WestEd Leandro Report: Finance

WestEd Leandro Report: Finance

• 1.
  A Study ofCost Adequacy, Distribution and Alignment of Funding for North Carolina’s K- 12 Public Education System 1.22.2020 • JasonWillis, Kelsey Krausen, Alex Berg-Jacobson, Ruthie Caparas, and Ryan Lewis
• 2.
  2 LeandroTenet: Finance andResources North Carolina Supreme Court held that it is the State’s responsibility to see: “[T]hat every school be provided, in the most cost-effective manner, the resources necessary to support the effective instructional program within that school so that the educational needs of all children, including at-risk children, to have the equal opportunity to obtain a sound basic education can be met.” Hoke County Board of Education v. State (Hoke IV), 95 CVS 1158 (2002)
• 3.
  3 Research Questions Adequacy • Howmuch funding is necessary to achieve the desired outcomes identified in North Carolina? Distribution • What is the current distribution of funding by district? • What factors (statutory or distribution of funds) create inequities in the allocation of resources? Alignment • Is funding flexible enough to ensure effective use of funds? • Is funding stable enough to ensure effective use of funds?
• 4.
  4 Findings 1. Funding inNorth Carolina has declined over the last decade. • When adjusted to 2018 dollars, per pupil spending in the state has declined overall, about 6% since 2009-10. 2. The current distribution of education funding is inequitable. 3. Specific student populations need higher levels of funding.
• 5.
  5 Finding #3: Specific studentpopulations need higher levels of funding
• 6.
  6 Findings (continued) 4. Greaterconcentrations of higher-needs students increases funding needs. 5. Regional variations in costs impact funding needs. 6. The scale of district operations impacts costs. 7. Local funding and the Classroom Teacher allotments create additional funding inequities.
• 7.
  7 Finding #5: Regional variationsin costs impact funding needs.
• 8.
  8 Finding #6: The scaleof district operations impacts costs
• 9.
  9 Findings (continued) 8. Newconstraints on local flexibility hinder district ability to align resources with student needs. 9. Restrictions on Classroom Teacher allotments reduce flexibility and funding levels. 10. Frequent changes in funding regulations hamper budget planning. 11. The state budget timeline and adjustments create instability.
• 10.
  10 Finding #7: Impact oflocal funding and the ClassroomTeacher allotment
• 11.
  11 Findings (continued) 8. Thereis inadequate funding to meet student needs. • Critical to consider the finding in tandem with the findings from other sections of the report, particularly those that support more effective use of existing resources. • Research indicates that increases need to occur in two ways: (1) short-term investments and (2) additional, ongoing funding over the next eight years. • Student performance thresholds – such as graduation rates and ELA/math performance – were used to identify the associated cost; and triangulated with results from the professional judgment panels. • Several scenarios were developed for consideration by stakeholders. • Coordination between existing and new resources is essential to achieve the desired results modeled.
• 12.
  12 Finding #11: There isinadequate funding to meet student needs
• 13.
  13 Findings (continued) Other factorsthat influence the effectiveness of additional resources • Coordination between existing and new resources is essential to achieve the desired results modeled. • Importantly, the choices of policymakers and practitioners about the use of these resources, and the resulting outcomes for students, cannot be observed. • This fact reinforces the importance of pursuing the implementation of other recommendations in the report that are evidence-based to maximize the potential for the effective use of resources. • Necessarily, the implementation of recommendations must be measured, monitored, and acted upon to ensure existing and any new resources are having the intended impact on learning.
• 14.
  14 Recommendations 1. Increase thecost effectiveness of the North Carolina funding system so that public education investment prioritizes higher- need students and provides appropriate flexibility to address local needs. 2. Modify the school finance system to ensure future stability in funding for public education, including predictable, anticipated funding levels that acknowledge external cost factors.
• 15.
  15 Recommendations (cont.) 3. Increasethe overall investment in North Carolina’s public schools first by identifying a small number of foundational, high-impact investments. Continued investment in these foundational areas are most critical to setting the system up for success in the future.