Presentation to the Austin CAC
-
Upload
valeriefleonard -
Category
Documents
-
view
216 -
download
0
Transcript of 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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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.
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
4/30
Whats driving these
changes?
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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.
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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;
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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)
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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.
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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.
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
22/30
So, how does all of this impact
the local school budgets?
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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.
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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%
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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.
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
27/30
Source: CPS 2014 Interactive Dashboards
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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.
Source: CPS 2014 Interactive Dashboards
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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
-
8/12/2019 Presentation to the Austin CAC
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/