A New Option for School District Leaders Under NCLB

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A New Option for School District Leaders Under NCLB starting starting 1 in low-performing schools fresh in low-performing schools fresh The Starting Fresh in Low-Performing Schools series provides district leaders with a blueprint for making deep and lasting change – the kind that is likely to lead to improvements in our most struggling schools. Presented in five parts, the Starting Fresh series honestly addresses the challenges of restruc- A New Option for turing low-performing schools. Through these books, districts learn both why and how to use the Start Fresh strategy successfully. School District Leaders under NCLB 1 A New Option for School District Leaders under NCLB 2 Engaging Parents and the Community 3 Selecting the Right Providers 4 Establishing the Right Relationship Terms 5 Collaborating with Teachers www.charterauthorizers.org M 5 | 6 0 / 3 National Association of A S Charter School Authorizers C A 105 W. Adams Street, Suite 1430 N 6 Chicago, IL 60603-6253 0 0 312.376.2300 2 © The National Association of Charter School Authorizers (NACSA) is a nonprofit Dear School District Leader: membership association of educational agencies that approve and oversee public Today’s school district leaders face a growing list of challenges, not only to charter schools. ensure that their schools provide quality instruction, but to successfully man- NACSA’s mission is to achieve the establishment and operation of quality charter age employee relations, keep parents happy, administer finances wisely and suc- schools through responsible oversight in the public interest. We believe that quality cessfully navigate complex state and federal accountability systems. All of these authorizing plays a critical role in creating and sustaining quality charter schools. challenges come together and intensify when a school fails to make Adequate A quality charter school is characterized by high student achievement, financial Yearly Progress (AYP) under No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) for five years and stewardship, and responsible governance and management. Charter schools can the district must develop and implement a plan for “Restructuring” the school. improve public education by creating greater educational opportunities for students To date, schools around the country are only beginning to reach “restructuring.” and educators and greater educational accountability for public schools. Initial reviews suggest that most district leaders, when considering the five NACSA BOARD OF DIRECTORS restructuring options available under NCLB, are choosing “Other” instead of implementing more aggressive options1 , such as contracting with a school Josephine Baker (Chairperson) District of Columbia Public Charter School Board management company to operate the school or reopening the school as a public James Merriman (Vice Chairperson) State University of New York charter school. While choosing “Other” may make sense for some reasons, one James Goenner (Treasurer) Central Michigan University of those reasons probably isn’t because “Other” provides the best mechanism Jennifer Rippner (Secretary) Office of the Governor, Georgia Bill Andrekopoulos Milwaukee (WI) Public Schools for creating a powerful, enduring, quality school. Indeed “Other” often looks a Dennis Doyle Chula Vista (CA) Elementary School District lot like incremental school improvement strategies that have already been tried James Peyser Massachusetts Board of Education and failed at the very same schools. Carlo Rodriguez Miami-Dade County (FL) Public Schools Justin Testerman Volunteers of America of Minnesota What’s a school district leader to do? The National Association of Charter Greg Richmond (ex-officio) National Association of Charter School Authorizers School Authorizers (NACSA) suggests that you seriously consider all of the powerful tools that are available under Restructuring. Because we specialize in the profession of approving charter schools and developing, overseeing and NACSA STAFF enforcing performance-based contracts with such schools, we particularly Greg Richmond President suggest that you evaluate how “reopening as a charter school”or “entering into Michael R. Cernauskas, CPA Chief Operating Officer a contract with an entity to operate the public school” may be your best John S. Ayers Vice President for Communications options, not only to improve instruction and student performance, but also Rebecca Cass Director, National Activities to increase parental happiness, empower your teachers and successfully meet Brian Bennett Director, Western Region Shenita Johnson Garrard Director, Central Region the demands of state and federal accountability systems. Elizabeth Genco Program Support Manager But even if you choose one of these more aggressive options it doesn’t guaran- Mary Zawaski Executive Assistant tee success. Simply changing the name “Kennedy Middle School” to “Kennedy William Haft Senior Associate Middle Charter School” will do absolutely nothing to increase student perform- Margaret Lin Senior Associate Otho Tucker Senior Associate ance. Likewise, entering into a contract with an outside provider that has no authority to make changes to Kennedy’s instructional approach, curriculum, staffing, management structures, and budget is extremely unlikely to bring STARTING FRESH ADVISORY PANEL about academic improvements. Thus, even when districts choose to use these Gene Eidelman Mosaica Education aggressive restructuring options they must use them correctly and enable the Carolyn Finch Polk County Public Schools (FL) kinds of dramatic changes envisioned by NCLB. We believe that in order for Libia Gil American Institute Research this to work, districts must allow restructured schools to start fresh. David Lin Chicago Public Schools Colin Miller California Charter School Association School district leaders face a growing list of challenges. Starting fresh is not the Paul O’Neill Edison Schools right tool in every circumstance, but it may be the right tool for you. Mike Ronan Lighthouse Academies Todd Ziebarth National Alliance for Public Charter Schools Sincerely, starting Greg Richmond, President 1 fresh in low-performing schools A New Hope for Our Most Challenging Schools The 2005-06 school year started in early September at San Diego’s Gompers Middle School, just like it had for the past 50 years. Well, not exactly. On that Tuesday, California’s governor was on hand to welcome back the students, along with his secretary of education, the chancellor of school year, the school hired a dynamic new leader who remains at the the University of California at San Diego, the superintendent of schools, helm. But Gompers started the 2005-06 school year with just about every- the president of the local Urban League, and a host of other dignitaries. thing else new – and we are not talking about just the paint on the walls. The school grounds were spruced up, thanks to hours of painting, remod- Seventy-five percent of the staff is new, and all of them chose to teach at eling and cleaning over the summer by parents and community members. Gompers rather than being assigned there. For the first time in the build- The school literally rolled out a red carpet for the school’s 1,000 seventh ing’s history, there were no teacher vacancies on the first day of classes. to ninth graders, almost all of whom were from low-income families. In a newly established partnership with University of California at San The fresh start at Gompers had deep and wide Diego (UCSD), the school is replicating the UCSD’s highly successful support, from teachers all the way to the Governor. Preuss School, a charter school that opened in 1999. Like Preuss and Most importantly, it had strong support from parents. other high-performing middle schools around the country, Gompers will have a longer school day, uniforms, and a clear expectation that all stu- dents will go on to college after high school. As part of the partnership Why all the fuss? Gompers and its local school district – San Diego with UCSD, Gompers students will have access to the University’s Unified – are on the leading edge of a new strategy for improving chroni- resources. University students will serve as tutors. And University cally low-performing schools, a strategy known as “starting fresh.” Last teachers will train Gompers faculty. year, fewer than 20% of Gompers students were proficient in language arts and math, ranking the school as one of the lowest performing schools in Across the country in Lakeland, Florida, Seth McKeel Middle School was the district. Years of improvement efforts had failed. The federal No Child one of Polk County’s lowest performing middle schools when the district Left Behind Act said the district had to do something significant to turn converted it to a choice school and then to a charter school. After this the school around. But what? “fresh start,” it’s one of the highest rated middle-high schools, typically earning As in Florida’s accountability system. Like Gompers is seeking to Spurred by strong demand from parents and community members, the do, McKeel transformed itself into a high-performing technology academy school board agreed in March to enable the school to restructure and by essentially building a new school from scratch within the walls of the “start fresh” as Gompers Charter Middle School. During the 2004-05 old middle school. This “fresh-start” school leveraged district and state resources to transform the facility, purchase technology and train teachers, as well as reached an agreement with the teacher’s union to reconstitute the 2 starting 3 fresh in low-performing schools The Challenge staff. McKeel has since gone on to launch a high-performing elementary school with a similar focus. Parents are clamoring to get in: the two schools had a combined waiting list of more than 2,000 in spring 2005. McKeel’s start fresh leveraged resources and enabled an agreement with the teacher's union to Decades of well-intended reforms – including curriculum changes, reconstitute the school's staff. increased funding and professional development – have produced disap- pointing outcomes for many students. While some children have benefited from these initiatives, numerous reforms have offered promise without State and district leaders across the U.S.
Recommended publications
  • New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc
    THE ‘LEARNING BUREAUCRACY’: NEW UNITED MOTOR MANUFACTURING, INC. By Paul S. Adler Downloaded from http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~padler/ THE ‘LEARNING BUREAUCRACY’: NEW UNITED MOTOR MANUFACTURING, INC. by Paul S. Adler School of Business Administration University of Southern California Los Angeles 90089-1421 Tel: (213) 740-0748 DRAFT 3.1 April 1992 Forthcoming in Barry M. Staw and Larry L. Cummings (eds.) Research in Organizational Behavior, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Acknowledgements: The research on which this study is based would not have been possible without the generous cooperation of managers, workers and union officials at NUMMI. Gary Robinson helped transcribe taped interviews with them and discern the key points. This article has benefitted from the comments of several NUMMI people and from the responses of many friends and colleagues: Chris Argyris, Joel Beinin, Christian Berggren, Bob Brenner, Clair Brown, El Buffa, Bob Cole, John Ettlie, Steve Frenkel, Don Gerwin, Meg Graham, Jan Hopland, Sandy Jacoby, Ed Lawler, Ann Majchrzak, Ruth Milkman, Michael Reich, Dick Scott, Bill Simon, David Stern, Steve Wheelwright, Bob Sutton, Lowell Turner, and Stephen Wood. My thinking has also been stimulated by the reaction of colleagues to presentations at the USC, Harvard Business School, NYU, UCLA, and UC Berkeley. My thanks to all these people, many of whom still disagree. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 3 RESEARCH METHODS.........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT WITNESS DESIGNATION on the Interested Parties in This Action by Placing Same in a Sealed Envelope, Addressed As Follows
    1 SAMUEL J. MUIR (SBN 89883) STEPHEN B. LITCHFIELD (SBN 284951) 2 COLLINS COLLINS MUIR + STEWART LLP 3 1999 Harrison Street, Suite 1700 Oakland, CA 94612 4 (510) 844-5100 – FAX (510) 844-5101 5 Attorneys for Defendant McLARAND, VASQUEZ & PARTNERS, INC. (erroneously sued herein as MCLARLAND, VARQUEZ & PARTNERS, INC.) 6 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA —DOWNTOWN DISTRICT 10 CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC, ) CASE NO. 1-13-CV-258281 Complex ) [Assigned to Hon. Peter H. Kirwan; Dept. 1] 11 Plaintiffs, ) ) McLARAND, VASQUEZ & PARTNERS, 12 vs. ) INC.’S SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT WITNESS 13 ) DESIGNATION WESTERN NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION, ) 14 MCLARLAND, VARQUEZ & PARTNERS, ) INC., GROUP M ENGINEERS, GENTRY ) 15 ASSOCIATES CONSTRUCTION ) CONSULTANTS, LARCO INDUSTRIES, ) 16 FITCH PLASTERING, COURTNEY ) 17 WATERPROOFING, CELL CRETE, LOS ) NIETOS CONSTRUCTION, MADERA ) 18 FRAMING, KELLY DOOR, TARA ) COATNGS, LDI, ADM PAINTING, ) 19 ALLIANCE BUILDING PRODUCT, JOS. J. ) ALBANESE, ANDERSON TRUSS, ) Complaint Filed: 12/26/13 20 CALIFORNIA CLASSIC PAVERS, CASEY-) FAC Filed: 03/20/14 21 FOGIL CONCRETE CONTRACTORS, ) Trial Date: 02/01/16 CENTRAL COAST STAIRS, ) 22 COMMERCIAL ROOF MANAGEMENT, ) DAVEY ROOFING, INC., DEMETRIS ) 23 PAINTING II, INC., DOORWAY MFG., ) LANDSCAPE PROS, MULTI-BUILDING ) 24 STRUCTURES, PARK WEST, PYRAMID ) 25 BUILDERS, ROBECKS WELDING & ) FABRICATION, RYLOCK COMPANY, ) 26 SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR, ) VANGUARD and DOES 1-100, inclusive, ) 27 ) Defendants. ) 28 _____________________________________) Collins Collins 19010 – EXPERT DESIGNATION OF MVP (SUPP) (12-04-15) Muir + Stewart LLP 1999 Harrison Street Suite 1700 1 Oakland, CA 94612 Phone (510) 844-5100 SUPPLEMENTAL EXPERT DESIGNATION OF McLARAND, VASQUEZ & PARTNERS Fax (510) 844-5101 1 WESTERN NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION, ) ) 2 Cross-Complainant, ) 3 ) vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Pg 1.Qxp 6/20/2008 11:34 AM Page 1
    pg 1.qxp 6/20/2008 11:34 AM Page 1 Supplement to JUNE 23, 2008 © 2008 Crain Communications. All rights reserved. 20082008 GlobalGlobal MarketMarket DataData BookBook Global vehicle production and sales by region • Regional vehicle production and sales history and forecast Expanded version online at autonews.com/datacenter pg 2.qxp 6/20/2008 11:37 AM Page 1 June 23, 2008 www.autonews.com Keith E. Crain Publisher and Editor-in-Chief Peter Brown Associate Publisher and Editorial Director DETROIT 2008 313-446-0361 Fax: 313-446-0383 1155 Gratiot Ave. Detroit, MI 48207-2997 ADVERTISING AND SALES DETROIT Global Market 1155 Gratiot Ave., Detroit, MI 48207-2997 313-446-6790 Fax: 313-446-8030 Rick Greer, Director of Sales and Marketing [email protected], 313-446-6050 Data Book Colleen Robar, Director of Marketing Communications [email protected], 313-446-0331 WWW.AUTONEWS.COM John Fitzgerald, Director of Business Contents Planning and Online Commerce [email protected], 313-446-1679 Global vehicle production and sales by manufacturer ........3 CIRCULATION [email protected] Global vehicle production and sales by region ................4-5 888-446-1422 (U.S. & Canada) 313-446-1662 (all other locations) Europe production and sales ..........................................6-10 Fax: 313-446-6777 To subscribe via the Web www.autonews.com/subscribe.htm North America production and sales............................11-15 Patrick Sheposh, Corporate Circulation Director Lauren Cialella, Circulation Manager Japan production and sales..........................................16-20 Jennifer Natone, Circulation Coordinator SUBSCRIPTIONS China-India production and sales ......................................21 U.S. 1 year, $155; 2 years, $266. Canada, $239 (U.S.); other countries, $395.
    [Show full text]
  • Genesee and General Motors' Outsourcing
    New Automotive Markets: Genesee and General Motors' Outsourcing Prepared by: Michael S. Flynn and David J. Andrea of the Office for the Study of Automotive Transportation Transportation Research Institute The University of Michigan January 1990 Under a Sub-contract from the Industrial Technology Institute for a Contract from The Charles Stewart Mott Foundation Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 1: Introduction This report seeks to identify potential market opportunities for Genesee County within the automotive economy, but external to General Motors. Through a combination of interview, survey, and archival data, it identifies product markets with three characteristics. First, demand from suppliers is likely to increase due to increased sourcing rather than manufacturing by the automotive assemblers. Second, capacity levels in the independent supplier sector are unlikely to be adequate to meet those demands. Third, the skills and product-experience of the GM labor force in Genesee constitute an available, trained workforce. The report also identifies companies, including domestic and transplant suppliers, that are likely beneficiaries of the increased outsourcing by the manufacturers; are likely to be capacity- constrained; and are likely to seek new locations. The ultimate goal of the study is to provide some direction to Genesee's efforts to find near-term replacement activity and jobs for expected losses at General Motors. The strategy reflects a recognition that Genesee's immediate attractions are its location with respect to the automotive facilities of the manufacturers, and a workforce both acclimated to the industrial culture of the automotive industry and experienced and skilled in its work requirements. In the final analysis, Genesee must diversify away from its heavy reliance on the automotive economy, but diversification within that economy is an important step, both to alleviate the impacts of the coming losses at GM and to achieve a diversified economy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ohio Motor Vehicle Industry
    Research Office A State Affiliate of the U.S. Census Bureau The Ohio Motor Vehicle Report February 2019 Intentionally blank THE OHIO MOTOR VEHICLE INDUSTRY FEBRUARY 2019 B1002: Don Larrick, Principal Analyst Office of Research, Ohio Development Services Agency PO Box 1001, Columbus, Oh. 43216-1001 Production Support: Steven Kelley, Editor; Jim Kell, Contributor Robert Schmidley, GIS Specialist TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Executive Summary 1 Description of Ohio’s Motor Vehicle Industry 4 The Motor Vehicle Industry’s Impact on Ohio’s Economy 5 Ohio’s Strategic Position in Motor Vehicle Assembly 7 Notable Motor Vehicle Industry Manufacturers in Ohio 10 Recent Expansion and Attraction Announcements 16 The Concentration of the Industry in Ohio: Gross Domestic Product and Value-Added 18 Company Summaries of Light Vehicle Production in Ohio 20 Parts Suppliers 24 The Composition of Ohio’s Motor Vehicle Industry – Employment at the Plants 28 Industry Wages 30 The Distribution of Industry Establishments Across Ohio 32 The Distribution of Industry Employment Across Ohio 34 Foreign Investment in Ohio 35 Trends 40 Employment 42 i Gross Domestic Product 44 Value-Added by Ohio’s Motor Vehicle Industry 46 Light Vehicle Production in Ohio and the U.S. 48 Capital Expenditures for Ohio’s Motor Vehicle Industry 50 Establishments 52 Output, Employment and Productivity 54 U.S. Industry Analysis and Outlook 56 Market Share Trends 58 Trade Balances 62 Industry Operations and Recent Trends 65 Technologies for Production Processes and Vehicles 69 The Transportation Research Center 75 The Near- and Longer-Term Outlooks 78 About the Bodies-and-Trailers Group 82 Assembler Profiles 84 Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV 86 Ford Motor Co.
    [Show full text]
  • Vehicle Make, Vehicle Model
    V8, V9 VEHICLE MAKE, VEHICLE MODEL Format: VEHICLE MAKE – 2 numeric VEHICLE MODEL – 3 numeric Element Values: MAKE: Blanks 01-03, 06-10, 12-14, 18-25, 29-65, 69-77, 80-89, 90-94, 98-99 MODEL: Blanks 001-999 Remarks: SEE REMARKS UNDER VEHICLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER – V12 2009 181 ALPHABETICAL LISTING OF MAKES FARS MAKE MAKE/ NCIC FARS MAKE MAKE/ NCIC MAKE MODEL CODE* MAKE MODEL CODE* CODE TABLE CODE TABLE PAGE # PAGE # 54 Acura 187 (ACUR) 71 Ducati 253 (DUCA) 31 Alfa Romeo 187 (ALFA) 10 Eagle 205 (EGIL) 03 AM General 188 (AMGN) 91 Eagle Coach 267 01 American Motors 189 (AMER) 29-398 Excaliber 250 (EXCL) 69-031 Aston Martin 250 (ASTO) 69-035 Ferrari 251 (FERR) 32 Audi 190 (AUDI) 36 Fiat 205 (FIAT) 33 Austin/Austin 191 (AUST) 12 Ford 206 (FORD) Healey 82 Freightliner 259 (FRHT) 29-001 Avanti 250 (AVTI) 83 FWD 260 (FWD) 98-802 Auto-Union-DKW 269 (AUTU) 69-398 Gazelle 252 (GZL) 69-042 Bentley 251 (BENT) 92 Gillig 268 69-052 Bertone 251 (BERO) 23 GMC 210 (GMC) 90 Bluebird 267 (BLUI) 25 Grumman 212 (GRUM) 34 BMW 191 (BMW) 72 Harley- 253 (HD) 69-032 Bricklin 250 (BRIC) Davidson 80 Brockway 257 (BROC) 69-036 Hillman 251 (HILL) 70 BSA 253 (BSA) 98-806 Hino 270 (HINO) 18 Buick 193 (BUIC) 37 Honda 213 (HOND) 19 Cadillac 194 (CADI) 29-398 Hudson 250 (HUDS) 98-903 Carpenter 270 55 Hyundai 215 (HYUN) 29-002 Checker 250 (CHEC) 08 Imperial 216 (CHRY) 20 Chevrolet 195 (CHEV) 58 Infiniti 216 (INFI) 06 Chrysler 199 (CHRY) 84 International 261 (INTL) 69-033 Citroen 250 (CITR) Harvester 98-904 Collins Bus 270 38 Isuzu 217 (ISU ) 64 Daewoo 201 (DAEW) 88 Iveco/Magirus
    [Show full text]
  • Ford) Compared with Japanese
    A MAJOR STUDY OF AMERICAN (FORD) COMPARED WITH JAPANESE (HONDA) AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY – THEIR STRATEGIES AFFECTING SURVIABILTY PATRICK F. CALLIHAN Bachelor of Engineering in Material Science Youngstown State University June 1993 Master of Science in Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering Youngstown State University March 2000 Submitted in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree DOCTOR OF ENGINEERING at the CLEVELAND STATE UNIVERSITY AUGUST, 2010 This Dissertation has been approved for the Department of MECHANICAL ENGINEERING and the College of Graduate Studies by Dr. L. Ken Keys, Dissertation Committee Chairperson Date Department of Mechanical Engineering Dr. Paul A. Bosela Date Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering Dr. Bahman Ghorashi Date Department of Chemical and Biomedical Engineering Dean of Fenn College of Engineering Dr. Chien-Hua Lin Date Department Computer and Information Science Dr. Hanz Richter Date Department of Mechanical Engineering ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First I would like to express my sincere appreciation to Dr. Keys, my advisor, for spending so much time with me and providing me with such valuable experience and guidance. I would like to thank each of my committee members for their participation: Dr. Paul Bosela, Dr. Baham Ghorashi, Dr. Chien-Hua Lin and Dr. Hanz Richter. I want to especially thank my wife, Kimberly and two sons, Jacob and Nicholas, for the sacrifice they gave during my efforts. A MAJOR STUDY OF AMERICAN (FORD) COMPARED WITH JAPANESE (HONDA) AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY – THEIR STRATEGIES AFFECTING SURVIABILTY PATRICK F. CALLIHAN ABSTRACT Understanding the role of technology, in the automotive industry, is necessary for the development, implementation, service and disposal of such technology, from a complete integrated system life cycle approach, to assure long-term success.
    [Show full text]
  • Nber Working Paper Series Management Practices
    NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES MANAGEMENT PRACTICES, RELATIONAL CONTRACTS, AND THE DECLINE OF GENERAL MOTORS Susan Helper Rebecca Henderson Working Paper 19867 http://www.nber.org/papers/w19867 NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge, MA 02138 January 2014 The authors would like to thank the editors of this journal for their comments and suggestions, and would also like to thank Robert Gibbons, Casey Ichniowski, Mari Sako, Jeff Liker, Michael Wasser, Paul Adler, Brad Markell, and Jeffrey Morrow. Susan Helper is Chief Economist at the Department of Commerce and AT&T Professor of Economics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio. Rebecca Henderson is the John and Natty McArthur University Professor, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts. Funding for this paper came from the Harvard Business School Division of Research. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Bureau of Economic Research. NBER working papers are circulated for discussion and comment purposes. They have not been peer- reviewed or been subject to the review by the NBER Board of Directors that accompanies official NBER publications. © 2014 by Susan Helper and Rebecca Henderson. All rights reserved. Short sections of text, not to exceed two paragraphs, may be quoted without explicit permission provided that full credit, including © notice, is given to the source. Management Practices, Relational Contracts, and the Decline of General Motors Susan Helper and Rebecca Henderson NBER Working Paper No. 19867 January 2014 JEL No. J24,L2,L21,L23 ABSTRACT General Motors was once regarded as one of the best managed and most successful firms in the world, but between 1980 and 2009 its share of the US market fell from 62.6 to 19.8 percent, and in 2009 the firm went bankrupt.
    [Show full text]
  • The US Motor Vehicle Industry
    The U.S. Motor Vehicle Industry: Confronting a New Dynamic in the Global Economy Bill Canis Specialist in Industrial Organization and Business Brent D. Yacobucci Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy March 26, 2010 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R41154 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress The U.S. Motor Vehicle Industry: Confronting a New Dynamic in the Global Economy Summary This report provides an in-depth analysis of the 2009 crisis in the U.S. auto industry and its prospects for regaining domestic and global competitiveness. It also analyzes business and policy issues arising from the unprecedented restructurings that occurred within the industry. The starting point for this analysis is June-July 2009, with General Motors Company (GM or new GM) and Chrysler Group LLC (or new Chrysler) incorporated as new companies, having selectively acquired many, but not all, assets from their predecessor companies. The year 2009 was marked by recession and a crisis in global credit markets; the bankruptcy of General Motors Corporation and Chrysler LLC; the incorporation of successor companies under the auspices of the U.S. Treasury; hundreds of parts supplier bankruptcies; plant closings and worker buyouts; the cash-for-clunkers program; and increasing production and sales at year’s end. This report also examines the relative successes of the Ford Motor Company and the increasing presence of foreign-owned original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), foreign-owned parts manufacturers, competition from imported vehicles, and a serious buildup of global overcapacity that potentially threatens the recovery of the major U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Bella Group's Dealer Network
    GUIA_COVER 2 3/4/13 10:34:41 AM Father of the automobile mass production GUIA_IFC 1 3/4/13 10:32:25 AM Table of Contents 2 President’s Message 42 Bella Group Profile 4 Mission and Purpose of GUIA 46 Chrysler Profile 6 Puerto Rico Profile 50 Ford Profile 10 The General Economy 54 General Motors Profile 22 Puerto Rico’s Automotive History 58 Hyundai Profile 32 Auto Industry Overview 62 Mitsubishi Profile 36 Industry Statistics 66 Motorambar Profile 38 Finance and Insurance 70 Suzuki Profile Companies are Vital to Puerto Rico’s 74 Toyota Profile Auto Industry 78 Other Industry Players GUIA_1 2 3/4/13 10:33:33 AM WithWi h great enthusiasm,h i we present theh firstfi ever AutomotiveA i IIndustryd RReport off PPuerto Rico.Rico This report is long overdue, and at Grupo Unido de Importadores de Automóviles, oror GUIA,G we have taken on the challenge of producing this important reference, which willwill prove fruitful not only within our industry, both in Puerto Rico and abroad, but alsoalso for government entities, industry stakeholders and the general public. ThisT publication has been possible thanks to the hard work and commitment of our membersmem at GUIA: Bella Group (Honda, Acura and Mazda), Chrysler International (Chrysler,(Ch Jeep, Dodge, Ram and Fiat), Ford International (Ford and Lincoln), General MotorsMot (GMC, Chevrolet, Buick and Cadillac), Hyundai de Puerto Rico (Hyundai), MitsubishiMits Motor Sales of the Caribbean (Mitsubishi), Motorambar (Nissan, Infiniti and Kia),Kia) Suzuki del Caribe (Suzuki) and Toyota de Puerto Rico (Toyota, Lexus and Scion).
    [Show full text]
  • GM 2007 Annual Report
    General Motors Corporation 2007 Annual Report next 100 YEARS of leadership. 100 YEARS of innovation. General Motors Corporation 1 100 YEARS of putting people on wheels. 2 General Motors Corporation And we’re just getting started. We’re making the best cars and trucks we ever have. And we’re selling them in more parts of the world than ever before. We’re very proud of our past, but even more excited about our future. We’re focused on what’s next: building the best General Motors yet. General Motors Corporation 3 Bob Lutz Vice Chairman, Global Product Development Fritz Henderson Rick Wagoner GM’s senior leadership in the President & Chairman & Cadillac Display at the 2008 Chief Operating Offi cer Chief Executive Offi cer North American International Auto Show in Detroit, Michigan. 4 General Motors Corporation DEAR STOCKHOLDERS: A century is a long time to be in business. For General Motors, it’s been a century of leadership and achievements, of challenges and opportunities. A centennial is a great time to refl ect on and celebrate the past. But for us, it’s more than that…it’s an oppor- tunity to look forward to our next 100 years. GM’s centennial comes at an exciting time for the 2007 YEAR IN REVIEW auto industry, as we move aggressively to realize the 2007 was another year of important progress for GM, potential of two huge trends that are transforming the as we implemented further signifi cant structural cost global auto industry and society itself. The fi rst trend is reductions in North America, grew aggressively in emerg- the rapidly growing role, and importance, of emerging ing markets, negotiated an historic labor contract with markets.
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Icsa Applied Statistics Symposium
    2016 ICSA APPLIED STATISTICS SYMPOSIUM Atlanta, GA June 12-15, 2016 Published by: International Chinese Statistical Association Photographer for the front cover: Diana Li International Chinese Statistical Association Applied Statistics Symposium 2016 CONFERENCE INFORMATION,PROGRAM AND ABSTRACTS June 12 - 15, 2016 Hyatt Regency Atlanta Atlanta, Georgia, USA Organized by International Chinese Statistical Association c 2016 International Chinese Statistical Association Contents Welcome ..........................................................1 Conference Information . .2 ICSA Officers and Committees . .2 Conference Committees . .4 Acknowledgements . .6 Travel and Transportation . .9 Conference Venue Information . 10 Program Overview . 15 Keynote Lectures . 17 Banquet Speaker . 20 Student Paper Awards . 21 Short Courses . 22 Career Service . 28 Social Events . 29 The 10th ICSA International Conference . 30 ICSA 2017 in Chicago, IL. 31 ICSA Dinner at 2016 JSM . 32 Scientific Program . 33 Monday, June 13. 8:00 AM - 9:30 AM . 33 Monday, June 13. 10:00 AM-11:40 AM . 33 Monday, June 13. 1:30 PM - 3:10 PM . 36 Monday June 13. 3:30 PM - 5:10 PM . 40 Tuesday, June 14. 8:00 AM - 10:10 AM . 43 Tuesday, June 14. 10:30 AM - 12:10 PM . 44 Tuesday, June 14. 1:30 PM - 3:10 PM . 47 Tuesday, June 14. 3:30 PM - 5:10 PM . 51 Wednesday, June 15. 8:30 AM - 10:10 AM . 54 Wednesday, June 15. 10:30 AM-12:10 PM . 58 Abstracts . 63 Session 1: Biostatistics in Medical Applications . 63 Session 2: Geometric Approaches in Functional Data Analysis . 64 Session 3: Advance in Statistical Genomics and Computational Biology . 64 Session 4: New Developments in Biomedical Research and Statistical Genetics .
    [Show full text]