the number, allocation, and composition of all instructionalrelated staffing, including but not limited to student-staffing ratios S. Procedures and policies concerning maintenance by all school staff of required licenses and certifications T. Procedures and policies addressing CORI and SORI checks



Academic student support. Areas and disciplines that shape BPS’ direct services to students: I. Curriculum policies, procedures, management and controls (Pre K -12) J. SPED (Special Ed.) policies, procedures, management, and controls K. Student assignment policies, procedures, management, and controls Q. Policies and procedures regarding parent engagement

McKinsey&Company


17


November 10, 2014

R. Policies and procedures to address needs of non-English-speaking students and parents



Non-academic student support L. Student transportation policies, procedures, and management, including the use of school buses and other means of student transportation M. Food service management, cafeteria food delivery P. Miscellaneous extracurricular programs: non-athletic staffing, management, controls, and financial reporting U. Procedures and policies addressing general security matters, including lockdown and antibullying policies and procedures



Performance management. Areas and disciplines that enable BPS to understand the performance of all programs and support operations and identify areas to commend and opportunities for improvement V. Performance and quality objectives and measurement tools (covering relevant items including general administrative operations, success in meeting early education goals, including ability of students to read by 3rd grade, academic growth of students with disabilities, graduation rates, success in closing achievement gaps, college-readiness of graduates)



Leadership and governance. Areas and disciplines related to the leadership and governance of BPS in serving the students of Boston W. School Committee – administrative costs, expenses and financial reporting



Administrative services. Areas and disciplines that BPS uses to manage its finances, time, and attendance, IT, facilities operations, and spending for goods and services from external vendors: F. Finance and accounting systems and related policies, practices, and procedures regarding: payroll, accounts payable and billing/accounts receivable; the overall operational and capital budget process and associated budget controls; capital/maintenance/facilities strategic planning and integration with finance operations Y. Identification of, accounting for, and transparency of use of external funds (e.g., grants, 501(c)(3) contributions, and miscellaneous fees collected) G. Timekeeping policy, procedures, practices, and controls H. Purchasing and contract management policy, procedures, practices, and controls O. Technology (IT) systems, staffing, procedures and controls, and assessment of whether technology is being appropriately leveraged in the classroom, in the general administration and operation of BPS, in the maintenance of a centralized records and documents management database N. Building maintenance staffing, policies, procedures, and management, including heating, AC, electrical, plumbing, and routine maintenance X. School building construction and renovation: planning process, including affordability and comprehensiveness of facilities planning

McKinsey&Company


18


3.3

November 10, 2014

Staffing Plan

McKinsey will be a full and collaborative partner with the City and BPS throughout this effort. Exhibit 2 shows our proposed team structure for the BPS Audit Review effort, including involvement from key City and BPS stakeholders. Full resumes of commited and represenative McKinsey team members are available in Appendix A for your review. McKinsey Project Leadership

McKinsey City of Boston Leadership

Doug Scott, Project Leader, Senior Expert

Navjot Singh, Director of Client Service, Managing Partner of McKinsey's Boston Office Jules Seeley, Director of Client Service, Partner, Boston

McKinsey Subject Matter Experts (participating on an as-needed basis)

Project Team Boston Public Schools Project Team

▪ ▪ ▪

▪

Project Manager BPS/City Team member(s) Other key stakeholders

▪

McKinsey Project Team

▪

Jake Bryant, Representative Associate, Boston

▪

Evan Smith, Representative Associate

▪ ▪ ▪

Additional McKinsey internal Firm support and resources

▪ ▪ ▪

Research analysts Graphics and editing resources Other internal Firm services as needed

David Fubini, Former Managing Partner of McKinsey’s Boston Office, serving the City of Boston for 34 years Susan Colby, Expert Partner, leader of McKinsey’s Education Practice, K-12 education and system operations expertise Kartik Jayaram, Senior Partner, leader of McKinsey’s Education Practice, K-12 expertise Julie Goran, Partner, Education and Public Sector Practice leader; organizational improvement and education expertise Jung Paik, Junior Partner, Education & operations and CBSF Practice expertise, Boston

City and BPS Subject Matter Experts (participating on an as-needed basis)

▪ ▪ ▪ ▪

City of Boston Office of Finance and Budget BPS Leadership Team School Committee members Community stakeholders

Exhibit 2: Proposed Team Organization.

McKinsey&Company


19






























































Stakeholder collaboration

Coordinating multidisciplinary planning teams

McKinsey Project Leadership Navjot Singh, Director of Client 25 Managing Partner of Service for the City of      McKinsey’s Boston Boston Office Jules Seeley, Partner Client Service Team 15      leader for City of Boston McKinsey Project Leader Doug Scott, Senior Project Leader 18      Expert McKinsey Representative Project Team (sample biographies and experience) Jacob Bryant, Senior Representative 3      Associate Associate Evan Smith, Representative 4      Associate Associate McKinsey Subject Matter Experts (participating on an as-needed basis) David Fubini, Former SME, City of Boston 34 Managing Partner of      McKinsey's Boston office Kartik Jayaram, SME, K-12 education 18      Senior Partner Susan Colby, Senior SME, K-12 education 14      Expert and system operations Julie Goran, Partner SME, Organizational 10      Improvement Jung Paik, Junior SME, Education 7      Partner operations

Planning and general government processes

Organizational management

Articulating complex concepts in a simple manner

Business process improvement

Public School operations experience

Public sector experience

Project role

Years of related experience

Name and McKinsey title

November 10, 2014

Exhibit 3. McKinsey Key Personnel Skills Matrix. The skills of each our key personnel directly support the requirements outlined in the RFP.

Consistent with each of our client engagements, we will bring the best of McKinsey’s expertise to complete this work for the City of Boston. Each of the team members we have identified for this critical program has an exemplary track record of performance, and experience with work that is similar in scope and size to the BPS effort. McKinsey recommends team structures based on the goal of providing maximum value, delivering the end products needed, and driving to solutions on client-defined timelines. Based on BPS priorities and input, our team is flexible and can quickly and efficiently prioritize high-risk and high-priority work items. We have outlined these items in our proposed workplan and timeline in Exhibit 1.

McKinsey&Company


20


November 10, 2014

The on-the-ground team in Boston will be composed of an Associate working day-to-day with City of Boston and BPS staff as the project team. A second Associate will supplement this team for a period of time to help complete diagnostics and deep-dives. This team will be directed by a subject-matter expert as the project lead and our partners responsible for the overall relationship with the City of Boston. The team will have access to McKinsey subject-matter experts and administrative resources to maximize their effectiveness on the ground. The team will be available on short notice for consultations, as they will be working onsite closely with City and BPS team members. We will bring three categories of resources to serve BPS on this project, including: a) Project Leadership b) Project Team c) Subject Matter Experts, and additional support and resources. The description of these groups is outlined below. Full resumes for proposed personnel can be found in Appendix A. a) Project Leadership. The overall client relationship will be overseen by Navjot Singh (Managing Partner of McKinsey’s Boston Office) and Jules Seeley (Partner in Boston). They will serve as the overall Director of Client Service for the City of Boston to ensure the team is engaging with the right stakeholders to inform the diagnostic and opportunity identification, and generate excitement and support to lead the change effort required by the City. The Project Leader will manage the overall project and this role will be filled by Expert Partner Doug Scott. He will participate in executive leadership meetings with the City of Boston leadership team, provide ongoing guidance and direction, lead problem-solving with the team, draft documents, review analytics, and oversee the overall quality of deliverables. Name/title

Experience and qualifications Project Leadership Directors of Client Services • Managing Partner of McKinsey’s Boston Office • Director of Client Service for McKinsey’s Commonwealth of Massachusetts engagements, which includes the IT capital investment analysis and monitoring effort, and design of the CASE digital tool • Worked with Mayor Walsh’s 2014 transition team on the audit of Boston’s Navjot Singh, permitting and licensing process Boston-based Managing Partner • Board and Executive Committee member of the Greater Boston Chamber of of McKinsey’s Commerce Boston Office • Led the Kendall Square Association project (Cambridge, MA) helping stakeholders understand and develop strategies to optimize Kendall Square’s distinct advantages as a place to work, live, and innovate • Expert on innovation, corporate finance, and strategy • Expert on Six Sigma methodologies for process design • Leader in McKinsey’s Boston Office with deep knowledge and familiarity of the City’s management structure and processes • Led work with Mayor Walsh’s transition team on the audit of Boston’s permitting and licensing processes Jules Seeley, Boston-based • Leads McKinsey Corporate and Business Support Function Practice, Partner focusing on administrative and operational support • Focuses on operational transformations and customer experience • Experience with public sector operations improvements • Formerly on Board of Governors for an elementary school in London

McKinsey&Company


21

BOSTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS OPERATIONAL AUDIT/REVIEW RFP Name/title

November 10, 2014

Experience and qualifications Project Leadership

Project Leader Doug Scott, Senior Expert K-12 education and school system operations

• • • • •

Leader in the North America Social Sector and Education Practices 12 years of Education Sector-related experience Led operations and strategy transformations for multiple major urban U.S. school districts Led programs across a wide range of high-needs school systems and states Developed a state-level strategy for higher education

b) Project Team. Due to the nature of McKinsey’s staffing model, all Associate-level staff cannot be fully committed to any given project until the start date is determined. In order to provide the City of Boston and BPS with a clear picture of the level of support, experience, and the caliber of staff it will receive for this effort, we have included Representative Associates for the Project Team: Jacob Bryant and Evan Smith. The day-to-day work of the Project Team is managed by the Representative Associate. The Associate will be co-located with the BPS Team and will participate in problem-solving sessions, drive the majority of research, interviews, and document creation, and be responsible for providing highquality deliverables and results to BPS. Name/title

Jacob Bryant, Boston-based Representative Senior Associate

Evan Smith, Representative Associate

Experience and qualifications McKinsey Representative Project Team • Has worked with over 40 school districts including Boston, Newark, Prince George’s County (MD), Baltimore, and Pittsburgh in more than 10 states on topics including operational, academic, and financial audits, strengthening support to struggling students, developing a strategic plan and a system for performance management, and improving teacher human capital • Led the planning and launch of a $20 million/year investment portfolio in attracting and developing new teachers and principals for low-income schools for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation • Former Director of School Operations for District of Columbia Public Schools • Former classroom teacher • Board member, Meridian Public Charter School (Washington, DC)

c) McKinsey Subject-Matter Experts and additional support and resources. The project team will be assisted by subject-matter experts, who will bring extensive experience in organizational design, change management, and transformations in state and local governments. These experts include David Fubini, former Managing Partner of the Boston Office and current Director Emeritus. He will draw upon perspectives from a rich set of connections across the Boston community including BPS. He currently serves on the boards of key local organizations including the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, the Boston Municipal Research Bureau, and the YMCA of Greater Boston. Name/title David Fubini, Boston-based former Managing Partner of the Boston Office, and currently Director Emeritus

Experience and qualifications Subject Matter Experts • Boston-based former Senior Partner of McKinsey, will provide guidance on the focus of the effort and key priorities as needed • Possesses deep expertise on working successfully with the City of Boston and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts • Possesses 34 years of public and private sector experience, including work as the Director of Client Service with some of the world’s largest companies • Current member of several prominent Boston civic organizations

McKinsey&Company


22


Kartik Jayaram, Senior Partner, K-12 education Susan Colby, Senior Expert K-12 education Jung Paik, Associate Partner, education and service operations

• • • • • • • • • • •

November 10, 2014

Co-leader of the North American Education Practice Leader in McKinsey’s North America Operations Practice and member of McKinsey’s Business Technology Practice Expert in system administration and operations Has led work in multiple urban U.S. public school systems Leader in McKinsey’s Education Practice Former CEO of Stupski Foundation, a national education philanthropy Led K-12 education and foundation strategy for more than a decade at The Bridgespan Group Leader in McKinsey's Service Operations Practice Leader in State and Local Government Practice Deep expertise in business and corporate support functions in the public sector, with a focus on educational systems Former member of Boston Public Schools Strategic and Operational Planning team

Additional support/resources and expert network. Our leadership and working teams have a vast array of global resources at their fingertips. This includes a staff of 1,000+ researchers accessing public and proprietary data sources to developing customized reports; technical and graphics support to develop presentations, models, and other tools; and administrative staff to assist with logistics, travel, and report production. This frees up our project team resources to spend more time with City of Boston leadership and staff.

3.4

Regular Check-ins with the City of Boston

In our approach, we will work closely with project leadership and representatives from Boston Public Schools to generate hypotheses and test them to ensure the practicality of audit results and opportunities identified. Particularly given the quick timeline and breadth of areas covered in this scope of work, we believe that a strong governance process composed of steering committees toward the end of each phase should help to set priorities for where to focus in the following phase and in the creation of the Final Report. We will also have daily check-ins with the project team that will be critical to ensure alignment and removal of any barriers to progress.

3.5

Final Report

As requested, McKinsey would be happy to share interim findings with the BPHC and the City of Boston by December 31, 2014. This would include emerging findings from the diagnostic activities and a summary view of the issues and topics we have been exploring. McKinsey will share its Final Report, including the findings and recommendations from this work, supporting rationales, comparisons with best practices, and projected impact of the recommendations at the conclusion of the engagement.

3.6

Past Performance on Similar & Successful Projects, and Customer References

We have deep experience serving K-12 public school districts and school systems across the globe. McKinsey brings perspectives on best practices and approaches from school systems across the globe. We have conducted 40+ school system reviews worldwide and compiled a database of ~600 successful education reform interventions. We have unparalleled experience diagnosing operations and support functions. McKinsey has conducted over 2,000 engagements focusing on support functions (e.g. IT, HR, facilities, finance) in the last 10 years, serving over 1,600 individual organizations in the public and private sectors. Across these functions, we have proprietary tools used to assess the effectiveness and efficiency of the functions, and a database of over 500 levers for operational improvement.

McKinsey&Company


23


November 10, 2014

Detailed below are the full write-ups of McKinsey-led engagements similar in size and scope to the BPS RFP.

3.6.1

Offeror Experience 1: Large Urban City Public School System, Department of Education organizational analysis

Large Urban City Public School System, Department of Education organizational analysis Proposer’s role: McKinsey served as the Prime Contractor with no Subcontractors >7,000 staff Period of Performance 5/2013 – 6/2013 Number of employees Relevance to the BPS Operational Audit Review RFP A large urban school system's effort is similar to the BPS objectives as follows: • Analyzing and understanding the current organizational structure of a major U.S. district • Identifying challenges and best practices from the field • Developing an approach to segmenting schools based on their strategy and need, to help best support schools; developed options for a new structure • Worked with client to take into account input from a wide variety of key stakeholders including senior leaders, principals, teachers, leading advocates and experts, and students • Developed implementation plans going forward Client background/challenge • Large city currently provides support and management to over 1,800 schools serving over 1 million students. This engagement stemmed from the Mayor's office to reexamine the school support structure. • With the change in administration, it was critical to examine past efforts and continue to improve student achievement. The aim was to take a rigorous look at past efforts, assess the health of the system, and identify and evaluate opportunities to provide the most effective professional development, improve family engagement, support struggling schools, create cost savings, and meet the other diverse needs of its stakeholders. Client benefit/impact of our work • New approach for the district to better segmenting and supporting schools

3.6.2

Offeror Experience 2: Milwaukee Public School System Assessment

Milwaukee Public School System Assessment Proposer’s role: McKinsey served as the Prime Contractor with no Subcontractors 10,640 staff Period of Performance 2008-2009 Number of employees Relevance to the BPS Operational Audit Review RFP Many U.S. school systems have been enduring increased budget pressure, which raises barriers to trying new initiatives that could improve teacher quality and educational performance. If systems can thoughtfully reduce their spending on non-instructional functions (e.g., maintenance, transportation, IT, general supplies, etc.), which the U.S. Department of Education has found to make up roughly 39 percent of system budgets in most states, they may be able to relieve some of this pressure and even free up money to invest in student outcomes. • Based on McKinsey’s analysis of the Milwaukee Public School (MPS) system, we know how sensible improvements in areas such as purchasing and operations can free up as much as 10 percent of a school system’s total budget. With rigorous planning and execution, these measures could also maintain or improve service levels, and correct inefficiencies that commonly lead to worker dissatisfaction. The final McKinsey project report – which was entitled Toward Stronger Milwaukee

McKinsey&Company


24


November 10, 2014

Milwaukee Public School System Assessment Public Schools – examined the district’s non-instructional costs and opportunities for greater operational efficiency. The article is a public document that can be reviewed at the following website: city.milwaukee.gov/ImageLibrary/Groups/MayorAuthors/PDFsHighlights/MPSReport090409.pdf Client background/challenge In fall 2008, Governor Jim Doyle and Mayor Tom Barrett undertook an independent evaluation of the MPS’ finances and operations to better understand the financial state of the district and the options available to address it. This work was conducted by McKinsey throughout the winter of 2008-2009. Brief description of our solution McKinsey provided much of the factbase and analysis for this effort. Our expertise and thorough examination and analysis of district finances and operations led to the following: Direct observations and analyses • Analyzed MPS’ budget to identify historical trends and drivers, and conducted additional analyses in priority areas identified by the system (e.g., conducting site visits at 15 different schools to identify efficiency improvement opportunities) • Interviewed more than 40 personnel (in finance, purchasing, transportation, food services, facilities and maintenance) to collect data, understand their ideas for improvement, share analyses, examine options, and assess the performance culture • Collaborated with the City Assessor’s Office to estimate the value of 24 unused facilities owned by MPS • Analyzed electronic purchasing data and weeks of paper receipts Scenario modeling • Developed a roughly 5-year financial projection for MPS, with technical assistance from MPS staff • Modeled savings for various transportation initiatives using detailed MPS and county bus routes, student data, and Geographic Information Systems mapping software Benchmarking • Benchmarked several areas of MPS’ budget and expenditures against other school districts, both within Wisconsin and beyond • Compared county transit discounts to national benchmarks • Worked with MPS Purchasing to compare MPS prices for purchased items with external and internal benchmarks • Benchmarked MPS’ current performance management system against the characteristics of highperforming school systems, and developed options for sustained improvements • As part of this study, the team conducted a performance management diagnostic to assess MPS’ performance management processes and culture against best practices in public- and private-sector organizations Client benefit/impact of our work Through this engagement, the leadership of the district and state conveners identified the following next steps based on the McKinsey's final report: • Launch an operations transformation program. To improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the district’s non-instructional operations and an operations transformation program to take advantage of some or all the opportunities identified by the project team Implement a robust performance management system • A dedicated, short-term effort led by a new and empowered program management office could be implemented to begin making changes and accruing savings immediately • If properly implemented, the identified $58 million to $103 million in annual savings could be achieved over 2 to 3 years

McKinsey&Company


25


November 10, 2014

Milwaukee Public School System Assessment • Savings were identified across numerous categories of spend (e.g., textbook purchasing, supply purchasing, cost of transportation service, facility optimization, and aligning benefits with benchmarks) • While achieving financial sustainability is of critical importance, it is the means to an end: freeing up resources to help improve academic outcomes. Timeliness of performance/services provided • All services and work products were of high quality, and were delivered on time and on budget.

3.6.3

Offeror Experience 3: Urban Midwestern School System

Urban Midwestern School District Proposer’s role: McKinsey was engaged by a local coalition seeking an Operational Review as part of a broader reflection on the path forward for the system >7,000 staff May-Jun 2013 Period of performance Number of employees Relevance to the BPS Operational Audit Review RFP A large, urban, Midwestern school system with over 50,000 students was engaging on a broad process with a set of external community members and key stakeholders. As part of this extensive effort to understand the system’s challenges, engage the community to get their perspectives, and chart an effective path forward, the system sought an operational review of the system to highlight strengths, identify areas of opportunity, and propose next steps that the system could pursue as part of its renewed path forward. This approach of rapidly developing a perspective on operational effectiveness in collaboration with the system in order to actively shape the path forward for improvement is very analogous to the proposed BPS effort. Client background/challenge In early 2013, the urban school system was faced by declining enrollment, a troubling lack of academic progress, and a deeply skeptical local community including parents, community, and business leaders. An outside commission was formed to do a cross-cutting review of the system’s overall situation and potential path forward. McKinsey was engaged to dive deeply in a short period of time on operational issues. Brief description of our solution McKinsey focused explicitly on non-instructional spend, and conducted a rapid diagnostic of the system, comparing the system to comparable national peers as well as analogous systems within the state. Based on these insights and early discussions across the system, the client identified a series of opportunities that warranted further exploration based on the potential for improvement. In these areas, we conducted further diagnostics, and engaged McKinsey subject-matter experts both within and outside of our Education Practices. Based on this work, we identified a number of places where recent improvements within the system should be recognized and celebrated. In addition, we identified savings on the order of 10%-20%. Direct observations and analyses • Analyzed the system’s core spending categories, trends over times, and drivers of major costs • Brought prior experience to bear in order to rapidly assess potential areas for improvement from which system leadership selected areas for further pursuit in the near term • Conducted extensive interviews, understanding practices at the system and school levels and comparing those to our experiences in other systems Scenario modeling • Modeled different configurations (e.g., transportation routing) to identify the critical factors driving

McKinsey&Company


26


November 10, 2014

Urban Midwestern School District high costs today and room for improvement in the future Client benefit/impact of our work • Operational review was well-received and high-level findings incorporated into a broader report • Group of local leaders worked together to extend the diagnostic findings, triage the potential opportunities, and set short-term and long-term savings targets for the system • Report served to both acknowledge the progress of the system – allaying some community skepticism, while providing a set of options for improvement that could yield funds that could be reallocated to high-priority academic initiatives Timeliness of performance/services provided • All services and work products were of high quality, and were delivered on time and on budget.

3.6.4

Offeror Experience 4: Gates Foundation/ Pittsburgh Public School System, Effective Teachers

Gates Foundation + 5 Public School Districts including Pittsburgh Public Schools Teacher effectiveness Proposer’s role: McKinsey served as the Prime Contractor with no Subcontractors Gates:1,211 Period of Performance 05/09 to 08/09, Number of employees 09/09 to 09/10 Pittsburgh PS:5,180 at the client organization Relevance to the BPS Operational Audit Review RFP • Stakeholder management: Demonstrated ability to manage complex stakeholder relationships on politically-sensitive issues (teacher performance) • Cost analyses: Developed cost analyses of proposals across complex urban schools districts Client background/challenge • Need to improve teacher effectiveness and student achievement Brief description of McKinsey's solution/services provided • Worked in partnership with district leadership, principals, and teachers to develop vision for teacher effectiveness, create strategies to improve effectiveness from preparation through retention, and created detailed implementation plans, cost analyses, and stakeholder communication plans • Supported Pittsburgh Public Schools in first year of implementation of teacher effectiveness strategies, including HR effectiveness, IT systems, and teacher practice evaluation Client benefit/impact of our work • Leveraged further philanthropic funding for districts through submission of clear proposals to improve teacher effectiveness Timeliness of performance/services provided • All services and work products were of high quality, and were delivered on time and on budget.

McKinsey&Company


27


3.6.5

November 10, 2014

Offeror Experience 5: Mayor Walsh 2014 Transition Team Engagement

Mayor Walsh 2014 Transition Team Proposer’s role: McKinsey served as the Prime Contractor with no Subcontractors 230 Period of performance Jan-Feb 2014 Number of employees Relevance to the BPS Operational Audit Review RFP This project demonstrates McKinsey’s intimate familiarity with the City of Boston. It also gives us considerable context into why neighborhood development is such a critical topic for the City. We performed an as-is/to-be assessment and interviewed stakeholders to understand the key challenges and opportunities. We also performed benchmarking services to understand permitting best practices in other cities. We then synthesized our findings into a clear, recommended vision, and a set of eight actions for the mayor and Inspectional Services Department team to take. Client background/challenge In early 2014, the new Mayor of Boston, Marty Walsh, was transitioning into office. Mayor Walsh’s Transition Team tasked McKinsey with addressing and evaluating two key, front-line issues: 1) the City’s approach to permitting; and 2) the potential consolidation of two major City departments. The team asked McKinsey to identify opportunities to improve a permitting process that constituents viewed as slow, complex, and burdensome, and then to create a clear and actionable plan for improvement. Brief description of our solution We conducted a diagnostic of permitting issues and developed recommendations for changes required in order for the permitting process to be a faster, clearer, and easier experience. Our approach consisted of the following five steps: 1. Diagnose current performance. The McKinsey team built a clear baseline of current performance, including time to approval for different types of permits, causes of delays, and stakeholder perceptions, all while gathering insights on the experiences of both applicants and City employees. 2. Identify root causes of issues. To determine the root causes of performance issues, the McKinsey team mapped each step of the permitting process, including the time and resources required at each step. This enabled the team to identify bottlenecks and key issues in the existing process. 3. Compare Boston’s permitting qualitatively to other U.S. cities. The team compared Boston’s permitting process to that of other cities, particularly those with an easy, clear experience. This enabled the team to expand on the potential opportunities for improvement. 4. Highlight potential innovations in government. The team also identified farther-reaching, cuttingedge technologies and approaches that might be applied to City permitting. The team presented the ideas that were most relevant to Boston’s permitting process as long-term aspirational ideas. 5. Develop a perspective on how Boston and ISD should approach revising the permitting process. Finally, the McKinsey team synthesized the ideas for improvement into a set of eight discrete actions and an action plan. Together, the execution of these actions will enable Boston to significantly improve its permitting process and realize the mayor’s vision. Client benefit/impact of our work • Developed a vision with explicit goals and timing for ISD’s permitting performance, underpinning the mayor’s announcement of targets (e.g., 75% of basic permits approved in less than 20 days) • Identified and outlined eight actions required to realize this vision, including specific operational improvements to the permitting process, as well as organizational and cultural changes Timeliness of performance/services provided • All services and work products were of high quality, and were delivered on time and on budget.

McKinsey&Company


28


3.7

November 10, 2014

Additional Services

McKinsey confirms that if the City elects to obtain additional operational audit/review services, at its sole discretion, the selected Offeror shall be available for such additional services directly related to this RFP, at the rates provided in response to this RFP, and pursuant to a contract amendment, additional statement of work, or purchase order, as applicable and as permitted by law.

McKinsey&Company


29


November 10, 2014

Appendix A: Resumes DR. NAVJOT SINGH, PH.D.

Director of Client Service

Key qualifications  Managing Partner of McKinsey’s Boston Office  Director of Client Services for Commonwealth of Massachusetts and City of Boston  Led McKinsey’s support on permitting with Boston 2014 to assist the Inspectional Services Department in Boston  Member of the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce and Executive Committee

Dr. Navjot Singh is the Managing Partner of McKinsey & Company’s Boston Office. He leads McKinsey’s work with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and City of Boston. He is also the leader of the Innovation Service Line working both with private sector and public sector institutions. He primarily consults in the areas of strategy, operations, corporate finance, business development, and risk management engagements. Prior to joining McKinsey, Navjot was a Laboratory Manager at General Electric and he is a co-inventor on over 15 patents. Relevant experience  Leads McKinsey’s work with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the City of Boston  Approach to Permitting – Boston 2014. Led the McKinsey team’s effort to identify opportunities to improve the ISD’s permitting process and to create a clear and actionable plan for improvement. This project involved diagnosing current performance, identifying root causes of issues, conducting an analytic comparison of Boston’s permitting process to other U.S. cities, and highlighting potential innovations. The team identified and outlined eight actions required to realize this vision, including specific operational improvements to the permitting process, as well as organizational and cultural changes, which are currently being implemented by ISD and City leadership.  IT portfolio optimization – U.S. state. Assisted in revitalizing the state’s IT portfolio. This included developing a digital tool, CASE, that estimated the return on investment (ROI) for existing and future IT programs. McKinsey designed and tested the tool, developed training documentation for key stakeholders, and provides continuous improvement against existing SLAs. The team also developed a structured ROI optimization methodology that, in addition to quantifying financial costs and benefits, was able to quantify nonfinancial benefits and assess the likelihood of success. They also built client capabilities to ensure sustainability of the transformation.  Regional development association. Led a team serving this key regional association, comprised of stakeholders from academia and research, technology firms, and other community members to help understand its competitive position compared to other innovation hubs. This served as the basis for the Association’s strategic plan to ensure the area maintains it distinct advantages as a place to work, live, and innovate.  Leading medical institution in Massachusetts. Worked extensively across all facets of the organization to help leadership bridge the budget challenges, and identify its future strategic direction. Work led to over $90 million in cost savings and helped define future revenue opportunities.  Multiple clients – extensive experiences in change management and fast-changing environments. Complexity and large programs have been central to impact for multiple clients. Nav

McKinsey&Company


A-1


 

November 10, 2014

has worked across all type of clients varying from public sector to private sector – both large and smaller institutions to drive impact at scale in complex environments. Design for Six Sigma. Trained and experienced in all Design for Six Sigma tools and applying customer insights and experience to enhance performance. Multiple clients. Work across multiple clients to enhance performance and drive continuous improvement.

Education, professional licenses, certifications, and memberships Institution Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute University of Minnesota Indian Institute of Technology

Degree or certification

Graduated

M.B.A. Ph.D., Chemical Engineering B. Tech, Engineering

2000 1994 1989

Role Senior Partner Laboratory Manager Staff Scientist

Date 2001-present 1998-2001 1994-1998

Work history Employer McKinsey & Company General Electric Company General Electric Company

McKinsey&Company


A-2


JULES SEELEY

November 10, 2014

Director of Client Service

Key qualifications  A leader in McKinsey’s Boston Office with deep knowledge and familiarity of the city management structure  Led McKinsey’s support on permitting with Boston 2014 to assist the Inspectional Services Department in Boston, and explored opportunities in Boston Transport Department and Public Works Department  Extensive public sector work for cities on the topics of urban transit and infrastructure  Leads McKinsey’s Corporate and Business Support Function Practice Jules Seeley is a Partner in McKinsey’s Boston Office with extensive experience serving public sector clients in the U.S. and internationally, including many cities and their agencies over his 14 years at McKinsey. He has experience in departmental efficiency, operational effectiveness, public transportation, departmental reform and customer experience. Jules leads our Corporate and Business Support Function Practice in North America, which tackles cost efficiency and effectiveness of the administrative support activities of an organization including finance, HR, IT, and procurement. He led our support to the Inspectional Services Department in the City of Boston. He has advised clients in many countries around the world, with extensive experience in the United States, the United Kingdom (where he was based for 8 years), Spain, Israel, Belgium, Greece, South Africa, and India. Relevant experience  Approach to Permitting – Boston 2014. Led the McKinsey team’s effort to identify opportunities to improve the ISD’s permitting process and to create a clear and actionable plan for improvement. This project involved diagnosing current performance, identifying root causes of issues, conducting an analytic comparison of Boston’s permitting process to other U.S. cities, and highlighting potential innovations. The team identified and outlined eight actions required to realize this vision, including specific operational improvements to the permitting process, as well as organizational and cultural changes, which are currently being implemented by ISD and City leadership.  Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce. Led work with the GBCC to explore its future aspirations and vision, and how current activities align with these aspirations. Work involved analysis of the GBCC’s current performance, interviews with members and non-member stakeholders, and working closely with the Chamber’s executive team to assess current performance and develop a vision for the future.  Major U.S. transit authority. Led an operational efficiency and strategic sourcing program, initially addressing nearly $1 billion of spend across indirect and direct categories. Work involved building the baseline of current spend, identifying potential savings levers from policy changes, operational improvements, quantities purchased, specifications, and pricing; exploring new revenue opportunities; and building capabilities.  Leading U.S. city. Supported the commuter railroad in a leading U.S. city to explore the potential to offer Internet connectivity to commuters. Work involved exploring the current customer experience and pain-points, understanding needs and expectations from customers, and an assessment of the technology options. The team also ran a survey of ~1,000 commuters to explore directly their needs and “use cases” for connectivity and to prioritize, for example, speed versus cost versus reliability.

McKinsey&Company


A-3














November 10, 2014

Large public sector organization. Supported a public sector organization to streamline how it processes case work. Mapped current document and information flows and understood issues for current users. Then, through a series of workshops, developed a streamlined and improved process that allowed the case workers to nearly double their efficiency and significantly improved job satisfaction and excitement. Heavy focus on the end-user experience and the implications of these changes. Large transportation client. Worked alongside a McKinsey Digital Labs team at a transport client to redesign then recode critical elements of the mobile site and app. The work saw the app improve from 1-star to 4-star ratings through improved speed to load and run, more intuitive and visual interface and more “error-friendly” interaction with customers. Subsequent releases improved the user interface further, driving improvement in the conversion rate on the site. Metropolitan infrastructure provider. Developed the regulatory strategy approach and supporting approach to negotiations. Work included developing pricing proposals and sharpening the arguments to demonstrate that the operator provides value for money. Supported through a series of multiple rounds of engagement. U.S. Class I freight railroad. Supported the organization through a cost transformation. Work involved a broad-based diagnostic across the operating cost base followed by a series of targeted engagements to drive efficiency and cost transformation in key areas of the railroad operations and administration. The second phase involved driving cost-efficiency in the business support functions (finance, legal, HR, etc.). British Armed Forces. Improved efficiency and effectiveness of maintenance support to vehicle fleets in the British Armed Forces. The work involved developing a new lean maintenance support for multiple helicopter fleet platforms, taking an end-to-end approach to optimizing materials, resourcing and information flows throughout the entire support and repair loop, leading to significant increase in fleet “up-time” and substantial reduction in size of the total fleet to deliver the same operational fleet requirements. Major European transit authority. Supported a major European transit authority on a transformation program to transform operating, maintenance and capital costs, assess opportunities to raise farebox and ancillary revenue, and assess strategic options including new ownership structures.

Education, professional licenses, certifications, and memberships Institution Harvard Business School Cambridge University Cambridge University

Degree M.B.A., Baker Scholar, High Distinction

Graduated 2004

M.Sc., Experimental Physics M.A., Natural Sciences, Experimental Physics

1999 1998

Work history Employer McKinsey & Company Mitchel Madison Group Deloitte and Touche

McKinsey&Company

Role Partner Intern Intern


Date 1999-present 1998-1998 1997-1997

A-4


DOUG SCOTT

November 10, 2014

Project Leadership, Project Leader

Key qualifications  Senior Expert in McKinsey’s Social Sector Practice, focused on Education  12+ years of education sector-related experience  Led operational reviews and resource reallocation efforts to improve student outcomes in multiple systems  Developed a long-term strategic plan for a large Midwestern school system  Led the transformation effort for a major community college system  Led programs across a wide range of high-needs K-12 school systems on topics such as teacher effectiveness, teacher professional development Doug is a Senior Expert in McKinsey’s Social Sector Practice, and a core leader of the Education Practice. Doug grew up outside of Boston, benefitting greatly from the strong public schools in the suburbs of Massachusetts. In many ways, his gratitude for the excellent education he received in public school fuels his passion to support K-12 systems improvement around the country. Doug’s core focus, both at and prior to joining McKinsey, has been education with specific emphasis in talent development and performance transformation. Doug is also part of McKinsey’s Organization Practice which is focused on ensuring that change efforts are designed and executed sustainably so that progress is durable and significant. His education work includes: leading operational reviews and resource reallocation efforts to improve student outcomes in multiple systems, developing a long-term strategic plan for a large Midwestern school system, leading the transformation effort for a major community college system, and leading programs across a wide range of high-needs K-12 school systems on topics such as teacher effectiveness and professional development. Doug also worked on projects to build broad stakeholder support for a state’s Race to the Top application, and supported a foundation’s roll-out of a digitallyenabled professional development strategy. His education experience is built on five years as a Partner with The New Teacher Project (TNTP). TNTP is a nationally-known organization focused on improving teacher quality in the districts that need it most, and shaping the national debate on education policy. At TNTP, Doug led programs across a wide range of high-needs school systems and states including Kansas City, Missouri; Kansas City, Kansas; New Orleans Parish, Louisiana; the Louisiana Board of Regents; Pinellas County, Florida; and the Arkansas State Board of Education. Relevant experience (select examples only)  Long-term strategic plan for an urban school system. McKinsey worked with a major Midwestern system to develop a 5-year strategic plan. This effort was developed in collaboration with the Board, system leadership, and business community drawing on extensive input from parents, teachers, principals, and other local community members. The plan is still the guiding approach for the system despite Board and Superintendent transitions given the level of support generated during the effort. 

Working with a major urban K-12 system to develop and launch major change initiative. Doug led McKinsey’s support of a major urban system in developing an approach to for a 10-year footprint and neighborhood strategy and accelerate the academic strategy. As part of this, the McKinsey team built a delivery unit structure to help focus the system’s strategy, prioritize initiatives, and monitor implementation progress to ensure barriers are removed and progress is accelerated.

McKinsey&Company


A-5


November 10, 2014



Transforming a large community college system. McKinsey supported the strategic transformation of a top 5 community college system to dramatically improve student success, both in terms of near-term employment and transfers to a 4-year institution. The work including deep dives into areas including student support, developmental education, program alignment, partnerships with local employers and engaging Advisory Boards of local businesses, community members, academics, and funders. This work also included a capability-building program for task force members and task force leaders to ensure the faculty, staff, and students were well equipped to identify promising improvement opportunities for the system across 7 priority areas. To date, the system has doubled its graduation rate and been nationally recognized for its improved performance.



Developing a teacher effectiveness strategy for a major urban school system, diving deep into topics including teacher recruitment, placement policies, career ladders, and professional development. This collaborative effort resulted in the system submitting a proposal with full support of its teacher’s union to dramatically improve effectiveness over the coming years. The system’s proposal resulted in a significant award from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and early success garnered further financial support for the work.



Supported a state in developing its Race to the Top application: which included working with a broad range of stakeholders (districts, teacher’s unions, state leaders, and the community) to develop an innovative application with a strong base of support.



Worked with a private equity firm to understand a range of issues related to the Education industry: including the potential migration to digital materials in K-12 and Higher Education. Effort included understanding administrator perspectives, identifying barriers and enablers for adoption, as well as the areas most likely to move to digital materials in the near-term



Developing a state-level strategy for Higher Education: Doug led the McKinsey effort to design a state-level strategy for the higher education system of a large Midwestern US state. The work focused on helping to develop partnerships between the major public systems in the state and the business community to improve the alignment of degrees to workforce demands and to adapt in the face of ongoing funding pressures



Revising McKinsey’s organizational capacity assessment tool to improve usability and add a full module for Advocacy Organizations. The original tool has been used by thousands of funders and nonprofits, and has been translated into 11 languages. In the year since the revision launched online, it has been used by over 120 organizations and over 1200 users.

Education, professional licenses, certifications, and memberships Institution

Degree

Northwestern University, Graduate School of Management Harvard University

M.B.A., Marketing, Management of Organization A.B., Psychology

Graduated 2007 1996

Work history Employer McKinsey & Company

Senior Expert

Johnson & Johnson Vision Care The New Teacher Project Merck-Medco Managed Care, LLC

Marketing Intern Partner Manager

McKinsey&Company

Role


Date 1996-1999 2007-present 2006 2000-2005 1999-2000

A-6


JACOB BRYANT

November 10, 2014

Project Team, Representative Associate

Key qualifications  Has worked with over 40 school districts including Boston, Newark, Prince George’s County (MD), Baltimore, and Pittsburgh in more than 10 states on topics including operational, academic and financial audits, strengthening support to struggling students, developing a strategic plan and a system for performance management, and improving teacher human capital  Led the planning and launch of a $20 million/year investment portfolio in attracting and developing new teachers and principals for low-income schools for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation  Taught middle school social studies and ESL in Los Angeles, CA and Yokohama, Japan

Jacob Bryant is a Senior Associate with McKinsey & Company who lives in Massachusetts, where he serves education leaders on topics including operational review and improvement, strategic planning, organizational transformation, and performance management. He is an expert on school district strategy and resource allocation, special education, elementary reading, and teacher and principal human capital. Previously, Jacob served as a Program Officer for Education at the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, where he designed and launched a new $20 million per year grant portfolio focused on strengthening the pipeline of new, high-quality teachers and school leaders for low-income students. Prior to the Gates Foundation, Jacob served as a senior manager at the District Management Council, a boutique consultancy focused on supporting the leadership of school systems to plan and implement reform. In his previous tenure at McKinsey, Jacob helped found the Education Delivery Institute, a non-profit joint venture between McKinsey and the Education Trust, which works with state superintendents to articulate goals and manage performance. He holds a Bachelors degree from Harvard College and has taught elementary and middle school in Yokohama, Japan, and East Los Angeles. Recent engagement experience  Comprehensive plan for education division of a large U.S. foundation.- A comprehensive strategic plan for the education division of a large U.S. foundation, including the articulation of a theory of change, key initiatives, and the formation of a $25 million “innovation portfolio” to stimulate high-risk, high-reward projects to dramatically improve educational outcomes for lowincome and minority students.  Southern U.S. state. An assessment of the workforce development system of a medium-sized Southern state, including the identification of opportunities to better connect higher education programs to employers’ needs and potential interventions to increase economic opportunity.  Large urban district: develop a clear theory of action and realign resources to support the strategy, including review of staffing ratios, special education investments and opportunities, financial and enrollment outlook. Education, professional licenses, certifications, and memberships Institution Harvard College

McKinsey&Company

Degree or certification B.A., Social Studies


Graduated 2012

A-7


November 10, 2014

Work history Employer McKinsey & Company Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation District Management Council

McKinsey&Company

Role Senior Associate Program Officer Engagement Manager


Date 2013-present 2012-13 2010-12

A-8


November 10, 2014

EVAN SMITH

Project Team, Representative Associate

Key qualifications  Former Director of School Operations for District of Columbia Public Schools  Former classroom teacher  Board member, Meridian Public Charter School (Washington, DC) Evan is an Associate in the Washington, DC, Office of McKinsey & Company with broad operational, analytic and leadership experiences across the public and private sectors. Before joining McKinsey, Evan was a Teach for America teacher in the New Orleans Public Schools. After his time in the classroom, Evan joined the Washington, D.C. Public Schools, where he was the Director of School Operations during a major school district transformation. Beyond Evan’s focus on education with McKinsey he has experiences that have spanned sectors including health care, economic development, technology and education, working in areas of corporate strategy, organizational design and service operations. Relevant McKinsey experience  New business development study for a large, global education provider. Built a new business model for a company who is ambitious to expand into other markets and functions through market research and organizational design.  Education study for a major national consortium of states to help them develop and implement a Race to the Top grant supporting the roll out of the Common Core Standards.  Organizational study for a major education non-profit, helping to build a new organization from scratch, best equipped to assist states and districts with the implementation of the Common Core curriculum.  Intensive, 6-week workshop for the top team of a U.S. federal agency, to drive them to reimagine their agency’s mission and impacts over the next 5 years. Education, professional licenses, certifications, and memberships Institution University of Virginia, Darden Graduate School of Business Administration University of Cambridge, Girton College University of Pennsylvania

Degree or certification M.B.A., Business Administration

Graduated 2012

Masters, History

2007

B.A., Political Science, Urban Studies, History

2004

Work history Employer McKinsey & Company District of Columbia Public Schools Federal Emergency Management Agency New Orleans Public Schools/ Teach for America

McKinsey&Company

Role

Director of School Operations

Date 2012-present Summer 2011 2007-2010

Disaster Recovery Center Manager

2005

High School Social Studies Teacher

2004-2005

Associate


A-9


DAVID FUBINI

November 10, 2014

Subject Matter Expert, City of Boston and Transformation

Key qualifications  34 years of public and private sector experience  Deep experience with City of Boston and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts  Former Managing Partner of McKinsey’s Boston Office  Current member of several prominent Boston civic organizations  Former leader of North American Organization Practice  Founder and former leader of Worldwide Merger Integration Practice

David Fubini recently completed a 34-year career at McKinsey & Company and remains an Emeritus Director acting as counsel to the Firm. During his McKinsey career, David was a long-tenured, Managing Partner of the Boston Office, a leader of the Firm’s North American Organization Practice, as well as the founder and leader of the Firm’s Global Merger Integration Practice. During his tenure at McKinsey, David led – and/or was a member – of every Firm personnel committee, as well as a participant in a wide cross-section of McKinsey’s governance forums and committees. David recently joined the faculty of the Harvard Business School as a Senior Lecturer with a focus on organization leadership and behavior, transformative strategy, and leading professional service operations. David graduated with a BBA from University of Massachusetts, Amherst, and an MBA from Harvard Business School, both with distinction. He is the author of two books: Mergers, Leadership Performance, and Corporate Health as well as Let Me Explain, a biography of his father, Eugene Fubini. Relevant experience  Led the organizational transformation of one of the world’s largest media services companies  Supported the reorganization of six sales and marketing divisions, as well as the creation of a new nameplate division, for one of the major U.S.-based OEM automotive manufacturers  Helped create one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical companies by supporting the largest merger in the industry’s history  Led support for the largest corporate vertical integration effort in the global beverage industry  Aided the consolidation of one of the world’s largest aluminum companies with an equally prominent mining conglomerate  Supported merger of a leading PC manufacturer with a global high-tech entrepreneurial company based in the Far East  Current Senior Lecturer at Harvard Business School with a focus on organization leadership and behavior, transformative strategy, and leading professional service operations  Member of several prominent Boston civic organizations. He was appointed as a Trustee of the University of Massachusetts and named by the Massachusetts State Legislature as a member of the Massachusetts Court Management Advisory Board. He is an Executive Committee member of the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, as well as the Boston Municipal Research Board, the Inner City Scholarship Fund, and is also a co-chair of the Board of Overseers of the Boston YMCA. In addition, David is a member of Harvard Business School’s Dean’s Advisory Council, the UMass Amherst Foundation, and the UMass Eisenberg School of Business Dean’s Committee.

McKinsey&Company


A-10


November 10, 2014

Education, professional licenses, certifications, and memberships Institution Harvard Business School University of Massachusetts at Amherst

Degree M.B.A., with Distinction B.A., Marketing, with Distinction

Graduated 1980 1976

Title Emeritus Director Assistant Brand Manager

Date 1980-present 1976-1978

Work history Organization McKinsey & Company McNeil Consumer Product Company

McKinsey&Company


A-11


KARTIK JAYARAM

November 10, 2014

Subject Matter Expert, Education and System Administration and Operation

Key qualifications  Co-leader of the North American Education Practice  Leader in McKinsey’s North America Operations practice and member of McKinsey’s Business Technology Practice  Expert in system administration and operations  Has led work in multiple urban U.S. public school systems

Kartik is a Partner in McKinsey’s Chicago Office. Since joining the Firm, he has worked with a broad range of clients including social sector, public sector, high-tech, and industrial clients. Before settling into the Chicago office, Kartik spent time in Asia and Europe, primarily working in McKinsey’s Kuala Lumpur, Shanghai and Paris offices. Kartik leads McKinsey’s North America Education Practice. He has served global foundations, community colleges, K-12 school districts, charter/turnaround operators, universities and private sector companies. His recent work in education includes initiatives to develop performance management systems, drive financial and operational efficiencies, develop organization and talent management strategies, and increase student success/ improve productivity in the U.S. post-secondary education sector In addition to his education work, Kartik works on economic development with governments and bilateral agencies in Africa and interested in driving operations and org transformations with his clients. Relevant experience  Strategic planning for leading university’s Graduate School of Education. Kartik was part of the leadership team supporting the blue sky strategy review to rethink the way the School of Education prepares students to be leaders at school systems, and to become global educators. A large part of the blue sky strategy hinged upon the role of technology in global education and school systems of the future. In addition to helping to develop the strategy, the McKinsey team supported stakeholder engagement and alignment. Included in the stakeholder management efforts, the team convened and supported a periodic faculty steering committee as well as an integrated faculty/administration committee. Other stakeholder management activities included managing defensive faculty and admin attitudes by holding a “gallery walk” to syndicate findings of the study’s diagnostic, and working closely with the dean and lead faculty members as endorsers of the work to their colleagues.  Transforming a large community college system: McKinsey supported the strategic transformation of a top 5 community college system to dramatically improve student success, both in terms of near-term employment and transfers to a 4-year institution. The work including deep dives into areas including student support, developmental education, program alignment, partnerships with local employers and engaging Advisory Boards of local businesses, community members, academics, and funders. This work included a capability-building program for task force members and task force leaders to ensure faculty, staff, and students were well equipped to identify promising improvement opportunities for the system across 7 priority areas.  Winning by Degrees: Kartik was a contributing author of the report, "Winning by degrees: The strategies of highly productive higher-education initiatives." Through that work, the team found that college attainment rates in the U.S. have remained nearly flat for the past 10 years, whereas they have continued to rise in most industrialized nations. Based on a recent analysis, the report estimated that the U.S. needs to graduate roughly one million more people per year by 2020 to

McKinsey&Company


A-12






November 10, 2014

ensure that the country has the skilled workers it needs to maintain economic growth. To graduate up to one million additional students per year without increasing public spending or compromising quality, U.S. higher-education institutions need to improve their degree completion productivity by an average of 23 percent. Through an in-depth study of detailed data on performance, costs and practices shared by eight highly productive schools, the report identified five winning strategies, focusing on raising the rate at which students complete their degrees and improving cost efficiency. Together these strategies could result in over 60 percent higher degree productivity. inBloom, Inc. Kartik helped to lead our work on designing and standing up a new non-profit in the K-12 education technology space. We supported the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and Carnegie Corporation of New York in developing the sustainable organization, governance, and business model for inBloom, a K-12 education database and application platform in the U.S. We have also supported this new organization as it transitioned from a project of the two foundations to an independent 501c3, and continue to support the organization as it establishes itself as a transformative new player in the education market. Education technology strategy for leading technology company. Kartik has worked on many education technology strategy studies with companies in the high-tech space. An example of this work includes recent work with a leading technology conglomerate thinking through possible solutions to support universities. The strategy incorporated McKinsey’s best thinking on online growth, and incorporated options for hardware/software product strategies and infrastructure needs. In addition to developing as strategy and business case for building the new business, McKinsey helped with the implementation planning and support.

Education, professional licenses, certifications, and memberships Institution Booth School of Business, University of Chicago University of North Carolina Indian Institute of Technology

Degree

Graduated

M.B.A.

2000

M.S., Operations Research Engineering B.Eng., Industrial Engineering

1998 1996

Work history Employer McKinsey & Company Kenan Flagler Business School, UNC Chapel Hill

McKinsey&Company

Title Director Instructor, Business Statistics/Management Science


Dates 2000-present 1996-1998

A-13


SUSAN COLBY

November 10, 2014

Subject Matter Expert K-12

Key qualifications  Leader in McKinsey’s Education Practice  Former CEO of Stupski Foundation, a national education philanthropy  Led K-12 education and foundation strategy for more than a decade at The Bridgespan Group

Susan Colby is a leader in McKinsey’s Education Practice. She recently left the Stupski Foundation, a national education philanthropy, where she served as Chief Executive Officer. Before that, Susan was a founding partner of The Bridgespan Group’s San Francisco office and led the group’s work in K-12 education and foundation strategy for more than a decade. Susan has also served as co-president of the Sustainable Development Sector at Monsanto. Earlier in her career, she worked at McKinsey. Relevant Experience  Developed a U.S. K-12 education strategy, the biggest initiative in the United States, for a major foundation. The strategy has led to unprecedented national impact on teacher effectiveness, data, standards, and innovation in teaching and learning.  Fashioned the post-secondary initiative of a large private foundation. She started with a “blank sheet of paper,” researched and prioritized issues, and designed major programs  Worked with a foundation to understand education reform in the relevant geography, including district efforts, the small school movement, and nonprofit and community actors. She worked with the foundation and industry to improve education in the locality.  Developed the strategy and organizational plan for a medium-sized urban school district. She aligned all efforts to enable great teaching and learning in every classroom for all students . She developed supports for students and teachers. Susan reorganized the overall leadership structure and various departments within the district to increase effectiveness and efficiency. And she worked with internal and external stakeholders, including the business community and local community, to build support.  Worked hand in glove with leaders of client and non-client organizations to design conferences to launch new initiatives, enable innovative thinking, develop plans, and forge partnerships across actors and organizations.  Developed internal meetings that help develop strategy, implement new initiatives, improve service, and increase clarity and alignment with core values.  Led the research and writing of major reports that have been published in journals ranging from the Harvard Business Review to Education Next and internal publications.  Worked with internal teams and external communications firms to develop high-impact, attractive, engaging materials in PowerPoint, Word, and other presentation software.  Worked with a foundation and nonprofit organization to develop and support a career pathways initiative that spanned K-12, higher education, and career.  Worked with five CEOs of Charter Management Organizations and their teams to develop and implement best-in-class teacher effectiveness and data practices across their networks.  Worked with school districts to develop strategies and implementation plans that take reform from the idea stage through to implementation at scale. For example, she has worked with a district

McKinsey&Company


A-14


  

November 10, 2014

to ensure that every school has the resources it needs (talent and budget) to deliver excellent educational outcomes for all students. Worked with organizations to develop local, state, and federal policy agendas to enable scaling of reforms. Worked with charter management organizations to develop and implement ambitious growth strategies. Worked with many education nonprofits to develop scaling strategies for their organizations.

Education, professional licenses, certifications, and memberships Institution American University Stanford University

Degree B.A. M.B.A.

Graduated 1983 1987

Work History Employer McKinsey & Company

Expert Partner

Stupski Foundation Bridgespan Group

CEO Partner

McKinsey&Company

Role


Date 1987-1997 2013-present 2010-2012 2000-2010

A-15


JULIE GORAN

November 10, 2014

Subject Matter Expert Organizational Improvement

Key qualifications  Leader in McKinsey’s North America Organizational Practice  Developed a new school support model for a major U.S. school district  Implemented a major cost program at a top health payor to reduce administrative costs  Extensive experience designing new organizational and governance structures across industries

Julie Goran is a Principal in the New York Office of McKinsey & Company. Julie first joined the Firm in 2000 as a Business Analyst, and then again in 2005 as a Senior Associate. She focuses on serving clients across industries on organizational issues, in particular on issues of governance, structure, and organizational design. Julie is a leader in McKinsey’s North America Organizational Practice. Relevant experience  Developing a new school support model for a major U.S. school district. Included assessing needs of schools, other district models, and strengths and weaknesses of current and past district model. Worked closely with senior education and city officials to develop recommendations 

Developing a strategy for a retirement player to better serve its customers across lines of business. Including assessing the current organization and operating model and working with senior executives to develop and implement solutions.



Designing and implementing a major cost program at a top health payor to reduce administrative costs in context of a corporate strategy and responding to health care reform. Focused on program management, organizational assessment, and change management.



Designing a new governance structure for a global asset manager, including top level organization structure and committee structure. Worked closely with senior leaders to define roles and responsibilities for making firm-wide strategic decisions.



Designing a transformation program for a U.S. financial institution, including diagnosing and analyzing the company’s organizational health. Worked closely with the CEO, head of HR, and senior business leaders to understand issues and develop a broad-based transformation program.



Redefining the operating model for the marketing function at a global life insurer. Includes understanding of current structure and capabilities, analysis of best practices and design of new structure.



Conducting a spans and layers analysis for the operations and IT functions at a global life insurer to improve efficiency and effectiveness.



Designing a top team organization structure and governance model for a top health insurance payor. Worked directly with the incoming president to design a structure to enable the organization to achieve its long-term strategic goals.



Designing a new reporting structure for the operations and IT functions at a global life insurer. Included counseling sessions with the CEO and top team in addition to analysis of best practices



Designing a governance model for a U.S. financial institution, including committee structure, mandates, membership, and decision-making authorities. Worked closely with the CEO to design structure and decision-making rights.

McKinsey&Company


A-16


November 10, 2014



Designing a new top management structure for a global pharmaceutical company undergoing a major strategic shift. Worked closely with the CEO and senior leadership team to define options, implications of options, and implementation plan.



Designing a new governance structure for a global asset manager, including top-level organization structure and committee structure. Worked closely with senior leaders to define roles and responsibilities for making firm-wide strategic decisions and to define the annual planning and budgeting process.



Developing a new organizational model for a large global professional services firm. Included defining top management roles, responsibilities, and committees and streamlining the firm’s geographic, practice, and industry structure.



Designing a new organizational model for a global law firm, including leadership positions, organizational structure and governance model. Work also included developing a new compensation and a new retirement program.

Education, professional licenses, Certifications, and memberships Institution New York University Yale University

Degree or Certification J.D. B.A., magna cum laude

Graduated 2005 2000

Work history Employer McKinsey & Company

McKinsey&Company

Role Partner


Date 2000-present

A-17


JUNG PAIK

November 10, 2014

Subject Matter Expert, Education, IT, and Operations

Key qualifications  Leader in McKinsey’s Corporate and Business Support Functions Practice and State and Local Government Practice  Deep expertise in operational diagnostics in the public sector, with a focus on educational organizations  Former member of Boston Public Schools COO’s Strategic Planning Team

Jung Paik is an Associate Partner in the Boston Office of McKinsey & Company. Prior to transferring to the Boston Office in 2010, she was a social sector fellow in McKinsey’s Washington D.C. Office focusing on education and economic development. Jung serves public and private sector clients on operational and strategic topics, with a focus on operational transformations in support functions. Jung is a leader in McKinsey’s State and Local Practice and Corporate and Business Support Functions Practice. Relevant experience  Developing a 90-day operations turnaround plan for a large public school district. Supported the new superintendent of a large urban school district in conducting a high-level diagnostic of operational challenges facing the district and developing a 90-day plan for addressing priority opportunities.  Conducting an in-depth cost diagnostic for a leading educational system to identify >$200 million in savings opportunities over the next five years that would enable the system to reinvest in academic and student programs. Established historic and current baselines on spend, and fostered input and buy-in from key stakeholders on opportunities for reallocating resources.  Building the business case for operational improvements in support functions across a university system’s 64 campuses, to improve quality of services and cost savings. Identified and sized the opportunity for operational improvements and shared services across a wide range of functions including finance, procurement, HR, financial aid, and IT  Implementing and scaling up a finance and HR state shared services center serving 50+ agencies across a large U.S. state. Designed key processes including staff and agency onboarding, performance management, and capacity management. Developed a value assurance model to track impact of the shared services center against the State’s objectives and implemented a robust capability-building program to train the new senior leadership team.  Implementing an operational transformation across all support functions for a large industrials corporation. Identified 20 percent to 30 percent of efficiency opportunity across multiple departments, freeing up resources that could be redirected to priority strategic efforts. Designed a sustainable rollout plan to increase coverage of the lean management system from 600 FTEs to over 5,000.  Creating a growth strategy for a top 10 medical school seeking to improve its rankings to be a top 5 school in the near future. Assessed the quality of its clinical, research, and academic programs and the school’s funds flow model. Engaged key stakeholders in setting new strategic goals and priorities for the school.  Developing an IT transformation for a federal tax agency to dramatically improve the organization’s ability to respond to varying work volumes, time-to-development, and quality.

McKinsey&Company


A-18


November 10, 2014

Conducted a broad diagnostic of current performance, designed new work flows and processes, and coached client team in implementation across multiple pilots. Education, professional licenses, certifications, and memberships Institution

Degree

Graduated

Harvard Business School

MBA

2010

Harvard Kennedy School

MPA

2010

Harvard College

B.A.

2004

Work history Employer

Role

Date

McKinsey & Company

Associate Partner

2004-2007 2010- present

Boston Public Schools

Strategic Planning Associate

2011

McKinsey&Company


A-19


November 10, 2014

Appendix B: Corporate and Business Support Functions Our Corporate and Business Support Functions (CBF) Practice, led by Jules Seeley in North America, specializes in driving efficiency and effectiveness of these processes. We have over 200 partners and function-by-function experts in this area. Our value proposition in improving these support functions rests on three qualifications  Extensive experience and track record. We have completed over 2,000 shared services/G&A redesign transformation engagements over the past 11 years, including helping many leading Fortune 100 firms set up shared services organizations. These projects span the whole improvement cycle from diagnostic to planning and to implementation and value capture. We were among the first professional services organizations globally to drive a range of internal shared service efforts (e.g., knowledge, HR, treasury and finance, IT); recognized as pioneers in India and we have over 600 practitioners worldwide dedicated to shared services and G&A.  Deep functional expertise. We maintain proprietary benchmarking data based on experience with largest companies, including:

– Business and Corporate Support Functions Benchmarking Database, with ~2,130 companies, 13 functions, and 50 subfunctions across multiple sectors and geographies

– – – –

OPP (Organizational Performance Profile) Global Process 360 (Outsourcing & Off-shoring) database

Spans and layers database Sector specific in-depth benchmarking databases (e.g., BOSS for banking, COD for CPG). These databases are complemented by our Organization Practice that has pioneered research on talent acquisition and retention (“war for talent,” “creating wealth from talent in 21st century”).  Proprietary tools and methodologies. In addition to these data, in-depth functional assessment tools gauge effectiveness and efficiency (“360” surveys) spanning finance, HR, IT, facilities/real estate, marketing, communications and legal. Our idea bank is a web-based repository of over 1,000 improvement ideas/ initiatives for each sub-function and driver gathered from over 300 client studies and continuously updated. WAVE is an online initiative training tool that supports implementation of these ideas.

McKinsey&Company


B-1


November 10, 2014

We are helping companies drive efficiency and effectiveness with McKinsey’s CBF 360 — a robust and proprietary approach

>2000 global companies benchmarked against key efficiency & effectiveness metrics, and operating practices Results include 20-35% savings in most cases; as well as improved capabilities & effectiveness (financial controls, service levels, cycle times, etc.)

CBF 360

~100,000 responses from support function & business personnel (voice of customer) Database of best practices, improvement initiatives, and idea library across business support functions and processes Action oriented, involves detailed root cause analysis for issues and translates insights into actions including a clear roadmap to transform the support function

Exhibit 4. McKinsey’s CBF 360 Approach.

Through this work, we have established a set of five core beliefs for what makes an organization successful at deriving sustainable value from business and corporate support functions: 1. Believes transforming support functions is not a one-time event, improvement becomes a matter of course through business cycles 2. Uses a comprehensive approach focused on an integrated set of levers, versus “slash and burn” tactics 3. Addresses organizational structure, governance, mindsets, and capabilities, in addition to fundamental operating practice 4. Focuses on effectiveness as much as efficiency to drive economic value (Exhibit 5) 5. Optimizes end-to-end cross functional business processes to complement functional improvements

McKinsey&Company


B-2


November 10, 2014

Example: Focus on effectiveness as much as efficiency to drive economic value Typical impact and time frame

Effectiveness

3-6 mos

6-18 mos

Sub-total

▪ Reduced Procure-to-Pay (P2P)

1

Demand management

3-4%

2-5%

6-9%

2

Consolidation and centralization

1-2%

2-5%

4-7%

3

Off-shoring and outsourcing

-

5-7%

8-11%

4

Lean process optimization

~1%

3-6%

5-7%

5

Technology enablement

0-1%

2-4%

3-5%

6

Org. structure and governance

2-3%

2-3%

4-6%

~ 6-10%

~15- 25%

20-35%

Efficiency

Total

cycle time by 30% and generated $20 million in supplier discounts

▪ Reduced Order-to-Cash (O2C) cycle time by 40% and increased seller productivity by 25%

▪ Improved workforce planning process, resulting in better matches in demand-supply of staff

▪ Streamlined FP&A at regional hubs to enable faster and higher quality decision making for BUs

Exhibit 5. Focus on Effectiveness is Key to Creating Sustainable Value.

McKinsey&Company


B-3


November 10, 2014

Appendix C: Minimum Evaluation Criteria Minimum Qualifications for Proposal: Please respond Yes or No to the questions below. Has an authorized representative of the Offeror signed the proposal where required and returned all requested forms? [X ] Yes [ ] No Did Offeror submit separate sealed Price and Technical proposals as required by law? [X ] Yes [ ] No

Has Offeror submitted completed signed copies of Standard Contract Forms (Appendix A Standard Contract Forms) including the CM 9 Form: Contractor Certification? [ X] Yes [ ] No

McKinsey&Company


C-1


November 10, 2014

Appendix D: City of Boston Standard Contract Forms

A. Form CM10-11: Standard Contract

McKinsey&Company


D-1


McKinsey&Company


November 10, 2014

D-2


McKinsey&Company


November 10, 2014

D-3


McKinsey&Company


November 10, 2014

D-4


November 10, 2014

B. Form CM06: Certificate of Authority (For Corporations Only)

McKinsey&Company


D-5


November 10, 2014

C. Form CM09: Contractor Certification

McKinsey&Company


D-6


McKinsey&Company


November 10, 2014

D-7


McKinsey&Company


November 10, 2014

D-8


November 10, 2014

D. Forms CM15A-B: CORI

McKinsey&Company


D-9


McKinsey&Company


November 10, 2014

D-10


November 10, 2014

E. Living Wage Forms (LW-2 and LW-8) LW-2

McKinsey&Company


D-11


McKinsey&Company


November 10, 2014

D-12


McKinsey&Company


November 10, 2014

D-13


November 10, 2014

LW-8

McKinsey&Company


D-14


McKinsey&Company


November 10, 2014

D-15


McKinsey&Company


November 10, 2014

D-16

McKinsey Response to RFP

Recommend Documents