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

Similar documents
Budgeting for

A Welcome From our Workshop Sponsors

Thank You to our Workshop Sponsors

Budget Development

Why Budgets Should Be Evaluated

HOGAN PREPARATORY ACADEMY, INC. KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI FINANCIAL STATEMENTS TOGETHER WITH INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT

State Aid. School Funding Reform Act of 2008

6/24/15. The Color. of Money. The Money Pit. School Boards = Prisoners of Information

SB1947 Evidence Based Funding for Student Success Act

Appendix E Glossary of Common School Finance Terms

DERRICK THOMAS ACADEMY KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI FINANCIAL STATEMENTS TOGETHER WITH INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT

BOARD OF EDUCATION Attachment: Discussion 11. PALO ALTO UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Date:

GLOSSARY OF COMMON SCHOOL FINANCE TERMS.

School Funding 101. How are schools supposed to be funded and why is Chesterfield so dramatically under-funded?

Fulton School District # Annual Budget

Colorado Legislative Council Staff

ST. LOUIS CHARTER SCHOOL

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

Special Education Funding

ASSEMBLY, No STATE OF NEW JERSEY. 217th LEGISLATURE INTRODUCED DECEMBER 4, 2017

PARK HILL SCHOOL DISTRICT 7703 NW Barry Road Kansas City, Missouri (816) FINANCIAL SECTION

POPLAR BLUFF R-I SCHOOL DISTRICT POPLAR BLUFF, MISSOURI FINANCIAL STATEMENTS JUNE 30, 2017

Initiative # 93 INITIAL FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT

ROCKWOOD R-VI SCHOOL DISTRICT FUND SUMMARY FY 2013/14

Contents Budget Summary Key Performance Indicators Enrollment Assumptions Revenue and Expense Detail Cash Flow Appendix

COLORADO. Description of the Formula. District-Based Components

EWING MARION KAUFFMAN SCHOOL, INC. KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI FINANCIAL STATEMENTS TOGETHER WITH INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' REPORT

The Basics of School Funding. Kathryn Summers, Associate Director Senate Fiscal Agency July 2015

Kansas City 33 School District Financial Condition and Projections

PARK HILL SCHOOL DISTRICT INFORMATIONAL SECTION

Republican FY 2018/2019 Budget Summary Updated September 2017

Understanding Evidence Based Funding

An Initial Look at Missouri s State Budget for Fiscal Year 2019

Understanding the K-12 General Education Funding Program

St. Francis Area Schools

ROCKWOOD R-VI SCHOOL DISTRICT

UNDERSTANDING COLORADO SCHOOL FINANCE AND CATEGORICAL PROGRAM FUNDING

An Overview of the Evidence Based Funding Formula

Arkansas School District Finance

REVISED BUDGET. February 15, 2012

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

Our Mission. To inspire every student to think, to learn, to achieve, to care

School Year Budget

SPECIAL EDUCATION FUNDING UPDATE Senate Committee on E-12 Policy

School Business Processes

Rockwood R-VI School District Annual Budget Meritorious Budget Award

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

State Funding Comparisons: Where do we stand? Margaret Buckton

PARK HILL SCHOOL DISTRICT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

High Incident Disability, 0.24 weight - Communication Disorders of Speech or Language;

Process. Board of County Commissioners. March 27, 2012

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

2018/19 Proposed Adopted Budget Board of Trustees Meeting

Colorado Legislative Council Staff

Oasis Charter High School

Overview of the State Education Fund and K-12 Public School Funding

Summary of Significant Forecast Assumptions and Accounting Policies For the Fiscal Years Ending June 30, 2018 through 2022

This summary is provided to answer some

AMENDMENT 23 ECONOMIC MODELING FOR DECISION MAKERS FEBRUARY 2001

Forecast Provided By Newark City School District Treasurer's Office Julio Valladares, MBA, Treasurer/CFO

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

Christa McAuliffe Charter Elementary

Charter School State Funding. Alexis Schauss, Director of School Business NC Department of Public Instruction February 22, 2018

The Basics of School Funding. Kathryn Summers, Chief Analyst Senate Fiscal Agency

Our Mission. To inspire every student to think, to learn, to achieve, to care

Savannah Chatham County Public Schools FY Adopted Budget Revenue Source Overview

Marietta City School District Assumptions for October year Forecast

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools Funding Scenarios. Board of Education May 2, 2016

Initiative #93 Funding for Public Schools. Amendment? proposes amending the Colorado Constitution and Colorado statutes to:


Chatfield Public School

School Finance Update

Financial Section III

What does it all. mean?!?

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

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

Budget Projections

Chatfield Public School

Financial Plan

LITTLETON PUBLIC SCHOOLS ADOPTED BUDGET

FINANCIAL PLAN F I N A N C I A L P L A N. Prince George s County Public Schools Page 27

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

Introduction to Public Education Finance

Superintendent s Proposed Budget Recommendation

PARADISE UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. County of Butte Paradise, California

PRELIMINARY OPERATING BUDGET FISCAL YEAR 2019

Intended to set the ratio of property taxes raised from both residential vs. business properties

BUDGET SUMMARY FISCAL YEAR Working Together, Achieving Excellence

PARKWAY C-2 SCHOOL DISTRICT ANNUAL BUDGET St. Louis County M issouri


Rev. 5/16 FY 2017 Page 1 of 4

State Funding Comparisons: Where do we stand? Margaret Buckton

LITTLETON PUBLIC SCHOOLS

LaCrescent-Hokah School District

Agency 30m 1/18/2013

Money and Your School District

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

Fiscal Year GUIDE TO UNDERSTANDING THE BUDGET CHERRY CREEK SCHOOL DISTRICT #5 ARAPAHOE COUNTY, COLORADO

What s The BIG Picture?

FINANCIAL PLAN. F i n a n c i a l P l a n

Transcription:

Funding Formulas 1. All states have a mathematical calculation, referred to as a formula to distribute state money to public schools. 2. Each of them is different. 3. All state formulas, to differing degrees, have been influenced by court decisions. 4. The two major principles that courts have used in evaluating and influencing state formulas are: 1. Equity 2. Adequacy 1

Equity v The quality of a child s education should not be solely determined by the level of resources available at the local level. Adequacy v The total amount of local and state resources available for the education of children should be sufficient to give each child an opportunity to achieve state standards. 2

10/31/17 Missouri s Current Formula 1. Adopted by the General Assembly in 2005 to take effect in 2006-07 school year (SB287 Sponsored by then Senator & current State BOE President Charlie Shields) 2. Emphasis on adequacy 3

Missouri s Current Formula 3. Originally, school districts that met all of Missouri s 14 Performance Standards (High Performing Districts) were examined and on average: a. How much do they spend per student? b. What percent of their students are High Cost? 1. Free and reduced lunch eligible 2. Special Education 3. Limited English Proficiency c. Operating Tax Rate Goal of Formula v Provide all school districts in Missouri with at least as much local and state money per student as High Performing Districts have available. 4

Basic Formula Factors Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) X State Adequacy Target (SAT) X Dollar Value Modifier (DVM) Local Effort = State Funding 5

Basic Formula Factors Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) X State Adequacy Target (SAT) X Dollar Value Modifier (DVM) Local Effort = State Funding Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) 1- Average Daily Attendance (ADA) regular year 2- plus ADA for Summer School (current year) 3- plus weights for number of High Cost Students in excess of the averages for High Performing Districts:.25 weight for number of Free & Reduced students above average..75 weight for number of Special Education students above average..60 weight for number of Limited English Proficiency students above average. *These weighting thresholds are recalculated every two years based upon the current definition of High Performing Districts. 6

Basic Formula Factors Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) X State Adequacy Target (SAT) X Dollar Value Modifier (DVM) Local Effort = State Funding 7

State Adequacy Target (SAT) v v v Expenditures per weighted average daily attendance in High Performing Districts (excludes capital, transportation, food service, federal expenditures and growth in local revenues since 2004-05). High Performance Districts are Capped at 25% of Total Number of Districts (129 Districts). Recalculated every two years based upon current High Performing Districts. Basic Formula Factors Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) X State Adequacy Target (SAT) X Dollar Value Modifier (DVM) Local Effort = State Funding 8

Dollar Value Modifier (DVM) Based on wages in area as determined by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Current Range: 1.00 1.094 (1.095 in FY19) (Metropolitan or Micropolitan areas or County) Re-calculated every year based on wages in 57 th wage-rated county in the state. 9

Basic Formula Factors Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) X State Adequacy Target (SAT) X Dollar Value Modifier (DVM) Local Effort = State Funding Local Effort Primarily based on 2004-05 assessed valuation x $3.43/$100 assessed valuation. ($3.43 is average operating tax rate of High Performing Districts in 2004-05. Called Performance Levy in SB287.) 10

11

Formula Adequacy v Based upon High Performing Districts and recognition of High Cost Students. Formula Equity v Based on local resources available in 2004-05. 12

Formula Cost v Cost to fully implement the SB287 Formula estimated in 2005 between $900 million and $1 billion. Formula Cost v v Cost was phased-in over a 7-year period beginning in 2006-07. That equated to $120 million - $140 million per year. Districts scheduled to be paid on a percentage of SB287 and a percentage of 2005-06 funding. 13

Phase-In Schedule Year 2005-06 SB287 Formula 2006-07 85% 15% 2007-08 70% 30% 2008-09 56% 44% 2009-10 42% 58% 2010-11 28% 72% 2011-12 14% 86% 2012-13 0% 100% Hold Harmless v SB287 contains a protection for districts that do not benefit from the formula. If formula calculation generates less money for a district than 2005-06 funding (as adjusted by the DVM), the district receives a modified 2005-06 amount (this clause is commonly referred to as Hold Harmless ). 14

Hold Harmless A. Schools with an ADA greater than 350 are held harmless to 2005-06 funding per WADA. B. Schools with an ADA less than 350 are held harmless to 2005-06 funding. ADA > 350 Hold Harmless 15

ADA < 350 Hold Harmless Formula Funding v Funding for the SB287 Formula was to be obtained from a combination of general state monies and a tax on casino revenues--known as the Classroom Trust Fund (CTF). 16

17

Formula Funding v In 2009-10 and in 2010-11, Federal Budget Stabilization and Federal Jobs Bill dollars were used to replace declining state general revenues monies and casino tax revenue shortfalls that support the formula. Formula Proration Beginning in 2015-16, State Adequacy Target (SAT) must be prorated so that Hold Harmless schools get 100% of their hold harmless amount. This was passed by the legislature in 2014. 18

What does Fully Funding the Formula Mean? 1. The formula would be fully funded when the calculated SAT is used in the formula and school districts are paid 100% of their formula and/or hold-harmless amount. 2. The amount needed to fully fund the formula in any one year will vary, depending upon state student WADA numbers, the SAT calculation, and the DVM calculation. SB 586 SB 586 passed in 2016 reinstated the 5% cap on the calculation of the State Adequacy Target (SAT) which was a part of the original formula created in 2005. The practical effect of SB 586 was to reduce the overall call on the foundation formula and therefore make the formula easier to fund. It was estimated the appropriation needed to fully fund the formula for FY18 is $3,392,907,149 which is $48,215,881 more than was appropriated in FY17. 19

Actual Formula Funding History School Year SAT Prorated SAT Formula Proration 2007-08 $6,117 $6,117 100% 2008-09 $6,117 $6,117 100% 2009-10 $6,117 $6,117 98.6% 2010-11 $6,124 $6,124 97.39% 2011-12 $6,131 $6,131 94.3% 2012-13 $6,423 $6,131* 92.6% 2013-14 $6,716 $6,131* 93.3% 2014-15 $6,716 $6,131* 96.9% 2015-16 $6,716 $6,145** 100% 2016-17 $6,241*** $6,198.7 100% 2017-18 $6,241 $6,220 (Oct. 2017) 100% *2012-13 is end of 7-year phase-in. Law allows proration of SAT. Partial Proration by DESE. ** 2015-16 was the first year that the SAT was used to prorate the formula. *** Formula funding total is reduced by re-instatement of 5% cap as a result of SB586. Foundation Formula *SAT for June 2017 was $6,198.7 (FY17) *SAT for October 2017 was $6,220 (FY18) *Full funding = $6,241 SAT (cannot exceed $6,241) *$3.392 billion appropriation for the formula in FY18 ($48.2 million more than FY17) * $750,000 to increase the SAT by $1, so $48.2 million/$750,000 = $64.2 increase in SAT *$6,198.7 + $64.2 = $6,262.9 SAT (capped at $6,241) 20

Early Childhood Provision Allows school districts to count free and reduced lunch eligible early childhood students in the WADA calculation will increase the cost. Legislation passed in 2014 allows unaccredited districts to do this in 2015-16 and provisionally accredited districts to do so in 2016-17. Accredited districts can do so when the formula is fully funded. RSMo 163.018.5 For all other districts, the provisions of subsection 1 of this section shall become effective in any school year subsequent to a school year in which the amount appropriated for subsections 1 and 2 of section 163.031 is equal to or exceeds the amount necessary to fund the entire entitlement calculation determined by subsections 1 and 2 of section 163.031, and shall remain effective in all school years thereafter, irrespective of the amount appropriated for subsections 1 and 2 of section 163.031 in any succeeding year. 21

Full Funding-DESE Position If the Basic Formula Calculation is fully funded at the SAT of $6,241 as of June 30, 2018 then all districts and charter schools can claim PK ADA starting FY 2019. Once that occurs, it will continue in the calculation from that point forward. The number of pupils that can be counted for Pre-K ADA is limited to 4% of the total number of free and reduced eligible students ages 5 to 18 (the word number is used and not FTE). Q & A time? 22

23