Transcript Slide 1

Interdistrict Public School Choice
Program Purpose
– The choice program is necessary to increase options and
flexibility for parents and students in selecting a school
that best meets the needs of each student, thereby
improving educational opportunities for New Jersey
citizens.
– The choice program has increased the degree to which
the education system is responsive to parents and
students.
2
Interdistrict Public School Choice
History
The Interdistrict Public School Choice Program was created by the New
Jersey Department of Education in 1999.
On September 1, 1999, the State Board of Education passed regulations
establishing the Interdistrict Public School Choice Program.
In December 1999, the State Legislature enacted the Interdistrict Public
School Choice Act of 1999, as a five-year pilot with substantial limitations.
The act was signed into law by the Governor in January 2000.
In September of 2010, the legislature established a permanent
Interdistrict Public School Choice Program.
In 2011, the Interdistrict Public School Choice Program expanded to
include 71 choice districts accepting almost 1,900 students.
Interdistrict Public School Choice
In SY 2012-2013, there were 3357 students
enrollment in the program, and two additional
districts joined.
In SY 2013-2014, nearly 4,700 students participated
in 110 districts.
136 districts will participate in the choice program
in SY 2015.
Enrollment is anticipated to be over 5,000 students
this year.
Office of Interdistrict Choice
The DOE Org chart is pretty simple
Commissioner
Chief Innovation Officer
Evo Popoff
Director
Interdistrict Choice
Jessani Gordon
Interdistrict Public School Choice
Current Enrollment
and Statistics
Number of Participating Choice Districts with Enrollment by Year
160
6000
140
5000
120
4000
80
3000
60
2000
40
1000
20
Number of Districts
Enrollment Count
-
0
2000 2001 2002 2203 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Enrollment
Number of Districts
100
Choice Enrollment by County - 2014
Warren
1%
Somerset
1%
Sussex
4%
Union
5%
Atlantic
6%
Bergen
7%
Burlington
3%
Salem
7%
Passaic
2%
Ocean
5%
Camden
15%
Morris
8%
Cape May
6%
Monmouth
6%
Hunterdon
9%
Cumberland
7%
Hudson
4%
Gloucester
5%
Brief History in Numbers
Fiscal Year
Total # Districts
Total Students
Total Amount
2010-11
15
964
2011-12
71
2,131
$ 20,604,400
2012-13
73
3,358
$ 33,001,800
2013-14
110
4700
$ 49,065,000
2014-2015
136
5000+ (est.)
$
9,846,649
$54,000,000 (est.)
Highest volume Sending LEAs
(Projected for 2012-13)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Sending District
WINSLOW TWP Total
PATERSON CITY Total
JERSEY CITY Total
MILLVILLE CITY Total
TRENTON CITY Total
VINELAND CITY Total
HILLSIDE TWP Total
GLOUCESTER CITY Total
BRIDGETON CITY Total
DOVER TOWN Total
CAMDEN CITY Total
LAWRENCE TWP Total
ROSELLE BORO Total
FAIRFIELD TWP Total
SALEM CITY Total
PENNSAUKEN TWP Total
DOWNE TWP Total
COMMERCIAL TWP Total
ELIZABETH CITY Total
MINE HILL Total
TOWNSHIP OF OCEAN Total
PENNS GRV-CARNEY'S PT REG Total
HOPATCONG Total
LINDENWOLD BORO Total
PHILLIPSBURG TOWN Total
Remaining 272 LEAs
Total 297 Sending LEAs
Count
397
100
94
83
76
75
73
65
58
55
54
54
51
46
46
43
40
39
38
38
38
36
35
32
32
1560
3258
12.2%
3.1%
2.9%
2.5%
2.3%
2.3%
2.2%
2.0%
1.8%
1.7%
1.7%
1.7%
1.6%
1.4%
1.4%
1.3%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.2%
1.1%
1.1%
1.0%
1.0%
47.9%
12.2%
15.3%
18.1%
20.7%
23.0%
25.3%
27.6%
29.6%
31.3%
33.0%
34.7%
36.3%
37.9%
39.3%
40.7%
42.1%
43.3%
44.5%
45.6%
46.8%
48.0%
49.1%
50.2%
51.1%
52.1%
Working on
the
reconciliation
Choice School District Student Counts for SY2012-13
Dist #
1410
1540
1960
4240
440
1370
3690
4050
5490
150
260
340
580
2540
2670
3110
3420
4590
5035
5080
5560
2840
3780
5610
997
1120
2570
3050
1715
1730
4020
4880
2210
County
ATLANTIC
ATLANTIC
ATLANTIC
ATLANTIC
BERGEN
BERGEN
BURLINGTON
BURLINGTON
BURLINGTON
CAMDEN
CAMDEN
CAMDEN
CAMDEN
CAMDEN
CAMDEN
CAMDEN
CAMDEN
CAMDEN
CAMDEN
CAMDEN
CAMDEN
CAPE MAY
CAPE MAY
CAPE MAY
CUMBERLAND
CUMBERLAND
CUMBERLAND
CUMBERLAND
GLOUCESTER
GLOUCESTER
GLOUCESTER
GLOUCESTER
HUDSON
District Name
ESTELL MANOR CITY
FOLSOM BORO
HAMMONTON
PORT REPUBLIC CITY
BOGOTA
ENGLEWOOD CITY
NORTHERN BURLINGTON REG
PEMBERTON TWP
WASHINGTON TWP
AUDUBON BORO
BELLMAWR
BERLIN TWP
BROOKLAWN BORO
LAUREL SPRINGS BORO
LINDENWOLD BORO
MERCHANTVILLE BORO
MOUNT EPHRAIM BORO
RUNNEMEDE BORO
STERLING HIGH SCHOOL DIST
STRATFORD
WATERFORD TWP
LOWER TOWNSHIP
OCEAN CITY
WEST CAPE MAY BORO
CUMBERLAND REGIONAL
DOWNE TWP
LAWRENCE TWP
MAURICE RIVER TWP
GATEWAY REGIONAL
GLASSBORO
PAULSBORO BORO
SOUTH HARRISON TWP
HOBOKEN CITY
FY13 Est.
Choice
Enrollment
15
223
115
9
5
285
31
24
8
50
5
74
149
11
26
30
29
8
66
27
42
59
68
23
133
17
67
61
33
12
5
23
136
FY13 Choice
Per Pupil
FY13 Choice
Total Choice
Amount
Aid
Aid by County Students
7,672
115,080
3,995
890,885
8,939
1,027,985
9,563
86,067
2,120,017
362
11,637
58,185
16,279
4,639,515
4,697,700
290
7,233
224,223
4,461
107,064
12,377
99,016
430,303
63
8,349
417,450
9,120
45,600
7,602
562,548
4,351
648,299
6,787
74,657
4,436
115,336
8,935
268,050
7,216
209,264
6,950
55,600
6,680
440,880
6,782
183,114
6,693
281,106
3,301,904
517
10,271
605,989
12,330
838,440
11,834
272,182
1,716,611
150
5,596
744,268
8,063
137,071
5,458
365,686
7,036
429,196
1,676,221
278
6,767
223,311
7,012
84,144
4,302
21,510
8,596
197,708
526,673
73
15,844
2,154,784
2,154,784
136
Choice School District Student Counts for SY2012-13
Dist #
20
430
920
1680
2530
2590
4890
5050
1000
5310
3240
3370
3385
5770
770
2760
5020
5220
3980
1350
3860
4150
4280
4630
5320
490
2490
2615
3840
5360
2420
5000
5810
3890
County
HUNTERDON
HUNTERDON
HUNTERDON
HUNTERDON
HUNTERDON
HUNTERDON
HUNTERDON
HUNTERDON
MONMOUTH
MONMOUTH
MORRIS
MORRIS
MORRIS
MORRIS
OCEAN
OCEAN
OCEAN
OCEAN
PASSAIC
SALEM
SALEM
SALEM
SALEM
SALEM
SALEM
SOMERSET
SUSSEX
SUSSEX
SUSSEX
SUSSEX
UNION
UNION
UNION
WARREN
District Name
ALEXANDRIA TWP
BLOOMSBURY BORO
CLINTON TWP
FRENCHTOWN BORO
LAMBERTVILLE CITY
LEBANON
SOUTH HUNTERDON REGIONAL
STOCKTON BORO
DEAL BORO
UPPER FREEHOLD REGIONAL
MINE HILL TWP
MORRIS HILLS REGIONAL
MORRIS SCHOOL DISTRICT
WHARTON BORO
CENTRAL REGIONAL
LONG BEACH ISLAND
STAFFORD TWP
TUCKERTON BORO
PASSAIC CO MANCHESTER REG
ELSINBORO
OLDMANS TWP
PITTSGROVE TWP
QUINTON TWP
SALEM CITY
UPPER PITTSGROVE TWP
BOUND BROOK BORO
LAFAYETTE TWP
LENAPE VALLEY REGIONAL
OGDENSBURG BORO
VERNON TWP
KENILWORTH BORO
SPRINGFIELD
WINFIELD TWP
OXFORD TWP
67
FY13 Est.
Choice
Enrollment
22
50
102
10
10
8
56
13
140
51
90
34
34
45
62
31
15
29
100
17
30
150
43
2
22
24
21
29
19
10
163
19
21
16
3,357
FY13 Choice
Per Pupil
FY13 Choice
Amount
Aid
12,576
8,970
12,580
9,264
13,535
12,454
13,862
12,421
12,638
10,668
12,279
14,013
14,986
11,686
14,163
12,167
9,099
9,342
11,588
12,702
8,145
6,022
5,950
2,706
7,413
12,110
11,304
8,548
7,133
8,819
12,887
13,484
4,955
6,922
276,672
448,500
1,283,160
92,640
135,350
99,632
776,272
161,473
1,769,320
544,068
1,105,110
476,442
509,524
525,870
871,025
377,177
136,485
270,918
1,158,800
215,934
244,350
903,300
255,850
5,412
163,086
290,640
237,384
247,892
135,527
88,190
2,100,581
256,196
104,055
110,752
33,001,800
Total Choice
Aid by County
Students
$
3,273,699
271
$
2,313,388
191
$
2,616,946
203
$
$
1,655,605
1,158,800
137
100
$
$
1,787,932
290,640
264
24
$
708,993
79
$
$
2,460,832
2,571,584
203
16
3,357
Program Size and Growth - Dollars
•
Program cost:
– The cost of the choice program has grown from $10 million in SY2011 to $49
million in SY2014, a 400% growth rate in three years.
Total Cost
$70,000,000
$60,000,000
$50,000,000
$49,064,570
$40,000,000
$33,001,800
$30,000,000
$20,604,400
$20,000,000
$10,000,000
$9,846,649
$2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15 (proj)
13
Program Size and Growth - Students
•
Student enrollment:
– Enrollment in the choice program has grown from 1000 students (in 15
districts) in SY2011 to 4,700 (in 105 districts) in SY2014, a 385% growth rate in
three years.
– 105 choice districts will actively participate in the choice program in SY2014.
Total Students
7000
6000
5000
4682
4000
3357
3000
2156
2000
1000
964
0
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15 (proj)
14
Interdistrict Public School Choice
Funding
• The State pays the choice district its local fair share, on a per
pupil basis, for each choice student plus formula aid for that
student.
– The State pays the district’s local fair share per pupil rate to choice districts in the form of
“choice aid;” resident districts keep the levy collected for students who choice out
– State formula aid follows the child to the choice district (starting in year 2)
– Transportation aid stays with resident district, which continues to provide transportation
Per pupil local
fair share
Choice
enrollment
Choice aid
Formula Aid
Attributable to Choice
Student
State cost
15
Program Features: Funding
• For non-Adjustment Aid districts: Choice aid will equal per
pupil local fair share amount times choice enrollment
• For Adjustment Aid districts: Choice aid will be offset by the
amount of Adjustment Aid the district receives
• Year 1 – direct state aid only (Choice Aid)
• Year 2 and beyond – direct state aid plus students included in
resident enrollment Students will be recorded as resident
students in the October ASSA count
16
Interdistrict Public School Choice
Note: no student or school-level data analysis to date.
Approximately 45% of all choice students are
from districts with priority and focus schools
(SY2012).
Choice enrollment by grade level SY2013
Kindergarten
8%
 16% of all choice students are from districts
with priority schools (SY2012).
Choice program is disproportionately serving
students in high schools (+10ppts).
Grades 9-12
41%
Grades 1-5
31%
Grades 6-8
20%
17
18
Strategic Focus
• Increase options and flexibility for parents and
students in failing schools in selecting a high
quality school that best meets the needs of
each student, thereby improving educational
opportunities for New Jersey citizens.
19
Interdistrict Public School Choice
Profile
•
•
•
In general, most choice districts are in the program for fiscal purposes:
– Smaller districts facing financial challenges or districts with declining or
low enrollment (approx. 80%)
– Districts seeking to implement innovative/special programs (approx. 20%)
District participation near the 5 major urban districts is under-represented,
with exception of Camden
– Camden has approx. 18 choice districts nearby
– Jersey City, Paterson and Trenton each have very few choice districts
within commuting distance
– Newark has no choice districts within commuting distance
There has been an increase in the number of choice districts offering special
programs:
– 22 operating in SY2013 up from 14 in SY2012
20
Benefits of Becoming a Choice District
•Lowers tax rates without sacrificing programs
•Maximizes the use of classroom space
•Enriches the diversity of school community
•Expands or establishes innovative programs
•Stabilizes class size
•School choice aid is outside the cap and
unrestricted
Benefits to Parents and Students
•Better educational achievement
•Safer school environment
•Access to specialized programs (JROTC,
ARTs, Agribusiness, International
Baccalaureate, Math & Science Academy)
•Convenient to parent’s work location or
afterschool caregiver
How does a district apply to become a
Choice District?
•Applications are available by contacting the
Department of Education [email protected]
•Applications are due each year by April 30 for the
following school year implementation
•Board approval must accompany the application
•NJ Department of Education Web Site
http://www.state.nj.us/education/choice/
Interdistrict Public School Choice
Proposed Legislation
Over the past year, NJIPSCA has been working with
legislators to improve the program, and address the funding
formula. Our initiatives have included:
• Eliminating the 30 day transfer rule for athletic programs
• Clarification of Tier 1 and Tier 2 eligibility
NJSIAA Transfer Policy
• A student-athlete transferring from one
secondary school to another, without a bona
fide change of residence by that student’s
parent or guardian, shall be ineligible to
participate for a period of thirty (30) calendar
days or one half of the maximum number of
games allowed in the sport by NJSIAA rules
(the ineligibility period) from the beginning of
the regular schedule, whichever is less, in
any sport in which the student has previously
participated at the varsity level.
25
New Guidance: Limiting Resolutions
•
A sending district may adopt a resolution to limit the number of its students
participating in the choice program to an approved percentage of students.
The resolution may limit participation to a maximum of 10% per grade per
year and/or 15% of the total student body, subject to commissioner approval
upon a determination that:
– the resolution is in the best interest of the district's students, and
– unlimited participation in the choice program would adversely affect the district's
programs, services, operations, or fiscal conditions; and
– unlimited participation in the Choice program would adversely affect or limit the
diversity of the remainder of the student population in the district who do not
participate in the choice program
26
Proposed Legislation: Assembly No. 3866
• Introduced Feb. 21, 2013; sponsored by Paul Moriarty and Jay
Webber
• Eliminates requirement that to participate in interdistrict public
school choice program a student be enrolled for one year in a
sending district and allows public and nonpublic school students to
participate equally in program
• Families that have attended a nonpublic school or a school outside
their district of residence in the prior year will have an equal
opportunity to attend a choice school. Affected groups:
– students who attended a nonpublic school
– students who attended a choice school
– students who are entering kindergarten and attended a nonpublic
preschool
27
What Choice Districts Say About the
Program:
“Manchester Regional High School was one of the
original pilot schools, and we have been accepting
Choice students for eight years. It has been a win
win for the Choice students and our district.
Students from other districts benefit because they
are able to come to Manchester Regional for
programs that might not be available in their home
district. Our school benefits because we can fill
otherwise vacant seats, and the additional students
help to further diversify our school population. “
Dr. Richard Ney, Superintendent
Manchester Regional High School
What Choice Districts Say About the
Program:
“School Choice has offered a demographic solution for South
Hunterdon that we previously only dreamed about. We had low
enrollments and high costs per pupil. We knew we needed more
students, but we had no idea how to bring them in. By moving aid to
receiving districts and helping with transportation costs, School
Choice removed two significant barriers for parents seeking
alternatives for their kids. We were thrilled to finally open our
nurturing educational haven to more of the state’s young people!
And thanks to School Choice, all of our students are now members of
a diverse learning community that more closely approximates the
global reality. “
Marie Collins, Board Member
South Hunterdon Regional High School District
What Choice Districts Say About the
Program:
“The Bound Brook Board of Education is excited to
announce in the 2012-2013 school year, Bound
Brook High School students will participate in a one
to one iPad program. The Bound Brook School
District was able to purchase the necessary
equipment and tools because they are a “School of
Choice.”
Dan Gallagher, Ed. D., Principal
Bound Brook School District
What Choice Districts Say About the
Program:
“In addition to expanding the diversity of our
student population that we see as a benefit, the
Choice Program allowed Quinton Township to hire a
World Language Teacher. Students will now be able
to expand their world view of communication and
their perspective of the Spanish Culture.”
Dr. Donna M. Agnew
Quinton Township School District
Join the
New Jersey Interdistrict Public School
Choice Association
(NJIPSCA)
We are the only Association dedicated solely
to support and advocacy for the
Interdistrict Public School Choice Program.
For more information visit our website:
www.NJIPSCA.org
Or visit our Facebook Page
https://www.facebook.com/NjInterdistrictPublicSchoolChoiceAssociation