Upload
oded
View
43
Download
20
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
School Funding: Facts and Figures A library of PowerPoint slides compiled by the Association of Metropolitan School Districts Jon Commers, Research Director 651-999-7327 [email protected]. Research Library. Click to: Section 1: General Education Funding Trends - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
School Funding: Facts and Figures
A library of PowerPoint slides compiled by
the Association of Metropolitan School Districts
Jon Commers, Research Director
651-999-7327
Research LibraryClick to:
Section 1: General Education Funding TrendsSection 2: Special EducationSection 3: ELL/LEP/Language DiversitySection 4: Child Poverty and MobilitySection 5: Referenda
Research Library
Section 1: General Education Funding Trends
Basic Formula Allowance is Lagging Behind Inflation
Source: Minnesota House Research, "Education Funding: A History of Funding Increases and Reductions," March 2006; CPI figures from Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank
Basic Formula Allowance Lagging Behind Inflation
92 186 270 308 407 412 390303
273277 237 329 441
402373
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
1991
-92
1992
-93
1993
-94
1994
-95
1995
-96
1996
-97
1997
-98
1998
-99
1999
-2000
2000
-01
2001
-02
2002
-03
2003
-04
2004
-05
2005
-06
2006
-07
School Year Net Formula Allowance Formula Gap
AMCPU = Adjusted Marginal Cost Pupil Unit
Source: AMSD Analysis of Department of Education 2007 What If Report
2007 General Education Revenue per AMCPU
(Without Basic Education Aid)
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
Greater MN Districts <500 AMCPU
Greater MN Districts 500-1000 AMCPU
Greater MN Districts 1000-2000 AMCPU
Greater MN Districts>2000 AMCPU
All Metro Districts Mpls and St. Paul Only
Dollar
s
REFERENDUM
ALT COMP
OPER. CAPITAL
TRANSITION
EQUITY
T&E
TRANSP SPARS
SPARSITY
LEP TOTAL
COMPENSATORY
EXTENDED TIME
GIFTED & TALENT
AMCPU = Adjusted Marginal Cost Pupil Unit
Source: AMSD Analysis of Department of Education 2007 What If Report
2007 General Education Revenue per AMCPU
(Without Basic Education Aid and Referendum Revenue)
-
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
Greater MN Districts <500 AMCPU
Greater MN Districts 500-1000 AMCPU
Greater MN Districts 1000-2000 AMCPU
Greater MN Districts>2000 AMCPU
All Metro Districts Mpls and St. Paul Only
Dollar
s
ALT COMP
OPER. CAPITAL
TRANSITION
EQUITY
T&E
TRANSP SPARS
SPARSITY
LEP TOTAL
COMPENSATORY
EXTENDED TIME
GIFTED & TALENT
FY 2007 GENERAL ED FUNDING FOR AMSD DISTRICTS PER AMCPU: AID AND LEVY
AMSD Districts: Ranking of General Ed Funding Per AMCPU
AID LEVY
District No. District Name FY07 AMCPU Total Aid Aid/ AMCPUStatewide Aid
Rank Total Levy Levy/ AMCPUStatewide
Levy Rank1.2 Minneapolis 40,432.52 277,263,326 6,857 35 42,047,040 1,040 36
6 South St. Paul 3,531.64 19,580,570 5,544 238 3,144,457 890 4414Fridley 3,011.91 16,961,506 5,631 211 2,940,727 976 3816Spring Lake Park 5,158.62 27,464,114 5,324 297 5,597,823 1,085 31
112Chaska 10,203.69 54,081,296 5,300 308 9,045,029 886 45191Burnsville 11,937.78 63,194,849 5,294 315 12,662,043 1,061 34197West St. Paul 5,343.81 28,022,373 5,244 325 6,562,981 1,228 20199 Inver Grove 4,275.17 22,085,219 5,166 331 4,709,143 1,102 27270Hopkins 9,409.31 48,098,684 5,112 333 15,470,545 1,644 5271Bloomington 12,312.22 65,188,731 5,295 314 15,509,544 1,260 17272Eden Prairie 11,377.25 57,551,573 5,058 337 16,156,505 1,420 12273Edina 8,697.41 43,549,838 5,007 339 12,918,673 1,485 10276Minnetonka 8,857.08 44,349,323 5,007 340 13,483,514 1,522 9278Orono 2,891.95 14,429,970 4,990 342 3,632,711 1,256 18280Richfield 4,638.69 26,933,211 5,806 173 6,392,622 1,378 14281Robbinsdale 15,261.71 82,701,915 5,419 277 16,809,498 1,101 28282St. Anthony-New Brighton 1,917.02 9,786,075 5,105 334 2,097,419 1,094 30283St. Louis Park 5,089.75 26,612,265 5,229 328 9,112,432 1,790 4284Wayzata 11,272.45 56,697,698 5,030 338 17,496,260 1,552 8286Brooklyn Center 1,879.25 11,959,983 6,364 63 753,289 401 176621Mounds View 11,392.71 59,027,501 5,181 330 12,685,554 1,113 26622North St. Paul-Maplewood 12,579.57 66,619,528 5,296 313 13,507,706 1,074 32623Roseville 7,353.03 38,543,481 5,242 326 10,237,038 1,392 13625St. Paul 46,528.86 326,654,266 7,020 28 25,185,052 541 112720Shakopee 6,686.36 36,601,424 5,474 264 4,965,663 743 63728Elk River 13,573.81 73,252,875 5,397 282 8,894,692 655 78832Mahtomedi 3,514.31 17,805,842 5,067 336 4,484,028 1,276 15
Source: Minnesota Department of Education, WhatIf Interactive Revenue Model, FY2007.
Minnesota Per-Pupil Revenue Trends, FY1984-2004
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,00019
84
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Total Revenue Total Inflation-Adjusted Total Revenue
Source: Minnesota House Research, “School District Revenue History,” February 2006.
Minnesota Per-Pupil Revenue, FY1984-2004(Less Building Debt Service and Special Education)
-
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Total Revenue Less Bldg Debt and Special Ed Inflation-Adjusted
Source: Minnesota House Research, “School District Revenue History,” February 2006.
Since State “Takeover” in 2002, Local Share of Total Revenue Has Increased
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1993-4 1994-5 1995-6 1996-7 1997-8 1998-9 1999-00 2000-1 2001-2 2002-3 2003-4 2004-5 2005-6 2006-7
State Percentage of Total Revenue Local Percentage of Total Revenue
Source: Minnesota House Research, July 2006.
Minnesota’s rank in education spending relative to income plunged over the past
decade
12121617
26272831
28
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
FY 1995
FY 1996
FY 1997
FY 1998
FY 1999
FY 2000
FY 2001
FY 2002
FY 2003
Minnesota's rank in education spending per $1000 personal income
Source: U.S Census Bureau: Public Education Finances Report, 2003 is the most recent available
Minnesota Ranked 46th in the nation in growth in inflation adjusted per pupil spending from
1997 to 2002
U.S. Average: 16.8%Minnesota: 9.4%
Weak Growth in MN Education Funding
Source: Donald J. Boyd, K-12 Education: Still Growing Strongly, June 21, 2004. The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, State Fiscal News Volume 4, No. 5.
Example of How Declining Enrollment Affects a Metro School District: Revenue Change Due to
Enrollment Decline
2004-05 2005-06 2006-07
Projection
Enrollment Est. 10,734 10,466 10,256 General Ed. Rev. 73,049,74473,823,339 75,197,234
% Change 1.0% 1.9%Simulation
Enrollment 10,734 10,73410,734 General Ed. Rev.73,049,744
75,166,698 78,219,810 % Change2.8% 4.0%
Revenue Change -1,343,359-3,022,576
Example of How Declining Enrollment Affects a Metro School District: Expenditure Reductions due
to Enrollment Decline
2004-05 2005-06
Enrollment Est. 10,734 10,466
Change -268
Student/Teacher Ratio 25:1
Staff Reduction 10.7
Beginning Teacher Compensation $45,000
Cost Savings (10.5 x $45,000) $481,500
Revenue Loss $1,343,359
Net Loss $858,359
Research Library
Section 2: Special Education
Districts Subsidizing Growing Needs with Static Funding
Special Education: Adjusted Net Cross-Subsidy
250
270
290
310
330
350
370
390
FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004
Source: Minnesota Department of Education, Special Education Cross-Subsidy Reports. Adjusted Net Cross-Subsidy = Special education expenditures, less categorical revenues, less, general education revenue attributable to special education students served more than 60% of the time outside regular classrooms.
The number of special education students has grown by 12% since
1998
Source: MDE Fall Enrollment Reports, K-12, 1997-8 through 2005-6 school years.
92,220
95,322
97,398
99,309100,474
101,803102,856 103,391 103,911
86,000
88,000
90,000
92,000
94,000
96,000
98,000
100,000
102,000
104,000St
uden
ts
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Fiscal Year
SPECIAL EDUCATION CROSS-SUBSIDY FY 2004 (Latest Available)District District Adjusted NetNumber Name Cross Subsidy* Per WADM
1Minneapolis 24,953,438 528.93 6South St. Paul 1,458,874 371.84
14Fridley 1,298,437 436.15 16Spring Lake Park 1,626,155 331.71
112Chaska 3,645,615 388.48 191Burnsville 6,319,100 495.67 197West St. Paul 2,711,785 490.50 199 Inver Grove 1,886,508 419.38 270Hopkins 4,547,151 473.23 271Bloomington 4,969,920 401.22 272Eden Prairie 4,785,332 402.86 273Edina 3,376,260 403.90 276Minnetonka 3,905,780 439.06 278Orono 1,041,838 359.41 280Richfield 1,880,647 381.15 281Robbinsdale 6,610,097 408.25 282St. Anthony-New Brighton 616,801 320.83 283St. Louis Park 2,718,019 540.35 284Wayzata 4,221,454 376.57 286Brooklyn Center 591,940 294.74 621Mounds View 4,816,411 389.02 622North St. Paul-Maplewood 5,966,945 431.32 623Roseville 3,429,339 459.25 625St. Paul 23,710,724 490.01 720Shakopee 2,328,384 416.23 728Elk River 4,707,045 397.04 832Mahtomedi 1,309,583 368.05
AMSD Total 129,433,583 State Total 378,706,399
* Calculation of Adjusted Net Cross-Subsidy:
Special education expendituresLess: Categorical revenuesLess: General ed revenue attributable to special ed students
= Adjusted Net Cross-Subsidy
Source: Minnesota Department of Education, Special Education Cross-Subsidy Report by District, March 2006.
Special Ed Cross Subsidy Grows
Source: Minnesota Department of Education, Special Education Cross-Subsidy Report for FY2004 (latest available). Subsidies from School District Program Funds represents the adjusted net cross subsidy figure.
400
500
600
700
800
900
1,000
1,100
1,200
FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004
($M
illio
ns)
State Categorical Revenues Federal Funds Tuition Subsidies from School District Program Funds
Research Library
Section 3: ELL/LEP/Language Diversity
The number of LEP students has increased over 110% in eight years
Source: MDE Fall Enrollment Reports, K-12, 1997-8 through 2005-6 school years.
26,849
31,47035,748
44,34247,963
51,27553,507
56,829 57,665
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000St
uden
ts
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Fiscal Year
ELL Students Growing as Percentage of Total Enrollment
0.000%
2.000%
4.000%
6.000%
8.000%
10.000%
12.000%
14.000%
16.000%
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Statewide
AMSD Districts
Source: Minnesota Department of Education, Fall Population Data, 1997-8 to 2005-6.
Number of Home Primary LanguagesPercent of Districts With Various Numbers of Primary Languages
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Fiscal Year
1
2
2-5
5-10
10-40
>40
Source: Minnesota Department of Education, “Home Primary Language Totals – District” reports, 1997-2006.
Number of Languages Spoken at Home by Minnesota’s Students Continues to Rise
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Source: Minnesota Department of Education, analysis of MARSS data, 1996-7 to 2005-6.
LEP Funding Outpaced By LEP Enrollment
-
10,000,000
20,000,000
30,000,000
40,000,000
50,000,000
60,000,000
70,000,000
80,000,000
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Fiscal Year
Fund
ing
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
Stud
ents
LEP Students Total LEP Funding
Source: Minnesota Department of Education, WhatIf Interactive School Funding Model, 1999-2006; Fall Population Counts, 1998-9 to 2005-6.
Research Library
Section 4: Poverty and Mobility
Between 1998 and 2006, the number of students receiving free and reduced-price lunch increased by
14.8%
Source: MDE Fall Enrollment Reports, K-12, 1997-8 through 2005-6 school years.
219,343 220,708217,731 217,059
223,498
229,762
236,152
245,205
251,820
190,000
200,000
210,000
220,000
230,000
240,000
250,000
260,000
Stud
ents
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
Fiscal Year
Number of Districts With Specified Levels of Mobility, 2004-5
69
137
113
26103
0-5%
5-10%
10-15%
15-20%
20-30%
>30%
Source: Minnesota Department of Education. Students are counted as mobile if they are counted in MDE categories 1-3 (summer transfers in, mid-year transfers in, mid-year in-district transfers). Charter schools not included.
Mobile Students on the Rise as Proportion of Total Statewide Enrollment
12.74
%
12.35
%
12.97
%
13.36
% 13.45
%
13.59
%
13.66
% 13.96
%
11.50%
12.00%
12.50%
13.00%
13.50%
14.00%
1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05
Source: Minnesota Department of Education. Figures reflect summer transfers in, mid-year transfers in, and mid-year in-district transfers (categories 1-3), divided by October 1 K12 enrollment count. Charter schools not included.
Number of Districts Experiencing >10% Mobility is Growing
204
155
228
131
231
128
220
139
211
148
218
141
214
145
206
153
0
50
100
150
200
250
1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05
Districts <= 10% Districts > 10%
Source: Minnesota Department of Education. Figures reflect summer transfers in, mid-year transfers in, and mid-year in-district transfers (categories 1-3), divided by October 1 K12 enrollment count. Charter schools not included.
Comparison of Statewide Mobility Measures to AMSD Membership
0.000%
2.000%
4.000%
6.000%
8.000%
10.000%
12.000%
14.000%
16.000%
18.000%
1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000
2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05
Mean Mobility
Median Mobility
AMSD Average
Source: Minnesota Department of Education, Mobility Reports by District.
Research Library
Section 5: Referenda
Note: The dip in 2003 was caused by a conversion of $415 in referendum authority to $415 in the basic formula. Sources: 1) Crowe, Greg “A History of the School Operating Levy Referendum,” Money Matters, December 2002. Fiscal Analysis Department, Minnesota House of Representatives. 2) Minnesota Department of Education, department of Program Finance.
The Percent of Districts with Operating Referendum has Grown Significantly
Percent of Districts With Operating Referenda
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
Operating Referenda Growing More Common
0
50
100
150
200
250
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
1991
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Ballot Measures
Passage Rate
Source: Minnesota Department of Education, department of program finance.