school department budget past present and future
play

School Department Budget Past, Present, and Future Meeting with - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

School Department Budget Past, Present, and Future Meeting with Select Board 12-18-19 Keep What We Have Not Enough Funding High quality school Inadequate town system revenue (scores, students, staff, Problem programming,


  1. School Department Budget Past, Present, and Future Meeting with Select Board 12-18-19

  2. Keep What We Have Not Enough Funding • High quality school • Inadequate town system revenue (scores, students, staff, Problem programming, • Inadequate state activities) funding • Tremendous ROI (Bottom 3% in Massachusetts in funding)

  3. Historical % Increases 7.8 7.7 5.25 5.25 5.25 5.25 4.5 4.17 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20

  4. Per-Pupil Spending (FY18) $16,506 17,000 $15,839 16,000 15,000 14,000 $ 12,760 13,000 12,000 11,000 10,000 State Average Shrewsbury Mendon-Upton Millbury Westborough Northbridge Sutton Grafton

  5. How Low is GPS Funding? District Per-Pupil Amount Annual Difference if Applied in Grafton Grafton $12,760 - Shrewsbury $13,740 + $3,200,000 annually Sutton $14,090 + $4,300,000 annually Northbridge $14,750 + $6,400,000 annually Westborough $15,840 + $9,900,000 annually Millbury $16,330 + $11,600,000 annually Mendon-Upton $16,340 + $11,600,000 annually State Average $16,506 + $12,200,000 annually

  6. Westborough 100 110 120 130 140 150 160 153 Millbury 145 Hopkinton % Spending Over Required School 140 Ashland 135 Bellingham 134 Holliston 132 Auburn Spending 129 Uxbridge Shrewsbury 127 118 Sutton 117 Upton 117 Mendon 117 Grafton 115 Oxford Northbridge 107 106

  7. Comparison of % Composition of Per-Pupil Spending Total Tax Dollars Per Pupil State Funding Per Pupil Grant and Revolving Funds 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 Northborough Mendon/Upton Westborough Sutton Shrewsbury Northbridge Millbury Hopkinton Bellingham Uxbridge Oxford Ashland Holliston Auburn Grafton

  8. State Funding: Opportunity Act FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 Additional $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $46,680 $93,360 Chapter 70 Funding $103,575 $115,083 $127,870 $0 $0 $25,894 $51,787 $77,681 Additional Circuit Breaker Funding

  9. Projected Need FY21-FY27 5.9 7.8 7.7 4.48 4.24 4.24 4.14 4.55 4.2 5.25 5.25 5.25 5.25 4.5 4.17 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27

  10. Projected Funding 7.8 7.7 5.25 5.25 5.25 5.25 4.5 4.17 3.5 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.75 2.0 2.0 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27

  11. Projected Need vs. Projected Funding 5.9 4.48 4.55 2.4 4.24 4.24 4.14 4.2 7.8 7.7 1.8 1.4 1.5 1.4 2.6 2.2 5.25 5.25 5.25 5.25 4.5 4.17 3.5 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.75 2.0 2.0 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27

  12. Projected Funding Gap – School Department Need vs. Funding FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY27 Need 5.9% 4.48% 4.24% 4.14% 4.24% 4.55% 4.2% Funding 3.5% 2.7% 2.8% 2.7% 2.75% 2% 2% Gap $878,000 $714,000 $629,000 $789,000 $738,000 $991,000 $1,048,000 $3.7 Million $5.8 Million

  13. Reduced Spending & Revenue Generation • Bottom 3% in the state • Zero-based budgeting • Stabilization account ($200,000) • Partnership with municipal (SRO grant) • School Choice program • Solar • Fees 5 Year = $3.8 M 7 Year = $5.8 M

  14. Maximizing Funding • Transportation Fees (Approximately $140,000 annually) • Solar • School Choice Program (Approximately $500,000 annually) • Stabilization account ($200,000) • Partnership with municipal (SRO grant) • Building specialized programming • Retaining students in-district (only 31 OOD, less than 1%) • Tuitioning in students with special needs

  15. % Private Special Education Placement 7.8% Northbridge 6.7% Millbury 5.8% Mendon-Upton 5.7% Shrewsbury 5.2% Westborough 4.5% Sutton 3.2% Grafton

  16. Personnel-Based Organization Personnel – 80% Non-Personnel Expenses – 20% 520 employees Transportation (general, special education, OOD) 4 Units – Teachers, paraprofessionals, Tuitions (OOD – private and custodians, nurses collaboratives) Compensation ranges from 4 th – 7 th in Technology Capital/maintenance comparison to bordering towns Energy (Millbury, Mendon-Upton, Northbridge, Supplies Shrewsbury, Sutton, Westboro) Non-represented – Administration, maintenance

  17. Personnel vs. Non-Personnel % Spending 7.7% 5.9% 2.65 5.25% 5.25% 5.25% 4.5% 0 4.18% 1.7 1.17 1.26 0.58 0.22 5.25 5.05 4.11 4.08 3.99 3.96 3.92 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21

  18. Increase Funding Reduce Spending Solutions

  19. Reduction Scenario FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 Coordinator Req. Elementary Teacher 75% Athletics Elementary Counselor Administrator Coordinator Req. Elementary Teacher Athletic Director Elementary Teacher Elementary Teacher Elementary Teacher Elementary Teacher Secondary Teacher Elementary Teacher Elementary Teacher Secondary Teacher Elementary Teacher Line Reductions Elementary Teacher Elementary Teacher Secondary Teacher Secondary Teacher Secretary Position Elementary Teacher Administrator Secondary Teacher Secretary Position Elementary Teacher Administrator Secondary Teacher Secondary Teacher Elementary Teacher Secondary Teacher Elementary Teacher Maintenance Position Secondary Teacher Elementary Teacher Elementary Teacher Administrator Secondary Teacher Line Reductions Elementary Teacher Elementary Teacher Secondary Teacher Elementary Teacher Line Reductions Line Reductions 7 Positions 11 Positions 2 Positions 10 Positions 10 Positions -$877,974 -$714,328 -$628,518 -$788,567 -$737,501

  20. Compounding Issues 7 Positions 11 Positions 2 Positions 10 Positions 10 Positions -$877,974 -$714,328 -$628,518 -$788,567 -$737,501 Special Education Costs School Choice Funding

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend