2016-17 Budget Projection Scenarios January 12, 2016 Dr. Christina - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

2016-17 Budget Projection Scenarios

• Dr. Christina M. Kishimoto

Superintendent Tom Wohlleber Chief Financial Officer January 12, 2016

1

What is the purpose of a budget projection model?

• To provide a framework for budget development
• To identify the factors or variables that will impact the budget
• To clarify the planning assumptions to be utilized in

developing the budget Why are multiple budget projection scenarios being presented?

• To illustrate the range of impact that the most critical variables

will have in developing the 2016-17 budget

2

What are the critical factors that will impact the level of financial resources available for the 2016-17 budget? 1) Enrollment (Average Daily Membership or ADM)

• Change to current year enrollment (ADM) for determining

the District’s budget limit

• Each student (unweighted ADM) generates approximately

$5,200 in budget capacity (Revenue Control Limit) in the current school year

• GPS 2016-17 enrollment

2) Inflation Lawsuit Settlement 3) Base Level Inflation Factor

3

UE = Ungraded Elementary SOURCE: ADMS 46-1 Reports

4

Grade / Year FY11 100th Day FY12 100th Day FY13 100th Day FY14 100th Day FY15 100th Day FY15 40th Day FY16 40th Day Pre-School 233 231 227 240 245 218 176 KG (including UE) 1,231 1,305 1,173 1,202 1,187 1,153 1,049 Grade 1 2,587 2,526 2,594 2,485 2,427 2,415 2,102 Grade 2 2,655 2,598 2,569 2,589 2,504 2,504 2,365 Grade 3 2,719 2,726 2,596 2,624 2,586 2,580 2,449 Grade 4 2,835 2,737 2,761 2,623 2,599 2,600 2,502 Grade 5 2,855 2,871 2,763 2,710 2,565 2,566 2,505 Grade 6 2,899 2,875 2,851 2,770 2,705 2,708 2,561 Grade 7 3,247 3,181 3,212 3,127 3,038 3,049 2,876 Grade 8 3,252 3,241 3,258 3,258 3,156 3,169 3,027 Grade 9 3,200 3,170 3,182 3,186 3,177 3,186 3,080 Grade 10 3,084 3,131 3,117 3,174 3,171 3,180 3,162 Grade 11 2,942 2,910 3,008 2,998 3,034 3,077 3,094 Grade 12 2,830 2,838 2,890 3,040 2,962 2,998 3,086 Total 36,571 36,341 36,203 36,028 35,357 35,403 34,035 Change (230) (138) (174) (671) (1322) % Change

• 0.63%
• 0.38%
• 0.48%
• 1.86%
• 3.74%

Scenario A assumes an unweighted ADM loss of 1,350 Scenario B assumes an unweighted ADM loss of 2,000 Both Scenario A and Scenario B assume:

• Inflation Lawsuit Settlement election is NOT approved
• FY16 Base Level inflation increase of $54.99 remains intact

(Base Level with teacher comp of $3,524.56)

• FY17 Base Level inflation increase of 1.15%
• Teacher Experience Index factor of 1.0207
• Transfer to Capital Fund of $300,000
• Budget Balance Carry forward of $3,500,000

5

Scenario C assumes an unweighted ADM loss of 1,350 Scenario D assumes an unweighted ADM loss of 2,000 Both Scenario C and Scenario D assume:

• Inflation Lawsuit Settlement election IS approved
• FY16 Base Level with teacher comp is adjusted to $3,645
• FY17 Base Level inflation increase of 1.15%

(Base Level with teacher comp of $3,686.92)

• Teacher Experience Index factor of 1.0207
• Transfer to Capital Fund of $300,000
• Budget Balance Carry forward of $3,500,000

6

7

Without Inflation Lawsuit Settlement With Inflation Lawsuit Settlement*

FY 17 Scenario A FY 17 Scenario B FY 17 Scenario C* FY 17 Scenario D* FY 16 Budget 1350 ADM Decrease 2000 ADM Decrease 1350 ADM Decrease 2000 ADM Decrease Revenue Control Limit (RCL) $183,474,217 $178,460,000 $175,520,000 $184,250,000 $181,210,000 Transfer to Capital Fund (2,101,000) (300,000) (300,000) (300,000) (300,000) Override (10% of RCL) 17,846,000 17,552,000 18,425,000 18,121,000 Transfer from Capital Fund 2,681,893 Tuition Revenue 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Budget Balance Carryforward 5,270,412 3,500,000 3,500,000 3,500,000 3,500,000 M&O General Budget Limit $189,365,522 $199,546,000 $196,312,000 $205,915,000 $202,571,000 Increase from FY 16 $10,180,478 $6,946,478 $16,549,478 $13,205,478

*Scenarios C & D do NOT inlcude the GPS portion of the additional $50 million installment from the inflation lawsuit settlement.

What is the projected budget increase resulting from approval of the M&O override?

• The estimated increase in budget capacity for 2016-17 in the projection

scenarios ranges from $17.5 to $18.4 million. Why is the projected budget increase from the M&O override different than the amount estimated during the election?

• The estimated increase in budget capacity for 2016-17 from the M&O
• verride presented during the election was $18.6 million.
• Actual budget capacity is the result of a larger than expected decrease

(approximately double) in student enrollment.

8

9

Priority 1: Offer Competitive Wages Estimated Amount Staff Compensation Proposal Cost $10,000,000 Unpaid Professional Development Advancement $850,000 Priority 3: Quality Academic Programming Estimated Amount Instructional Improvement $1,500,000+ Priority 2: Maintain/Reduce Class Size Estimated Amount Maintain Class Size Limits for 2016-17 N/A

10

Priority 4: Affordable Student Access Estimated Amount Student Fee Reductions/Adjustments TBD Priority 5: College & Career Readiness Programming Estimated Amount Program Expansion $500,000+

11

Priority Description Estimated Amount Capital Funding Allocation (from M&O) $300,000+ District Contribution to Insurance Trust Fund $2,000,000+