5342+Week+3

Many districts are able to receive additional funds from the state due to their high concentrations of students with special needs, economically disadvantaged, bilingual, career education students and gifted and talented students. These groups make up the students considered in Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA). Upon analysis of the data provided by our professors, the school finance provided by state and local governments varies depending on student populations and sub-groups within the district. From the samples the Economically Disadvantaged enrollment is higher for District 1 than it is for District 2 based on compensatory education allotment. WADA is therefore affected by the special populations which require additional state funds to provide equitable instructional programs for students at District 1 schools based on the data below. Due to the special populations District 1 has the lower ADA, but a higher WADA as reflected below: * The ADA adjusted for decline: 3893.754 D1 and 4032.93 D2   * WADA 5555.81 D1 and 4794.07 D2. ** Analyzing School Finance Issues in District 1 and 2  ** Revenue WADA @ Compressed Rate: District 1 – 5044 District 2 – 7206 Target Revenue M&O Fund: District 1 – 19,640,075 District 2 – 29,061,290 Teachers, Librarians, Nurses, Counselors District 1 – 281 District 2 – 307 District 1, it is believed, has a large number of economically disadvantage students in comparison to District 2. Their revenue is significantly less because of Districts 2 high taxable value and this drives their WADA Revenue up. Now, Districts 1 state generated funds is larger per student and that is where the state finds equity in their funding system. In this case, District 2 taxable revenue drives up the WADA revenue. Target Revenue for the M&O Fund is found by multiplying ADA times the Revenue WADA @ the compressed rate. This number is driven up for the same reason as the Revenue WADA. ** Analyzing Contrasts in Districts 1 and 2  ** As stated on Part 2, the data sets are not from the same years. However as we complete the assignment with the assumption that they are the same, the Compensatory Allotment for District 2, is a district with low Economically Disadvantaged and therefore the action of providing WADA failed because it was not needed as badly in District 2 as it was for District 1. District 1 has 93.3% ED while District 2 has 20.7%. Yet the M & O of district 2 is higher and therefore there is no correlation in ED and WADA or M & O in this case. In addition, district 2 is severely property rich and their spending per student will be much higher. The state does try to find equity in its funding but in this case, the state does not have enough house money to bring District 1 up to the level of District 2 spending per child.
 * Texas School Finance Position Paper after District 1 and 2 Comparison **

** Review and Analyze Salado ISD M&O Fund  ** __ 2010-2011 Summary of Finances for Salado ISD __ Refined ADA – 1267.017 Revenue Per WADA @ Compressed Rate – 5459 Local District Property Value – 592,757,633 2010 Adopted M&O Rate – 1.04 I&S Tax Collections – 1,586,632 Total M&O Tax Collections – 6,133,850 Above you will find the Summary of Finances for Salado ISD and the answers to some of the questions from this week for our district. What you can derive from this breakdown is that the ADA represents a small school. Our revenue based on WADA is not too much over the average of $5000. Our property value is very high and the tax rate is maxed out. Our I&S collections drive a new high school that was built 3 years ago. The Maintenance and Operating funds are primarily driven by the collection of local taxes. Below you will find the adopted budget for Salado ISD. The first 3 lines under revenue show the total M&O Revenue for the District and it is broken down into Federal, State and Local Sources. // 2010-11 // // Adopted Budget for SALADO ISD // // Date Adopted by Board: August 23, 2010 // // Revenue: // // 5700 Local and Intermediate Sources $6,839,784 // // 5800 State Program Revenues $4,113,443 // // 5900 Federal Program Revenues $655,028 // // Total Revenues $11,608,255 // // Expenditures: // // 11 Instruction $6,322,285 // // 12 Instructional Resources, Media $354,311 // // 13 Curriculum Development & Staff $73,780 // // 21 Instructional Leadership $0 // // 23 School Leadership $683,437 // // 31 Guidance & Counseling, Evaluation $207,017 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">32 Social Work Services $35,697 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">33 Health Services $82,101 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">34 Student Transportation $421,600 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">35 Food Services $541,787 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">36 Co-curricular/ Extra-curricular $634,764 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">41 General Administration $450,304 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">51 Plant Maintenance & Operations $965,753 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">52 Security and Monitoring $9,773 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">53 Data Processing $0 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">61 Community Service $0 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">71 Debt Service $21,670 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">81 Facilities Acquisition and $0 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">91 Contracted Instructional Services $0 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">92 Incremental Cost Associated with $0 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">93 Payments to Fiscal Agents for Shared $700,000 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">94 Payments to Other Schools $0 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">95 Payments to Juvenile Justice AEP $5,000 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">96 Payments to Charter Schools $0 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">97 Payments to TIF $0 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">99 Inter-government charges not defined $98,000 // // <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman','serif'; font-size: 12pt;">Total Adopted Expenditure Budget $11,607,279.00 // // Difference in Revenue/Expenditures $976.00  // ** Examine District 1 and 2 Funding and Facilities  ** 2010 Property Value: District 1 - 145,968, 635 District 2 - 2,916,187,709 I&S Fund: District 1 - 94,871 District 2 - 8,836,256 (these are funds used to pay debt from bonds and such; this lets me know that the facilities at D2 are awesome) Chapter 46: District 1 - 572,716 District 2 - 0 (District 2 has the most funds for debt)

It is apparent from the calculations that District #2 is by far a wealthier district. Based on the numbers we can conclude that the facilities in district #2 are modern and up to date. We also suspect that District #2 has the latest in technology and state of the art equipment. We can guess that there are constant renovations and modernizations conducted in District #2. Furthermore, District #2 has the most funds available to make payments on the existing debt and still enjoy top of the line school buildings and facilities. Although we are not negating that District #1 does not provide students with an optimal learning environment, however, we can assume that District #2 takes advantage of its revenues to use constantly improve and modernize its facilities. ** Examine Compensatory Education Allotment in Districts 1 and 2  ** Compensatory Education Fund: District 1 - 3,835,006 District 2 - 633,369 (Not a lot of ED students in district 2)

My conclusion from all of this is that District 2 is very wealthy with low enrollment of ED students. Their property value drives their budget and pays for a lot. They look like they are chapter 41 and subject to recapture. Also, if you take a look at the payment class at the top of the report, District two gets paid at the first of the year and then at the end of the year and that tells us they have a lot of "house money". The other district receives state funds every month which resembles a family living paycheck to paycheck.