Glendale ESD’s fiscal year 2008 administrative costs were 13 percent higher than the comparable districts’ average costs because it employed more assistant principals, administrative technology-related employees, and administrative assistants. The District’s student transportation bus routes were efficient. However, its per-mile transportation costs were 11 percent higher than the comparable districts’ costs primarily because safety reasons caused it to transport students living closer to schools who would not normally be transported. Glendale ESD’s per-square-foot plant operation and maintenance costs were slightly higher than the comparable districts’ average primarily because of high salary and benefit costs, and slightly higher electricity costs. To help control costs, the District has implemented an energy conservation plan and monitoring system. The District spent its Proposition 301 monies appropriately. At 55.7 percent, Glendale ESD’s classroom dollar percentage was lower than the comparable districts’ and state averages. The District also spent fewer dollars in the classroom primarily because it received less revenues, such as desegregation monies, and secondly because of its higher administration costs. Because of these two factors, and because its teachers were generally less experienced, Glendale ESD’s reported average teacher salary was 12 percent lower than the comparable districts’ average reported teacher salary. The District made minor errors in grouping its English Language Learners (ELL) into language development classes. As a result, some students at one school were placed on Individual Language Learner Plans rather than being placed in language development classes.