Instruction. Washington. Calvin W. Brodie. School Apportionment and Financial Services 6/2/2008 1

Transcription

1 Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction Overview v ew of K 12 Funding in Washington Calvin W. Brodie School Apportionment and Financial Services 6/2/2008 1

2 Note: Page numbers refer to the January 2006 Organization and Financing of Washington Public Schools, available at Disclaimer: l i This is a simplified presentation on K 12 funding in Washington State for informational overview purposes only. Specific authoritative technical details are contained in statute and rules and may not be fully represented here.

3 Presentation Agenda School Governance and Statewide Perspective Apportionment Funding Other State Categorical Funding Local Levy Funding Federal Funding 6/2/2008 3

4 School Governance and Statewide Perspective 6/2/2008 4

5 School Governance I Legislative Branch State Legislature U.S. Congress Executive Branch Governor Supt. of Public Instruction State Auditor State Board of Education U.S. Department of Education Professional Educator Standards Board 6/2/2008 5

6 School Governance II State Superintendent of Public Instruction State Auditor Regional Nine Educational Service Districts pg. 28 Local 295 or 296? School Districts 6/2/2008 6

7 What is the State s Responsibility? Page 11 Washington State t Constitution Article IX Section 1. It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all children residing within its borders, without distinction or preference on account of race, color, caste, or sex. Section 2. The legislature shall provide a general and uniform system of public schools... and such... normal and technical schools as may hereafter be established. 6/2/2008 7

8 Washington s School lfinance System Is a legislative response to three court decisions interpreting the paramount duty clause of the state constitution. These court decisions describe the state s duty under the constitution /2/2008 8

9 Seattle Lawsuit - Doran I Page 21 After a levy failure in 1976, Seattle School District i t sued the state, t alleging that t the state t was not meeting its constitutional duty to make ample provision for education. On January 14, 1977, Judge Doran issued a declaratory judgment finding that: State funding was insufficient to fund a basic program of education; therefore, The Legislature must define and fully fund a program of basic education through regular and dependable d tax sources and must not rely on local excess levies for that funding. 6/2/2008 9

10 Doran II and IIB Decisions Subsequent decisions by Judge Doran expanded and clarified the state s t responsibility for basic education. The 1983 decision included the following categorical programs to the state s basic responsibilities: Special Education Bilingual Education Remediation (LAP) Pupil Transp. (some students) The 1988 decision: Supported state funding for special education based on averages. Concluded some form of safety net was needed to supplement special education funding for districts demonstrating need. 6/2/

11 Funding Principles The funding formula is not cast in concrete; it is the continuing obligation of the Legislature to review, define, and fund basic education. Local school levies may be allowed as long as: they enrich programs outside of the legislative definition of basic education and are not used to reduce the state s obligation to fund basic education. 6/2/

12 Contemporary Issues Lawsuits: Special education. K 12 adequacy. Equity. K-12 Funding Task Force: Recommendations due November /2/

13 Biennium State General Fund Revenues Page 6 (Dollars in Billions) Retail Sales & Use Tax $ 15.8 B & O Tax $ 5.6, Property Tax (State Share) $ 3.0 Real Estate Excise Tax $ 1.6 Property ( Public Utility Tax $ 0.7 All Other $ 3.2 Total $ Real Estate Excise Tax, 5.4% Tax (State Share), 10. 0% Public Utility Tax, 2.3% B & O Tax, 18.7% All Other, 10.7 % Retail Sales & Use Tax, 52.8% Source: Economic and Revenue Forecast, November 2007 (Cash Basis), reprinted from A Citizen s Guide to the Washington State Budget, p. 10 6/2/

14 Bienniumi State General Fund Expenditures (Dollars in Billions) Public Schools $ 12.1 Human Services $ 11.0 Higher Education $ Governmental Operations $ 0.9 Natural Resources $ 0.4 Debt Service/Other $ 1.9 Total $ 29.5 Governmental Operations, 3% Higher Education, 11% Natural Resources 1% Debt Service/Other 6% Public Schools 41% Human Services, 37% Citizens Guide to the Budget, page 12: wa gov/senate/committees/wm/publications htm Columns may not add up due to rounding. 6/2/

15 School District General Fund Revenue per Student School Year Average Revenue per Percent FTE Student State $6137 $6, Local Tax 1, Federal Other Total $8, Source: Summary of all School Districts F-196; is the latest available year. 6/2/

16 State t Average School District i t Expenditures School Year Program Statewide (millions) Per Student Basic Ed. $4,518 $4,569 Special Ed Vocational/Skills Ctr Compensatory Ed Other Instruction Community Service District-wide Support 1,233 1,247 Food Services Transportation Total $8,594 $8692 Source: Summary of all School Districts F-196; is the latest available year. 6/2/

17 Apportionment Funding 6/2/

18 General Apportionment Basic Funding Concepts Enrollment Formula Staff Units (Teachers, Administrators, and Aides) Salaries &Benefits Nonemployee Related Costs (NERC) State General Apportionment Allocation 6/2/

19 Factor #1 Basic Education Enrollment page 52 Student FTE based on seat time. Grade K: 2 hours per day = 0.5 FTE Grades 1 3: 4 hours per day = 1.0 FTE Grades 4 12: 5 hours per day = 1.0 FTE Based on enrolled hours not attendance. Nine monthly count dates first t school day of each month. All day kindergarten is funded separately for up to 20% highest poverty buildings. Alternative Learning Experience, Work-based Learning, and Running Start provide exceptions to seat time FTE rule. 6/2/

20 Factor # 2 Legislative Staffing Ratios page 53 1,000 FTE students generate: 4.0 Certificated Administrative Staff (CAS) Superintendents, Principals etc Certificated Instructional Staff (CIS) Teachers, Program Supervisors Classified Staff (1 for every FTE students) Business office, classroom aides. Enhanced staffing (per 1,000 FTEs): K 3 FTEs = CIS (use it or lose it.) 4th grade = CIS (use it or lose it.) 6/2/

21 Factor #3 Instructional Staff Salary Funding page 56 The state determines the funding provided to each certificated position based upon the experience and education level of the staff hired. This is captured in a staff mix factor. Districtwide average mix factor determines the state funding gprovided for each funded certificated staff position in the district. 6/2/

22 Staff Mix page 59 The staff mix factor is a five-decimal number between and approximately that quantifies the educational and experience level of instructional staff of the district equals a new teacher with no experience. The highest staff mix, current is , equals a teacher with a Ph.D. and 16 or more years of experience. 6/2/

23 Compensation Certificated staff are typically compensated as follows: Base Contract typically tied to state funding schedule. Supplemental Contracts for additional time, responsibilities, and incentives (TRI). The state assumes No responsibility for supplemental contracts. These are typically funded from local levy dollars. 6/2/

24 Why do some districts i t get more state t funding than others? Differences in base salary amounts. Different levels of staff experience and education. Different levels of students participating in: Bilingual Programs. Special Education. Vocational leducation. Transportation. Different levels of poverty affect LAP funding. Differences in levy equalization funding. 6/2/

25 General Apportionment Simplified Example 1,000 Students Staff Units and Salaries Total 46 certificated instructional staff (CIS) X X 32,746 = $ 2,451, CIS X X 34,426 - Maint = 125,794 4 certificated administrative staff (CAS) X 57,986 = 231, classified staff (CLS) X 31,865 = 541,705 Mandatory Benefits Maint: CIS & CAS - ( * (2,451, ,944)) = 449,550 Inc: CIS ( * (125,794 )) = 20,265 Maint: Classified - ( * 541,705) = 101,407 Inc: Classified - ( * 0) = Health Benefits 50 certificated staff X 12 months X $ = 439, classified staff X X 12 months X $ = 171, Nonemployee Related Costs 50 certificated staff X $10,178 = 508,900 TOTAL ALLOCATION = $ 5,042,429 Per Student Allocation $ 5,042.43

26 General Apportionment Fiscal Accountability Must maintain K 12 ratio of 46/1000 (CIS-per-student). Must use K 4 enhancement for K 4 staffing (more K 4 funding for more K 4 staff, up to 53.2/1000 ratio). Must add 2 learning improvement days to 180-day base contract year CIS. Must not pay district average CIS base salary that exceeds district allocated salary rate (Salary Compliance). Must use state accounting and program structure. 6/2/

27 Other State Categorical Funding 6/2/

28 Special Education Funding - Page 68 2 categories: Birth to 115% of BEA Kindergarten 93.09% of BEA Additional safety net funding provided. 6/2/

29 Learning Assistance Program (LAP) - Page 73 Purpose: to assist low achieving students Funding based on the sum of: District % of FRPL * FTE * $ PLUS If District % of FRPL is > state average of 40%, then (District % of FRPL - 40 %) * FTE * $ Funding may be spent on any grade. Typical service: LAP instructors provide one-on-one or small group instructional support. 6/2/

30 Bilingual Education - Page 74 Purpose: To assist limited English proficient (LEP) students. Funding is based on number of eligible students funding: $ per bilingual student. 6/2/

31 Highly Capable - Page 78 Purpose: To provide additional support for highly capable (gifted) students. Funding provided for 2.314% of total enrollment funding: $ per student. Money is used in a variety of ways for enriched programs. 6/2/

32 Local Levy Funding 6/2/

33 Local Levy Funding - Page 81 Local levies: Are for enhancements to basic education programs. Are calculated on a calendar year basis, not school year. Are sometimes called excess levies because the levy is in excess of the statutory 1 percent limit on property tax. Are also referred to as special levies because they require voter approval. Are not required. For 2008, 21 districts did not have a local levy. 6/2/

34 Local Levy Funding Prior to 1977, there was no limit on the amount that school districts could raise from local levies. In 1977, the Legislature passed the Levy Lid Act, which limited school district maintenance and operation (M&O) levies to 10% of a levy base and set a 4 year time limit for districts to get to 10%. Before all districts were reduced to 10%, the Legislature raised the lid to its current 24% of the levy base. Lid was last changed in Levy lid = Levy base X Levy authority % ± Transfers Maximum LEA 6/2/

35 The levy base is: Local Levy Funding - Page 81 Generally the total of the state and federal revenues a district received in the previous school year revenues make up the 2008 base. One of the limiting i i factors for M&O levies and is multiplied by the levy authority %. Statewide average per student for 2007 collections was $1,497. 6/2/

36 Local Levy Funding - Page 83 Levy Authority (Lid) Percent - page 82 Statewide lid is 24%. Statewide average is 23.06%. 91 districts have grand-fathered levy authority percentages up to 33.9%. Transfers are made for nonhigh students residing in one school district but served by another district. 6/2/

37 Local llevy Funding Local Effort Assistance (LEA) - Page 72 LEA is state funding begun in 1989 to: Match excess general fund levies. Help school districts i t with above-average tax rates due to low property valuations. For calendar year 2006: 217 of the state s 295 districts received LEA allocations totaling $195 Million. 18 additional districts were eligible but failed to pass a levy. 6/2/

38 Local llevy Funding Local Effort Assistance (LEA) - Page 72 To qualify, districts must: Pass a levy. Have above average tax rates due to low property valuations per student. Have a levy rate per $1,000 based upon a 12% theoretical levy that exceeds the calculated state average rate required to collect a 12% levy. That rate is $1.197 per 1,000 for /2/

39 Fd Federal Funding 6/2/

40 Federal Funding To Schools School Year Revenues Dollars in Millions Percentage of Total School Food Services % Programs Under NCLB % IDEA Special Education, Supplemental % Medicaid Administrative Match % Special Purpose % Federal Forests % Head Start % Carl Perkins - Vocational Education % Special Education, Medicaid % Other Federal Revenues % 0.7% Skills Center, Youth Training Programs % Direct Federal Grants - General Purpose % 0.4% Total %

41 Federal Funding - Allocations Programs under NCLB: Title I, Part A, Basic; Part B, Reading First; Part C, Migrant. Title III, Limited English Proficient. Title VII, Indian Education. Title VIII, Federal Impact Aid. School Improvement multiple sections. Title I funds are allocated to districts in part based upon poverty factors obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau. IDEA and Impact Aid are based upon specific student populations. School Food Service (USDA) funding is based upon free & reduced price eligibilities. Average October 2005 = 37.9%; October 2006 = 37.5%.

42 Want More Info? Please see the School Apportionment and Financial Services website at: 6/2/