State of the State - case closed, money is bad for schools

[john "teach me how to" dougie]

Maybe the waitress could give the tip to her favorite school. They could buy a small box of crayons.

[Jabeez]

Oh man, she got him real good.

[star seed 7]

Chances she gets harassed by a brownback staffer?

[BringBackEcoKat]

Surely she would post that for media too

[ednksu]

Not that I'm a big fan of the local 'pubs, but they did have one largest increase in teach salaries recently and the usual suspects still went ballistic.   Many of the quasi-state agencies which thrived like ticks on a buffalo under previous administrations saw their funding cut and they of course lost their minds . . . their $1500 suits and S-Class's got to be a bigger burden to carry.

shame i missed out on this gem.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Yes that's very cute. Meanwhile, we're spending more on public education than ever.

I keep seeing this statement, and I'm pretty sure it isn't true.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

Yes that's very cute. Meanwhile, we're spending more on public education than ever.

I keep seeing this statement, and I'm pretty sure it isn't true.

Pretty sure it is, whether in total dollars or in spending per pupil.

Total Spending Per Pupil through 2014: http://www.kansasopengov.org/StateAverageSpendMajorCategory/tabid/1563/Default.aspx

Total Local, State, and Federal Funding through 2013: http://www.kansaspolicy.org/KPIBlog/112858.aspx?plain=true

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

The real reason this is so annoying is not because she behaved like a jerk - people do that all the time - but that she actually thought she was making a valid point because she "watches the news." It's an indictment of the media's failure to report simple, basic facts in an effort to support their liberal agenda. As an example, look no further than this very article about the dumbass waitress, which at no point even mentions the basic facts regarding school funding.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Looks like Obama is the real culprit here.

I can't believe how politicized Kansas has allowed education to become. At the drop of a hat leftists can file suit in Shawnee county district court to have a three judge panel of leftists decide how much money is supposed to be spent on schools. That's rough ridin' crazy from a governance pov. The tiniest minority of whackos can completely obfuscate the legislative process.

[Rage Against the McKee]

http://www.cbpp.org/research/most-states-still-funding-schools-less-than-before-the-recession?fa=view&id=4213

[slobber]

http://www.kshb.com/news/tip-the-schools-receipt-to-brownback-from-waitress-goes-viral

very ethical @trim

"Tip The Grid Iron Club"

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

http://www.cbpp.org/research/most-states-still-funding-schools-less-than-before-the-recession?fa=view&id=4213

I just gave you that actual dollar figures. You're just citing a liberal think tank. The source for their numbers is "CBPP [their own] budget analysis." So believe what you want, I guess.

[Kat Kid]

When you say "actual" dollar figures, does that include a consistent definition of "per pupil spending" for each year?  That would seem to be kind of important.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

When you say "actual" dollar figures, does that include a consistent definition of "per pupil spending" for each year?  That would seem to be kind of important.

I don't know. But that's why I linked both "per pupil" and "total funding" numbers.

[Rage Against the McKee]

I think if you are going to claim "more funding than ever before" you should at least account for inflation.

[Kat Kid]

When you say "actual" dollar figures, does that include a consistent definition of "per pupil spending" for each year?  That would seem to be kind of important.

I don't know. But that's why I linked both "per pupil" and "total funding" numbers.

Right, but KPI is using weasel words and their own definitions to get around the change in definition of "per pupil spending" done under Brownback.  The state had been putting IOUs in to KPERS and not fully funding their obligations.  Brownback and the legislature shored up the shortfall by increasing teacher rate of contribution, increasing the district rate and by counting the increased state and district obligations as part of "per pupil" or "total per pupil" spending.  They re-defined what "per-pupil spending" meant to include this additional spending.  In addition, that chart is not inflation adjusted.



This is not new information, this was a campaign issue that was widely discussed in the governor's race.

Monday, August 11, 2014

Facts about Kansas school funding: up, down or flat?
New facts about changes in Kansas school funding: up, down or flat?

 As the 2014 election campaign heats up and school boards adopt budgets for the current year, KASB has been receiving more and more questions about what has really happened to Kansas school funding in recent years.

 Questions about school funding will continue to grow because the Kansas Supreme Court has held the test of constitutionally adequate funding is the so-called “Rose” standards for preparing students to be successful in their lives beyond high school.  Before the state can decide how much money is needed to reach those standards, there must be an agreement on what we are already spending.

 To help answer this question, we started with two documents the Kansas Budget Division - which is headed by Governor Brownback’s budget director - recently posted on its website.  First is the budget Comparison Report. This document reflects final Legislative action on the state budget for the the fiscal year that ended June 30 and the current fiscal year that began July 1.  Page 60 contains a chart showing state aid programs for K-12 education, including federal stimulus funding during the recession years, from Fiscal Year 2010 to the current year FY 2015 (2014-15 school year).  Page 62 contains a chart showing state and federal funding for FY 2013 through FY 2015.  The second document is a spreadsheet entitled State and Federal Support of Elementary and Secondary Education in Kansas, which covers the years from 2009 to 2015.

 There are two major differences between these reports.  The Comparison Report shows the shift of the 20 mill statewide levy from local revenue to state aid, which indicates that state aid increased 23 percent from last year to this year.  The second document does not (as of August 3) show that change, which indicates total state and federal support increased just 4.6 percent this year.  The second document also includes funding for Governor Brownback’s initiatives that impact K-12 students and districts but are not under the Kansas State Department of Education or included in district budgets: secondary technical education tuition funding through the Board of Regents and funding for the Read to Succeed program, Reading Roadmap and Jobs for America’s Graduates under the Department of Children and Families.

 Missing from both of the documents is local school district funding.  To show total changes in total school funding, KASB used total school district expenditure levels as provided by KSDE for 2009 through 2013, and KASB estimates for 2014 (final actual spending is not yet reported) and 2015 (budgets are not yet adopted) to develop the following data.  (NOTE: All numbers in these tables and charts are in thousands of dollars.)

 

 Several items stand out.  First, total school district support declined from 2009 to 2011 during the Great Recession.  Second, total funding has risen each year from 2011 to 2015.  Third, funding from the state general fund - the state’s general purpose “checkbook” of revenue from income and sales taxes - has remained essentially unchanged for five years even though the state economy has recovered, largely because state income tax cuts have reduced available revenue.  Fourth, other state funding and federal funding increased from less than $500 million in 2009 to $850 million in 2014, largely because of federal stimulus funding in 2010 and 2011, and the use of state highway funding and expanded lottery revenues for education programs in 2014.

 Because the statewide 20 mill levy will be collected by the state, rather than local districts, beginning in 2015, it produces a major increase in “other state and federal funding.”  However, this change does not provide an increase in total school funding, because the 20 mill revenue disappears as a local revenue source.  Finally, other local revenues are expected to decrease by about $20 million in 2015 because fully funding local option budget state aid will reduce LOB property tax requirements in many districts.  These changes are displayed graphically below.

 

 This data shows that school funding has increased every year during Governor Brownback’s administration.  However, when adjusted for inflation, the picture looks somewhat different.  KASB used the state’s April Consensus Revenue Estimate predictions for changes in the consumer price index in 2014 and 2015, and then adjusted previous years’ funding to projected 2015 dollars.

 As the following chart shows, when adjusted for inflation, total K-12 revenue has been essentially flat for the past five years, and is still below 2009 and 2010 levels.

 

 Total revenues by source, however, does not explain how funding has changed for different programs within district budgets.  In fact, most of the increase in school funding has not been available for “this year” expenditures for teachers, administrators, and support staff positions or salaries, or other annual operating costs.  Instead, most of the increase has gone to pension and building costs.

 Most funding for operating costs is in four areas that make up about 75 percent of total school budgets.  First is the school district general fund, determined by the base state aid per pupil multiplied by student enrollment as adjusted with pupil weightings, plus special education state aid.  Except for a few minor local revenues, this is funded entirely by state aid and the 20 mill statewide levy.

 Second is the local option budget, funded by local property taxes, and in about 80 percent of districts, by state LOB aid based on the district’s per pupil property wealth. Third is funding for federal educational programs like special education and Title I (No Child Left Behind), but excluding student meal support and federal stimulus funding that was included in the general fund and LOB funding.  Fourth, we included funding for Governor Brownback’s technical education and reading initiatives.

 

 In actual dollars, school district general funds and special education aid have been reduced by about $160 million, but local option budgets have increased by about the same amount.  Federal education programs increased about $15 million, and funding for the Governor’s targeted programs increased by about $40 million.  As a result, net funding for these programs, after dropping over $200 million in 2010, in 2014 recovered to about the same level as it was six years ago.

 When adjusted for inflation, however, as the following table and graph show, the state’s base support for K-12 education through school district general fund budgets has declined almost $500 million, and Local Option Budgets did no more than keep up with inflation until 2015, when the Legislature increased the maximum LOB districts can adopt.  Federal education program funding declined $15 million during this timeframe.

 

 These figures illustrate why school leaders continue to express deep concerns about the adequacy of school funding, despite increases that have been provided in certain areas.  When measured against changes in the cost of living, funding for educational programs that can actually be spent on teachers, administrators and student support programs has declined by $500 million since 2009, and even the increases in these areas provided by the 2014 Legislature for 2015 will be less than the projected rate of inflation.

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I think if you are going to claim "more funding than ever before" you should at least account for inflation.

Yeah - inflation has just been off the charts recently.

[Kat Kid]

I think if you are going to claim "more funding than ever before" you should at least account for inflation.

Yeah - inflation has just been off the charts recently.

It is intellectually dishonest to not use inflation adjustments when comparing funding year-to-year.  No one is claiming it will make much difference, but it is a good starting point.  It makes no sense to do it unless there is an ulterior motive.  I explained that there was a purposeful attempt to re-define "per-pupil" spending to game the statistics.  The lack of inflation adjusted numbers is in keeping with the "apples to oranges" nature of the comparison being put forth.

It is fine to be uninformed about the basic vocabulary and numbers of the debate, as you admitted earlier, but to then get pissy when others point out basic problems with the statistics you posted is further evidence that you aren't interested in actually knowing what is happening here.

[Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)]

Looking only at the leftists graphs and information you still can't find a "draconian" "gutting" of the education system, or anything that even resembles anything more than a slight reduction in funding. That's the point in all of this - that the left and the media is misrepresenting (lying) the facts of the matter.

There have been claims that schools are going to have to shudder their doors over funding, that copy paper and pens are running out, etc. It's all bullshit. And if the people in those districts actually cared, they'd raise the mill levy a mill or two.

[BringBackEcoKat]

There's funding in the schools, just not where they need it. My high school recently got a grant to install cameras around the entire school (because a small rural school needs cameras) but it still is using 15 year old books and they don't have an A/C. 

[CNS]

Its not all bullshit, but there is definitely waste.  Our local HS is doing a $130k reno of their cafeteria to make the whole eating area look like some kind of cafe, complete with charging stations at every table for the phones they aren't even supposed to have on in school.  They are doing this because their lunch revenue is severely down over the last two years(since switching to a new vendor).  Evidently their food is similar in quality to the recent bucknight hotdogs of twitter fame.  So, rather than spending some money on higher quaility meals, they are convinced that making the place look like an Applebees, or something, will make the kids buy more school lunch.

Dumb.

Oh, also, they just deleted the Instructional Math Coach and ESL Specialist positions from my wife's school.  Both of which could have been maintained with something like $30-$40k of that left over. 

Pretty smart spending going on. 

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

I think if you are going to claim "more funding than ever before" you should at least account for inflation.

Yeah - inflation has just been off the charts recently.

It is intellectually dishonest to not use inflation adjustments when comparing funding year-to-year.  No one is claiming it will make much difference, but it is a good starting point.  It makes no sense to do it unless there is an ulterior motive.  I explained that there was a purposeful attempt to re-define "per-pupil" spending to game the statistics.  The lack of inflation adjusted numbers is in keeping with the "apples to oranges" nature of the comparison being put forth.

It is fine to be uninformed about the basic vocabulary and numbers of the debate, as you admitted earlier, but to then get pissy when others point out basic problems with the statistics you posted is further evidence that you aren't interested in actually knowing what is happening here.

I'm not running the numbers against inflation because I'm not running the numbers. Instead, I'm doing a google search for numbers from a source I trust, like kansasopengov.org. Feel free to nitpick away, but the idea that Brownback is cutting spending on education is rough ridin' stupid. You are being rough ridin' stupid. Why? Almost speaks of an "alterior motive."

[Rage Against the McKee]

What is it that makes kansasopengov.org a source you can trust?

[K-S-U-Wildcats!]

What is it that makes kansasopengov.org a source you can trust?

Because it is a government transparency website devoted to reporting raw numbers straight from official government sources (the numbers I posted above came straight from the Department of Education) without manipulation or editorial content.

[Rage Against the McKee]

What is it that makes kansasopengov.org a source you can trust?

Because it is a government transparency website devoted to reporting raw numbers straight from official government sources (the numbers I posted above came straight from the Department of Education) without manipulation or editorial content.

It's a service provided by the Kansas Policy Institute, which appears to be a right-wing blog at first glance anyway.