10
Integration Revenue Overview – House Education Policy Committee Hearing July 9, 2013

Sheri Thompson Slides

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Presented on 9 July 2013 the Minnesota House Education Policy Committee held a hearing on integration policy at the Crosswinds Arts & Science School in Woodbury, MN.

Citation preview

Page 1: Sheri Thompson Slides

Integration Revenue Overview –

House Education Policy Committee Hearing

July 9, 2013

Page 2: Sheri Thompson Slides

Integration Revenue•How do districts generate integration revenue?

•Formula•Approval Process•Statute vs. Rule

•How is integration revenue distributed?

•How does EMID spend integration revenue?

Page 3: Sheri Thompson Slides

East Metro Integration District - 6067

Integration Revenue Forecast

FY12 (July 1,2012- June 30, 2013) - District ImpactRevenue Source Revenue Distribution

DISTRICT ADJ. PU's STATE $ @70% + LOCAL $ @30% = DESEG. $ TO EMID DISTRICT *ALT. ED. $ = TOTAL $

St. Paul 43,222 0 0 0    0 0Urban Subtotal 43,222 0 0 0    0 0

                 

Roseville 7,660 493,330 211,427 704,757 229,812 474,945 96,281 801,038

Roseville $37 7,660   283,435 283,435 0 283,435  283,435

                 

                 

So Wash Co 20,033 1,290,141 552,917 1,843,058 600,997 1,242,061 16,968 1,860,026

So Wash Co $37 20,033 741,230 741,230 0 741,230  741,230

                 

S St Paul 3,655 235,358 100,868 336,225 109,639 226,586 25,769 361,994

S St Paul $37 3,655   135,221 135,221  135,221  135,221

                 

W St Paul 5,225 336,490 144,210 480,700 156,750 323,950 84,117 564,817

W St Paul $37 5,225   193,325 193,325 0 193,325  193,325

                 

W B L 9,255 596,010 255,433 851,443 277,645 573,799 21,552 872,995

                 

Spring Lake Park 5,546 357,174 153,075 510,249 166,385 343,863 5,247 515,495

                 

Stillwater 9,860 634,954 272,123 907,077 295,786 611,291 4,596 911,673

                 

I G H 4,317 278,006 119,145 397,151 129,506 267,645 12,823 409,974

                 

Forest Lake 7,700 495,880 212,520 708,400 231,000 477,400 459 708,859

             

   

  116,472 4,717,342 3,374,929 8,092,270 2,197,520 5,894,751 267,810 8,360,081

Page 4: Sheri Thompson Slides

How does EMID spend Integration Revenue?

Member Services $1,981,841•Office of Equity and Integration •College and Career Readiness•Equity Leadership•Early Literacy

District Administration and Leadership $ 215,679

TOTAL INTEGRATION EXPENSES FY13 $2,197,520

Page 5: Sheri Thompson Slides

Historical Changes to EMID FundingJuly 1, 2003 – EMID receives $46 per pupil served in integration revenue from each of its suburban district members generating $3.6 million annually for the collaborative.

July 1, 2008 – EMID Board takes action to remove operating levy dollars from tuition calculation for students attending the EMID schools resulting in a loss of $800,000 in tuition revenue annually. To partially offset this decrease in funding, the Board increases the amount of integration revenue sent to the EMID collaborative by the suburban partners from $46 per pupil unit to $52 per pupil unit resulting in an increase of $400,000 in integration revenue.

July 1, 2009 – North St. Paul leaves the collaborative and Spring Lake Park becomes a full member resulting in net reduction of $400,000 in annual integration revenue.

July 1, 2010 – Mahtomedi leaves and Forest Lake joins the collaborative generating an additional $400,000 in additional integration revenue.

July 1, 2012 – EMID Board takes action reducing the per pupil amount of the integration revenue being sent to the collaborative from $52 per pupil unit to $30 per pupil unit. In addition, it is decided that integration revenue will no longer be used to support the magnet schools but rather redirected to support the 115,000 students being served by the member districts throughout EMID resulting in an annual reduction of $1.6 Million in revenues.

Page 6: Sheri Thompson Slides

Funding the Schools•EMID Schools are funded using general education dollars including the “backpack” or formula dollars, certain categorical aids including compensatory aid, special education aid, and federal Title dollars.

•Funds are generated by student’s attendance at the EMID Schools but the dollars flow to the member district of residence for each student

•EMID bills each of its member districts for the general education dollars generated by their resident students attending the EMID Schools

•Special Education aids and Title Grant monies are sent directly to EMID from MDE

•The average tuition amount is $5,391 per pupil unit

Page 7: Sheri Thompson Slides

Challenges to EMID Funding•EMID Schools are funded using general education dollars including the “backpack” or formula dollars, certain categorical aids including compensatory aid, special education aid, and federal Title dollars.

•Funds are generated by student’s attendance at the EMID Schools but the dollars flow to the member district of residence for each student

•EMID bills each of its member districts for the general education dollars generated by their resident students attending the EMID Schools

•Special Education aids and Title Grant monies are sent directly to EMID from MDE

•The average tuition amount is $5,391 per pupil unit

Page 8: Sheri Thompson Slides

Why did EMID decide to close the schools?

•Change in demographics in the member districts have driven an increased demand in member district needs and the associated financial resources

•Member districts are more integrated and better equipped to serve their resident students needs

•Ongoing strategic planning is focusing on member services to provide increased support to the member districts and the 115,000 students served within the districts

•The shift in EMID’s mission reduces annual revenue for school programs by $1.6M annually

Page 9: Sheri Thompson Slides

Why did EMID decide to close the schools?•No local levy authority

EMID would need to generate $800 -$1,000 per pupil unit for all member district’s resident students attending the magnet schools to sustain current programming level

•Enrollment at secondary grade levels

•Choice Schools

•Uncertainty regarding future of integration revenue

•Sustainability into the future

Page 10: Sheri Thompson Slides

Questions?