Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

K-12 Efficiency Task Force
Spending Facts & Efficiency Opportunities

Dave Trabert President, Kansas Policy Institute

Kansas Policy Institute

1

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

2

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Kansas Policy Institute
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 don’t have unlimited funds. Money is important, but many education officials say (and the data shows) that it’s how money is spent that matters…not how much.

Kansas Policy Institute

3

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Kansas Policy Institute
A lot of our work (not just in education) is factfinding. Much of what citizens understand about education…here and across the nation…is either incomplete or in some cases, not true. That’s not being critical of citizens, school districts or anyone else. It’s just a fact based on multiple scientific polls and lots of experience. Facts sometimes cause discomfort but good decision-making requires good information.

Kansas Policy Institute

4

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Kansas Policy Institute
One last thought...how districts spend money isn’t always their preference. To some extent, districts are ‘stuck’ working within a system full of well-intended barriers. That’s no one’s fault, but everyone’s responsibility. Those barriers can be removed.

Kansas Policy Institute

5

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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 achievement…no risk of efficiency having any impact on achievement.

Kansas Policy Institute

6

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

States with Best Regional Scores Spend Less than Kansas
2010 Current Spending Per‐Pupil Kansas Missouri Oklahoma Colorado Nebraska Texas $9,715 $9,634 $7,896 $8,853 $10,734 $8,746 White Students Scale Score 229 226 221 236 230 233 U.S.  Rank T‐20 T‐30 T‐48 6 T‐17 T‐10 Hispanic Students Scale Score 209 209 207 203 208 210 U.S.  Rank T‐15 T‐15 T‐23 T‐32 T‐20 14 Black Students Scale Score 204 199 199 207 199 210 U.S.  Rank T‐21 T‐31 T‐31 17 T‐31 T‐7

Source: Census Bureau; U.S. Dept. of Education, National Center for  Education Statistics  (4th grade Reading)

Kansas Policy Institute

7

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

More $ ≠ Higher Achievement
Kansas Reading Proficiency (NAEP) and Per‐Pupil Spending (KSDE)
100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% '98 '02 '03 '05 '07 '09 '11 Source: U.S. Dept. of Education, NCES; Kansas Dept. of Education $2,000 $0 $6,000 $4,000 $10,000 $8,000 4th Reading 8th Reading Total $ $14,000 $12,000

Kansas Policy Institute

8

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

More $ ≠ Higher Achievement
ACT Scores and Per‐Pupil Spending (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
ACT Score

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

Total Spend

Source: ACT.org; KSDE

Kansas Policy Institute

9

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

ACT Score Only Appeared to Decline Because the Demographics Shifted
2011 Demo Mix White Hispanic African Amer. Asian Amer. Indian Hawaiian Multi‐Racial Other / No Resp. Composite 75.8% 8.8% 5.6% 2.8% 0.9% 0.1% 3.3% 2.8% 100% 2011 Score 22.6 19.4 17.7 22.5 20.2 18.7 21.2 22.0 22.0
Source: ACT.org

2012 Demo Mix 73.8% 9.9% 5.3% 2.8% 0.7% 0.1% 4.6% 2.8% 100%

2012 Score 22.6 19.5 17.6 22.0 20.3 20.5 21.0 22.7 21.9

Kansas Policy Institute

10

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

ACT Score Only Appeared to Decline Because the Demographics Shifted
Actual Demo Scores Weighted the Same as 2012 Shows No Change
2008 Composite Score 21.9 2009 21.8 2010 21.9 2011 21.9 2012 21.9

Once again, funding changes have no impact on independent national  tests.  FYI, Total State Aid and Base State Aid peaked in 2009.

Kansas Policy Institute

11

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

12

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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

All Students

State Aid

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education

Kansas Policy Institute

13

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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

All Students

State Aid

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education

Kansas Policy Institute

14

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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 it’s how money is spent that matters…not how much.

Kansas Policy Institute

15

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Revenue Review

Kansas Policy Institute

16

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

K-12 Funding
Millions of Dollars 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: Kansas Dept. of Education.

Kansas Policy Institute

17

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education

Kansas Policy Institute

18

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

19

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

20

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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 isn’t reported as Capital spending; it’s only reported as Debt Service when bond payments are made. Changes in cash reserves also impact Local aid.

Kansas Policy Institute

21

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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).

Kansas Policy Institute

22

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Carryover Cash (millions)
All Districts Statewide
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 All Other $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: Kansas Dept. of Education; excludes federal funds

Kansas Policy Institute

23

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Carryover Reserve Implications
$410 million increase in All Other (current operating) funds represents tax revenue that was used to increase reserves…in 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

24

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

25

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Spending Review

Kansas Policy Institute

26

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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

Other Current

Capital & Debt

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education, Comparative Performance & Fiscal System with no  capital allocated to operating costs.

Kansas Policy Institute

27

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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

Other Current

Capital & Debt

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education, Comparative Performance & Fiscal System with no  capital allocated to operating costs; 2012 from District Budget Profiles, unknown if any  capital is allocated to operating costs.

Kansas Policy Institute

28

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2012 Record Spending Year
Districts’ Budget at a Glance reports provide summary information. Greater detail on cost centers won’t 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 costs…and different basis than other per-pupil comparisons.

Kansas Policy Institute

29

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2012 Record Spending Year
Millions of Dollars 2011
Instruction Other Operating Capital Outlay Debt Service 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: Kansas Dept. of Education, Budget at a Glance

Kansas Policy Institute

30

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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 Other Current Instruction
$6,799 $6,970

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education, Budget at a Glance; districts are permitted to record some  capital spending as operating costs, the exact amount of which won’t be known until late 2012  .

Kansas Policy Institute

31

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Primary Spending Categories
Instruction Student Support Staff Support General Administration School Administration Central Services (Admin.) Operations & Maintenance Transportation Food Services Community Services Capital Outlay Debt Service

Source: KSDE Accounting Manual available online at  http://www.ksde.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=u1dJuGOEBzg%3d&tabid=18 77&mid=7853 

Kansas Policy Institute

32

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2011 Per-Pupil Spending
Statewide
Low
Instruction Student Support Staff Support Administration Operations / Maint. Transportation Food Service Community Svc. 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: Kansas Dept. of Education, Comparative Performance & Fiscal  System; no capital expenditures allocated to operating costs.

Kansas Policy Institute

33

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2011 Per-Pupil Spending
72 – 499 FTE Students
Low
Instruction Student Support Staff Support Administration Operations / Maint. Transportation Food Service Community Svc. Capital & Debt Total spending 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: Kansas Dept. of Education, Comparative Performance & Fiscal  System; no capital expenditures allocated to operating costs. Total is  measurement of overall spending, not the sum of each category.

Kansas Policy Institute

34

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2011 Per-Pupil Spending
500 – 999 FTE Students
Low
Instruction Student Support Staff Support Administration Operations / Maint. Transportation Food Service Community Svc. Capital & Debt Total
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 

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education, Comparative Performance & Fiscal  System; no capital expenditures allocated to operating costs. Total is  measurement of overall spending, not the sum of each category.

Kansas Policy Institute

35

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2011 Per-Pupil Spending
1,000 – 1,999 FTE Students
Low
Instruction Student Support Staff Support Administration Operations / Maint. Transportation Food Service Community Svc. Capital & Debt Total
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 

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education, Comparative Performance & Fiscal  System; no capital expenditures allocated to operating costs. Total is  measurement of overall spending, not the sum of each category.

Kansas Policy Institute

36

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2011 Per-Pupil Spending
2,000 – 4,999 FTE Students
Low
Instruction Student Support Staff Support Administration Operations / Maint. Transportation Food Service Community Svc. Capital & Debt Total
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 

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education, Comparative Performance & Fiscal  System; no capital expenditures allocated to operating costs. Total is  measurement of overall spending, not the sum of each category.

Kansas Policy Institute

37

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2011 Per-Pupil Spending
5,000 – 14,999 FTE Students
Low
Instruction Student Support Staff Support Administration Operations / Maint. Transportation Food Service Community Svc. Capital & Debt Total
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 

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education, Comparative Performance & Fiscal  System; no capital expenditures allocated to operating costs. Total is  measurement of overall spending, not the sum of each category.

Kansas Policy Institute

38

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2011 Per-Pupil Spending
Over 15,000 FTE Students
Low
Instruction Student Support Staff Support Administration Operations / Maint. Transportation Food Service Community Svc. Capital & Debt Total
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 

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education, Comparative Performance & Fiscal  System; no capital expenditures allocated to operating costs. Total is  measurement of overall spending, not the sum of each category.

Kansas Policy Institute

39

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2011 FTE Enrollment ranges from 72 students to 46,484
FTE Enrollment Less than 500 500 to 999 1,000 to 1,999 2,000 to 4,999 5,000 to 14,999 Over 15,000 Statewide Number of  Percent of  School Districts School Districts 131  73  38  28  11  5  286  46% 26% 13% 10% 4% 2% 100% FTE Students  Enrolled 38,160.9  52,102.4  53,860.1  90,226.9  82,123.9  138,638.6  455,112.8  Percent of FTE  Enrolled 8% 11% 12% 20% 18% 30% 100%

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education; FTE in Comparative Performance & Fiscal  System at the time spending data was downloaded

Kansas Policy Institute

40

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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 opportunity…and it’s not just about saving money.

Kansas Policy Institute

41

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2011 Median Per-Pupil Spending Administration vs. Student/Staff Support
Gap between Administration and Support Narrows Until  Administrative Spending Increases
$1,600 $1,400 $1,200 $1,000 $800 $600 $400 $200 $0
<500 500‐999 1,000‐1,999 2,000‐4,999 5,000‐14,999 over 15,000

District FTE Enrollment Size
Adminstration Student & Staff Support

Kansas Policy Institute

42

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

43

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Students per District by County
Sampling of Counties with Low Average Enrollment and Multiple Districts
County Gove Gray Marion Sumner Osage Jefferson Dickinson 2012 FTE  Enrolled 469 1,260 1,976 3,688 2,738 3,577 3,742 Districts 3 4 5 7 5 6 5 Avg. FTE per  District 156 315 395 527 548 596 748 County Sq.  Miles 1,071 869 954 1,185 719 557 852

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education, Google Maps.  Portions of some  counties may be assigned to some districts in adjacent states.

Kansas Policy Institute

44

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Students per District by County
Sampling of Counties with Only 1 Home District per KSDE
County Rawlins Sherman Jewell Osborne Hodgeman Scott Morris 2012 FTE  Enrolled 311 982 293 300 303 895 753 Districts 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Avg. FTE per  District 311 982 293 300 303 895 753 County Sq.  Miles 1,071 1,056 914 894 860 718 703

Source: Kansas Dept. of Education, Google Maps.  Portions of some  counties may be assigned to some districts in adjacent states.

Kansas Policy Institute

45

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Students per District by County
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.

Kansas Policy Institute

46

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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

Kansas Policy Institute

47

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Efficiency Opportunities

Kansas Policy Institute

48

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Efficiency Opportunities
Heard superintendents and other district staff say they’ve done all they can, and don’t doubt that they believe that to be true. That’s why independent reviews by experts in logistics and finance are so valuable…insiders know what they’ve done but I’ve seen ‘bunker mentality,’ parameter limitations and ‘political correctness’ prevent a lot of employees and managers from speaking up or seeing the full potential.

Kansas Policy Institute

49

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Efficiency Opportunities
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 good…but many require cultural shift in thinking.

Kansas Policy Institute

50

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Potential Operating Savings at Median (millions of dollars)
Less than  500 to  1,000 ‐ 500 999 1,999 Instruction Stud. Support Staff Support Administration Oper. & Maint. Transportation Food Service 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 2,000 to  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: Kansas Dept. of Education, Comparative Performance and Fiscal System.   Calculation of spending in excess of median cost per‐pupil by district classification.

Kansas Policy Institute

51

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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 areas…where 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

52

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Efficiency Categories
Organization / Logistics Contractual / HR policies Prioritization Privatization Key to all is changing the thought process. Change “that can’t be done” to “what has to change to make that possible?” Andover technology savings.

Kansas Policy Institute

53

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

54

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

55

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

56

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

57

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Prioritization
Priority-based budgeting
If educating kids is #1 priority, all expenditures should be measured…not justified…against 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

58

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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 sector…only pay contractors when work must be done.

Kansas Policy Institute

59

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

2012 Payroll
Examples from districts laying off teachers, closing schools, 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 Bus Driver Security Maintenance Supv. Nurse Psychologist Social Worker $75,571 $51,055 $60,379 $100,877 $81,535 $92,619 $80,724

Source: KansasOpenGov.org, with payroll data provided by  school districts, reflecting total pay but not benefits.

Kansas Policy Institute

60

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 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.

Kansas Policy Institute

61

Governor's K‐12 Efficiency Task Force

October 8, 2012

Contact Info
KansasOpenGov.org KansasPolicy.org (316) 634-0218 Dave.Trabert@KansasPolicy.org

Kansas Policy Institute

62

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Special offer for students: Only $4.99/month.

Master your semester with Scribd & The New York Times

Cancel anytime.