Understanding Evidence Based Funding

Similar documents
An Overview of the Evidence Based Funding Formula

SENATE BILL 1947 (PA ) THE EVIDENCE-BASED FUNDING FOR STUDENT SUCCESS ACT. Ensuring equitable funding to help all students succeed.

Basics of School Finance: Revenues

SB1947 Evidence Based Funding for Student Success Act

STATE, LOCAL AND FEDERAL RESOURCES

EVIDENCE-BASED SCHOOL FUNDING IS HERE

Community Consolidated School District 15

Financing Education In Minnesota A Publication of the Minnesota House of Representatives Fiscal Analysis Department

Financing Education In Minnesota A Publication of the Minnesota House of Representatives Fiscal Analysis Department

FY14 BUDGET Preliminary Budget Estimates

Understanding the K-12 General Education Funding Program

Valley View Schools District 365U. Budget and Property Tax Workshop October 20, 2008

Budget Overview Daniel G. Lowengard, Interim Superintendent of Schools Everton Sewell, Chief Financial Officer March 19,

Board Adopted Budget: Summary Presentation

Phil Frei Director of Business & Finance July 22, 2014

KIMBERLY AREA SCHOOL DISTRICT

School Finance 101. Independent School District 882 Monticello Public Schools. December 2017

Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Worcester Public Schools FY15 BUDGET. School Committee Budget Priority Session & Budget Update. Melinda J. Boone Superintendent.

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT FOR GEORGIA LOCAL UNITS OF ADMINISTRATION. 10/30/91 II Financial Reporting. 1 March 2017 II-7 QBE Program Reporting/Budgeting

PRELIMINARY REVENUE PROJECTIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2019 BUDGET FINANCE COMMITTEE PRESENTATION JANUARY 25, 2018

FY 17 School Budget Update Finance Committee Meeting April 13, 2016

Cherry Creek School District Profile of Student-Based Budgeting for Schools FY

State, Local and Federal Resources

South Orange-Maplewood School District. February 27, 2017

An Overview of the Minimum Foundation Program (MFP) Formula Louisiana Believes

Fund Revenue Expenditure Fund Balance. General $ 127,122,457 $ 128,759,941 $ (1,637,484) Food Service 5,910,702 6,117,537 (206,835)

Budget Development Update. January 16, 2018

State Aid. School Funding Reform Act of 2008

MISSISSIPPI ADEQUATE EDUCATION PROGRAM (MAEP) AN OVERVIEW OF HOW THE FORMULA IS CALCULATED

ASBO Accountability Teacher- Compensation. Wednesday, April 26th

School District of Philadelphia Budget 101: Understanding the District s Budget. April 17, 2018

Ann Arbor Public Schools Budget Update. April 2012

Family and Community Guide to the DC Public Schools Budget

Bloomfield Hills Schools FY2014/15 Midyear Budget and Forecast Preview

NPS BUDGET DEVELOPMENT FY School Committee Presentation January 15, /11/2019 Nantucket Public Schools 1

January Status. Worcester Public Schools. FY13 BUDGET Updated Preliminary Budget Estimates April Melinda J. Boone Superintendent

Illinois Fiscal System And Education Funding

Cherry Creek School District Profile of Student-Based Budgeting for Schools FY

McCracken County Public Schools Salary Schedule

FY18 Budget Development Update

Funding Formulas. 1. All states have a mathematical calculation, referred to as a formula to distribute state money to public schools.

Proposed Budget. May 21, 2013 Stan Rounds Superintendent of Schools

Understanding Montana School Finance and School District Budgets

PUBLIC HEARING: FY18 BUDGET March 21, 2017

FY20 School District Budget EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Shrewsbury Public Schools. Fiscal Year 2019 Superintendent s Budget Recommendation January 31, 2018

TABLE 1 SUMMARY OF RESOURCES BY OBJECT OF EXPENDITURE

Dianne Easterling, Coordinator Michigan Department of Education Office of Special Education October, 2017

BUDGET UPDATE PART II. Board of Education Meeting March 26, 2018

Also included is a brief power point presentation that I will be using to help explain the five year forecast at Wednesday s board meeting.

Cash Balance June 30 15,940,136 15,271,647 13,479,243 12,241,640 11,698,295 10,837,831 9,756,394 8,379,673

Summary of Proposed Budget for FY June 11, 2013

PUPIL DATA (CONT) PENSION ADJUSTMENT REVENUE ENGLISH LEARNER (CONT)

GLOSSARY OF SCHOOL FINANCE TERMS

Parnassus Preparatory School Long Range Budget Projection Model March 24, 2017

If you need further assistance, contact the OPI school budgeting staff: Kara Sperle , Paul Taylor , or Mari Haefka

South Orange-Maplewood School District. January 30, 2017

A n Overview o f the M i n i m u m Fo u n d ation Pro g ram (MFP) Fo rmula Louisiana Believes 1

Budget Forum

HINGHAM PUBLIC SCHOOLS BUDGET OVERVIEW FOR FY 20. Operating Budget Proposal from the Administration to the School Committee January 3, 2019

Proposed Budget Fiscal Year 2016

Budget Study Session A Fiscal Profile of CVUSD. Business Services Division September 12, 2012

NC Community College System:

K-12 Funding in Virginia. Fiscal Analytics, Ltd August 14, 2015

ADMINISTRATION S RECOMMENDED FY14 OPERATING BUDGET. Presented to the Wellesley School Committee December 18, 2012

Twin Rivers Unified School District 2018/19 ADOPTED BUDGET

FIVE-YEAR FINANCIAL FORECAST NOTES AND ASSUMPTIONS. For the Fiscal Years Ending June 30, 2014 through 2018

BUDGET ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BUDGET SOLUTIONS

SUPERINTENDENT S BUDGET PRESENTATION

5995 Other Sources $ 220, $ 390, $ 170, Total Local Revenues $ 34,321, $ 34,541, $ 220, %

Preliminary Five-Year Plan (FY17-21) and Lump Sum Statement (FY16-17)

Shaping our Future Together. Northfield Sanbornton Tilton

ROCKINGHAM COUNTY SCHOOLS PROPOSED BUDGET

Chapter 70 Aid. FY14 Budget 7/12/2013

NOVATO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. March 25, Presented by: Karen Maloney, CFO

1. Assess needs to determine. 2. Account for non-tax revenue 3. Levy taxes to balance budget. (revenue = appropriations)

STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SUPPORT PROGRAM BASED ON THE FINAL COMPUTATIONS FOR THE YEAR

Demystifying the Chapter 70 Formula: How the Massachusetts Education Funding System Works

% of Total Population

STATE PUBLIC SCHOOL FUND ACCOUNT CODE DESCRIPTION BUDGET BUDGET COMMENTS

School Year Budget Planning BUDGET FORUM

Wrentham Public Schools

FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 210 RUN DEC 04, 15:16 F-195 BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR CERTIFICATION

PUPIL DATA (CONT) PENSION ADJUSTMENT REVENUE ENGLISH LEARNER (CONT)

PUPIL DATA (CONT) PENSION ADJUSTMENT REVENUE ENGLISH LEARNER (CONT)

Table of Contents Page # Executive Summary 2. District Summary of Finances 10

REPORT) 190, = [(101) - $530] 111 EST FY 2017 COMPENSATORY OR MEMO: 30, BASIC REVENUE REVENUE = (110)

PUPIL DATA (CONT) PENSION ADJUSTMENT REVENUE ENGLISH LEARNER (CONT)

F-195 TABLE OF CONTENTS. Fiscal Year

PUPIL DATA (CONT) PENSION ADJUSTMENT REVENUE ENGLISH LEARNER (CONT)

FY 15 IDEA Part B Allocations and Funding Issues

2014/2015 Budget Presentation

Proposed Budget

Preliminary Recommended Budget for School Year. School Board Meeting June 22, 2011

HINGHAM PUBLIC SCHOOLS BUDGET OVERVIEW FOR FY 18. Operating Budget Proposal from the Administration to the School Committee January 5, 2017

FY 2009 STAFFING ALLOCATION AND FORMULAS

Board of Education. Daniel A. Nerad, Superintendent. Date: March 11, Citizen s Budget

LCAP / Supplemental and Concentration Regulations

F-195 TABLE OF CONTENTS. Fiscal Year

Transcription:

Understanding Evidence Based Funding PA 100 0465 A Guide to the Distribution System Spring 2018 Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 1

Introduction The Evidence Based Funding (EBF) formula performs calculations in three general stages. Stage 1: Determining the cost of educating all students, according to the defined cost factors. The result is the Adequacy Target for each district. Stage 2: Measuring each district s local resources for comparison to the Adequacy Target. Stage 3: Distributing additional state funds to assist districts in meeting their Adequacy Targets. Completing the first and second stages produces a ratio that determines how far away a district is from adequate funding in Stage Three. Base Funding Minimum (Hold Harmless) Tier Funding (New Money) Evidence Based Funding (Total State Contribution) Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 2

Stage 1: Determining a District s Adequacy Target Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 3

Adequacy Target Adequacy Target (AT) = Sum of all Education Cost Factors Core Investments Per Student Investments Per Student Investments Subject to CWI Subject to CWI Per Student Investments Not Subject to CWI Additional Investments = Initial Adequacy Target Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 4

Abbreviations Used Several abbreviations are used when building a district s Adequacy Target, they are as follows: Item Elementary Middle School High School Low Income* Non Low Income Abbreviation E M HS LI Non LI * Reported by the Department of Human Services (DHS). Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 5

Adequacy Target Core Investments Core Teachers K 3 rd LI 15:1, Non LI 20:1; 4 th 12 th LI 20:1, Non LI 25:1 Specialist Teachers % of Core = E 20%, M 20%, HS 33% Instructional Facilitators E/M/HS = 200:1 Core Intervention Teachers E/M = 450:1, HS = 600:1 Guidance Counselor E = 450:1, M/HS = 250:1 School Site Staff E/M = 225:1, HS = 200:1 Core Investment Cost Factors Nurse E/M/HS = 750:1 Supervisory Aide E/M = 225:1, HS = 200:1 Librarian E/M = 450:1, HS = 600:1 Librarian Aide/Media Tech E/M/HS = 300:1 Principal & Assistant Principal E/M = 450:1, HS = 600:1 Substitute Teachers Average Daily Salary x 5.7% of 176 school days x FTE Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 6

Adequacy Target Per Student Investments Gifted E/M/HS = $40/student Professional Development E/M/HS = $125/student Instructional Material E/M/HS = $190/student Assessments E/M/HS = $25/student Computer/Tech Equipment E/M/HS = $285.5/student Per Student Investment Cost Factors Student Activities E = $100, M = $200, HS = $675/student Operations & Maintenance E/M/HS = $1038/student Central Office E/M/HS = $742/student Employee Benefits (% of Salary) E/M/HS = 30% Employee Benefits (Central Office, Maintenance & Operations, and Normal Pension Costs*) CO =$368.48, M&O = $352.92/student *Currently Normal Pension Costs only applies to Chicago Public Schools. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 7

Adequacy Target Additional Investments Additional Investment Cost Factors Low Income Intervention Teacher (125:1) Pupil Support (125:1) Extended Day Teacher (120:1) Summer School Teacher (120:1) English Learner Intervention Teacher (125:1) Pupil Support (125:1) Extended Day Teacher (120:1) Summer School Teacher (120:1) English Learner Core Teacher (100:1) Special Education Special Education Core Teacher (141:1) Instructional Assistant (141:1) Psychologist (1000:1) Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 8

Adequacy Target Enrollment Calculating the total investment costs that determine a district s Adequacy Target requires enrollment data by grade. Enrollment impacts the number of calculated Full Time Equivalent (FTE) associated with each of the Adequacy Target cost factors or a per student cost. EBF requires several adjustments to raw home enrollment data to account for subset student populations. These subset student populations include:» Special Education Pre Kindergarten Students» Students from Deactivated/Non operating Districts» Regular (18 3) Youth in Care» Tuition In Students» Students Served at State Authorized Charters» Special Education Youth in Care» Students at State Funded Residential Schools EBF requires the collection of two prior years of enrollment in addition to the current one year of enrollment for the calculation of a three year average. The greater of either the current year or the three year average for each district s Average Student Enrollment (ASE) is used in EBF calculations. Note: Half day Kindergarten students are counted as 0.50. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 9

Adequacy Target Enrollment Special Ed Orphans (K 12) State Authorized Charter (To Sponsor) Deactivated / Non Operating (From Serving) Deactivated / Non Operating (To Home) Base Home Enrollment Youth in Care (18 3 Regular) Special Ed Pre K Final Adjusted Enrollment Detention Center Youth in Care (From Former Home) Tuition In Parent Paid (From Serving) State Residential Schools (From Home) Detention Center Youth in Care (New Home) These adjustments apply to each year of enrollment collected. Adjustments also apply to any prior year school district consolidations. *ISBE collects the above data on both October 1 and March 1. EBF calculations use the greater of the three year average or current year for each data set. Final enrollment for each year is the average of the October 1 and March 1 data sets. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 10

Adequacy Target Regionalization Factor A Regionalization Factor is used to determine the Final Adequacy Target. The Regionalization Factor or Comparable Wage Index (CWI) is a measure of regional variations in salaries. Initial Adequacy Target Regionalization Factor (CWI) = Final Adequacy Target Note: EBF sets the lowest Regionalization Factor to 0.90. Previous EBF models used a highest factor of 1.05651. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 11

Stage 2: Determining a District s Local Resources Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 12

Determining Local Resources EBF defines a district s resources as the sum of: Local Capacity Target (LCT) Corporate Personal Property Replacement Taxes (CPPRT) Base Funding Minimum (BFM) (Prior Year Distributions) Dividing a district s resources by its Adequacy Target determines the district s Adequacy Level: Resources Adequacy Target = Adequacy Level (Preliminary % of Adequacy) Increasing any element of the numerator (Resources) means a district appears closer to its Adequacy Target, resulting in less State funding. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 13

Determining Local Resources Base Funding Minimum EBF includes a hold harmless provision called the Base Funding Minimum. EBF consolidates and replaces five grants received in FY 17 into the BFM: Gross General State Aid + Stop Loss Grant (if applicable) English Learner Education Special Ed Personnel Special Ed Funding for Children Special Ed Summer School Chicago Public Schools will also receive the calculated FY 17 Block Grant Overage. BFM will be recalculated each fiscal year to include additional funds received by each district (the Tier Funding). FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 FY 17 Distributions FY 17 +FY 18 Tier Money FY 18 + FY 19 Tier Money Effective FY 19 $29 M English Learner Administration grant will also be included in the BFM calculation. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 14

Determining Local Resources Local Capacity Target Calculating Adjusted Equalized Assessed Valuation (EAV) The Adjusted EAV is used in the calculation of the Local Capacity Target. The amount is determined through a three step process: Step 1: Calculate the three year average of a district s Real EAV Real EAV = (Original EAV Adjustments) (Property Tax Appeal Board Decisions, Certificates of Error, and Abatements ) Step 2: Compare the three year average EAV to the most recent year EAV. If the most recent year EAV represents a decrease of 10 percent or greater, EBF uses the lesser EAV. Step 3: For districts subject to Property Tax Extension Limitation Law (PTELL), compare the EAV selected in Step 2 to the calculated PTELL EAV. EBF uses the lesser EAV. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 15

Determining Local Resources Local Capacity Target Calculating Local Capacity Ratio & Percentage (1) Each district s Local Capacity Target calculation continues with determining its Local Capacity Percentage through a four step process: Step 1: Determine the district s Local Capacity Ratio (LCR). LCR = Adjusted EAV Adequacy Target Step 2: If a unit district LCR x 1 If an elementary district LCR x 9/13 If a high school district LCR x 4/13 Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 16

Determining Local Resources Local Capacity Target Calculating Local Capacity Ratio & Percentage (2) Step 3: Calculate the district s Cumulative Distribution resulting in the Percentile Ranking of LCR. This step is a method for standardizing this measure of local property wealth. This step uses Weighted Average LCR and Weighted Standard Deviation. Note: LCR is capped at 90 percent. The capped LCR becomes the Local Capacity Percentage (LCP). Step 4: Multiply the district s LCP by its Adequacy Target to arrive at the Local Capacity Target (LCT). LCT = Adequacy Target LCP Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 17

Determining Local Resources Adjusted Local Capacity Target (1) EBF calls for an adjustment to LCT to increase the measurement of wealth for districts whose local revenue exceeds their Local Capacity Target. The adjustment is calculated by following six steps: Step 1: Identify the Adjusted EAV for the calculation. PTELL EAV is not considered for this calculation Step 2a: Calculate the Adjusted Operating Tax Rate (OTR) requires the following data points: Tax Year 2015 Real EAV Tax Year 2015 OTR (prior to any adjustments) FY 2016 Annual Financial Report Transportation Expenditures (Codes 2250, 4110, 4120) FY 2016 State Transportation Reimbursements (Codes 3500, 3510) Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 18

Determining Local Resources Adjusted Local Capacity Target (2) Step 2b: Calculate the Adjusted Operating Tax Rate (OTR): Calculate the Transportation Rate to deduct from OTR. Transportation Expenditures State Transportation Reimbursement Real EAV Transportation Rate If the State Transportation Expenditures is greater than the Transportation Reimbursement, subtract the calculated Transportation Rate from the Original OTR. Original OTR Calculated Transportation Rate Final Adjusted OTR Note: OTR is adjusted because no transportation funding and expenditures are included in EBF. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 19

Determining Local Resources Adjusted Local Capacity Target (3) Step 3: Calculate Local Revenue (Real Receipts): Real Receipts (RR) = Real EAV Adjusted OTR Step 4: Identify if an adjustment to LCT applies: If Local Rev < LCT, NO Adjustment to LCT. If Local Rev > LCT, Adjustment to LCT applies. Step 5: If applicable, calculate the Real Receipts Adjustment: RR Adjustment = Real Receipts LCT Local Capacity Percentage % Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 20

Determining Local Resources Adjusted Local Capacity Target (4) Step 6: Apply RR Adjustment to LCT (if applicable): Adjusted LCT = LCT RR Adjustment CPS Remaining Pension Obligation Note: If the adjustment is applied the numerator increases, making the district appear wealthier. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 21

Determining Local Resources Adjusted Base Funding Minimum The final adjustment made in determining a district s local resources is the adjustment to Base Funding Minimum. The BFM adjustment reduces local wealth, with a greater reduction for districts furthest from their Adequacy Targets. The BFM adjustment modifies the amount of Supplemental General State Aid (SGSA) funding for low income students included in local resources. Adjusted BFM = BFM SGSA SGSA Preliminary % of Adequacy Note: EBF credits districts with a low Percent of Adequacy with a reduced amount of the Lowincome SGSA Grant funding received in the prior year in their local resources Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 22

Determining Local Resources Final Resources and Final Percent of Adequacy The Final Percent of Adequacy determines a district s Tier Assignment in Stage Three of the calculations. Final Local Resources = Final LCT Adjusted BFM CPPRT Final Percent of Adequacy = Final Resources Adequacy Target Note: A low Percent of Adequacy means the district is distant from meeting its Adequacy Target and needs greater state assistance. A higher Percent of Adequacy means the district is closer to its Adequacy Target and therefore requires less state assistance. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 23

Stage 3: Distribution of New State Funding Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 24

Determining State Contribution As examined in the introduction the State Contribution to Evidence Based Funding is comprised of: Base Funding Minimum (Hold Harmless) Tier Funding (New Money) Evidence Based Funding (Total State Contribution) As explained in the previous stage, Base Funding Minimum is the sum of the following grants received in FY 17: General State Aid + Stop Loss Grant (if applicable) English Learner Education Special Ed Personnel Special Ed Funding for Children Special Ed Summer School Tier Funding will vary depending on a district s Final % of Adequacy Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 25

Determining State Contribution Funds Available for Tier Distributions EBF specifies how to determine the total funds available for Tier Distributions: From the total appropriation amount, subtract BFM and Fixed Distributions: BFM for all public school districts and Regional Offices of Education (ROE) programs BFM for Specially Funded Units (State Authorized Charters, Illinois Department of Juvenile Justice Programs, Co ops, ROE, and Glenwood Academy) English Learner Technical Assistance, Professional Development, and Other Support Services Normal Pension Costs for CPS (FY 18 Only) Prior Year Adjustments for EAV Corrections The remaining funds are available for Tier Distributions. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 26

Determining State Contribution Tier Funding Once the funds available for Tier Distribution are identified, the percent of funding for each Tier is calculated. Per EBF, each Tier receives the percent as listed below. Tier % of New Funding Tier 1 Receives 50% Tier 2* Receives 49% (*Includes Tier 1 and Tier 2 Districts) Tier 3 Receives 0.9% Tier 4 Receives 0.1% Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 27

Determining State Contribution Tier Assignments A district s Final percent of Adequacy determines its assignment into one of the four tiers. A low percent of Adequacy means the district is distant from meeting Adequacy and needs and receives more state assistance. A higher percent means the district is closer to Adequacy and therefore requires and receives less state assistance. Tier Target Ratio State Assistance Tier 1 Tier 2 <90% TBD (in modeling ranged from 60 65%) Tier 3 90% <100% Furthest away from Adequacy, more state assistance Tier 4 100% Greater than adequacy, least amount of state assistance. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 28

Funding Allocation Rate Funds available for each Tier based on the Funding Allocation Rate. The Funding Allocation Rate applies to the Funding Gap for districts in Tiers 1 and 2 and to the Adequacy Target for districts in Tiers 3 and 4. Tier Funding Allocation Rate Tier 1 Fixed at 30 % Tier 2 TBD (In EBF modeling, averaged 5%.) Tier 3 TBD (In EBF modeling, averaged 0.2%.) Tier 4 TBD (In EBF modeling, averaged 0.01%.) Note: With the exception of Tier 1, the Funding Allocation Rate will vary every year depending on the funds available for Tier Distributions. Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 29

Tier Funding Calculation Varies Depending on Tier Assignment of Each District Funding calculations for Tiers 1 and 2 require multiple steps. Tier 1 funding is deducted from Tier 2 distributions to recognize Tier 1 districts already receive this funding in addition to Tier 2 funding. Tier Tier 1 Tier 2 Tier 3 Tier 4 Calculating Tier Funding Step 1 Funding Gap = (Final Adequacy Target X Tier 1Target Ratio) Final Resources Step 2 Tier 1 Funding = Funding Gap X Tier 1 Allocation Rate Step 1 Funding Gap = [(Final Adequacy Target X Tier 2 Target Ratio) Final Resources T1 Funding] X (1 Local Capacity Percentage) Step 2 Tier 2 Initial Funding = Funding Gap X Tier 2 Allocation Rate Step 3 Ensure no Tier 2 district receives less funding per student than a Tier 3 district. Funding comes from Tier 3 districts. Tier 3 Funding = Adequacy Target X Tier 3 Allocation Rate Tier 4 Funding = Adequacy Target X Tier 4 Allocation Rate Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 30

Summary The Evidence Based Funding (EBF) formula performs calculations in three general stages. Stage 1: Determining the cost of educating all students, according to the defined cost factors. The result is the Adequacy Target for each district. Stage 2: Measuring each district s local resources for comparison to the Adequacy Target. Stage 3: Distributing additional state funds to assist districts in meeting their Adequacy Targets. Completing the first and second stages produces a ratio that determines how far away a district is from adequate funding. The districts furthest away from Adequacy receive the greatest proportion of the Tier Funding. Base Funding Minimum (Hold Harmless) Tier Funding (New Money) Evidence Based Funding (Total State Contribution) Whole Child Whole School Whole Community 31