Upload
others
View
3
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
OVERVIEW OF OVERVIEW OF SCHOOL FINANCESCHOOL FINANCE
Charles County Public SchoolsCharles County Public Schools
AgendaAgenda
Funding AuthorityFunding Authority State FundingState FundingCounty FundingCounty Funding
Internal Budget ProcessInternal Budget ProcessData and TrendsData and Trends Future Considerations/ChallengesFuture Considerations/Challenges
Funding AuthorityFunding Authority
State GovernmentState Government
County GovernmentCounty Government
Local Board of Education (BOE)Local Board of Education (BOE)
Summary of Budget ProcessSummary of Budget Process
STATE FUNDINGSTATE FUNDING
Based on Wealth FormulasBased on Wealth Formulas Based on Adequacy Concepts & FormulasBased on Adequacy Concepts & Formulas Separate Formula Allocations forSeparate Formula Allocations for Major Major
State AidState Aid Foundation ProgramFoundation Program TransportationTransportation PovertyPoverty Special EducationSpecial Education Restricted Funds (Federal Programs)Restricted Funds (Federal Programs)
Comparative StatisticsComparative StatisticsCompared to 23 Other Maryland Compared to 23 Other Maryland
JurisdictionsJurisdictions
2424thth
1919thth
99thth
1313thth
88thth
1212thth
1111thth
2020thth
1515thth
1010thth
FY2002 RankingFY2002 Ranking
1313ththCounty Aid Per PupilCounty Aid Per Pupil
2424ththFixed Charges (Benefits)Fixed Charges (Benefits)
1515ththInstructional SalariesInstructional Salaries
1414ththAdministration/MidAdministration/Mid--LevelLevel
1010ththEnrollmentEnrollment
1414ththCost Per PupilCost Per Pupil
1616ththWealth Per PupilWealth Per Pupil
99ththOperations/MaintenanceOperations/Maintenance
99ththTextbooks/MOITextbooks/MOI
1111ththState Aid Per PupilState Aid Per Pupil
FY 2009 RankingFY 2009 RankingDescriptionDescription
Total Charles County Wealth: $9.0 billion
Total Charles County Wealth Per Pupil: $348,341
County FundingCounty Funding Based on negotiations between BOE and County Based on negotiations between BOE and County
Commissioners, subject to minimal Maintenance of Effort Commissioners, subject to minimal Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements established by law(MOE) requirements established by law
Allocated By Categories (15) including food servicesAllocated By Categories (15) including food services
Excludes Federal (Restricted) FundsExcludes Federal (Restricted) Funds
Separate process for construction (CIP)Separate process for construction (CIP)
Approval authority for categories in aggregateApproval authority for categories in aggregate
Board of EducationBoard of EducationFunding Proportion of Operating BudgetFunding Proportion of Operating Budget
BOE funding as a BOE funding as a percent of county total percent of county total (50.6% in 2002 to (50.6% in 2002 to 48.8% in 2011).48.8% in 2011).
BOE funding as a BOE funding as a percent of county percent of county undedicated revenues undedicated revenues (55.3% in 2002 to (55.3% in 2002 to 52.4% in 2011).52.4% in 2011).
40.0%42.0%44.0%46.0%48.0%50.0%52.0%54.0%56.0%58.0%60.0%
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
BOE/Total BOE/Undedicated
Funding Sources of Operating Budget/ActualFunding Sources of Operating Budget/Actual2002 to 20112002 to 2011
County Funding as a County Funding as a percent of undedicated percent of undedicated revenue budget is revenue budget is targeted at 52.4%.targeted at 52.4%.
County Funding as a County Funding as a percent of undedicated percent of undedicated actual revenue.actual revenue.
44.4%
50.0%
52.4%
54.1% 53.6%
52.7%
52.41%52.0%51.5%
46.6%
40.0%
42.0%
44.0%
46.0%
48.0%
50.0%
52.0%
54.0%
56.0%
58.0%
60.0%
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010Est.
2011Est.
Budget TargetActual
Board of EducationBoard of EducationFunding Sources of Operating BudgetFunding Sources of Operating Budget
The proportion of state The proportion of state funding has increased from funding has increased from 43.2 % in 2002 to 49.0 % 43.2 % in 2002 to 49.0 % in 2011.in 2011.
The proportion of local The proportion of local funding has decreased from funding has decreased from 55.5 % in 2002 to 49.3% in 55.5 % in 2002 to 49.3% in 2011.2011.
Other sources have slightly Other sources have slightly increased from 1.3 % in increased from 1.3 % in 2002 to 1.7 % in 2011.2002 to 1.7 % in 2011.
40.0%42.0%44.0%46.0%48.0%50.0%52.0%54.0%56.0%58.0%60.0%
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Local State
History of State and County FundingHistory of State and County Funding2002 to 20112002 to 2011
-4.00%
-2.00%
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
14.00%
2002 2004 2006 2008 2010
State County
--0.20.2289.6289.6145.3145.3144.3144.320112011
--6.26.2289.8289.8145.4145.4144.4144.420102010
16.616.6296.0296.0145.3145.3150.7150.720092009
28.428.4279.4279.4135.8135.8143.6143.620082008
27.327.3251.0251.0124.0124.0127.0127.020072007
25.025.0223.7223.7112.2112.2111.5111.520062006
18.518.5198.7198.7101.8101.896.996.920052005
16.616.6180.2180.294.694.685.685.620042004
11.211.2163.6163.691.791.771.971.920032003
$ 10.7$ 10.7$ 152.4$ 152.4$ 85.7$ 85.7$ 66.7$ 66.720022002
Change Change $$
Total Total $$
County County $$
State State $$
Fiscal Fiscal YearYear
Charles County Public SchoolsCharles County Public SchoolsBudget Reductions FY2009 Budget Reductions FY2009 –– FY2011FY2011
2,500,0002,500,000FY2009 Fund Balance Reduction (Technology, Maintenance)FY2009 Fund Balance Reduction (Technology, Maintenance)
$12,885,000$12,885,000GRAND TOTALGRAND TOTAL
1,600,0001,600,000FY2010 Eliminate Central Office Positions (28)FY2010 Eliminate Central Office Positions (28)
1,200,0001,200,000FY2010 Reduce Funding for Major Technology ProjectsFY2010 Reduce Funding for Major Technology Projects
976,000976,000FY2010 Reduce School Allocations & Textbook ReplacementsFY2010 Reduce School Allocations & Textbook Replacements
650,000650,000FY2010 Reduce Capital Projects Funding (from $1.3M)FY2010 Reduce Capital Projects Funding (from $1.3M)
425,000425,000FY2010 Reduce Funding for Technology Upgrades (from $800K)FY2010 Reduce Funding for Technology Upgrades (from $800K)
250,000250,000FY2010 Reduce AfterFY2010 Reduce After--school Activity Bus Routesschool Activity Bus Routes
375,000375,000FY2009 Reduce Transportation BudgetFY2009 Reduce Transportation Budget
475,000475,000FY2009 Eliminate Fund Balance Reserves (Special Projects)FY2009 Eliminate Fund Balance Reserves (Special Projects)
600,000600,000FY2009 Eliminate Fund Balance Reserves (Digital Classroom)FY2009 Eliminate Fund Balance Reserves (Digital Classroom)
1,300,0001,300,000FY2009 Eliminate Fund Balance Reserves (OPEB)FY2009 Eliminate Fund Balance Reserves (OPEB)
1,600,0001,600,000FY2009 Hiring Freeze (Central Office Positions and Other)FY2009 Hiring Freeze (Central Office Positions and Other)
321,000321,000
613,000613,000
Expenditure $Expenditure $
FY2011 Technology EquipmentFY2011 Technology Equipment
FY2011 Capital Projects (NonFY2011 Capital Projects (Non--CIP)CIP)
DescriptionDescription
BOE Budget Internal ProcessBOE Budget Internal Process
Combination of formula, centralized allocations Combination of formula, centralized allocations (top down) and individual school requests(top down) and individual school requests
Internal process to review and approve school Internal process to review and approve school level requestslevel requests
Tied to the objectives of the Master PlanTied to the objectives of the Master Plan
Salaries and benefits subject to union negotiationsSalaries and benefits subject to union negotiations
BOE Budget Internal ProcessBOE Budget Internal Process(continued)(continued)
Development:Development:1)1) Determine revenuesDetermine revenues2)2) Identify mandatory costsIdentify mandatory costs
a.a. Salary step/insurance/retirementSalary step/insurance/retirementb.b. TransportationTransportationc.c. New school start up costsNew school start up costsd.d. Unfunded mandatesUnfunded mandatese.e. Restricted grant supplementsRestricted grant supplements
3)3) Incorporate negotiated cost of livingIncorporate negotiated cost of living4)4) Teachers for growth or new schoolsTeachers for growth or new schools5)5) School and departmental requestsSchool and departmental requests6)6) Supplemental requestsSupplemental requests
BOE Budget Internal ProcessBOE Budget Internal Process(continued)(continued)
Execution:Execution:1)1) Monitor new hires/separations and retireesMonitor new hires/separations and retirees2)2) Determine salary savings (October) and Determine salary savings (October) and
contingency listcontingency list3)3) Develop and maintain yearDevelop and maintain year--end forecast end forecast
(January(January--June) and release contingencyJune) and release contingency4)4) Revise multiRevise multi--year financial planyear financial plan5)5) Audit and review processAudit and review process
FY2011 BudgetFY2011 BudgetOperating Cost Per Pupil = $11,216Operating Cost Per Pupil = $11,216
Instruction(Classroom)
CentralAdministration
Maintenance, Operations& Capital
Outlay
$0.12
Student Transportation
$0.08
$0.67
$0.03
Student & Community Services
$0.01 $0.09
School Administration
FY2011 Budget by ObjectFY2011 Budget by Object$294.8 Million$294.8 Million
Contracted Services
11%
Other Charges4%
Supplies/Equip.3%
Transfers1%
Salaries65%
Benefits16%
Compensation81%
Future Financial and Program Future Financial and Program ConsiderationsConsiderations
Impact of the state and local economy on education Impact of the state and local economy on education
Impact of budget reductions made in prior years and the ability Impact of budget reductions made in prior years and the ability to to make additional cutsmake additional cuts
Impact of funding reductions on staffing, class size, test scoreImpact of funding reductions on staffing, class size, test scores and s and the ability to continue programs and servicesthe ability to continue programs and services
Implications of no enhancements or new program initiatives on Implications of no enhancements or new program initiatives on accountabilityaccountability
Loss of funding related to federal and state restricted programsLoss of funding related to federal and state restricted programs and and the ability to continue or maintain themthe ability to continue or maintain them
Ability to address costAbility to address cost--ofof--living increases, classified pension plans living increases, classified pension plans and OPEB trust fundingand OPEB trust funding
Future Financial and Program Future Financial and Program Considerations Considerations
(continued)(continued)•• Loss of ARRA funding Loss of ARRA funding
($8.5 Million)($8.5 Million)
•• Required funding and startRequired funding and start--up costs for new schools up costs for new schools ($18 Million estimate)($18 Million estimate)
•• Continuation of federal and state restricted grantsContinuation of federal and state restricted grants
•• Federal and state accountability, including testing initiativeFederal and state accountability, including testing initiatives and s and unfunded mandatesunfunded mandates($696 Thousand for programs; $6.8 Million for infrastructure cos($696 Thousand for programs; $6.8 Million for infrastructure cost)t)
•• Ability to continue Race to the Top initiatives Ability to continue Race to the Top initiatives ($1.2 Million for programs)($1.2 Million for programs)
•• Make up lost compensation and benefits (OPEB) funding Make up lost compensation and benefits (OPEB) funding ($24 Million annual funding gap)($24 Million annual funding gap)
Future Financial and Program Future Financial and Program Considerations Considerations
(continued)(continued)
• County funding levels related to benchmarks
• Technology renewal projects and enhancements
• Providing funding for the Master Plan
Summary Conclusions Summary Conclusions
• Major shortfalls to address for the next several years
• Need to reach consensus with Commissioners and Unions over future funding
• Need to maintain flexibility with budget changes and contingencies
•Reduce reliance on the use of fund balance to avoid budget shortfalls