Transcript Document

Comparison of the DOE Current Budget
with the New Weighted Student Formula
Reinventing Education Act
for the Children of Hawaii
REACH
Our Goal. Our Children. Our Future.
Outline
• How are School Resources Allocated Now?
-- School Equity based on Enrollment
• Weighted Student Formula:
-- Equity Based on Students’ Needs
• Committee on Weights: Key Questions
• Characteristics to Consider for Weights
• Introduction to Other School Districts’ Formulas:
Edmonton, Seattle & Houston
How are School Resources
Currently Allocated?
State
(Legislature & Governor)
DHRD
DAGS
DOH
Board of Education
Department of Education
Civil Service
Employee Screening
Repairs & Maintenance
School Construction
School Health Aides
Hourly
Payroll
($)
Schools
The Current Budget Allocation System
Promotes School Equity
• The primary method of allocating resources
to schools is through staffing formulas:
– Student : Teacher Ratio
– Support Staff Ratios
– Staffing based on program decisions
• Positions are allocated to schools;
• Payroll is processed centrally.
• Most school districts across the U.S. follow
similar procedures.
Staffing Ratios Vary with Enrollment,
But Do Not Adjust for Students’ Needs
$/Pupil
Add-on Programs
STAFFING RATIOS
FTEs
Low
High
Student Need
Under Current Allocations,
Schools With Similar Enrollments Receive
Similar Numbers of Teacher Positions,
Even Though Student Needs Vary by School
Kaimuki
Hi
Hilo
Hi
Kalama Waianae
Int
Int
Kalihi
Kai El
Mokapu
El
Enrollment
1,202
1,285
905
937
802
796
% Limited
English
Proficiency
14.8%
2.1%
1.2%
3.8%
18.6%
1.9%
% Poverty
46.7%
46.9%
44.4%
78.0%
75.6%
17.0%
% Special
Education
15.8%
20.0%
19.2%
26.2%
5.6%
12.56%
Current Budget Allocations: Positions Allocated
to Schools, Payroll Processed Centrally
Fourteen Percent of Current Total DOE Budget Allocated to School Principals,
Excluding Salaries
Fiscal Year 2005 Budget, Excluding Debt Service and CIP
EDN 100 Categorical
Programs excluding salaries
2%
Federal Funds
6%
Special and Trust Funds
1%
EDN 600 Charter Schools
2%
EDN 100 Lump Sum school
programs, excluding salaries
3%
EDN 500 Adult Education and
After-School Plus (A+)
2%
EDN 100 Salaries,
Processed Centrally
for Schools
41%
EDN 300 State and District
Administration
3%
Federal Funds centrally
administered
3%
EDN 200 Instructional Support
2%
EDN 400 Food Services,
Custodial, Student Transportation
11%
EDN 150 All Special Ed and
Comprehensive Student Support
Services
24%
In Contrast:
Weighted Student Formula Achieves
Equity Based on Students’ Needs
• Empowers schools to use resources to
positively impact student achievement
• Resources follow the student
-- Revenue is portable
• Each child's needs are counted
-- Weights are established for different needs
One Example of Students’ Needs: The link
between poverty and academic
performance
70%
100%
60%
80%
50%
40%
60%
30%
40%
20%
20%
10%
% Meeting/Exceeding State Standards 01/02
80%
120%
% of Students Qualifying for F/R Lunch
• There is a clear
correlation between
poverty and
academic
performance.
• In general, the
higher the poverty
level at a school the
lower the academic
performance of the
school.
Honolulu District Schools
0%
0%
I I
I I
I
I
I A D E
I I
I
I
I
I
I
I I
I
I
D
LO N RN A H IH E LE KA N LA ID A ID I H A AL I IO ID N A LA H ID N NU A HO Y N ID IK H A LN H ID H LO IK NE ID N N O I A NU LA AD N A
O PU E EN N AL LIK A - U LA KI M W M K I- K Y M UH M LA W E Y M SO A AM LI LE LA M IK NI UO O LT M R LI LO IO M SO LA N I M M A A E LA IN
AL A F A TO K KE UH HI A NA TT AE AL MU IH RO LE K ON IU LA UW NLE ON ER UM AL HO AL IIO UA A LA PA INC E OA SE NA MI A EY IL KU MA UK AE UU AH H E HA
W
O O
I K
P IN
O
L EV K AI U A AH LL W O
S A A L KI T FF H AP LI V AL A W KA
I- NG
LI PU AL O LA RE K TR AI AL
M M N K K N NA
L
D
G
K
N K
E
H
O
I
S A K L K H A
AI
IH RI
N K K
AU C N E AA K
A
K L IU
R
P
K
A
V
O N
K
E
K M HI J K
VE
U
AL R
O A
AL
LI
JA
C
IU
K FA
S
IL
K
R AN
TE
N
A
A
S
W
W
W
A
K
Poverty
Achievement
Weighted Student Formula Provides Dollar
Resources to Schools Based on Students’ Needs
$/Pupil
$
$
Low
High
Student Need
Act 51, With Weighted Student Formula:
70% Budget Requirement
70% of Total DOE Budget
To Be Expended By School Principals
Beginning in School Year 2006-07
Budget To Be
Expended by
School Principals
Under Act 51,
SLH 2004
70%
Intensive Special
Education Services
9%
Food Services, Custodial,
Student Transportation
11%
Instructional Support
2%
Consisting of:
Weighted student formula 58 %
Other school funds:
Categorical, federal,
special, trust funds,
and charter schools
12 %
Total
70 %
Federal Funds centrally
administered
3%
Adult Education and A+
Program
2%
State and
District/Complex Area
Administration
3%
Committee on Weights: Key Questions
• What programs to include in the WSF?
• Which students or schools should get more?
• How much more should they get?
Characteristics to Consider for Weights
Poverty
Mobility
Free/Reduced Lunch
Transfers to/from schools
Average Daily Attendance
Grade Level
Accountability Measures
Test Scores
Adequate Yearly Progress
Grades K-2
Elementary
Middle, High
Other
English For Second Language Learners
Special Education
Gifted/Talented
At-Risk / Alienated Students
Small School Adjustments
Geographic Isolation
Process to Develop Weights
• Committee on Weights:
• Identification of programs to be included in WSF
• Identification of student or school characteristics to
receive weighting
• Review of “base-line” weightings using current
allocations
• Review comparison of schools “as is” and “would
be” allocations
• Revise weights to appropriately reflect student and
school needs
What programs to include in the
Weighted Student Formula?
• Conceptually:
• Include direct costs of instructional programs
• Include programs currently operated by staffing
formulas and other direct allocations to schools
• Exclude non-instructional programs
• Exclude programs more appropriately managed
centrally
Other School Districts’ Weighted Student
Formulas
• Edmonton
• 2002-03 enrollment = 82,000
• First year of WSF implementation: 1976-77
• 92% of budget included in WSF
» Excludes Student Transportation, Food Services, Debt
Service, Facilities Construction
• Seattle
• 2003-04 enrollment = 47,000
• First year of WSF implementation: 1997-98
• 50-60% of budget included in WSF
• Houston
• 2002-03 enrollment = 212,099
• First year of WSF implementation: 2001-02
• 70-80% of budget included in WSF
Questions So Far?