School Funding: Facts and Figures

A library of PowerPoint slides compiled by

the Association of Metropolitan School Districts

Jon Commers, Research Director

651-999-7327

jcommers@amsd.org

Research LibraryClick to:

Section 1: General Education Funding TrendsSection 2: Special EducationSection 3: ELL/LEP/Language DiversitySection 4: Child Poverty and MobilitySection 5: Referenda

Research Library

Section 1: General Education Funding Trends

Basic Formula Allowance is Lagging Behind Inflation

Source: Minnesota House Research, "Education Funding: A History of Funding Increases and Reductions," March 2006; CPI figures from Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank

Basic Formula Allowance Lagging Behind Inflation

92 186 270 308 407 412 390303

273277 237 329 441

402373

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

4,500

5,000

1991

-92

1992

-93

1993

-94

1994

-95

1995

-96

1996

-97

1997

-98

1998

-99

1999

-2000

2000

-01

2001

-02

2002

-03

2003

-04

2004

-05

2005

-06

2006

-07

School Year Net Formula Allowance Formula Gap

AMCPU = Adjusted Marginal Cost Pupil Unit

Source: AMSD Analysis of Department of Education 2007 What If Report

2007 General Education Revenue per AMCPU

(Without Basic Education Aid)

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

Greater MN Districts <500 AMCPU

Greater MN Districts 500-1000 AMCPU

Greater MN Districts 1000-2000 AMCPU

Greater MN Districts>2000 AMCPU

All Metro Districts Mpls and St. Paul Only

Dollar

s

REFERENDUM

ALT COMP

OPER. CAPITAL

TRANSITION

EQUITY

T&E

TRANSP SPARS

SPARSITY

LEP TOTAL

COMPENSATORY

EXTENDED TIME

GIFTED & TALENT

AMCPU = Adjusted Marginal Cost Pupil Unit

Source: AMSD Analysis of Department of Education 2007 What If Report

2007 General Education Revenue per AMCPU

(Without Basic Education Aid and Referendum Revenue)

-

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Greater MN Districts <500 AMCPU

Greater MN Districts 500-1000 AMCPU

Greater MN Districts 1000-2000 AMCPU

Greater MN Districts>2000 AMCPU

All Metro Districts Mpls and St. Paul Only

Dollar

s

ALT COMP

OPER. CAPITAL

TRANSITION

EQUITY

T&E

TRANSP SPARS

SPARSITY

LEP TOTAL

COMPENSATORY

EXTENDED TIME

GIFTED & TALENT

FY 2007 GENERAL ED FUNDING FOR AMSD DISTRICTS PER AMCPU: AID AND LEVY

AMSD Districts: Ranking of General Ed Funding Per AMCPU

AID LEVY

District No. District Name FY07 AMCPU Total Aid Aid/ AMCPUStatewide Aid

Rank Total Levy Levy/ AMCPUStatewide

Levy Rank1.2 Minneapolis 40,432.52 277,263,326 6,857 35 42,047,040 1,040 36

6 South St. Paul 3,531.64 19,580,570 5,544 238 3,144,457 890 4414Fridley 3,011.91 16,961,506 5,631 211 2,940,727 976 3816Spring Lake Park 5,158.62 27,464,114 5,324 297 5,597,823 1,085 31

112Chaska 10,203.69 54,081,296 5,300 308 9,045,029 886 45191Burnsville 11,937.78 63,194,849 5,294 315 12,662,043 1,061 34197West St. Paul 5,343.81 28,022,373 5,244 325 6,562,981 1,228 20199 Inver Grove 4,275.17 22,085,219 5,166 331 4,709,143 1,102 27270Hopkins 9,409.31 48,098,684 5,112 333 15,470,545 1,644 5271Bloomington 12,312.22 65,188,731 5,295 314 15,509,544 1,260 17272Eden Prairie 11,377.25 57,551,573 5,058 337 16,156,505 1,420 12273Edina 8,697.41 43,549,838 5,007 339 12,918,673 1,485 10276Minnetonka 8,857.08 44,349,323 5,007 340 13,483,514 1,522 9278Orono 2,891.95 14,429,970 4,990 342 3,632,711 1,256 18280Richfield 4,638.69 26,933,211 5,806 173 6,392,622 1,378 14281Robbinsdale 15,261.71 82,701,915 5,419 277 16,809,498 1,101 28282St. Anthony-New Brighton 1,917.02 9,786,075 5,105 334 2,097,419 1,094 30283St. Louis Park 5,089.75 26,612,265 5,229 328 9,112,432 1,790 4284Wayzata 11,272.45 56,697,698 5,030 338 17,496,260 1,552 8286Brooklyn Center 1,879.25 11,959,983 6,364 63 753,289 401 176621Mounds View 11,392.71 59,027,501 5,181 330 12,685,554 1,113 26622North St. Paul-Maplewood 12,579.57 66,619,528 5,296 313 13,507,706 1,074 32623Roseville 7,353.03 38,543,481 5,242 326 10,237,038 1,392 13625St. Paul 46,528.86 326,654,266 7,020 28 25,185,052 541 112720Shakopee 6,686.36 36,601,424 5,474 264 4,965,663 743 63728Elk River 13,573.81 73,252,875 5,397 282 8,894,692 655 78832Mahtomedi 3,514.31 17,805,842 5,067 336 4,484,028 1,276 15

Source: Minnesota Department of Education, WhatIf Interactive Revenue Model, FY2007.

Minnesota Per-Pupil Revenue Trends, FY1984-2004

-

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,00019

84

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

Total Revenue Total Inflation-Adjusted Total Revenue

Source: Minnesota House Research, “School District Revenue History,” February 2006.

Minnesota Per-Pupil Revenue, FY1984-2004(Less Building Debt Service and Special Education)

-

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

9,000

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

Total Revenue Less Bldg Debt and Special Ed Inflation-Adjusted

Source: Minnesota House Research, “School District Revenue History,” February 2006.

Since State “Takeover” in 2002, Local Share of Total Revenue Has Increased

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1993-4 1994-5 1995-6 1996-7 1997-8 1998-9 1999-00 2000-1 2001-2 2002-3 2003-4 2004-5 2005-6 2006-7

State Percentage of Total Revenue Local Percentage of Total Revenue

Source: Minnesota House Research, July 2006.

Minnesota’s rank in education spending relative to income plunged over the past

decade

12121617

26272831

28

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

FY 1995

FY 1996

FY 1997

FY 1998

FY 1999

FY 2000

FY 2001

FY 2002

FY 2003

Minnesota's rank in education spending per $1000 personal income

Source: U.S Census Bureau: Public Education Finances Report, 2003 is the most recent available

Minnesota Ranked 46th in the nation in growth in inflation adjusted per pupil spending from

1997 to 2002

U.S. Average: 16.8%Minnesota: 9.4%

Weak Growth in MN Education Funding

Source: Donald J. Boyd, K-12 Education: Still Growing Strongly, June 21, 2004. The Nelson A. Rockefeller Institute of Government, State Fiscal News Volume 4, No. 5.

Example of How Declining Enrollment Affects a Metro School District: Revenue Change Due to

Enrollment Decline

2004-05 2005-06 2006-07

Projection

Enrollment Est. 10,734 10,466 10,256 General Ed. Rev. 73,049,74473,823,339 75,197,234

% Change 1.0% 1.9%Simulation

Enrollment 10,734 10,73410,734 General Ed. Rev.73,049,744

75,166,698 78,219,810 % Change2.8% 4.0%

Revenue Change -1,343,359-3,022,576

Example of How Declining Enrollment Affects a Metro School District: Expenditure Reductions due

to Enrollment Decline

2004-05 2005-06

Enrollment Est. 10,734 10,466

Change -268

Student/Teacher Ratio 25:1

Staff Reduction 10.7

Beginning Teacher Compensation $45,000

Cost Savings (10.5 x $45,000) $481,500

Revenue Loss $1,343,359

Net Loss $858,359

Research Library

Section 2: Special Education

Districts Subsidizing Growing Needs with Static Funding

Special Education: Adjusted Net Cross-Subsidy

250

270

290

310

330

350

370

390

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004

Source: Minnesota Department of Education, Special Education Cross-Subsidy Reports. Adjusted Net Cross-Subsidy = Special education expenditures, less categorical revenues, less, general education revenue attributable to special education students served more than 60% of the time outside regular classrooms.

The number of special education students has grown by 12% since

1998

Source: MDE Fall Enrollment Reports, K-12, 1997-8 through 2005-6 school years.

92,220

95,322

97,398

99,309100,474

101,803102,856 103,391 103,911

86,000

88,000

90,000

92,000

94,000

96,000

98,000

100,000

102,000

104,000St

uden

ts

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Fiscal Year

SPECIAL EDUCATION CROSS-SUBSIDY FY 2004 (Latest Available)District District Adjusted NetNumber Name Cross Subsidy* Per WADM

1Minneapolis 24,953,438 528.93 6South St. Paul 1,458,874 371.84

14Fridley 1,298,437 436.15 16Spring Lake Park 1,626,155 331.71

112Chaska 3,645,615 388.48 191Burnsville 6,319,100 495.67 197West St. Paul 2,711,785 490.50 199 Inver Grove 1,886,508 419.38 270Hopkins 4,547,151 473.23 271Bloomington 4,969,920 401.22 272Eden Prairie 4,785,332 402.86 273Edina 3,376,260 403.90 276Minnetonka 3,905,780 439.06 278Orono 1,041,838 359.41 280Richfield 1,880,647 381.15 281Robbinsdale 6,610,097 408.25 282St. Anthony-New Brighton 616,801 320.83 283St. Louis Park 2,718,019 540.35 284Wayzata 4,221,454 376.57 286Brooklyn Center 591,940 294.74 621Mounds View 4,816,411 389.02 622North St. Paul-Maplewood 5,966,945 431.32 623Roseville 3,429,339 459.25 625St. Paul 23,710,724 490.01 720Shakopee 2,328,384 416.23 728Elk River 4,707,045 397.04 832Mahtomedi 1,309,583 368.05

AMSD Total 129,433,583 State Total 378,706,399

* Calculation of Adjusted Net Cross-Subsidy:

Special education expendituresLess: Categorical revenuesLess: General ed revenue attributable to special ed students

= Adjusted Net Cross-Subsidy

Source: Minnesota Department of Education, Special Education Cross-Subsidy Report by District, March 2006.

Special Ed Cross Subsidy Grows

Source: Minnesota Department of Education, Special Education Cross-Subsidy Report for FY2004 (latest available). Subsidies from School District Program Funds represents the adjusted net cross subsidy figure.

400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

1,100

1,200

FY 1999 FY 2000 FY 2001 FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004

($M

illio

ns)

State Categorical Revenues Federal Funds Tuition Subsidies from School District Program Funds

Research Library

Section 3: ELL/LEP/Language Diversity

The number of LEP students has increased over 110% in eight years

Source: MDE Fall Enrollment Reports, K-12, 1997-8 through 2005-6 school years.

26,849

31,47035,748

44,34247,963

51,27553,507

56,829 57,665

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000St

uden

ts

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Fiscal Year

ELL Students Growing as Percentage of Total Enrollment

0.000%

2.000%

4.000%

6.000%

8.000%

10.000%

12.000%

14.000%

16.000%

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Statewide

AMSD Districts

Source: Minnesota Department of Education, Fall Population Data, 1997-8 to 2005-6.

Number of Home Primary LanguagesPercent of Districts With Various Numbers of Primary Languages

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Fiscal Year

1

2

2-5

5-10

10-40

>40

Source: Minnesota Department of Education, “Home Primary Language Totals – District” reports, 1997-2006.

Number of Languages Spoken at Home by Minnesota’s Students Continues to Rise

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Source: Minnesota Department of Education, analysis of MARSS data, 1996-7 to 2005-6.

LEP Funding Outpaced By LEP Enrollment

-

10,000,000

20,000,000

30,000,000

40,000,000

50,000,000

60,000,000

70,000,000

80,000,000

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Fiscal Year

Fund

ing

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

Stud

ents

LEP Students Total LEP Funding

Source: Minnesota Department of Education, WhatIf Interactive School Funding Model, 1999-2006; Fall Population Counts, 1998-9 to 2005-6.

Research Library

Section 4: Poverty and Mobility

Between 1998 and 2006, the number of students receiving free and reduced-price lunch increased by

14.8%

Source: MDE Fall Enrollment Reports, K-12, 1997-8 through 2005-6 school years.

219,343 220,708217,731 217,059

223,498

229,762

236,152

245,205

251,820

190,000

200,000

210,000

220,000

230,000

240,000

250,000

260,000

Stud

ents

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Fiscal Year

Number of Districts With Specified Levels of Mobility, 2004-5

69

137

113

26103

0-5%

5-10%

10-15%

15-20%

20-30%

>30%

Source: Minnesota Department of Education. Students are counted as mobile if they are counted in MDE categories 1-3 (summer transfers in, mid-year transfers in, mid-year in-district transfers). Charter schools not included.

Mobile Students on the Rise as Proportion of Total Statewide Enrollment

12.74

%

12.35

%

12.97

%

13.36

% 13.45

%

13.59

%

13.66

% 13.96

%

11.50%

12.00%

12.50%

13.00%

13.50%

14.00%

1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Source: Minnesota Department of Education. Figures reflect summer transfers in, mid-year transfers in, and mid-year in-district transfers (categories 1-3), divided by October 1 K12 enrollment count. Charter schools not included.

Number of Districts Experiencing >10% Mobility is Growing

204

155

228

131

231

128

220

139

211

148

218

141

214

145

206

153

0

50

100

150

200

250

1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Districts <= 10% Districts > 10%

Source: Minnesota Department of Education. Figures reflect summer transfers in, mid-year transfers in, and mid-year in-district transfers (categories 1-3), divided by October 1 K12 enrollment count. Charter schools not included.

Comparison of Statewide Mobility Measures to AMSD Membership

0.000%

2.000%

4.000%

6.000%

8.000%

10.000%

12.000%

14.000%

16.000%

18.000%

1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Mean Mobility

Median Mobility

AMSD Average

Source: Minnesota Department of Education, Mobility Reports by District.

Research Library

Section 5: Referenda

Note: The dip in 2003 was caused by a conversion of $415 in referendum authority to $415 in the basic formula. Sources: 1) Crowe, Greg “A History of the School Operating Levy Referendum,” Money Matters, December 2002. Fiscal Analysis Department, Minnesota House of Representatives. 2) Minnesota Department of Education, department of Program Finance.

The Percent of Districts with Operating Referendum has Grown Significantly

Percent of Districts With Operating Referenda

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

Operating Referenda Growing More Common

0

50

100

150

200

250

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

Ballot Measures

Passage Rate

Source: Minnesota Department of Education, department of program finance.