Presentation to the Austin CAC

8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC

1/30

STUDENTBASED

BUDGETING

Authors: Sarah Karp and Valerie F. Leonard

Presenter: Valerie F. LeonardMarch 11, 2014


2/30

Acknowledgments:This presentation was developed for the AustinCommunity Action Council using slides from

Catalysts Cheat Sheet CPS Budgeting and SchoolClosings and School Pictures Featuring

Snapshots of the Condition of West Side Schools

town hall meeting series. We give a special thanks

to Sarah Karp, Deputy Editor of Catalyst-ChicagoMagazine, and Dwayne Truss, Board Member,Raise Your Hand.


3/30

Background

Citing a need to close a loomingbillion dollar deficit and to correct autilization crisis, the Chicago Board

of Education voted to close 49 publicschools and 1 high school programin June 2013.

The West Side took a significant hit.

23 of 49 schools are on the West Sideof Chicago, representing 47% of allschool closures in 2013.

The West Side is home to 17% of allschools in Chicago


4/30

Whats driving these

changes?


5/30

Race to the Top

Race to the Top is President Obamas

signature education policy

Part of American Reinvestment Act of 2009

(ARRA) or Stimulus Package, historiclegislation designed to stimulate the economy,support job creation, and invest in critical

sectors, including education.


6/30

ARRA

The ARRA provides $4.35 billion for the Race tothe Top Fund, a competitive grant programdesigned to encourage and reward States that arecreating the conditions for education innovation

and reform; Achieving significant improvement in student

outcomes, including making substantial gains instudent achievement

closing achievement gaps, improving high schoolgraduation rates, and ensuring studentpreparation for success in college and careers


7/30

1. Adopting standards and assessments thatprepare students to succeed in college and theworkplace and to compete in the globaleconomy;

2. Building data systems that measure studentgrowth and success, and inform teachers andprincipals about how they can improveinstruction;

3. Recruiting, developing, rewarding, and retainingeffective teachers and principals, especiallywhere they are needed most; and

4. Turning around our lowest-achieving schools.

Four Core Reform Areas


8/30

Excerpt from Funding Criteria

(F)(2) Ensuring successful conditions for high-performing charter schools and otherinnovative schools (40 points)

The extent to which(iii) The States charter schools receive (as set

forth in Appendix B) equitable funding

compared to traditional public schools, and acommensurate share of local, State, andFederal revenues;


9/30

GATES DISTRICT CHARTER COMPACT

Since 2002, CPS has received approximately$28 million from the Bill & Melinda GatesFoundation to spur innovative approachesto education reform.

December, 2011, CPS signed a compactagreement with the Gates Foundation, pledginggreater cooperation and collaboration betweenthe city's charter and traditional neighborhoodschools.

The agreement allows Chicago to compete fora piece of a $40 million grant from the Gates

Foundation, aimed at building betweencharters and neighborhood schools and allowfor the sharing of ideas.

(Chicago Tribune, December 7, 2011)


10/30

KEY TERMS OF GATES COMPACT

Gates Foundation typically requires schooldistricts to close bottom 25% of schools Prioritize turning over public school buildings to

charters Fund charters at the same level as other schools

in the district

In return, districts compete for up to $7 millionin operating and professional developmentfunds and up to $20 million in constructionfunds to develop new charter schools


11/30

STATUS:

GATES DISTRICT CHARTER COMPACT

In December 2012,CPS and Gates Foundationmutually agreed that CPS would not receive $4.5million grant award for the current funding rounddue to leadership changes at CPS.

CPS was eligible to compete for up to $20 millionin capital funds for spring, 2013

To date, no capital funds have been awarded, and

CPS has received $100,000 in professionaldevelopment funds for charter schools


12/30

Where does CPS get its money?

24%

31%

36%

2%

2%5% Federal revenue

State revenue

Local property taxes

Personal propertyand replacement

taxesOther local revenue

Fund balance

40 %

frompropertytaxes


13/30

Old System

Schools allocated teachers based onthe number of students.

Small enrollment swings didntchange the bottom line.

Teacher salary didnt matter to

principalsLess flexibility for principals


14/30

This year:Student-based budgeting

Core allocation money

follows the student.

$4,140 perstudent Schools get less SBB core

allocation depending onnumber of students who aremore severely disabled


15/30

How CPS arrived at this amount

Adding together last yearsexpenditures on things that would be

covered by SBB.= $2 billion

But the amount was reduced by

because of the districts budget deficitsubtract $81 million


16/30

On top of SBB schools get:

Administrative base to pay for 1 principal, 1counselor and 1 clerk

Salary adjustment for veteran teachers

Magnetschools and magnet cluster schools

Federal and state poverty money, based onnumber of students who qualify for free and

reduced lunch.


17/30

Charter schools

Same per-pupilamount as district runschool.

administrative base salary adjustment

stipend for in-kindservices

(operations,maintenance, securityand magnet positions)

Elem k -3

Elem 4-8 H.S.

Weighting 1.07 1 1.24

Per pupil $4,429 $4,140 5,132

Admin Base $542 $507 $623

Teacheradjustment

$98 $91 $112

Stipend forservices

$1,758 $1,643 $2020

Total $6827 $6381 $7887

Plus, state and federal poverty money


18/30

Extra money

Government Grants

Private foundation grants

Parent fundraising

Charters bring in more---more than half bring in

over $100,000 in private money

Less than 10 district-run schools bring in more than

$100,000


19/30

School actions this year

49 elementary schools closed; $155 million in investments in

welcoming schools, including

renovations, air conditioners,specialized programs andtechnology, such as iPads

60% of students to designatedwelcoming schools


20/30

49%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

HENSON

POPE

KING

GOLDBLATT

Grand TotalLAFAYETTE

EMMET

MAY

PEABODY

Fewer students from West Sideschools went to welcoming schools.


21/30

4,390students k thru 7thgrade

Spread among 195schools

5% CPS has no idea; 2% transferred out of

district 4 % went to charter schools;

5 % went to AUSL-run schools


22/30

So, how does all of this impact

the local school budgets?


23/30

School Level BudgetsBy School Type

School Type

FY 2013 Ending

Budget

FY 2014

Approved

Budget

Budget

Difference of

FY14 - FY13

%

Public Schools 3,048,651,116 2,792,841,017 (255,810,099) -8%

Turnaround Schools (Public) 139,395,644 125,220,768 (14,174,876) -10%Subtotal Public 3,188,046,760 2,918,061,785 $ (269,984,975) -8%

Charter Schools 475,556,655 511,078,376 35,521,721 7%

Total 3,663,603,415 3,429,140,161 $ (234,463,254) -6%

Under the new per pupil budgeting formula, public schools,including turnarounds, lost a total of $269.9 million, whilecharters gained $35.5 million. This translates into an 8%reduction for public schools and a 7% increase for charters.The combined effect for all schools is a 6% reduction.


24/30

School Level BudgetsBy Network

Under the new per pupil budgeting formula, West SideSchools lost $66.7 million, or 11% on average. The formerFulton Network was hit the hardest, with a 17% reductionin total school budgets.

Network FY 2013 Ending

Budget

FY 2014

Approved

Budget

Budget

Difference of

FY14 - FY13

%

Fulton 121,376,022 100,704,928 (20,671,094) -17%

West Side High Schools 164,458,797 142,960,402 (21,498,395) -13%Aus tin-North Lawndale 110,136,820 97,781,435 (12,355,385) -11%

Garfield-Humboldt 87,662,197 81,261,698 (6,400,499) -7%

Pilsen-Little Village 143,863,050 138,135,796 (5,727,254) -4%

Total 627,496,887 560,844,259 (66,652,628) -11%


25/30

School Level BudgetsPositions Lost

Network FY 2012

Ending

Positions

FY 2013

Budgeted

Positions

FY 2014

Approved

Positions

Positions

Difference

of FY14 -

FY13

%

Fulton 1,455.0 1,448.0 1,148.5 (299.5) -21%

West Side High Schools 1,964.4 1,786.7 1,554.9 (231.8) -13%

Austin-North Lawndale 1,258.0 1,243.0 1,079.5 (163.5) -13%

Garfield-Humboldt 980.0 978.5 909.0 (69.5) -7%

Pilsen-Little Village 1,548.0 1,617.0 1,511.5 (105.5) -7%

Total 7,205.4 7,073.2 6,203.4 (869.80) -12%

Under the new per pupil budgeting formula, West SideSchools lost 869.8 full-time equivalents (FTEs), or 12% oftotal staff. The former Fulton Network was hit the hardest,with a loss of 21% of its staff. At the same time, the publicschools lost 3,323.6 positions, for a total reduction of 9%of staff. Lower staffing levels is reportedly leading toovercrowding in some schools.


26/30

Case Study 1: Leslie Lewis School

The Lewis School lost 13 pupils between 2013 and 2014, going from569 to 556.

Source: CPS 2014 Interactive Dashboards


27/30


The Lewis School lost $509,967 between FY 2013 and FY 2014. The biggesthits were to core instruction (-$179.5 K), diverse learners (-$87.5K) andsupplemental general state aid (-$88.4K). At the same time, they added 3.5

positions.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Difference(FY14 - FY13)

FY 2012 FY

2013

FY

2014

Difference(FY14 - FY13)

4,690,983 4,998,516 4,488,549 (509,967) 57.0 55.5 59.0 3.5

Budget Positions


28/30

Case Study 2: Michelle Clark

Michelle Clark Academic Prep Magnet High School lost 61 studentsbetween 2013 and 2014, going from 574 to 513. They lost 220students over the past 2 years, going from 733 to 513.



29/30

Michelle Clark lost $1,763,041 between FY 2013 and FY 2014. The biggesthits were to core instruction (-$888.9 K), Title I(-$128K) and supplementalgeneral state aid (-$188K). At the same time, they lost 14.3 positions.

FY 2012 FY 2013 FY 2014 Difference(FY14 - FY13)

FY 2012 FY

2013

FY

2014

Difference(FY14 - FY13)

7,838,519 7,176,372 5,413,331 (1,763,041) 98.5 73.3 59.0 (14.3)

Budget Positions


30/30

CatalystChicagowww.catalyst-chicago.orgSarah [email protected]

Valerie F. Leonard

www.valeriefleonard.com773-521-3137consulting@valeriefleonard.com

For Further Info, Contact:
http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/mailto:[email protected]://www.valeriefleonard.com/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.valeriefleonard.com/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.catalyst-chicago.org/http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/http://www.catalyst-chicago.org/

Presentation to the Austin CAC

Documents

Transcript of Presentation to the Austin CAC