Ample School Funding


Published on

Published in: Education, Health & Medicine
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Ample School Funding

    1. 1. THE AMPLE SCHOOL FUNDING PROJECT Washington Education Research Network Forum May 12, 2004
    2. 2. THE PROBLEMS. . . <ul><li>The state is not currently meeting its constitutional obligation to fully fund basic education. </li></ul><ul><li>In addition, the state has added new performance standards without the necessary resources to accomplish them. </li></ul>
    3. 3. PER PUPIL EXPENDITURES National standing on K-12 per pupil support Washington’s per pupil expenditures from all sources compared to national average, 1959-2000 80% 90% 100% 110% 120% 1959-60 1969-70 1979-80 1980-81 1985-86 1989-90 1990-91 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 1999-2000 First year of full state funding of basic ed. Start of HB 1209 Ed Reform Source: US Dept. of Education, Digest of Education Statistics, Table 168, 2002. 113% 94% 112% National Average Funding Per Pupil In Average Daily Attendance From All Sources,
    4. 4. WASHINGTON STATE CONSTITUTION <ul><li>Article IX, Section 1: “It is the paramount duty of the state to make ample provision for the education of all students…” </li></ul><ul><li>( paramount : chief in importance; supreme; preeminent)* </li></ul><ul><li>( ample : more than enough; enough to fulfill the needs or purpose)* </li></ul><ul><li>* Webster’s New World Dictionary </li></ul>
    5. 5. DORAN SCHOOL FUNDING CASES – FUNDING PRINCIPLES <ul><li>Washington’s current finance system is a legislative response to three court decisions in interpreting the “paramount duty” clause of the state constitution. </li></ul><ul><li>The court decisions in 1977,1983 and 1988 described the state’s duty under Article IX, section 1 of the Washington State Constitution. These cases established the following principles of school funding: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Education is the “paramount duty” of the state and takes precedence over all other state financial obligations. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The Legislature must define basic education and provide adequate funding for those programs. </li></ul></ul>
    6. 6. <ul><ul><li>Programs considered basic education are: </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Regular Apportionment </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Vocational Education </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Special Education </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Most of Pupil Transportation </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Transitional Bilingual Education </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Learning Assistance </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>The funding formula is not “cast in concrete;” it is the continuing obligation of the Legislature to review the formula as the education system evolves and changes. </li></ul></ul>FUNDING PRINCIPLES (con’t.)
    7. 7. K-12 Finance Studies Were Completed in 2002, 2003 & 2004 <ul><li>The “ Realities of Education Funding in Washington State” study showed the long-term decline in state support for public schools and increasing reliance on special levies. (League of Education Voters, December 2002) </li></ul><ul><li>The “ What Will It Take ” study identified a 31% gap in the funding needed for all students to achieve the State’s education reform standards. (Rainier Institute, March 2003) </li></ul><ul><li>The “ Washington State School Finances: Does Every Child Count” documented worrisome funding gaps especially among our most needy school districts. ( Washington State PTA, March 2004) </li></ul>
    8. 8. Recent K-12 Finance Study Results and Requests For A State Finance Study Did Not Bear Fruit <ul><li>Various recent studies made it evident that a number of problems exist with the current K-12 funding system. </li></ul><ul><li>The Governor, the OSPI and many legislators called for a state K-12 finance study in 2003. The 2003 Legislature chose not to fund a study. </li></ul><ul><li>In 2004 legislators were asked but did not support funding for a COMPREHENSIVE K-12 Finance Study. (OSPI’s 2004Supplemental Budget Request, & WASA, WSSDA,WEA.) </li></ul>
    9. 9. Why Did WASA Undertake the Ample School Funding Project? <ul><li>Since the State has elected not to initiate a comprehensive funding study, the Washington Association of School Administrators has begun a two phase project to: </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Substantiate that current state funding levels are inadequate to fund Basic Education as required, and </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Continue and initiate studies to establish what additional resources are needed to reach the state’s new performance standards. </li></ul></ul>
    10. 10. PROJECT TASKS <ul><li>Hired a consultant to coordinate and perform the first phase of the project. </li></ul>  <ul><li>Created a technical analysis advisory panel consisting of a core group of experienced fiscal and policy analysts committed to assisting the project. </li></ul><ul><li>Create an oversight committee for the Project with members to be appointed from WASA’s K-12 Finance Study Workgroups and other associations. </li></ul>
    11. 11. PROJECT TASKS (cont.) <ul><li>Established an Ample School Funding Project Web site ( to share results of the studies. </li></ul><ul><li>Build a Larger Constituency Group to work together as much as possible </li></ul><ul><li>- WSLFA, AWSP, WSPTA, WSSDA, WEA, SBE,WASC, WSASCD, etc. </li></ul><ul><li>- ESDs and OSPI </li></ul><ul><li>- Regions (i.e. Puget Sound’s SAVE Project) </li></ul><ul><li>- Local School Districts. </li></ul>
    12. 12. THE PROCESS <ul><li>Prepare analysis of the adequacy of funding in each of the current basic education programs based on the decisions made in School Funding I, II, and III and Legislative responses. </li></ul><ul><li>Identify funding and formula changes needed to meet today’s Basic Education requirements. </li></ul><ul><li>Calculate a GAP analysis based on Washington State’s new standards and goals. </li></ul><ul><li>Propose remedies and solutions to the current system to provide ample funds to schools in an equitable manner. </li></ul>
    13. 13. CURRENT PROJECT STATUS <ul><li>A draft Pupil Transportation Study is available on our website documenting problems with the state’s funding formula and resulting underfunding in a large number of school districts. </li></ul><ul><li>A draft paper is underway on the Special Education Program . Early indications are that the state is requiring the use of special excess levies to fund this program, something specifically prohibited by various school funding decisions. </li></ul><ul><li>The next paper will address the main Basic Education program, Apportionment . We expect a draft to be available by July or August. </li></ul>
    14. 14. EXPECTED USES OF FIRST PHASE OF PROJECT <ul><li>As information is gathered it will be shared with legislators, other associations and school districts. </li></ul><ul><li>It may be used to solve one program at a time, or may become part of a comprehensive solution. </li></ul><ul><li>It may increase funding in different ways as part of a larger solution. </li></ul>
    15. 15. PROJECT TIMELINE <ul><li>May-Dec. 2004 Transportation </li></ul><ul><ul><li>In-depth 3 district summary </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Formula adjustment process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Finish paper </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Special Education </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Complete research </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Finish paper </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Apportionment </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Complete research </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>NERC Survey </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Formula Adjustment Process </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Finish Paper </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Outreach/Collaboration </li></ul>
    16. 16. WHY WE CAN’T WAIT