Kansas K-12 Efficiency Task Force: Spending Facts and Efficiency Opportunities

Governor'sK12EfficiencyTaskForce
October8,2012
K-12 Efficiency Task Force

Spending Facts & Efficiency Opportunities
DaveTrabert President,KansasPolicyInstitute
KansasPolicyInstitute
October8,2012
Kansas Policy Institute

Independent, non-profit organization promoting economic freedom and individual liberty. Economic issues with expertise in K-12 education, tax, fiscal policy and health care. Personally written several studies on K-12 finance and student achievement. 30 years experience as financial manager and general manager of for-profit businesses. Dispel myth of either / or ultimatum.
October8,2012

Our focus on education is finding ways to improve outcomes while also making efficient, effective use of taxpayer funds. It costs a lot of money to fund public education but taxpayers dont have unlimited funds. Money is important, but many education officials say (and the data shows) that its how money is spent that mattersnot how much.
October8,2012

A lot of our work (not just in education) is factfinding. Much of what citizens understand about educationhere and across the nationis either incomplete or in some cases, not true. Thats not being critical of citizens, school districts or anyone else. Its just a fact based on multiple scientific polls and lots of experience. Facts sometimes cause discomfort but good decision-making requires good information.
October8,2012

One last thought...how districts spend money isnt always their preference. To some extent, districts are stuck working within a system full of well-intended barriers. Thats no ones fault, but everyones responsibility. Those barriers can be removed.
October8,2012
Is More Money the Answer?

Most Kansas education officials equate better achievement with higher spending. Some researchers agree but a lot of researchers and many education officials in other states believe that money does not drive achievement. Data shows no relationship between higher spending and better achievementno risk of efficiency having any impact on achievement.
October8,2012
States with Best Regional Scores Spend Less than Kansas

2010 Current Spending PerPupil Kansas Missouri Oklahoma Colorado Nebraska Texas $9,715 $9,634 $7,896 $8,853 $10,734 $8,746 WhiteStudents Scale Score 229 226 221 236 230 233 U.S. Rank T20 T30 T48 6 T17 T10 HispanicStudents Scale Score 209 209 207 203 208 210 U.S. Rank T15 T15 T23 T32 T20 14 BlackStudents Scale Score 204 199 199 207 199 210 U.S. Rank T21 T31 T31 17 T31 T7
Source:CensusBureau;U.S.Dept.ofEducation,NationalCenterfor EducationStatistics (4th gradeReading)
October8,2012
More $ Higher Achievement

KansasReadingProficiency(NAEP)andPerPupilSpending(KSDE)
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% '98 '02 '03 '05 '07 '09 '11 Source:U.S.Dept.ofEducation,NCES;KansasDept.ofEducation $2,000 $0 $6,000 $4,000 $10,000 $8,000 4thReading 8thReading Total$ $14,000 $12,000
October8,2012
More $ Higher Achievement

ACTScoresandPerPupilSpending(KSDE)
36 33 30 27 24 21 18 15 12 9 6 3 0
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
$14,000 $12,000 $10,000 $8,000

ACTScore
$6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0
TotalSpend
Source:ACT.org;KSDE
October8,2012
ACT Score Only Appeared to Decline Because the Demographics Shifted

2011DemoMix White Hispanic AfricanAmer. Asian Amer.Indian Hawaiian MultiRacial Other/No Resp. Composite 75.8% 8.8% 5.6% 2.8% 0.9% 0.1% 3.3% 2.8% 100% 2011Score 22.6 19.4 17.7 22.5 20.2 18.7 21.2 22.0 22.0
Source:ACT.org
2012DemoMix 73.8% 9.9% 5.3% 2.8% 0.7% 0.1% 4.6% 2.8% 100%
2012Score 22.6 19.5 17.6 22.0 20.3 20.5 21.0 22.7 21.9
10
October8,2012
ACT Score Only Appeared to Decline Because the Demographics Shifted

ActualDemoScoresWeightedtheSameas2012ShowsNoChange
2008 CompositeScore 21.9 2009 21.8 2010 21.9 2011 21.9 2012 21.9
Onceagain,fundingchangeshavenoimpactonindependentnational tests.FYI,TotalStateAidandBaseStateAidpeakedin2009.
11
October8,2012
State Achievement
Not comparable to NAEP, which has higher standards and different methodology. Comparisons only valid to 2006 per KSDE; standards were reduced in 2002 and 2006 and the test changed in 2006. Slight upward trends since 2006, while funding rose significantly through 2009, dropped in 2010 and has been increasing since.
12
October8,2012
Meets Standard - Reading

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 $3,500 $3,300 $3,100 $2,900 $2,700 $2,500 $2,300 $2,100 $1,900 $1,700
AllStudents
StateAid
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation
13
October8,2012
Full Comprehension - Reading

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 $3,500 $3,300 $3,100 $2,900 $2,700 $2,500 $2,300 $2,100 $1,900 $1,700
AllStudents
StateAid
14
October8,2012
Spending Not Related to Achievement

Large funding increases had no impact on independent national tests. State assessment scores on slow, steady upward trend while State aid rapidly increased, dropped and then steadily rose again. Money is important but its how money is spent that mattersnot how much.
15
October8,2012
Revenue Review
16
October8,2012
K-12 Funding
MillionsofDollars State 1994 2005 2009 2010 2011 2012 $1,469 $2,362 $3,287 $2,868 $2,962 $3,184 Federal $137 $399 $414 $727 $667 $447 Local $1,012 $1,529 $1,966 $1,995 $1,959 $2,139 Total $2,618 $4,290 $5,667 $5,590 $5,587 $5,771
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation.
17
October8,2012
State Aid Per-Pupil

Base 1998 2004 2006 2008 2010 2011 2012 $3,670 $3,863 $4,257 $4,374 $4,012 $3,937 $3,780 KPERS $157 $250 $320 $434 $477 $409 $690 Bond $42 $113 $130 $156 $194 $212 $230 Other $178 $567 $1,299 $2,045 $1,643 $1,953 $2,283 Total $4,047 $4,793 $6,006 $7,008 $6,326 $6,511 $6,983
18
October8,2012
Base State Aid State Aid

Base State Aid was only 54% of state aid in 2012.
KPERS 10%, Bond 3%, Weightings & Special Ed 33%. Weightings assigned for At Risk (free & reduced lunch), Bilingual, High / Low / Declining enrollment, new facilities, etc. BSAPP x Adjusted Enrollment = State Financial Aid (with adjustments for local effort)plus KPERS, Bond, Special Education.
19
October8,2012
Base State Aid State Aid

456,000 full time equivalent students in 2012. 672,771 FTE was basis for aid distribution. Districts with higher concentrations of At Risk, Special Education, etc. receive more revenue, which partly accounts for higher spending perpupil relative to districts with low levels of same.
20
October8,2012
Local Aid Based on Spending

KSDE calculates Local aid by subtracting State and Federal aid from total spending reported by districts. Total spending can be higher than reported. Construction spending from bond proceeds isnt reported as Capital spending; its only reported as Debt Service when bond payments are made. Changes in cash reserves also impact Local aid.
21
October8,2012
Unencumbered Cash Reserves

All spending and revenue data is based on standard government cash accounting. District accounting is run through more than 30 different funds created by the Legislature. Annual fund balances only increase if revenues exceed expenditures (encumbrances account for funds committed via purchase order but not paid at year-end).
22
October8,2012
Carryover Cash (millions)

AllDistrictsStatewide
Capital 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 $320.1 $364.2 $384.0 $449.3 $451.7 $429.8 $470.8 Debt $284.7 $299.1 $307.4 $320.5 $344.3 $361.9 $366.3 AllOther $458.2 $494.1 $524.3 $587.1 $699.2 $774.6 $868.3 Total $1,068.6 $1,157.6 $1,236.4 $1,360.6 $1,498.9 $1,567.4 $1,710.2
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation;excludesfederalfunds
23
October8,2012
Carryover Reserve Implications

$410 million increase in All Other (current operating) funds represents tax revenue that was used to increase reservesin some cases planned, but $164 million of the increase was in At Risk, Special Ed and Bilingual. Carryover reserves present different type of efficiency opportunity. Finding ways to make reserves available helps districts and at least temporarily reduces taxpayer costs.
24
October8,2012
Carryover Reserve Ratio

All Other reserve balance on July 1 divided by current operating expense. Some degree of reserves are necessary for cash management, but carryover reserve ratios range from 1% to 65%, with median of 16%. Dozens of districts consistently operate with less than 10% ratio.
25
October8,2012
Spending Review
26
October8,2012
Spending Per-Pupil
$14,000 $12,000
1,401 1,389 1,567 1,611 1,561
$10,000
1,101
1,251 3,883 4,179 4,209 4,048 4,081 3,711
$8,000
3,429
$6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 5,177 5,634 6,884 6,274 6,620 6,671 6,641
Instruction
OtherCurrent
Capital&Debt
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation, ComparativePerformance&FiscalSystemwithno capitalallocatedtooperatingcosts.
27
October8,2012
Spending Per-Pupil
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 53.3% 53.2% 54.3% 54.3% 54.4% 54.1% 54.1% 35.3% 35.0% 33.6% 34.3% 33.2% 32.8% 33.2% 11.3% 11.8% 12.1% 11.4% 12.4% 13.1% 12.7%
Instruction
OtherCurrent
Capital&Debt
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,ComparativePerformance&FiscalSystemwithno capitalallocatedtooperatingcosts;2012fromDistrictBudgetProfiles,unknownifany capitalisallocatedtooperatingcosts.
28
October8,2012
2012 Record Spending Year

Districts Budget at a Glance reports provide summary information. Greater detail on cost centers wont be available for several weeks. KSDE accounting policy permits districts to report some capital expenditures as operating costs; BAG comparisons therefore understate capital and overstate operating costsand different basis than other per-pupil comparisons.
29
October8,2012
2012 Record Spending Year

MillionsofDollars 2011
Instruction OtherOperating CapitalOutlay DebtService Total $3,093 1,866 169 446 $5,574
2012
$3,178 1,925 209 457 $5,769
%Change
2.8% 3.1% 23.7% 2.5% 3.5%
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,BudgetataGlance
30
October8,2012
BAG Spending Per-Pupil (with some capital included in operating costs)

$14,000 $12,000 $10,000
$4,103 $4,221 $1,351 $1,460
$8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0

2011 2012
Capital&Debt OtherCurrent Instruction

$6,799 $6,970
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation, BudgetataGlance;districtsarepermittedtorecordsome capitalspendingasoperatingcosts,theexactamountofwhichwontbeknownuntillate2012 .
31
October8,2012
Primary Spending Categories

Instruction StudentSupport StaffSupport GeneralAdministration SchoolAdministration CentralServices (Admin.) Operations&Maintenance Transportation FoodServices Community Services CapitalOutlay DebtService
Source:KSDEAccountingManualavailableonlineat http://www.ksde.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=u1dJuGOEBzg%3d&tabid=18 77&mid=7853
32
October8,2012
2011 Per-Pupil Spending

Statewide
Low
Instruction StudentSupport StaffSupport Administration Operations /Maint. Transportation FoodService CommunitySvc. Capital&Debt Total
4,767 0 5 624 187 48 318 0 0 8,840
Median
7,023 287 268 1,269 1,105 501 573 0 1,132 12,367
High
17,698 2,172 887 4,236 6,444 1,981 1,459 334 19,405 51,408
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,ComparativePerformance&Fiscal System;nocapitalexpendituresallocatedtooperatingcosts.
33
October8,2012

72 499 FTE Students
Low
Instruction StudentSupport StaffSupport Administration Operations /Maint. Transportation FoodService CommunitySvc. Capital&Debt Totalspending 5,993 0 5 745 525 270 429 0 0 9,763
Median
7,688 239 206 1,571 1,228 627 658 0 532 13,367
High
17,698 858 861 4,236 6,444 1,981 1,459 334 21,983 51,408
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,ComparativePerformance&Fiscal System;nocapitalexpendituresallocatedtooperatingcosts.Totalis measurementofoverallspending,notthesumofeachcategory.
34
October8,2012

500 999 FTE Students
Low
4,990 50 26 836 540 204 318 0 0 9,426
Median
6,680 293 311 1,204 1,104 491 556 0 1,000 11,764
High
11,620 1,646 835 2,356 1,723 1,147 799 62 6,726 18,393
35
October8,2012

1,000 1,999 FTE Students
Low
5,087 105 116 636 365 205 339 0 0 9,209
Median
6,538 336 289 1,006 1,002 387 521 0 1,139 11,399
High
12,726 2,172 558 1,669 1,563 1,068 869 29 4,849 19,285
36
October8,2012

Low
4,767 110 140 624 187 48 322 0 0 8,840
Median
5,925 387 373 1,018 853 354 508 0 1,430 11,156
High
11,380 1,676 587 1,481 1,458 1,153 589 49 4,261 18,241
37
October8,2012

Low
5,460 270 196 716 714 182 364 0 476 10,179
Median
6,062 574 416 1,089 794 321 441 0 1,398 11,219
High
8,506 1,154 887 1,438 1,422 460 627 21 3,582 15,075
38
October8,2012

Over 15,000 FTE Students
Low
6,027 414 321 891 779 287 410 0 654 11,518
Median
6,390 540 522 1,142 804 340 434 0 1,654 12,529
High
8,293 872 737 2,085 1,297 988 586 0 3,161 15,628
39
October8,2012
2011 FTE Enrollment ranges from 72 students to 46,484

FTE Enrollment Lessthan500 500to999 1,000to1,999 2,000 to4,999 5,000to14,999 Over15,000 Statewide Numberof Percentof SchoolDistricts SchoolDistricts 131 73 38 28 11 5 286 46% 26% 13% 10% 4% 2% 100% FTEStudents Enrolled 38,160.9 52,102.4 53,860.1 90,226.9 82,123.9 138,638.6 455,112.8 PercentofFTE Enrolled 8% 11% 12% 20% 18% 30% 100%
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation;FTEinComparativePerformance&Fiscal Systematthetimespendingdatawasdownloaded
40
October8,2012
Combine Non-Instruction Functions

District size obviously has some impact on spending but significant efficiency opportunities exist without consolidating districts. Will discuss in greater detail later but touch on it now before Twitter lights up with the c word. Various service-sharing arrangements exist across district lines.but there is much more opportunityand its not just about saving money.
41
October8,2012
2011 Median Per-Pupil Spending Administration vs. Student/Staff Support

GapbetweenAdministrationandSupportNarrowsUntil AdministrativeSpendingIncreases
$1,600 $1,400 $1,200 $1,000 $800 $600 $400 $200 $0
<500 500999 1,0001,999 2,0004,999 5,00014,999 over15,000
DistrictFTEEnrollmentSize
Adminstration Student&StaffSupport
42
October8,2012
Students per District by County

286 districts across 105 counties. 77 counties have fewer than 1,000 students per district (see handout in packet). 22 counties have just one district, although portions of a county are assigned to districts in adjacent counties in some cases.
43
October8,2012

SamplingofCountieswithLowAverageEnrollmentandMultipleDistricts
County Gove Gray Marion Sumner Osage Jefferson Dickinson 2012FTE Enrolled 469 1,260 1,976 3,688 2,738 3,577 3,742 Districts 3 4 5 7 5 6 5 Avg.FTEper District 156 315 395 527 548 596 748 CountySq. Miles 1,071 869 954 1,185 719 557 852
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,GoogleMaps.Portionsofsome countiesmaybeassignedtosomedistrictsinadjacentstates.
44
October8,2012

SamplingofCountieswithOnly1HomeDistrictperKSDE
County Rawlins Sherman Jewell Osborne Hodgeman Scott Morris 2012FTE Enrolled 311 982 293 300 303 895 753 Districts 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Avg.FTEper District 311 982 293 300 303 895 753 CountySq. Miles 1,071 1,056 914 894 860 718 703
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,GoogleMaps.Portionsofsome countiesmaybeassignedtosomedistrictsinadjacentstates.
45
October8,2012

Geography is not a deterrent to service-sharing arrangements or combining many noninstruction functions across multiple districts or counties. Not just about saving money. Efficiency can (and should) reduce costs but also provides opportunity to redirect money. Expect resistance and apprehension, but know that parents are supportive when fully informed.
46
October8,2012
KansasOpenGov.org
All government data; listed by district
Revenue by source Spending by category Carryover cash Student achievement Employment and enrollment Payroll listings Checkbooks
47
October8,2012
Efficiency Opportunities
48
October8,2012
Heard superintendents and other district staff say theyve done all they can, and dont doubt that they believe that to be true. Thats why independent reviews by experts in logistics and finance are so valuableinsiders know what theyve done but Ive seen bunker mentality, parameter limitations and political correctness prevent a lot of employees and managers from speaking up or seeing the full potential.
49
October8,2012
Independent experts can ask questions without fear of retribution from supervisors. Benefit of why do you that? or why do you do it that way? Tremendous opportunities to save money and redirect resources where they will do most goodbut many require cultural shift in thinking.
50
October8,2012
Potential Operating Savings at Median (millions of dollars)

Less than 500 to 1,000 500 999 1,999 Instruction Stud.Support StaffSupport Administration Oper. &Maint. Transportation FoodService Comm. Svc. Total 16.1 2.5 3.3 4.8 5.2 5.2 3.8 0.2 41.1 24.7 5.6 3.5 4.9 5.5 4.3 0.1 1.9 50.4 29.8 8.9 2.9 6.4 4.9 3.6 0.0 2.1 58.5 2,000to 5,000 to 4,999 14,999 75.4 18.4 4.7 5.0 6.6 8.9 0.6 1.7 121.2 32.1 9.6 5.4 6.9 2.5 8.3 0.3 4.1 69.2 Over 15,000 38.0 17.1 12.1 26.1 22.3 16.8 0.0 3.1 135.6 Total 216.2 62.0 31.8 54.0 47.1 47.0 4.8 13.1 476.0
Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,ComparativePerformanceandFiscalSystem. Calculationofspendinginexcessofmediancostperpupilbydistrictclassification.
51
October8,2012
Potential Operating Savings at Median (millions of dollars)

Not saying funding could or should be reduced by $476 million. Purpose of this exercise is to identify greatest potential areaswhere to look first. Media and KASB repeat after me. Some Instruction variances are driven by formula; more money is available for At Risk, etc.; districts with above-median concentrations will likely have above-median cost.
52
October8,2012
Efficiency Categories
Organization / Logistics Contractual / HR policies Prioritization Privatization Key to all is changing the thought process. Change that cant be done to what has to change to make that possible? Andover technology savings.
53
October8,2012
Administrative Costs
Ranged from $624 to $4,236 per-pupil in 2011. If districts with enrollment under 1,000 FTE held administrative costs to $1,100 per-pupil and larger districts held to $900, savings in 2011 would have been $111.6 million. 31 small districts spent less than $1,100 perpupil in 2011 and 22 larger districts spent less than $900.
54
October8,2012
Organization and Logistics

Combine administrative functions within a county, including transportation, operations, food service, etc.
21 districts in Trumbull County, Ohio used 272 buses to transport 34,000 students across 600 square miles. 1 district in Kanawha County, WV used 150 buses to transport 33,500 students across 900 square miles.
55
October8,2012
Organization and Logistics

Functions that could be more affordably (and effectively) provided at the state level, such as IT and payroll. Multi-county purchasing and warehousing for all supplies, materials, etc. whether used in the classroom, for maintenance, technology, etc. Review of district checkbooks shows great potential for savings.
56
October8,2012
Contractual / HR Policies
Labor agreements and HR policies show a lot of self-inflicted costs.
Work rules that limit what an employee can do. Multiple (sometimes 10 or more) supplemental pay systems that inflate administrative costs. (Wichita) Payroll listings show multiple pay scales for clerical, custodial and others, which often result in abovemarket costs. Annuities and other plans in addition to KPERS. Paid leave, repurchased sick days, etc.
57
October8,2012
Prioritization
Priority-based budgeting
If educating kids is #1 priority, all expenditures should be measurednot justifiedagainst that priority. Every program and function should be examined for effectiveness and prioritized by staff. Once all funding needs (not wants) are met for top priority, needs are filled for the second priority, and so on. Example: district reduced Instruction staff and programs but gave $117,000 to another entity for a GED program outside the district.
58
October8,2012
Privatization
Decide what must be done by a district employee and privatize everything else that can done more affordably. Food service, custodial, building and grounds maintenance, payroll, IT, security, etc. KPERS real cost is about 16% of pay, plus other benefits that typically exceed private sectoronly pay contractors when work must be done.
59
October8,2012
2012 Payroll
Examplesfromdistrictslayingoffteachers,closingschools,etc.
Custodian Custodial Supervisor Electrician Foreman Carpenter Painter Locksmith Pipefitter $65,198 $91,046 $98,637 $81,545 $74,660 $45,703 $70,383 Secretary BusDriver Security MaintenanceSupv. Nurse Psychologist SocialWorker $75,571 $51,055 $60,379 $100,877 $81,535 $92,619 $80,724
Source:KansasOpenGov.org,withpayrolldataprovidedby schooldistricts,reflectingtotalpaybutnotbenefits.
60
October8,2012
2012 Payroll
Examples not necessarily representative of all districts; only have 21 district payrolls listed on KansasOpenGov.org. Deliberately chose some of the highest-paid positions to make a point. Multiple people typically employed in many maintenance, health care positions.
61
October8,2012
Contact Info
KansasOpenGov.org KansasPolicy.org (316) 634-0218 Dave.Trabert@KansasPolicy.org
62

Kansas K-12 Efficiency Task Force: Spending Facts and Efficiency Opportunities

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kansas K-12 Efficiency Task Force: Spending Facts and Efficiency Opportunities

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Governor'sK12EfficiencyTaskForce

K-12 Efficiency Task Force

Kansas Policy Institute

Kansas Policy Institute

Kansas Policy Institute

Kansas Policy Institute

Is More Money the Answer?

States with Best Regional Scores Spend Less than Kansas

Source:CensusBureau;U.S.Dept.ofEducation,NationalCenterfor EducationStatistics (4th gradeReading)

More $ Higher Achievement

More $ Higher Achievement

$14,000 $12,000 $10,000 $8,000

$6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0

ACT Score Only Appeared to Decline Because the Demographics Shifted

ACT Score Only Appeared to Decline Because the Demographics Shifted

Meets Standard - Reading

Full Comprehension - Reading

Spending Not Related to Achievement

State Aid Per-Pupil

Base State Aid State Aid

Base State Aid State Aid

Local Aid Based on Spending

Unencumbered Cash Reserves

Carryover Cash (millions)

Carryover Reserve Implications

Carryover Reserve Ratio

1,251 3,883 4,179 4,209 4,048 4,081 3,711

$6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0

Source:KansasDept.ofEducation, ComparativePerformance&FiscalSystemwithno capitalallocatedtooperatingcosts.

Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,ComparativePerformance&FiscalSystemwithno capitalallocatedtooperatingcosts;2012fromDistrictBudgetProfiles,unknownifany capitalisallocatedtooperatingcosts.

2012 Record Spending Year

2012 Record Spending Year

BAG Spending Per-Pupil (with some capital included in operating costs)

$8,000 $6,000 $4,000 $2,000 $0

Capital&Debt OtherCurrent Instruction

Source:KansasDept.ofEducation, BudgetataGlance;districtsarepermittedtorecordsome capitalspendingasoperatingcosts,theexactamountofwhichwontbeknownuntillate2012 .

Primary Spending Categories

Source:KSDEAccountingManualavailableonlineat http://www.ksde.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=u1dJuGOEBzg%3d&tabid=18 77&mid=7853

2011 Per-Pupil Spending

2011 Per-Pupil Spending

Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,ComparativePerformance&Fiscal System;nocapitalexpendituresallocatedtooperatingcosts.Totalis measurementofoverallspending,notthesumofeachcategory.

2011 Per-Pupil Spending

Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,ComparativePerformance&Fiscal System;nocapitalexpendituresallocatedtooperatingcosts.Totalis measurementofoverallspending,notthesumofeachcategory.

2011 Per-Pupil Spending

Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,ComparativePerformance&Fiscal System;nocapitalexpendituresallocatedtooperatingcosts.Totalis measurementofoverallspending,notthesumofeachcategory.

2011 Per-Pupil Spending

Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,ComparativePerformance&Fiscal System;nocapitalexpendituresallocatedtooperatingcosts.Totalis measurementofoverallspending,notthesumofeachcategory.

2011 Per-Pupil Spending

Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,ComparativePerformance&Fiscal System;nocapitalexpendituresallocatedtooperatingcosts.Totalis measurementofoverallspending,notthesumofeachcategory.

2011 Per-Pupil Spending

Source:KansasDept.ofEducation,ComparativePerformance&Fiscal System;nocapitalexpendituresallocatedtooperatingcosts.Totalis measurementofoverallspending,notthesumofeachcategory.

2011 FTE Enrollment ranges from 72 students to 46,484

Combine Non-Instruction Functions

2011 Median Per-Pupil Spending Administration vs. Student/Staff Support

Students per District by County

Students per District by County

Students per District by County

Students per District by County

Potential Operating Savings at Median (millions of dollars)

Potential Operating Savings at Median (millions of dollars)

Organization and Logistics

Organization and Logistics

You might also like