Title: OVERVIEW OF PENNSYLVANIAS K12 EDUCATION FUNDING SYSTEM State Funding Is It Fair
1OVERVIEW OF PENNSYLVANIAS K-12 EDUCATION
FUNDING SYSTEMState Funding Is It Fair
Equitable?
- York County Education Summit
- October 27, 2006
- Presented by
- Ronald Cowell
- The Education Policy and Leadership Center
2EPLC Mission
- The Mission of EPLC is to encourage and support
the use of more effective state-level
education policies in order to improve student
learning in grades P-12, increase the effective
operation of schools, and enhance educational
opportunities for citizens of all ages.
3FRAMEWORK FOR EDUCATION POLICY
- Governance
- Standards (Expectations)
- Assessment (How are we doing)
- Consequences
- Educational Capacity
- Education Finance
- Alignment
-
-
4PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY
- 1776 State Constitution A school or schools
shall be established in each county by the
legislature, for the convenient instruction of
youth. - 1790 State Constitution The legislature shall,
as soon as conveniently may be, provide, by law,
for the establishment of schools throughout the
State, in such manner that the poor may be taught
gratis. - 1831 Common School Fund established with
100,000 per year available
5PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY
- 1874 PA Constitution The General Assembly
shall provide for the maintenance and support of
a thorough and efficient system of public
schools, wherein all the children of this
Commonwealth above the age of six years may be
educated, and shall appropriate at least one
million dollars each year for that purpose.
6PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY
- 1923 First effort to use state funding for
equalization - 1930 to 1950 State aid increases from 17 to
40 of costs - 1949 New School Code - State aid based upon
district teaching units X fixed dollar figure
established by Legislature X districts standard
reimbursement fraction
7PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY
- 1957 State aid formula begins to consider
actual instructional expense (AIE) - Mid 60s to 1983 Statutory goal that the state
pay 50 of the statewide district instructional
costs - 1968 For 1966-67 school year and thereafter,
State began to pay on basis of weighted pupils
and local wealth state also began to make
additional payments for children in poverty,
density, sparsity, and homebound instruction
8PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY
- 1971 State income tax established
- 1974-75 State reimbursement at 54
- 1977 Personal income valuation becomes a factor
in determining district aid ratio (40) - 1977-1980 State reimbursement averages 46 per
year
9PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY
- 1983 Equalized Subsidy for Basic Education
(ESBE) enacted includes Factor for Educational
Expense (FEE) removes 50 finding requirement - 1991 Special Education funding changed
- 1992 ESBE abandoned
- 1993 and 1994 foundation funding
- Ridge/Schweiker Administration
- Vouchers Charter Schools
10PENNSYLVANIA HISTORY
- 2002 Rendell Campaign
- 2003-04 Budget Debate
- Accountability Block Grants
- Act 72 of 2004
- Special Session on Property Tax Relief
112006-07 EDUCATION BUDGET
- Basic Ed Subsidy - 4.784 billion
- Accountability Block Grants - 250 million
- Transportation - 507 million
- Special Education - 980 million
- Social Security - 474 million
- School Employees Retire - 368 million
- Higher Education - 1.562 billion
- PHEAA - 451 million
12PUBLIC K-12 SPENDING
- 2003-04 Per Pupil
- Amount Rank
- US 8,287 ---
- PA 9,979 9th
- Source US Census Bureau
13PUBLIC K-12 REVENUEPER 1,000 PERSONAL INCOME
- 2003-04 1991-92
- Amount Rank Amount
Rank - US - Total 50.53 --- 48.87 ---
- PA - Total 51.09 21 49.98
27 - US Local 22.20 ---
23.25 --- - PA Local- 28.65 7 27.24
13 - US State 23.82 --- 22.43
--- - PA State- 18.33 42 20.25
36 -
- Differences to 100 come from federal sources.
Source US Census Bureau.
14WHY STATE FUNDING FOR EDUCATION?
- State Constitutional Mandate for General
Assembly to Provide for System of Schools - State Incentive for local government to fund
schools - State funding to reduce local taxes
- Need for Equity
- Need for Adequacy
15ADEQUATE FOR WHAT?
- The Expectations for Student Performance
Established by PAs Academic Standards - The Expectations of No Child Left Behind Law and
Related Policies -
-
16KEY ELEMENTS OF ESBE FORMULA
- WADMs (Number of Students)
- X
- Aid Ratio (Relative Wealth of District)
- X
- FEE (Cost Factor)
-
- Basic Subsidy to the District
17SUBSIDY PLUS ADD-ONS
- Poverty
- Density, Low-density
- Sparsity
- Hold Harmless
- Transportation
- Special education
- Charter Schools
18SPECIAL EDUCATION FUNDING
- State paid 100 excess cost until 1991
- New formula as of 1991-92
- Assumes 1 and 15 incidence rates
- No consideration of district costs or wealth
- In 2004-05, more than 1 billion in
non-reimbursed cost to districts
19CHARTER SCHOOLS
- Approved by district or state appeal board
- No limit on number in state
- Cost borne by local districts
- Law assumes some savings to districts
- Almost half-billion annual cost to districts
- Since 2002-03, state will pay up to 30
- Cyber charter schools
20WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE CURRENT PA FUNDING SYSTEM
- Since 1992, a Non-System -
No PREDICTABILITY - State Government has no sense of obligation to
students or to honor a commitment to a funding
formula - Annual K-12 Funding is based on political
considerations rather than educational
21PRINCIPLES OF A SOUND STATE EDUCATION FINANCE
SYSTEM
- Equity
- Adequacy
- Accountability
- Predictability
22WHAT IS WRONG WITH THE CURRENT PA FUNDING SYSTEM
- PA honors none of the four principles
- State Share in bottom five in nation
- State Appropriations Per Student below national
average - Therefore, districts too dependent on Local
Wealth Property Taxes - Therefore, great Inequity and Inadequacy among
501 school districts
23STATE/LOCAL SHARES for Elementary/Secondary
Public Education
- State Share
Local Share - PA National PA National
- 2003-04 35.9 (47.1) 56.1
(43.9) - 2002-03 36.7 (49.0) 55.8 (42.7)
- 2001-02 37.4 (49.4) 55.3 (42.8)
- 2000-01 37.3 (49.9) 56.3 (43.0)
- 1999-00 37.9 (49.8) 55.8 (43.1)
- 1998-99 38.3 (49.5) 55.8 (43.6)
- 1997-98 38.7 (49.0) 55.5
(44.4) - 1996-97 39.2 (48.8) 55.4 (44.8)
- 1995-96 39.8 (48.1) 54.8 (45.5)
- 1994-95 40.0 (47.5) 54.8 (46.0)
- 1993-94 40.1 (45.9) 54.5 (47.6)
- 1992-93 39.9 (46.4) 54.2 (47.0)
- 1991-92 41.0 (47.3) 53.3 (46.2)
- Source US Census Bureau
24STATE FUNDING APPROPRIATED PER STUDENT
25RESULT 2003-04 BURDEN ON LOCAL PROPERTY TAXES
- Overly Dependent on Local Real Property Taxes
- Total K-12 State- Local K-12 from
- wide Revenues Property Taxes Prop T
- US 462,686,152 132,831,505 28.7
- PA 20,053,897 8,846,747 44.1
- in ooos
- Source US Census Bureau
26RESULT INEQUITY FOR STUDENTS ACROSS PA
- Great Inequity for Students
- Among 501 Districts
- In 2003-04, instructional spending per pupil in
Pennsylvania school districts ranged
from 4,690 to 14,527 - This means, in an average classroom of 25
students, a gap of almost 250,000 per classroom
per year. - Inequitable and Inadequate Resources in a NCLB
and Standards-Based Environment with Equal
Expectations for All Students
27RESULT INEQUITY FOR TAXPAYERS ACROSS PA
- Great Discrepancies in Local Effort and Resultant
Burden on Local Taxpayers
28Key Issues
-
- Should all children in PA
- have a fundamental right
- to a quality public education?
29Key Issues
30Key Issues
31Key Issues
- SBE Costing-Out Study
- What are the costs of providing
- the educational capacity
- necessary to achieve expectations of
- NCLB and Pennsylvanias academic
- standards/graduation requirements?
32Key Issues
- Who should pay for the
- implementation of
- No Child Left Behind?
33Key Issues
-
- State Mandates?
- Who Should Pay?
34Key Issues
- Tension of Local Control of Funding vs.
- State Requirements/Conditions attached to
some/all of the Funding
35Key Issues
- 501 School Districts
- Structural Consolidation?
- Functional Consolidation?
36Key Issues
- How can state funding be used most effectively
to level the playing field and ensure that
adequate/sufficient resources are available to
provide the educational capacity needed for every
student to have an opportunity to be successful?
37Key Issues
- How will communities and school boards make
decisions that will ensure sufficient resources
are available, and effectively invested,
to support the educational capacity
that is necessary and most effective to promote
student achievement consistent with state and
local academic standards?
38WHAT IS PROGRESSon STATE FUNDING
- Larger share of costs paid by state
- Increase in State Funding/Student
- Reduce dependency on property taxes
- Close the equity gap
- Ensure level of funding is adequate
- Investing in what works
- Stable and predictable Funding System
- Does this improve the system for students?
39FOR MORE INFORMATION
-
- Ronald Cowell
- The Education Policy and Leadership Center
- 717-260-9900
- cowell_at_eplc.org
- www.eplc.org