2011-12 Calgary Catholic School District Operating Budget

20112012
District Operating Budget

Administration Presentation to the Board of Trustees
May 25, 2011
District Operating Budget 20112012
Table of Contents
Budget Overview .......................................................................................................................................................................... A
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS .......................................................................................................................................................................... A
BUDGET AT A GLANCE .........................................................................................................................................................................C
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................................................... 1
Background.................................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Budget Planning Assumptions .................................................................................................................................................... 3

REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3
Student Enrolments ........................................................................................................................................................................................................ 3
Funding Factors .............................................................................................................................................................................................................. 3
High School Credit Enrolment Units ............................................................................................................................................................................... 4
EXPENDITURE ASSUMPTIONS ............................................................................................................................................................... 4
Salaries and Benefits ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4
New Schools and Curriculum ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Prioritization of Expenditures .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
SAVINGS AND DEFICIT ASSUMPTIONS .................................................................................................................................................... 5
Deficit Not Allowed.......................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Safety Valve Recommended .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Maintaining Operations with Savings ............................................................................................................................................................................. 5
Unfunded Deficits Not An Ongoing Solution .................................................................................................................................................................. 6
FUNDING ENVELOPES, ALLOCATIONS AND TARGETED REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS ....................................................................................... 6
Balancing Targeted Instructional Revenues and Expenditures ..................................................................................................................................... 6
Supporting Special Education ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 6
Maintaining Information Technology .............................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Administrative Envelope ................................................................................................................................................................................................. 7
Page | ii
Uncontrollable/Mandated Cost Increases and Prioritization of Expenditures ......................................................................... 8

SUSTAINING UNCONTROLLABLE CONTRACTUAL OR MANDATED OBLIGATIONS .......................................................................................... 8
SCHOOL-BASED STAFFING .................................................................................................................................................................. 8
PRIORITIZATION OF EXPENDITURES ...................................................................................................................................................... 9
One-Time Savings ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10

HISTORY OF USE OF ONE-TIME SAVINGS ............................................................................................................................................ 10
2010-2011 BUDGET AND 2010-2011 PROJECTIONS ............................................................................................................................ 10
ONE-TIME SAVINGS REMAINING AT AUGUST 31, 2011 ......................................................................................................................... 10
ONE-TIME SAVINGS REMAINING AT AUGUST 31, 2012 ......................................................................................................................... 10
2011 – 2012 Budgeted Revenues ............................................................................................................................................... 11

TOTAL REVENUES ............................................................................................................................................................................. 11
INSTRUCTIONAL GRANTS ................................................................................................................................................................... 11
TRANSPORTATION............................................................................................................................................................................. 11
CLASS SIZE INITIATIVE ...................................................................................................................................................................... 11
PLANT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (POM) .................................................................................................................................. 12
2011-2012 Budgeted Expenditures ............................................................................................................................................ 13

TOTAL BUDGETED EXPENDITURES ..................................................................................................................................................... 13
INCREASED EXPENDITURES ............................................................................................................................................................... 13
SCHOOLS AND INSTRUCTION.............................................................................................................................................................. 13
BOARD, ADMINISTRATION .................................................................................................................................................................. 14
INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT ................................................................................................................................................................. 14
PLANT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ............................................................................................................................................. 14
TRANSPORTATION............................................................................................................................................................................. 14
OTHER EXPENDITURES ...................................................................................................................................................................... 14
Page | iii
Appendix A - Projected and Actual Enrolments ....................................................................................................................... 15
Appendix B – Stakeholder Priorities .......................................................................................................................................... 19
Appendix C - Highlights of Government Funding Rates .......................................................................................................... 20
Appendix D - District Usage of One-Time Funds ...................................................................................................................... 21
Appendix E - Surplus and Available One-Time Funds ............................................................................................................. 23
Appendix F - Historical Pupil-Teacher Ratio (PTR)................................................................................................................... 24
Appendix G - Budget Detail ........................................................................................................................................................ 26
Appendix H - 2011-2012 Budgeted Revenues ........................................................................................................................... 31
Appendix I - 2011-2012 Budgeted Expenditures ....................................................................................................................... 32
Appendix J – 2011-2012 Salaries and Benefits ......................................................................................................................... 35
Appendix K - Glossary of Terms ................................................................................................................................................ 37
Page | iv
Budget Overview
BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS
$15.1 million operating deficit for the 2011-2012 Budget. The district is budgeting to bring in $477.7 million in revenue and spend $492.7 million in
2011-2012, which results in a $15.1 million operating deficit. Once capital transactions are taken into account, the district’s 2011-2012 Net Deficit is $14.1
million. This will be funded with $13.2 million in Accumulated Operating Surplus (AOS) or savings and a $0.9 million from capital reserves. Overall, the
budget has staff reductions of 92.0 FTE positions which will be addressed through attrition. Although cuts to Class Size funding resulted in a reduction of
30.0 FTE teaching positions, there are still 184.0 FTE more teaching positions funded by this targeted grant than were available prior to its inception in
2004. A 50% reduction in Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI) funding resulted in a further loss of 30.0 FTE positions and a change in the
staffing allocation formula produced the final 32 FTE position reductions. Re-tasking of 40.0 FTE Diverse Learning Teachers to assigned school-based
positions is intended to assist schools in implementing transformative changes to better meet the needs of all students. (See Budget at a Glance on the
following pages for further detail.)
The projected remaining savings as of August 31, 2011 will be $13.2 million. The district is projecting, as of February 2011, that there will be $13.2
million in AOS remaining at the end of the current fiscal year. The 2011-2012 budget will utilize all of those savings to offset the deficit. Use of the
district’s AOS funds will eliminate the financial safety net should there be any unforeseen changes during the budget period. It would also mean the
district would be unable, in 2011-2012, to meet the Auditor General recommended guidelines of 2.5% of revenue to be set aside in AOS.
Enrolment. Total enrolments are budgeted to be approximately 600 students (1.29%) higher than the September 2010 enrolments.
New Schools. The district is not opening any new schools in 2011-2012 and one new school built through the Phase 2 P3 (Public Private Partnership)
process will open in September 2012 in the community of Copperfield. The Government does not specifically fund school start-up costs for such things as
instructional supplies for new schools; therefore, these costs are mostly funded from instructional grants. The 2011-2012 budget includes $0.8 million in
start-up costs for this new school, as most of the start-up costs will be incurred in the fiscal year prior to the opening. There are also additional costs ($0.1
million) budgeted in 2011-2012 that are related to the three new schools opened in 2010-2011.
Provincial Budget. The province has a budgeted $5 billion dollar deficit in the current fiscal year; however, the overall increase to the Ministry of
Education was the second highest, after Health. The district respects that the Ministry was required to make difficult choices in these difficult financial
times. Teacher salary increases of 4.54% were funded by the Government but were largely offset by elimination or reduction of other grants. The
provincial budget for 2011-12 also does not provide any funding for new capital projects.
Page | A
Revenue Changes
$ Millions
500
Total Revenues
450
400 Total Revenues are increasing by $33.9 million or 7.7% to $477.7 million
350 in the 2011-2012 Budget (compared to the 2010-2011 Budget of $443.7
300 million)primarily due to inclusion of the Government contribution to the
250
200 Teachers’ Retirement Fund ($24.7 million) in all districts’ financial
150 records, a 4.54% increase in the base grant plus enrolment increase;
100
50 partially offset by losses in Class Size funding, Relative Cost of
0 Purchasing Goods and Services funding and AISI grants, elimination of
Enrolment Growth and Decline grants, and no increases in other
2008-2009
2009-2010
Actuals
2010-2011
Actuals
2010-2011 differential grants.

Forecast
2011-2012
Budget
Budget
Expenditure Changes
500
$ Millions 450
Total Expenditures 400
350
300
Total expenditures are increasing by $38.1 million or 8.4% to 250
$492.7 million in the 2011-2012 Budget (from the 2010-2011 200
Budget of $454.7 million). Increased expenditures are primarily 150
100
due to inclusion of the Government contribution to the Teachers’ 50
Retirement Fund ($24.7 million), salary increases and additional 0
2008-2009
curriculum costs; partially offset by position reallocations and
2009-2010
2010-2011
Actual
2010-2011
reductions. Expenditures were carefully evaluated to minimize the
Actual
Forecast
2011-2012
Budget
Budget
impact in the classroom.
Page | B
BUDGET AT A GLANCE
Revenue 2011-2012 Budget

Capital
Budgeted Revenues
Allocations
Provincial 3.5% 2011-2012 Budget
Grants
90.7% $ %
School
Generated Provincial Grants1 433,419,354 90.7%
Funds
3.3% Capital Allocations 16,683,179 3.5%
School Generated Funds2 15,844,422 3.3%

Other
2.5% Other3 11,734,945 2.5%
TOTAL REVENUE 477,681,900 100.0%
1. Provincial Grants include local Property Taxes.
2. School Generated Funds (SGF) are raised and expended exclusively at the school level.
3. Other consists of Federal Government Grants, lease and rental revenue, interest income, etc
Page | C
2011-2012 Budget Expense by Function
Board and
Instructional Budgeted Expenditures
Support
Administration 13,777,445 2011-2012 Budget
Schools & 27,796,061
Instruction 2.8%
356,544,365
5.6% Plant Operations & $ %
Mntce 1
72.5%
46,030,246 Schools & Instruction 356,544,365 72.5%
9.3% 2
Board and Administration 27,796,061 5.6%
Transportation
12,822,003
Instructional Support 3 13,777,445 2.8%
2.6%
Plant Operations & Maintenance 46,030,246 9.3%
Depreciation
19,784,868 Transportation 12,822,003 2.6%
4.0%
Depreciation 19,784,868 4.0%
Debt Interest
137,646 Debt Interest 137,646 0.0%
School Generated 0.0%
Funds School Generated Funds 4 15,844,422 3.2%
15,844,422
3.2% TOTAL EXPENDITURES 492,737,096 100.0%
1. Schools and Instruction includes the majority of the Government contribution to the Teachers’ Retirement Fund, the remainder would be allocated to certificated staff
found in Instructional Support and Board & Administration.
2. Board and Administration includes some Central Office positions who provide support (in whole or in part) to schools (e.g., School Accounting Officers, School
Computer Technicians, etc.) as well as Central Office administration staff and the Board. Also included are items such as sabbatical leaves for teachers (primarily
school-based) as required by the Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA) Collective Agreement. This breakdown of expenditures by function is not the same as the
Government definition of administration. Actual administration costs are only calculated at year-end to ensure the allocations necessary to meet the Government
definition are completed.
3. Instructional Support includes Central Office positions assigned to provide instructional support to schools (Instructional Services Department).
4 School Generated Funds (SGF) are raised and expended exclusively at the school level.
Most Expenditures are School-Based. Most expenditures are school-based (72.5%), with 93.4% of budgeted school based expenditures being for
salaries and benefits. The remainder of the district’s expenditures are in areas such as: Plant Operations and Maintenance (which includes caretaking,
utilities, etc.); Board, Administration & Instructional Support; School Generated Funds; Depreciation (primarily schools), etc. The district’s expenditures on
Administration, as defined by Alberta Education, are capped at 4% of expenditures.
Page | D
Introduction
Calgary Catholic School district is a separate school system (as defined by the School Act) that is fully funded by the provincial government and residential
taxes. The district serves Catholic students living in the City of Calgary as well as those living in Airdrie, Cochrane, Chestermere and the related Municipal
district of Rocky View. With 106 schools and close to 46,000 students from kindergarten to Grade 12, Calgary Catholic is the largest Catholic school
district in Alberta.
Calgary Catholic Schools follow the legally mandated provincial Program of Studies. The values of the Catholic Faith permeate the programs, services
and cultures of all Calgary Catholic schools. The district also offers a number of additional programs to meet the needs of students.
The City of Calgary is Canada’s fifth largest city with a population of 1,071,515 (2010 census), which is a growth of 0.57% over the 2009 census
information. This is the lowest rate of growth since 1984. The city continues to be a vibrant, growing community with many economic opportunities;
however, the current economic conditions world-wide continue to put pressure on both private and public institutions. In particular, the low commodity
prices over the past few years have presented particular challenges for the Province of Alberta given that a large portion of provincial revenues come from
oil and gas royalties. Maintaining services with declining or static revenues is a significant challenge in this environment.
Catholic education in Calgary began in 1885 when four sisters of the Faithful Companions of Jesus established what would eventually become known as
St. Mary’s School. Calgary Catholic celebrated 125 years of excellence in Catholic education in 2010. As part of the district’s 125th Anniversary, the
Board of Trustees unveiled a new Mission and Vision Statement.
Mission Statement: Living and Learning in our Catholic Faith.
Vision:
Faith: Our Catholic schools exist to uphold and support the development and permeation of out faith.
Contributors to Society: Our Catholic schools develop student to be faith filled contributors to society.
Family: Our Catholic schools recognize family as the primary educator of their children and promote a close relationship among families, parishes and
our schools.
Excellence in Teaching and Learning: Our Catholic schools develop and maximize the potential for students to excel.
Stewardship: Our Catholic School district will be fiscally responsible, transparent and value shared responsibility for the success of the students in
our care.
Treatment of Persons: Our Catholic schools value the sacredness of each individual.
Governance Structure: Consisting of seven members, the Board of Trustees is elected by Catholic school ratepayers. The Board has been granted
the legal and moral responsibility and authority to govern the Calgary Catholic School district and acts on behalf of the ratepayers to ensure that the
School district achieves its goals, while ensuring the use of acceptable practices.
Page | 1
Background
st
Alberta Education has extended the May 31 deadline to June 30, 2011 for submitting the district’s Operating Budget to the Minister of Education. The
delay is intended to allow districts to have more time to address the problems associated with the funding changes. The district budget process begins
early in the calendar year and although the current budget is challenging, the essential information has been gathered, consultation with stakeholders has
occurred, appropriate decisions have been made, and staffing decisions need to be made as expeditiously as possible. Accordingly, the district has
chosen to continue to work towards the goal of approving the budget by the original May 31st deadline.
As outlined in its Vision Statement on Stewardship, the district embraces fiscal responsibility, transparency and shared personal responsibility for the
success of the students in its care. The timeline between when funding announcements are made by the Government, and budget due dates, traditionally
results in a compressed budget process timeline. The financial planning process commences prior to all funding levels being announced and prior to
knowing the total funds available. As school staffing decisions generally need to be made no later than mid-May, certain assumptions must be made.
With less funding and public encouragement from the government to limit staff cuts, it is difficult to ascertain appropriate staffing levels and allocate
resources to the areas that require them, particularly when budget reallocations or reductions are necessitated to finalize budget decisions. As much
information as possible is gathered ahead of time to best inform decision-making but some budgetary decisions regularly need to occur prior to the
finalization of the complete budget. This includes significant decisions on such matters as new expenditure initiatives, new revenues (e.g., fees), and
budget reallocations and reductions (particularly those affecting school-based personnel). Through its staffing process, the district endeavours to address
class size and composition on a class-by-class basis. Information on these significant decisions is provided to the Board of Trustees, including budget
updates during every regular public meeting, up to and including the public Board meeting where the Budget is passed. The district works collaboratively
with the Ministry of Education and district stakeholders to inform budget decisions. Parent groups are kept apprised and consulted through their schools
and School Council meetings. Principals, Directors, Supervisors and other district budget managers are kept informed throughout the budget process
during their regular District Leadership Council monthly meetings. Employee Administration groups are also kept apprised of significant budgetary issues
impacting their members during the process. All stakeholder groups had an opportunity to identify budget priorities through school and district-wide
consultation sessions. The input from stakeholders was used to the maximum extent possible to inform budget decisions. Appendix B – Stakeholder
Priorities, lists feedback from school staff and parents and School Councils. The district will continue to work with the Ministry and with our communities to
seek innovative solutions to address accommodation needs developing from increased enrolment.
The district budget is prepared by Administration in accordance with Board Policies. Administration reports compliance with Board Policy EL-6, Financial
Planning, with a Monitoring Report at the Regular Board Meeting subsequent to the Board’s final approval to submit the Budget to the Minister of
Education. Ultimately, it is the responsibility of the Board of Trustees to approve the budget prepared by Administration.
Page | 2
Budget Planning Assumptions

The 2011-2012 district Operating Budget document is a financial plan for the district for the fiscal year that runs from September 1, 2011 through to
August 31, 2012. In putting this plan together, certain background information, assumptions and estimates affecting both revenue and expenditures must
be used in order to best predict the future financial operations of the district.
Once revenues and expenditures are estimated for the year, then it must be determined whether existing operations can be sustained, whether funding
exists for additional priorities, or whether budget reallocations or budget reductions (or additional revenues) are needed to balance the budget. This
budget presented unique challenges due to funding shortfalls at the provincial level that flowed through to school board budgets. While the Government
fully funded the teacher salary increases through increases to the base grants (approximately $13.0 million), other grants totaling approximately $12.0
million were reduced or eliminated. Discounting additional revenue due to enrolment increases and the addition of revenue to cover Government
contributions to the Teachers’ Retirement Fund (TRF), the net effect of Government grant increases was approximately $1.0 million (or a 0.22% increase).
As is normal for budget building, developing certain assumptions and projections early in the process are necessary to allow for consistency in practice.
The most significant of the 2011-2012 Budget planning assumptions follow:
REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS
Student Enrolments
The district’s funding from Alberta Education is based, for the most part, on total student enrolments in the district. The student enrolment projected for
September 2011 is 44,617 full-time equivalents (FTE’s), or 46,343 total students (Kindergarten students are 0.5 FTE’s). Actual enrolments may vary after
finalization of this budget; however, these projections are based on the best available information and allow for consistency in process. (See Appendix A –
Projected and Actual Enrolments for further details.)
Funding Factors
The major funding factors for the 2011-2012 budget include full funding of the teacher salary settlement (4.54%) mostly offset by a reduction in targeted
class size funding for grades 4 to 6, a 50% reduction in Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI) targeted grants, a reduction in the Relative Cost of
Purchasing Goods and Services Adjustment (RCPA) grant, elimination of Enrolment Growth and Decline grants, and a zero percent (0%) change in
differential grants. The elimination of the Enhanced English as a Second Language (ESL) grant was of particular concern due to the large number of ESL
students in Calgary. It should be noted that the $24.7 million added in revenue to cover the Government contribution to the Teachers’ Retirement Fund
(as required by the Government to reflect pension contributions paid in accordance with the ATA agreement with the Government) was offset by
Page | 3
equivalent expenditures in Salaries and Benefits. In addition, the funding factors utilized by Alberta Education are complex (See Appendix C – Highlights
of Government Funding Rates). Projecting the district’s 2011-2012 revenue from Alberta Education requires not only overall student enrolment
projections, but projections such as the number of Credit Equivalent Units (CEU’s) that Grades 10, 11, and 12 students will earn, the number of
Kindergarten students with severe disabilities, the number of English as a Second Language (ESL) students, identification of First Nations, Métis and Inuit
(FNMI) students, and enrolment by school in order to calculate the funding factor for small schools by necessity. The potential for variations due to the
variety and complexity of required projections is significant.
High School Credit Enrolment Units
The per CEU funding for Grades 10, 11 and 12 students is $185.62 plus Class Size increments for CTS courses which was an increase from $177.56 in
2010-2011 (See Appendix C – Highlights of Government Funding Rates). For the purposes of the 2011-2012 Budget, it is assumed that, on average,
district students in Grades 10, 11, and 12 will complete 35.0 CEU’s per school year. At St. Anne Academic Centre, the district’s returning Grade 12 high
school, the per student projection is 70 CEU’s on average as this number includes CEU’s earned for ULearn, Off-Campus and summer school programs
that run through St. Anne. These assumptions are based on the district’s historical averages for CEU’s. Any change (decrease or increase) will affect
district revenues. In order to receive the same funding per full-time equivalent Grade 1-9 student, high school students need to complete 35.0 CEU’s
(excluding summer school). With the change in class size funding, high school funding now includes three tiers of CEU payment amounts. The stated
intention of this change was to provide increased funding for specific CTS courses to ensure safety.
EXPENDITURE ASSUMPTIONS
Salaries and Benefits
For 2011-2012, the district is using settlements based on the approved long-term collective agreements with the Alberta Teachers’ Association (ATA), the
Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), and the Communication, Energy and Paperworkers’ Union (CEP) employees. The agreements with the
ATA, CUPE and CEP reference the Average Weekly Wage Index for Alberta (AWWIA) from Statistics Canada. The AWWIA is budgeted at 4.54% for this
budget based on Statistics Canada’s calculation for 2010. Salary and benefit expenditures were also increased by $24.7 million to cover the Government
contribution to the Teachers’ Retirement Fund (TRF) as noted above.
Given that salaries and benefits constitute 78.4% of district expenditures (with teachers being 62.5%), the impact of any change in salary rates is the
single largest expenditure variable in the budget.
Page | 4
New Schools and Curriculum
The district is not opening any new schools in 2011-2012 and is opening one new school in September 2012 (Copperfield). The 2011-2012 budget
includes $0.8 million in start-up costs for this new school, as most of the start-up costs will be incurred in the fiscal year prior to the opening. There are
also additional costs ($0.1 million) budgeted in 2011-2012 that are related to the three new schools opened in 2010-2011. Additional curriculum costs of
$0.8 million are also being implemented in 2011-2012.
Prioritization of Expenditures
Expenditures for high priority items identified during the budget process are included in the budget for 2011-2012. With fewer funds available, prioritization
of expenditures is necessary to provide the best balance between fiscal responsibility and what is best for children’s education. Some of the items are
currently funded through the use of district AOS and will have to be re-evaluated on an annual basis.
SAVINGS AND DEFICIT ASSUMPTIONS
Deficit Not Allowed
The School Act prohibits an unfunded deficit. By making reductions as necessary and using district Accumulated Operating Surplus (AOS) funds, the
deficit will be funded for the 2011-2012 budget year.
Safety Valve Recommended
Keeping some funds in savings (AOS) as a safety valve is desirable but very difficult in the current budgeting environment. To illustrate the impact of a 1%
budget variation, if the approximately $490 million Budget is 99% accurate on revenues, and 99% accurate on expenditures, then the district could still
incur a $9.8 million deficit ($4.9 million difference in both revenues and expenditures). The Provincial Auditor-General recommends that 2.5% of revenues
be set aside in savings as a safety valve (combined Operating Reserves and Accumulated Surplus).
Maintaining Operations with Savings
Funds in savings accounts (Accumulated Operating Surplus – AOS) are available to be used to enhance operations. The Government has recommended
that school districts utilize excess AOS during this period of economic challenge. When building the 2011-2012 Budget, $13.2 million of AOS, which
represents all of the remaining district savings, is budgeted to be spent to reduce the deficit. (See Appendix D – District Usage of One-Time Funds for
further detail.)
Page | 5
Unfunded Deficits Not An Ongoing Solution
The government has indicated districts should utilize savings to fund educational priorities in the short term, however, current projections are that there will
be no savings available at the end of the 2011-2012 budget cycle to supplement operations in future years. This will require careful management of
expenditures and possibly further reductions for 2012-2013 and beyond. (See section on “One-Time Savings”, Appendix D – District Usage of One-Time
Funds, and Appendix E – Surplus and Available One-Time Funds.)
FUNDING ENVELOPES, ALLOCATIONS AND TARGETED REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS

Balancing Targeted Instructional Revenues and Expenditures
Alberta Education allows the flexible spending of most of the funding provided to school districts. Some targeted funds include the Alberta Initiative for
School Improvement (AISI), Student Health Initiative, and Class Size Initiative. Where feasible, the district makes a practice of balancing expenditures and
funding within the applicable funding envelope. For 2011-2012, the reductions and elimination of targeted revenues for AISI and Class Size funding
means the loss of 30 FTE positions in each category. These reductions are a necessary component in balancing the budget. The Government indicated
that research and results does not support the continuation of Class Size funding other than for students in Kindergarten through Grade 3. In difficult
financial times, tough choices are required.
Supporting Special Education
Special Education funding is determined through a provincially applied process that leads to a district special education profile consisting of students
coded severe. The district elects to utilize funding generated through the profile to support Special Education programs and services. The district is
accountable for providing appropriate supports for these students in the overall context of planning and delivery of instruction, but has flexibility in relation
to how support and programming occurs. The Ministry of Education undertook a process called Setting the Direction to review all aspects of Special
Education in the province. As part of this process, the district’s profile (number of students for which the district has received funding) has been frozen for
four years. The district serves far more students than it is funded for in its profile. The Setting the Direction process received input from stakeholders and
is now moving towards implementation under the title of Action on Inclusion. For 2011-2012, the district continues to supplement Special Education with
an additional $2.0 million over and above the funding received for Special Education.
As has been the case since 2006-2007, the Student Health Initiative continues to support needs in Special Education. As well, the school Information
Technology budget provides for the assistive technology needs of special education students.
Page | 6
Maintaining Information Technology
The district is dedicated to building capacity in information technology and is utilizing available funds to this end. It is not possible to fund all potential
projects at one time and priorities will be identified to maximize the benefit to learning and teaching. For 2011-2012, district stakeholders indicated that
maintaining investments in information technology was a top priority (see Appendix B – Stakeholder Priorities). Within available resources, the district will
continue to expend resources to ensure appropriate infrastructure is available to support teaching and learning.
Administrative Envelope
There are no longer any maximum expenditure limits (envelopes) for the various allocations for expenditures, except for Administration. Outside of the
Ministry of Education, no other government department or agency has an expenditure limit on administrative expenditures.
With regard to the Administration Envelope, the district is restricted as to what it is allowed to spend to a maximum of 4.0% of expenditures. As has been
the case in the district since the implementation of the 1995-1996 Funding Framework, expenditures in the Administration Envelope will be within the
allowable 4.0% cap restrictions in 2011-2012.
The district is a centrally run organization. Certain tasks (e.g., Human Resources, Purchasing, Accounting, Payroll, Maintenance) are done centrally by
professional staff rather than being down-loaded to the school level. The focus of the schools is on learning and teaching and that focus is demonstrated
by outstanding accountability pillar results. Attempting to reduce administration costs by asking school-based staff to take on these responsibilities is
contrary to district philosophy and would have a negative impact on school operations. The role of a school-based administrator has expanded greatly in
our modern society and the more that is added to their responsibilities, the more difficult it is to achieve key responsibilities to the children of our district.
Administration costs in the district have been less than the 4% since the implementation of this Government requirement. For the past three years, the
administration costs (as reported in the annual Audited Financial Statements) have been as follows:
2009-2010 3.48%
2008-2009 3.78%
2007-2008 3.77%
It should be noted that these costs have been reducing as a percentage of budget.
Page | 7
Uncontrollable/Mandated Cost Increases and Prioritization of Expenditures

SUSTAINING UNCONTROLLABLE CONTRACTUAL OR MANDATED OBLIGATIONS
When building the district’s Budget, continuing or enhancing operations from year-to-year means having to accommodate certain uncontrollable or
mandated cost increases. This can include such items as contracted cost increases (like collective agreements or other types of business services
contracts such as telephones, utilities, transportation contracted services, property maintenance services such as snow removal, etc.). Mandated cost
increases that might exceed grant increases include such costs as new curriculum implementation, insurance costs, new and continuing legislated
responsibilities (e.g., occupational health and safety), and statutory benefit costs (e.g., Workers’ Compensation, Local Authorities Pension Plan,
Employment Insurance, Canada Pension Plan).
SCHOOL-BASED STAFFING
Annual adjustments to staffing allocations are necessary due to changed demands (growth, funding reductions, complexity, mandate changes, etc.).
School teaching and support staff levels are automatically adjusted during the budget process to ensure efficient operations from year to year. School-
based staffing is based on factors such as student enrolment by grade level in a school, classroom complexity and best use of resources. If budget
reductions are required during a year, or if there are additions available, changes to the Staffing Allocation formula occur as part of the district’s Budget
planning process. In the case of schools, changes in enrolment during the year can also automatically trigger increases or decreases to school staff
based on the staffing allocation formula, post-budget. For 2011-2012, the Staffing Allocation formula was adjusted to reflect reduced funding. This
resulted in the loss of 32 FTE positions. Combined with the reductions in funding for AISI and Class Size, total reductions are 92.0 FTE positions (90 FTE
teaching positions). Re-tasking of 40.0 FTE Diverse Learning Teachers to assigned school-based positions is intended to assist schools in implementing
transformative changes to better meet the needs of all students. Included in these positions are school-based staffing (teachers and support staff) for
special education as well as English as a Second Language (ESL) which have been centrally assigned to schools, within the funding set-aside for these
purposes.
In addition to school-based staffing allocations through the district’s staffing formula, teachers funded through the Class Size Initiative are assigned to
schools, to assist in meeting Alberta Education’s class size guidelines. It is important to note that even though there are reductions in Class Size teachers
year to year, there are still 184 additional teachers in the classroom (compared to the year prior to implementation of the grant) due to the Government
provision of Class Size grants. The Pupil-Teacher Ratio (see Appendix F – Historical Pupil-Teacher Ratio [PTR]) has increased above a 17 to 1 ratio;
however, it is still lower than what the ratio would be without the Class Size grant.
Page | 8
PRIORITIZATION OF EXPENDITURES
Identifying budget priorities is a necessary part of developing a dynamic, collaborative, responsive budget. When available funds are scarce, as is the
case for 2011-2012, budget decisions are even more difficult and the prioritization process becomes critical. For 2011-2012, this meant staffing cuts (92.0
FTE positions – see below), retention of initiatives identified as being of high priority, and required new curriculum.
Staff reductions are due to revenue shortfalls as explained previously. To summarize, reduction of targeted AISI grants resulted in the loss of 30 FTE
positions, targeted Class Size grant reductions resulted in the loss of 30 FTE positions and a change in the Staffing Allocation formula accounted for the
final 32 FTE positions. Although there were cuts to ESL funding, there was no reduction of spending in support of ESL programs. All staff reductions will
be addressed through normally occurring attrition. As a result of the targeted reductions, the district Pupil-Teacher Ratio (see Appendix F –Historical
Pupil-Teacher Ratio [PTR]) increased from 1:16.73 to 1:17.23 but is still the sixth lowest PTR over the past several decades.
Items identified as being of high priority and therefore retained from the 2010-2011 budget include continued support for Special Education ($2.0 million),
Career Practitioners, Contingency teaching positions, Full Day Kindergarten, Program Support Teachers, and maintenance of investment in technology
infrastructure. The re-tasking of 40 Diverse Learner teachers to schools is intended to support the Government’s Action on Inclusion initiative (previously
called Setting the Direction).
Page | 9
One-Time Savings
HISTORY OF USE OF ONE-TIME SAVINGS
Since 1997-1998, the district has been able to benefit from having savings available to subsidize or enhance instruction. The district has had one-time
funds, “savings”, or AOS due to under-expenditures in previous years’ budgets or due to timing differences resulting from revenues being received in one
year and expenditures being made the following. (See Appendix D – District Usage of One-Time Funds for additional information.)
2010-2011 BUDGET AND 2010-2011 PROJECTIONS

In the 2010-2011 Budget developed last year, use of $8.9 million from district savings was envisioned to balance the budget. At the time of the 2011-2012
budget preparation, a net deficit of $6.7 million is forecasted for year end (August 31, 2011).
ONE-TIME SAVINGS REMAINING AT AUGUST 31, 2011

Based on the forecasted net deficit of $6.7 million for 2010-2011, described in the preceding, it is projected that the district will have $13.2 million
remaining in total AOS as at August 31, 2011. This $13.2 million is budgeted to be made up entirely of unrestricted operating surplus (a decrease of $6.0
million from August 31, 2010). Total one-time savings projected to be remaining at August 31, 2011, excluding Capital Reserves, represents 2.8% of
forecasted district revenues in 2011-2012 or 6.9 days of operation. (See Appendix D – District Usage of One-Time Funds and Appendix E – Surplus and
Available One-Time Funds.)
ONE-TIME SAVINGS REMAINING AT AUGUST 31, 2012

The 2011-2012 Budget incorporates spending $13.2 million of AOS. At August 31, 2012, remaining savings will have been reduced to zero. The
Provincial Auditor-General recommends that 2.5% of revenue be kept in AOS. The budgeted amounts in one-time savings means the district will not meet
the recommended target in 2011-2012. (See Appendix D – District Usage of One-Time Funds and Appendix E – Surplus and Available One-Time)
Page | 10
2011 – 2012 Budgeted Revenues

TOTAL REVENUES
Total revenues budgeted to be received in 2011-2012 are $477.7 million. While this is an increase of $33.9 million or 7.7% over 2010-2011 budgeted
revenues of $443.7 million, it is primarily due to inclusion of the Government contribution to the Teachers’ Retirement Fund ($24.7 million) in all districts’
financial records, increased provincial grant revenue (4.54% increase on base grants); partially offset by reductions and elimination of other provincial
grants (e.g., Class Size, AISI, Enrolment Growth/Decline, RCPA). Total revenues include funding from Alberta Education, property taxes and other minor
sources. (See Appendix H – 2011-2012 Budgeted Revenues.)
INSTRUCTIONAL GRANTS
The basic instruction grants increased by 4.54% for 2011-2012 as the provincial Government covered the teachers’ 2011-2012 salary increase. A number
of other provincial grants were either reduced (AISI, Class Size, RCPA) or eliminated (Enrolment Growth, Enrolment Decline). All other instructional
grants remained at the same level as 2010-2011. The RCPA grant will be fully eliminated for the 2012-2013 budget. (See Appendix C – Highlights of
Government Funding Rates.)
TRANSPORTATION
Overall transportation revenue is budgeted to decrease by $2.6 million for 2011-2012. The provincial grant revenues for student transportation are
budgeted to be $0.8 million higher in 2011-2012 than budgeted in 2010-2011 ($11.0 million in 2011-2012 compared to $10.2 million in 2010-2011)
primarily due to increased eligible passengers. Non-grant revenue decreased by $3.5 million due to a change in process for student purchased bus
passes to improve efficiency. Previously, the district purchased the passes and sold them to students at a reduced cost. Commencing February 2011,
students purchase the passes directly from third party providers and apply to the district for a bus pass subsidy. There is a corresponding decrease in
district expenditures as bus passes are no longer purchased from Calgary Transit. Charter bus service fees are budgeted to increase in 2011-2012 from
$195 to $215 per year ($20 increase) which accounts for an additional $0.1 million in revenue.
CLASS SIZE INITIATIVE

In 2011-2012, Class Size funding will decrease by $3.0 million due to the elimination of class size funding for Grades 4-6, but will still fund 184.0 FTE class
size teachers (30 FTE fewer than 2010-2011). Funding was maintained only for Kindergarten to Grade 3 programming and for certain Career Technology
Studies (CTS) classes at a senior high level. The latter support recognizes the need for smaller class sizes to ensure safety in classes with hands on shop
activities.
Page | 11
PLANT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (POM)

POM revenues are increasing by $0.7 million (1.91%) to $36.2 million. This increase is largely due to the enrolment component of the formula.
Infrastructure Maintenance Renewal (IMR) funding increased marginally ($0.1 million) to $7.3 million. Funding was not provided to address the district’s
significant deferred maintenance backlog of approximately $34 million. As the district grows (more schools) and existing schools age, it becomes more
difficult to maintain and refurbish school buildings. Administrative buildings are not supported by POM funding.
Page | 12
2011-2012 Budgeted Expenditures

TOTAL BUDGETED EXPENDITURES
Total budgeted expenditures for 2011-2012 are $492.7 million. This is an increase of $38.1 million or 8.4% over 2010-2011 budgeted expenditures of
$454.7 million. (See Appendix I – 2011-2012 Budgeted Expenditures and Appendix G – Budget Detail.)
INCREASED EXPENDITURES
District expenditures budgeted for 2011-2012 are increasing by $38.1 million (8.4%) over 2010-2011 budgeted expenditures, primarily due to:
$43.1 million increase in salaries and benefits primarily due to ATA, CEP and CUPE salary settlements; movement in the salary grid (e.g., based
on education and experience), and inclusion of the $24.7 million Government contribution to the Teachers’ Retirement Fund (See Appendix J –
2011-2012 Salaries and Benefits); and,
partially offset by $4.5 million decrease in Transportation expenditures due to change in process for bus pass purchases (see 2011-2012
Budgeted Revenues – Transportation for further explanation).
SCHOOLS AND INSTRUCTION

Schools and instruction expenditures are budgeted to be $41.7 million higher (13.2%) than 2010-2011, which is primarily comprised of:
$23.8 million inclusion of expenditure for the Government contribution to the Teachers’ Retirement Fund;
$12.5 million increase for certificated salaries due to grid increase partially offset by reduced number of teachers budget over budget;
$1.2 million increase in uncertificated salaries due to grid increase;
$3.1 million increase in benefits due to rate increases, an end to a premium holiday for group life insurance, and enhanced benefits to CEP
employees; and,
$1.1 million increase in supplies and materials budget over budget primarily related to new school start-up expenditures, and higher instructional
resource fee expenditures being budgeted in 2011-2012.
Page | 13
BOARD, ADMINISTRATION
Board and Administration expenditures are budgeted to be $0.3 million less in 2011-2012 than what they were in 2010-2011. Inclusion of the
Government contribution to the Teachers’ Retirement Fund added $0.2 million to expenditures but even with this, overall Board and Administration
costs were decreased by $0.3 million.
Alberta Education defines Administration differently for the purposes of the 4.0% cap. The above itemization is based instead on the district’s organization
structure. Some expenditures that are considered to be Instructional are part of the Central Office departments’ budgets described in the preceding (e.g.
sabbaticals for school-based teachers; School Accounting Officers; school photocopiers, etc.).
INSTRUCTIONAL SUPPORT
Instructional Support expenditures are budgeted to increase by $1.1 million primarily due to inclusion of $0.7 million for the Government
contribution to the Teachers’ Retirement Fund and the 4.54% salary increases.
PLANT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

Plant Operations and Maintenance (POM) expenditures are budgeted to be $0.2 million higher (0.33%) than 2010-2011, primarily as a result of:
$0.8 million attributable to increase in salaries and benefits due to grid increases, and;
$0.7 million decrease in utility costs.
TRANSPORTATION
Transportation expenditures are budgeted to be $4.5 million lower (26.1%) than 2010-2011, primarily as a result of:
A change in the process for the sale of bus passes. Previously, the district purchased the passes and sold them to students at a reduced cost.
Commencing February 2011, students purchase the passes directly from third party providers and apply to the district for a bus pass subsidy.
This results in a significant decrease in district expenditures as bus passes are no longer purchased from Calgary Transit.
OTHER EXPENDITURES
Other expenditures are budgeted to be $0.1 million lower (0.32%) than 2010-2011, which is due to small budgeted changes in depreciation, debt interest
and school generated funds.
Page | 14
Appendix A - Projected and Actual Enrolments

From 1995-1996 to 2003-2004, the district had significant growth in enrolment (18.8%) from 35,830 full-time equivalent (FTE) students to 42,578 FTE’s.
Growing enrolments meant both growing revenues and expenditures. More students equated into more teachers and school staff during this period.
Around 2003-2004, the district’s September 30th enrolments more or less stabilized at the 42,500 FTE mark; however, in 2008-2009 enrolments began to
increase. Actual enrolment totals improved to 43,406 FTE students for September 30, 2009 and 44,053 FTE students for September 30, 2010. The
projection used for budget purposes for September 30, 2011 is 44,617 FTE. The budget was built on March 2011 projections as this is the normal process
utilized to retain a level of consistency year to year. The budget projection continues to reflect increasing student enrolments despite the City of Calgary
2010 Census (most recent information available at the time of this report) indicating that overall population growth for Calgary was the lowest since 1984.
Enrolment numbers are estimates until the September 30th count is finalized and are dependent upon available information. Variances in revenue due to
enrolment are reported to the Board of Trustees in Quarterly Monitoring Reports.
For the five year forecast period – September 30, 2011 through September 30, 2015, further increases are projected. Commencing in September 2011,
enrolment is anticipated to be 44,617 FTE, moving to 46,845 FTE by 2015. Going forward, the impetus for the increase is an increasing Alberta live birth
rate, immigration and a corresponding forecast growth at the Kindergarten and Division I entry level.
Enrolment projections are a key element in building the district budget as a large percentage of grant revenue is related to enrolment. The history of
district student enrolment and projections is found on the following pages in this Appendix.
Page | 15
C a lg a r y C a t h o lic S c h o o l D is t r ic t
A c t u a l E n r o lm e n t s
S e p te m b e r 3 0
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

K i n d e r g a r te n 2 ,9 2 2 2 ,8 0 9 2 ,8 4 9 2 ,9 6 4 3 ,1 0 5 3 ,2 7 8 3 ,3 6 0
K i n d e r g a r te n F u ll- T i m e
E q u i v a le n t ( F T E ) 1 ,4 6 1 1 ,4 0 5 1 ,4 2 5 1 ,4 8 2 1 ,5 5 3 1 ,6 3 9 1 ,6 8 0
G ra d e 1 3 ,1 9 1 3 ,2 3 7 3 ,0 5 8 3 ,0 7 2 3 ,2 4 1 3 ,2 1 5 3 ,3 1 7
G ra d e 2 3 ,1 7 2 3 ,2 6 6 3 ,2 9 6 3 ,1 0 9 3 ,1 7 7 3 ,2 5 6 3 ,3 4 2
G ra d e 3 3 ,3 2 4 3 ,2 2 4 3 ,3 4 5 3 ,3 4 1 3 ,2 2 6 3 ,2 3 8 3 ,4 0 5
G ra d e 4 3 ,4 8 9 3 ,3 2 7 3 ,2 6 2 3 ,3 6 9 3 ,4 0 2 3 ,3 1 1 3 ,3 1 2
G ra d e 5 3 ,4 7 6 3 ,5 1 7 3 ,3 5 0 3 ,2 8 5 3 ,4 6 6 3 ,3 8 5 3 ,3 6 5
G ra d e 6 3 ,3 0 1 3 ,5 2 9 3 ,5 0 0 3 ,3 8 8 3 ,3 6 6 3 ,4 9 9 3 ,4 7 3
T o ta l G r a d e s 1 -6 1 9 ,9 5 3 2 0 ,1 0 0 1 9 ,8 1 1 1 9 ,5 6 4 1 9 ,8 7 8 1 9 ,9 0 4 2 0 ,2 1 4
G ra d e 7 3 ,2 2 0 3 ,1 0 4 3 ,3 0 7 3 ,2 9 3 3 ,3 0 1 3 ,2 8 0 3 ,4 6 0
G ra d e 8 3 ,3 7 6 3 ,2 3 4 3 ,1 4 2 3 ,3 5 4 3 ,3 4 0 3 ,3 9 1 3 ,3 2 3
G ra d e 9 3 ,4 4 9 3 ,3 6 2 3 ,2 4 5 3 ,1 6 3 3 ,3 9 7 3 ,4 0 8 3 ,3 9 1
T o ta l G r a d e s 7 -9 1 0 ,0 4 5 9 ,7 0 0 9 ,6 9 4 9 ,8 1 0 1 0 ,0 3 8 1 0 ,0 7 9 1 0 ,1 7 4
G ra d e 1 0 3 ,3 2 6 3 ,5 1 1 3 ,4 7 1 3 ,3 6 8 3 ,3 7 9 3 ,5 6 6 3 ,6 5 6
G ra d e 1 1 3 ,2 7 7 3 ,3 7 0 3 ,4 6 7 3 ,5 0 2 3 ,4 1 1 3 ,3 8 2 3 ,6 2 3
G ra d e 1 2 3 ,6 5 9 3 ,8 3 5 3 ,8 8 2 3 ,9 0 2 3 ,9 7 5 4 ,0 9 8 4 ,0 3 5
T o ta l G r a d e s 1 0 -1 2 1 0 ,2 6 2 1 0 ,7 1 6 1 0 ,8 2 0 1 0 ,7 7 2 1 0 ,7 6 5 1 1 ,0 4 6 1 1 ,3 1 4
T o ta l S p e c i a l E d u c a ti o n 730 760 722 681 683 738 671
T o ta l H e a d C o u n t (H C ) 4 3 ,9 1 2 4 4 ,0 8 5 4 3 ,8 9 6 4 3 ,7 9 1 4 4 ,4 6 9 4 5 ,0 4 5 4 5 ,7 3 3
T o ta l F T E 's 4 2 ,4 5 1 4 2 ,6 8 1 4 2 ,4 7 2 4 2 ,3 0 9 4 2 ,9 1 7 4 3 ,4 0 6 4 4 ,0 5 3
In c r e a s e / ( D e c r e a s e ) ( H C ) (1 3 6 ) 173 (1 8 9 ) (1 0 5 ) 678 576 688

% In c r e a s e /( D e c r e a s e ) [H C ] - 0 .3 1 % 0 .3 9 % - 0 .4 3 % - 0 .2 4 % 1 .5 5 % 1 .3 0 % 1 .5 3 %
In c r e a s e /( D e c r e a s e ) ( F T E ) (1 2 7 ) 230 (2 0 9 ) (1 6 3 ) 608 489 647
% In c r e a s e /( D e c r e a s e ) ( F T E ) - 0 .3 0 % 0 .5 4 % - 0 .4 9 % - 0 .3 8 % 1 .4 4 % 1 .1 4 % 1 .4 9 %
Page | 16
C a l g a r y C a th o l i c S c h o o l D i str i c t
P r o j e c te d E n r o l m e n ts
S e p te m b e r 3 0
(May 25, 2011)
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

K in d e rg a rt e n 3,4 53 3 ,47 5 3,5 25 3 ,56 0 3,6 00
K in d e rg a rt e n F u l l -T i m e E q u i va l e n t (F T E ) 1,7 27 1 ,73 8 1,7 63 1 ,78 0 1,8 00
G ra d e 1 3,3 70 3 ,53 0 3,5 80 3 ,63 0 3,6 65

G ra d e 2 3,3 78 3 ,52 5 3,6 00 3 ,65 0 3,7 00
G ra d e 3 3,4 14 3 ,44 5 3,6 05 3 ,67 0 3,7 25
G ra d e 4 3,5 01 3 ,47 5 3,5 15 3 ,67 5 3,7 40
G ra d e 5 3,3 72 3 ,51 0 3,5 10 3 ,55 0 3,7 15
G ra d e 6 3,4 64 3 ,41 5 3,5 80 3 ,58 5 3,6 15
T o ta l G r a d e s 1 -6 2 0,4 99 20 ,90 0 2 1,3 90 21 ,76 0 2 2,1 60
G ra d e 7 3,4 68 3 ,35 0 3,3 80 3 ,51 0 3,5 25

G ra d e 8 3,5 42 3 ,45 5 3,4 25 3 ,45 5 3,5 85
G ra d e 9 3,3 23 3 ,57 0 3,4 90 3 ,45 5 3,4 90
T o ta l G r a d e s 7 -9 1 0,3 33 10 ,37 5 1 0,2 95 10 ,42 0 1 0,6 00
G ra d e 1 0 3,5 26 3 ,46 5 3,6 40 3 ,59 5 3,5 80

G ra d e 1 1 3,6 58 3 ,49 5 3,5 00 3 ,67 5 3,6 30
G ra d e 1 2 4,1 74 4 ,33 0 4,1 25 4 ,16 5 4,3 75
T o ta l G r a d e s 1 0 -1 2 1 1,3 58 11 ,29 0 1 1,2 65 11 ,43 5 1 1,5 85
T o t a l S p e c ia l E d u c a t io n 671 700 700 700 700
T o ta l H e a d C o u n t (H C ) 4 6,3 43 46 ,74 0 4 7,1 75 47 ,87 5 4 8,6 45
T o ta l F T E 's 4 4,5 88 45 ,00 3 4 5,4 13 46 ,09 5 4 6,8 45
In c re a s e / (D e c re a s e ) [ H C ] 610 397 435 700 770

% In c re a s e / (D e c re a s e ) [ H C ] 1.3 3% 0 .86 % 0.93 % 1 .4 8 % 1.61 %
In c re a s e / (D e c re a s e ) [ F T E ] 535 415 410 682 750

% In c re a s e / (D e c re a s e ) [ F T E ] 1.2 1% 0 .93 % 0.91 % 1 .5 0 % 1.63 %
T o t a l In c re a s e / (D e c re a s e ) [ H C ) 2 0 1 1 -2 0 1 5 2,3 02
T o t a l In c re a s e / (D e c re a s e ) [ F T E ] 2 0 1 1 -2 0 1 5 2,2 57
T o t a l % In c re a s e (H C ) 2 0 1 1 -2 0 1 5 4.97 %
T o t a l % In c re a s e ( F T E ) 2 0 1 1 - 2 0 1 5 5.06 %
Page | 17
Calgary Catholic School District
September 30 Student Enrolment
(May 25, 2011)
50,000
45,000
40,000
Speci a l Ed **
35,000 Gra de 12
Gra de 11
30,000 Gra de 10
FTE Students
Gra de 9
25,000
Gra de 8
20,000 Gra de 7

Gra de 6
15,000 Gra de 5
Gra de 4
10,000 Gra de 3
Gra de 2
5,000
Gra de 1
‐ Ki nderga rten *
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
{ Proj ected }
Page | 18
Appendix B – Stakeholder Priorities

The district undertook a process of soliciting stakeholder input to inform the budget process. The district asked parents and School Councils and district
staff to list their top three priorities and their bottom three priorities. Some stakeholders did not participate in the process of identifying priorities as they felt
it was a conflict to rate programs or staff against other programs and staff. The results of the stakeholder input was:
Identify your top three priorities
Staff Parents and School Councils
1. Maintain current class size. 1. Maintain investment in technology.
2. Maintain services for diverse learning needs (FNMI, ESL, Special 2. Maintain current class size.
Education, etc.).
3. Maintain investment in technology. 3. Maintain alternative programs of choice (Fine Arts, Sports, IB,AP).
4. Maintain alternative programs of choice (Fine Arts, Sports, IB, AP). 4. Maintain services for diverse learning needs (FNMI, ESL, Special
Education, etc.).
Identify your bottom three priorities
Staff Parents and School Councils
1. Maintain full-day kindergarten. 1. Maintain full-day kindergarten.
2. Maintain a “safety net” of savings. 2. Maintain a “safety net” of savings.
3. Maintain research into new teaching practices. 3. Maintain transportation fees and service levels.
4. Maintain transportation fees and service levels. 4. Maintain research into new teaching practices.
Page | 19
Appendix C - Highlights of Government Funding Rates

2010-2011 (per student) 2011-2012 (per student) % Change
A. Base Instruction (Grades 1-9, Kindergarten base rate is half or $6,214.57 $6,496.71 4.54%
$3,107.28 for 2010-2011 and $3,248.35 for 2011-2012)
¾ ECS – Early Childhood Services or Kindergarten (class size) $679.02 $709.85 4.54
¾ Grades 1-3 (class size) $1,358.05 $1,419.71 4.54%
¾ Grades 4-6 (class size) $285.36 $0 (100%)
¾ Grades 7-9 (class size) $0 $0 0%
¾ Grades 10-12 (per CEU)1 $177.56 $185.62 4.54%
B. Students with Severe Disabilities2 Severe mental, multiple, $16,465.00 $16,465.00 0%
physical/medical, deaf, blind or emotional/behavioral disability
C. English-as-a-Second Language (ESL)3
¾ Canadian-born students $1,155.00 $1,155.00 0%
¾ Foreign-born students (Added Grant Discontinued for 2011-2012) $404.00 $0 (100%)
D. Alberta Initiative for School Improvement 4 (per FTE student) $139.40 $69.70 (50%)
E. Relative Cost of Purchasing Goods & Services Adjustment (RCPA) per formula per formula (50%)
F. Enrolment Decline 4 (Grant Discontinued for 2011-2012)
¾ School Jurisdiction (decline rate>1.5% per FTE funded student) $4,212.00 $0 (100%)
¾ School (decline rate >4% per FTE funded student) $625.00 $0 (100%)
G. Enrolment Growth 4 (Grant Discontinued for 2011-2012)
¾ School Jurisdiction (growth rate >4% per FTE funded student) $625.00 $0 (100%)
¾ School (growth rate >7% per FTE funded student) $625.00 $0 (100%)
Notes:
1 Grades 10-12 students are funded to a maximum of 60 CEU’s per school year. CEU’s have three tiers beginning in 2010-2011 to address lower class size CTS
programs. Tier one is $185.62, tier two is $197.59 per CEU and tier three is $219.37 per CEU. There is also a small class size component for Tiers 2 and 3.
2 Note that this is not targeted funding, rather is a funding factor affecting total funding.
3 Alberta Education also has a second count for ESL on March 1st. The second count increase in ESL students is funded at 0.5 of the rate for students registered on
th
September 30 . Note that this is not targeted funding, rather is a funding factor affecting total funding.
4 The AISI and RCPA grants were reduced by half and the Enhanced ESL, Enrolment Decline, and Enrolment Growth grants were discontinued for 2011-2012. RCPA
will be eliminated for the 2012-2013 budget year.
Page | 20
Appendix D - District Usage of One-Time Funds

In essence, “savings” or one-time funds have come from the district’s ability to accumulate surpluses over the years, in part as a result of under-
expenditures in previous years. These savings have been held either in Reserves or Accumulated Surplus. Reserves are restricted and are set aside for
specific purposes. Capital reserves in particular can only be utilized for capital expenditures. Accumulated Surplus, on the other hand, is unrestricted and
is intended to act as a safety valve.
In the following pages are a graph and table depicting the district’s accumulation and disposition of one-time funds. The graph and table show the
historical use of the district’s one-time funds.
The School Act does not normally allow school jurisdictions to incur unfunded deficits. To prevent an unplanned, unfunded deficit from occurring means
the district should retain some unrestricted savings as a safety valve. These funds have been greatly depleted over the past several years.
C a l g a ry C a th o lic S c h o o l D is tr ic t
U S A G E O F O N E -T I M E F U N D S
($ m il li o n )
M ay 25, 2011
A c c u m u l at e d
C a p it al U n re st ric te d
O p era t in g O p era ti n g A O S as % o f N et AO S
R e se rv e s * O p e ra tin g
R e se rv e s * S u rp l u s R ev e n u e U til iz e d
( N o te 1 ) S u rp lu s
Y ear (A O S )**
2 00 1 -2 0 0 2 - 3. 9 0 4 .1 0 8. 0 0 3 .0 % 5 .4 1
2 00 2 -2 0 0 3 0 .6 0 5. 4 0 2 .7 0 8. 1 0 2 .8 % - 0. 1 0
2 00 3 -2 0 0 4 0 .0 3 4. 4 0 2 .7 3 7. 1 3 2 .3 % 0 .9 7
2 00 4 -2 0 0 5 0 .0 3 5. 3 0 3 .0 0 8. 3 0 2 .6 % - 1. 1 7
2 00 5 -2 0 0 6 0 .0 5 5. 3 4 4 .1 1 9. 4 5 2 .8 % - 1. 1 5
2 00 6 -2 0 0 7 0 .0 5 6. 0 4 8 .6 0 1 4 .6 4 4 .0 % - 5. 1 9
2 00 7 -2 0 0 8 0 .0 6 8. 0 3 1 5. 79 2 3 .8 2 6 .2 % - 9. 1 8
2 00 8 -2 0 0 9 0 .5 2 4. 1 9 1 7. 54 2 1 .7 3 5 .4 % 2 .0 9
2 00 9 -2 0 1 0 0 .8 4 4. 7 4 1 4. 47 1 9 .2 1 4 .4 % 2 .5 2
2 01 0 -2 0 1 1 ( Fo r e ca s t F e b 2 8 , 2 0 1 1 ) 1 3 .6 2 0 .0 0 1 3 .2 1 1 3 .2 1 2 .9 % 6 .0 0
2 01 1 -2 0 1 2 ( B u d g e t ) 1 2 .7 1 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0. 0 0 0 .0 % 13 . 21
N o te 1 : S i gn i fic an t in c re a s e in C a p ita l R e s e rv e s f ro m s a le pr oc ee d s o f th e o ld E d u c at io n C e n tr e a nt ic ipa t ed t o c lo s e J u n e 2 0 11 .

C a p it al re s e rv e s a re re s tri c te d a n d c a n on l y b e u s e d f or c a p ita l e x p en d it ur e s .
* R es e r ve s (v er s u s O p e ra tin g R e s e rv e s , o r C a p it al R es e rv e s ) is th e te rm u s e d o n th e S ta te m e n t o f F ina n c ia l P o s i tio n i n th e

A u d it ed F ina n c ia l S t a te m e n ts
** A c c u m u la t ed O p er at in g S ur p lu s i s th e t er m us e d b y A lb er ta E du c a tio n fo r th e to t al o f o pe ra t in g re s e rv e s a n d u nr es t ric te d
o pe ra t in g s u rp lu s .
Page | 21
Calgary Catholic School District
Chronology of Accumulated Operating Surplus at Year End (Aug 31)
(May 25, 2011)
25.00 23.82
22.50 21.73
20.00 19.21
17.50
14.64 15.79
15.00
13.21
$ Millions
17.54
12.50
14.47
10.00 9.45 8.60

8.00 8.10 8.30
7.13
7.50 4.11
2.70 3.00 13.21
4.10 2.73
5.00
8.03
5.40 5.30 5.34 6.04
2.50 4.40 4.19 4.74
3.90
0.00
0.00 0.00 0.00
2001‐2002 2002‐2003 2003‐2004 2004‐2005 2005‐2006 2006‐2007 2007‐2008 2008‐2009 2009‐2010 2010‐2011 2011‐2012
(Forecast (Budget)
Feb 28,
2011) Page | 22
Operating Reserves * Unrestricted Operating Surplus
Appendix E - Surplus and Available One-Time Funds

2 0 1 1 - 2 0 1 2 D IS T R IC T O P E R A T IN G B U D G E T
S ta te m e n t o f R e v e n u e s a n d E x p e n d itu re s a n d
C h a n g e in U n re s tric te d O p e ra tin g S u rp lu s
2 0 0 9 -2 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 -2 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 -2 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 -2 0 1 2
A c tual B udget F o re c a s t * B udget
$ $ $ $
R e ve n u e s 436,092,348 443,739,405 454,269,638 477,681,900
E x p e n d it u re s 440,413,800 454,667,545 460,566,150 492,737,056
O p e ra t in g S u rp lu s (D e fic it ) (4 , 3 2 1 , 4 5 2 ) (1 0 , 9 2 8 , 1 4 0 ) (6 , 2 9 6 , 5 1 2 ) (1 5 , 0 5 5 , 1 5 6 )
Tra n s fe r t o N e t In ve s t m e n t in C a p it a l A s s e t s 2,126,754 2,044,698 (4 2 5 , 1 1 7 ) 938,491
N e t S u rp lu s (D e fic it ) (2 , 1 9 4 , 6 9 8 ) (8 , 8 8 3 , 4 4 2 ) (6 , 7 2 1 , 6 2 9 ) (1 4 , 1 1 6 , 6 6 5 )
Tra n s fe rs fro m (t o ) R e s e rve s

C a p it a l R e s e rve s (3 1 7 , 3 0 3 ) (1 2 , 7 8 7 , 5 3 7 ) 911,216
O p e ra t in g R e s e rve s (5 5 3 , 2 5 5 ) 4,191,346 4,744,601
C h a n g e in U n re s t ric t e d O p e ra t in g S u rp lu s (3 , 0 6 5 , 2 5 6 ) (4 , 6 9 2 , 0 9 6 ) (1 , 2 6 4 , 5 6 5 ) (1 3 , 2 0 5 , 4 4 9 )
A c c u m u la t e d O p e ra t in g S u rp lu s 19,214,615 2,897,407 13,205,449 0
C a p it a l R e s e rve s 836,925 60,000 13,624,462 12,713,246
* B a s e d o n Q 2 Fo r e c a s t
Page | 23
Appendix F - Historical Pupil-Teacher Ratio (PTR)

The following table provides the calculated PTR for the past 17 years and the current budget parameters, using September 30th actual enrolments and actual
approved full-time equivalent (FTE) school-based certificated staff positions. Columns in white provide data for Grades 1-12, excluding Kindergarten, and
shaded columns provide data including Kindergarten.
Actual FTE Calculated Actual FTE Calculated

September 30 School-Based PTR September 30 School-Based PTR.
Actual Certificated Excluding Actual Certificated Including
Enrolments Staff 1 Kindergarten Enrolments Staff 1 Kindergarten
Excluding Excluding Children and Including Including Children and
Year Kindergarten Kindergarten Teachers Kindergarten Kindergarten Teachers
1994 33,067 1,669.30 1: 19.81 34,460 1,733.40 1: 19.88
1995 34,283 1,829.10 1: 18.74 35,830 1,898.80 1: 18.87
1996 35,967 1,911.70 1: 18.81 37,482 1,984.20 1: 18.89
1997 37,663 2,009.10 1: 18.75 39,210 2,084.50 1: 18.81
1998 39,187 2,143.05 1: 18.29 40,736 2,210.30 1: 18.43
1999 40,024 2,191.00 1: 18.27 41,669 2,267.10 1: 18.38
2000 40,577 2,253.20 1: 18.01 41,644 2,299.50 1: 18.11
2001 41,132 2,310.85 1: 17.80 42,655 2,384.30 1: 17.89
2002 41,330 2,261.40 1: 18.28 42,788 2,333.90 1: 18.33
2003 41,108 2,268.20 1: 18.12 42,578 2,338.70 1: 18.21
2004 40,990 2,358.70 1: 17.38 42,451 2,431.70 1: 17.46
2005 41,276 2,368.20 1: 17.43 42,680 2,439.20 1: 17.50
2006 41,047 2,457.20 1: 16.71 42,471 2,526.20 1: 16.81
2007 40,827 2,447.70 1: 16.68 42,309 2,519.20 1: 16.79
2008 41,364 2,541.20 1: 16.28 42,917 2,620.20 1: 16.38
2009 41,767 2,577.20 1:16.21 43,406 2,655.20 1:16.35
2010 42,373 2,553.20 1:16.60 44,053 2,633.20 1:16.73
2011 (budget) 42,890 2,494.60 1:17.19 44,617 2,589.60 1:17.23
Average PTR (1994 – 2010) 1:17.77 1:17.87
Last 5 Year Average PTR (2006 - 2010) 1:16.50 1:16.61
Page | 24
1. School certificated staff includes all Kindergarten to Grade 12 Classroom Teachers, all School Counselors, Assistant Principals, Vice-Principals and
Principals. In addition, the following “specialty” teachers in schools are also included: Special Education, Knowledge and Employability (K&E), English
as a Second Language (ESL), Special Projects, Contingency, Alternative Funding, AISI, Extended French, Program Support, Career & Technology
Studies (CTS) teachers, Class Size teachers, and Diverse Learning teachers.
School certificated staff does not include guest teachers, temporary contract teachers replacing teachers on sick leave, etc. These teachers are not
counted as staff FTE’s, as this would result in an erroneous double-count. Consequently, the number of teachers “employed” by the district in schools
actually exceeds the FTE numbers above.
Page | 25
Appendix G - Budget Detail

Schools
N o n - S a la ry
E x p e n d i tu re s
S al a n d B e n N o te 1 T ot als
C l a s s r o o m T e a c h e r s a n d S c h o o l -B a s e d A d m i n i s t r a to r s
1 -1 2 (s o m e c o v e r e d b y C la s s S iz e F u n d in g ) 1 8 0 ,2 2 2 , 9 3 8 4 ,3 0 8 ,8 0 5 1 8 4 ,5 3 1 , 7 4 3 N o t e 2
J r H i g h G u id a n c e 4 ,4 4 7 , 1 5 3 4 ,4 4 7 , 1 5 3
S r H ig h G u i d a n c e 3 ,3 8 8 , 8 9 5 3 ,3 8 8 , 8 9 5
C o n t in g e n c y 1 ,4 2 8 , 7 0 1 1 ,4 2 8 , 7 0 1
A lte r n a te F u n d e d 9 6 8, 45 4 9 6 8, 45 4
S c h o o l B a s e d A d m i n is tr a t o rs 3 2 ,2 7 7 , 7 1 9 3 2 ,2 7 7 , 7 1 9
T o t a l C la s s ro o m T e a c h e r a n d S c h o o l -B a s e d A d m in is t ra to rs 2 2 2 ,7 3 3 , 8 6 1 4 ,3 0 8 ,8 0 5 2 2 7 ,0 4 2 , 6 6 6
K i n d e rg a rt en T e a c h e rs
K in d e r g a rt e n 8 ,6 8 5 , 6 7 9 8 ,6 8 5 , 6 7 9
F u ll -D a y K i n d e rg a rte n ( c o v e re d b y C la s s S iz e F u n d in g ) 1 ,5 6 9 , 7 0 1 1 ,5 6 9 , 7 0 1
T o t a l K in d e r g a r te n T e a c h e rs 1 0 ,2 5 5 , 3 8 0 0 1 0 ,2 5 5 , 3 8 0
S p e c i a l F u n d in g T e a c h e r s
S p e c i a l E d u c a ti o n 1 8 ,9 1 0 , 0 6 3 6 ,5 6 7 ,1 8 5 2 5 ,4 7 7 , 2 4 8
E SL 9 ,9 7 1 , 4 9 2 1 ,2 3 9 ,3 9 8 1 1 ,2 1 0 , 8 9 0
A IS I 2 ,4 3 9 , 6 3 1 2 ,4 3 9 , 6 3 1
C la s s S iz e 1 5 ,3 9 9 , 0 6 0 1 5 ,3 9 9 , 0 6 0
S p e c i a l P ro je c ts (c o v e r e d b y C l a s s S i ze F u n d i n g ) 7 7 8, 85 3 7 7 8, 85 3
A b o r ig in a l E d u c a ti o n T e a c h e rs 5 2 9, 78 0 5 2 9, 78 0
U L e ar n 4 8 6, 78 3 1 0 0 ,0 0 0 5 8 6, 78 3
O ff C a m p u s 1 ,5 1 4 , 4 3 7 5 2 ,0 0 0 1 ,5 6 6 , 4 3 7
T ot a l S p ec ial F u nd ing T e a c h er s 5 0 ,0 3 0 , 1 0 0 7 ,9 5 8 ,5 8 3 5 7 ,9 8 8 , 6 8 3
O th e r S c h o o l-B a s e d T e a c h e r s
K n o w l e d g e a n d E m p l o ya b ili ty 1 ,3 5 2 , 1 7 6 4 3 ,1 9 0 1 ,3 9 5 , 3 6 6
T o t a l O th e r S c h o o l- B a s e d T e a c h e rs 1 ,3 5 2 , 1 7 6 4 3 ,1 9 0 1 ,3 9 5 , 3 6 6
C o s t o f S i ck L e a v e 5 ,6 0 3 , 7 5 4 0 5 ,6 0 3 , 7 5 4
G u e st T e ac h e rs
A bs e n c e s 7 ,1 4 8 , 6 9 9 0 7 ,1 4 8 , 6 9 9
T o t a l G u e s t T e a c h e rs 7 ,1 4 8 , 6 9 9 0 7 ,1 4 8 , 6 9 9
T o t a l S c h o o l -B a s e d T e a c h e r S a la r i e s a n d B e n e fit s 2 9 7 ,1 2 3 , 9 7 0 1 2 ,3 1 0 ,5 7 8 3 0 9 ,4 3 4 , 5 4 8
Page | 26
C la ssro o m A ssista n ts
S c hool A s s is tants 1,393,307 1,393,307
S c ienc e A s s is tants 355,762 355,762
Indus trial A rts A s s is tants 432,008 432,008
B eauty C ulture Tec hnic ians 285,381 285,381
S c hool Librarians 3,298,831 3,298,831
Total C las s room A s s is tants 5,765,288 0 5,765,288
U n ce rtifica te d S ch o o l-B a se d S u p p o rt (n o n -cla ssro o m )

S ec retaries & C lerk Ty pis ts 8,976,682 8,976,682
B us ines s M anagers 969,138 969,138
A c c ounts C lerk s 515,291 515,291
C areer P rac tioners 346,271 346,271
S IR S D ata C lerk s 719,967 719,967
D uplic ating C lerk 34,417 34,417
C haplains 611,949 611,949
O ther 353,000 353,000
A pproved C aretak er overtim e - s c hool events 40,000 40,000
Total U nc ertific ated S c hool-B as ed S upports (non-c las s room ) 12,566,715 0 12,566,715
S p e cia l F u n d in g S ch o o l-B a se d
S pec ial E duc ation A s s is tants 14,061,656 14,061,656
S pec ialty H igh N eeds A s s is tants (eg B raille, H earing etc ) 1,061,502 1,061,502
E S L A s s is tants 392,603 392,603
E S L R ec eption C entre A dm inis trative S ec retaries 121,116 121,116
E S L F am ily Liais on W ork ers 484,925 484,925
P s y c hologis ts - E S L 289,572 289,572
A boriginal P ride C oordinators 174,487 174,487
E arly Learning & C hildc are W ork er 328,570 328,570
C om m erc ial K itc hen C oordinator 63,538 63,538
International S tudent S upport S taff 137,489 300,000 437,489
F renc h Language M onitors 18,000 18,000
Total S pec ial F unding S c hool-B as ed A s s is tants 17,133,457 300,000 17,433,457
T o ta l S ch o o l-B a se d U n ce rtifica te d S a la rie s a n d B e n e fits 35,465,460 300,000 35,765,460
Page | 27
Other Non-Salary Expenditures - not allocated above

Student Health Partnership 1,210,891 1,210,891
Program Access 441,100 441,100
Hockey Program 323,400 323,400
International Baccalaureate Supports 71,200 71,200
New School Start up 920,000 920,000
New Curriculum 63,000 63,000
Faith Day and Opening Mass 104,200 104,200
CanCopy License 120,000 120,000
John Paul II Polish School 30,000 30,000
Calgary Jewish Academy 1,522,397 1,522,397
Instructional Resource Fees 1,600,000 1,600,000
Athletic Associations 120,230 120,230
School Supports 1,866,997 1,866,997
Total Other Non-Salary Expenditures - not allocated above 0 8,393,415 8,393,415
School-Generated Funds 15,844,422 15,844,422
TOTAL 332,589,430 36,848,415 369,437,845
Note 1 - Non-Salary expenditures are allocated where they are targeted funds except for scale of issue formula.
Note 2 - Non-Salary Expenditures allocated against Grades 1 - 12 teachers represents the scale of issue formula allocated to schools
based on enrolments.
Page | 28
Central Office
Non-Salary
Sal and Ben Expenditures Total
Boa rd of Truste e s 284,615 807,202 1,091,817
Chie f Supe rinte nde nt

School Photocopiers 567,000 567,000
Re-imagining 50,000 50,000
Other Chief Superintendent 1,716,251 788,159 2,504,410
Total Chief Superintendent 1,716,251 1,405,159 3,121,410
Fina nce & Busine ss

School Accounting Officers 559,856 559,856
Caretaker Overtime covered by rentals 325,000 325,000
Other Finance & Business 3,807,893 269,184 4,077,077
Property Taxes 83,888 83,888
Insurance 1,120,143 1,120,143
Total Finance & Business Services 4,692,749 1,473,215 6,165,964
Educa tiona l Se rvice s

School Computer Technicians and Manager 1,830,646 38,000 1,868,646
Technical Support AISI projects 256,763 256,763
High Speed Networking 901,000 901,000
School Computers & Technology 1,243,867 1,243,867
BER, Equity and Contingency for schools 449,519 449,519
Leadership Academy 50,000 50,000
Other Educational Services 4,817,674 2,884,521 7,702,195
Total Educational Services 6,905,083 5,566,907 12,471,990
Page | 29
Instructional Services
AISI funded 772,624 13,054 785,678
SHP funded 194,256 194,256
Special Education funded 6,556,587 91,928 6,648,515
FNMI funded 486,387 24,410 510,797
ESL funded 408,343 7,470 415,813
Secondary Band Program 287,274 287,274
Other Instructional Services 4,848,942 373,444 5,222,386
Total Instructional Services 13,267,139 797,580 14,064,719
Human Resource Services

Professional Development Guest Teachers 256,704 256,704
Professional Development Sabbaticals 928,187 928,187
ATA Professional Development Growth Subsidy 250,000 250,000
Other Professional Development 319,690 319,690
Other Human Resource Services 3,633,633 345,362 3,978,995
Total Human Resources 4,818,524 915,052 5,733,576
Support Services 819,536 300,404 1,119,940
Construction & Maintenance

Custodial & Maintenance CUPE 17,991,814 17,991,814
Other Construction and Maintenance 2,717,997 9,351,272 12,069,269
IMR and Portable Relocation contractual services 8,246,000 8,246,000
Utilities 7,639,275 7,639,275
Total Construction & Maintenance 20,709,811 25,236,547 45,946,358
Transportation 454,010 12,367,993 12,822,003
Other
Debt 286,566 286,566
Depreciation 19,784,868 19,784,868
Contingency 690,000 690,000
Total Other 0 20,761,434 20,761,434
TOTAL 53,667,718 69,631,493 123,299,211

Page | 30
Appendix H - 2011-2012 Budgeted Revenues

a) Total District Budgeted Revenues:
2009-2010 A c tuals 2010-2011 B udget 2010-2011 F orec as t* 2011-2012 B udget
$ % $ % $ % $ %
P rovinc ial G rants 394,538,842 90.5% 397,519,379 89.6% 408,259,025 89.9% 433,419,354 90.7%
Capital A lloc ations 13,342,610 3.1% 16,957,702 3.8% 16,809,345 3.7% 16,683,179 3.5%
S c hool G enerated F unds 15,844,422 3.6% 15,713,000 3.5% 15,844,422 3.5% 15,844,422 3.3%
O ther 12,366,474 2.8% 13,549,324 3.1% 13,356,846 2.9% 11,734,945 2.5%

436,092,348 100.0% 443,739,405 100.0% 454,269,638 100.0% 477,681,900 100.0%
* A s of Q 2 2011
Revenue 2011-2012 Budget

Capital
Allocations
Provincial 3.5% Provincial Grants include property tax revenues
Grants which are received directly by the district. The
90.7% Government reduces grant revenue by an amount
equivalent to the property taxes received to maintain
School equity between school districts. Also included for
Generated 2011-2012 are Government contributions to the
Funds Teachers’ Retirement Fund.
3.3%
Other
2.5%
Page | 31
Appendix I - 2011-2012 Budgeted Expenditures

Total District Budgeted Expenditures by Function:
2009-2010 Actuals 2010-2011 Budget 2010-2011 Forecast 2011-2012 Budget
$ % $ % $ % $ %
Schools & Instruction 312,100,883 70.9% 314,861,706 69.3% 324,380,357 70.5% 356,544,365 72.5%
Board and Administration 23,100,831 5.3% 28,061,564 6.2% 26,650,113 5.8% 27,796,061 5.6%
Instructional Support 11,911,719 2.7% 12,637,921 2.8% 12,519,799 2.7% 13,777,445 2.8%
Plant Operations & Mntce 43,884,022 10.0% 45,878,366 10.1% 47,212,784 10.3% 46,030,246 9.3%
Transportation 16,927,689 3.8% 17,347,441 3.8% 14,009,725 3.0% 12,822,003 2.6%
Depreciation 16,432,144 3.7% 20,002,400 4.4% 19,783,803 4.3% 19,784,868 4.0%
Debt Interest 212,090 0.0% 165,147 0.0% 165,147 0.0% 137,646 0.0%
School Generated Funds 15,844,422 3.6% 15,713,000 3.4% 15,844,422 3.4% 15,844,422 3.2%
440,413,800 100.0% 454,667,545 100.0% 460,566,150 100.0% 492,737,056 100.0%
2011-2012 Budget Expense by Function
Instructional
Board and Support
Administration 13,777,445
Schools & 27,796,061
A larger percentage of the budget is being spent in Schools and Instruction 2.8%
5.6% Plant Operations &
Instruction (72.5% in 2011-12 versus 69.3% in 2010-11). All other 356,544,365
Mntce
72.5%
expenditure categories decreased as a percentage of overall 46,030,246
9.3%
budget - most notably Transportation (from 3.8% of budget to
2.6%) due to the change in process for bus pass sales. Most of Transportation
the change in percentage of overall budget by category is due to 12,822,003
2.6%
the addition to the budget of the Government contribution to the
Teachers’ Retirement Fund and the 4.54% salary increases. Depreciation
19,784,868
4.0%
Debt Interest
137,646
School Generated 0.0%
Funds
15,844,422
3.2%
Page | 32
b) Total District Budgeted Expenditures by Object:

$ % $ % $ % $ %
Salaries & Benefits 335,537,184 76.2% 343,115,740 75.5% 346,612,248 75.3% 386,257,148 78.4%
Supplies & Materials 46,664,619 10.6% 49,445,993 10.9% 55,408,511 12.0% 49,585,561 10.1%
Transportation 16,519,270 3.8% 16,912,873 3.7% 13,622,598 3.0% 12,367,993 2.5%
School Generated Funds 15,844,422 3.6% 15,713,000 3.4% 15,844,422 3.4% 15,844,422 3.2%
Utilities 8,116,613 1.8% 8,289,720 1.8% 8,030,000 1.7% 7,639,275 1.5%
Debt Interest & Insurance 1,299,548 0.3% 1,187,819 0.3% 1,264,568 0.3% 1,257,789 0.3%
Depreciation 16,432,144 3.7% 20,002,400 4.4% 19,783,803 4.3% 19,784,868 4.0%
440,413,800 100.0% 454,667,545 100.0% 460,566,150 100.0% 492,737,056 100.0%
Expense by Object 2011-2012 Budget
Supplies & Transportation

Salaries &
Materials 2.5%
Benefits School In 2011-12, 78.4% of district expenditures are for salaries
78.4% 10.1% and benefits. This is higher than the 2010-11 Budget of
Generated
Funds 75.5%, primarily due to the salary increase to staff and
3.2% the Government TRF contribution. Transportation,
Utilities Utilities and Supplies & Materials are lower than the prior
1.5% year as a percentage of overall budget.
Debt Interest &

Insurance
0.3%
Depreciation
4.0%
Page | 33
c)Total District Budgeted Schools & Instruction Expenditures

$ % $ % $ % $ %
Certificated Salaries 235,492,274 75.5% 235,881,952 74.9% 240,435,218 74.1% 248,393,461 69.7%
Non-certificated Salaries 24,565,822 7.9% 26,901,854 8.5% 26,452,768 8.2% 28,096,263 7.9%
Employee Benefits 27,938,510 9.0% 29,483,128 9.4% 30,388,754 9.4% 56,379,988 15.8%
Supplies, Materials, 24,104,277 7.6% 22,594,772 7.2% 27,103,617 8.3% 23,674,653 6.6%
Services
312,100,883 100.0% 314,861,706 100.0% 324,380,357 100.0% 356,544,365 100.0%
Schools and Instruction Expenditures

2011-2012 Budget Non-
The percentage of funds being expended on salaries and certificated
Certificated
benefits in schools in 2011-12 increased (93.4% versus
Salaries Salaries
92.8%) from 2010-11 primarily due to 4.54% salary increases
69.7% 7.9%
and inclusion of Government TRF contributions. Supplies and
Materials expenditure decreased accordingly on a percentage
basis. Employee
Benefits
School districts are very labour intensive entities. Certificated 15.8%
salaries mean teacher salaries, while non-certificated salaries
represent support staff such as classroom assistants and
school secretaries. Benefit totals include all school-based
staff.
Supplies,
Materials,
6.6%
Page | 34
Appendix J – 2011-2012 Salaries and Benefits

a) 2011-2012 Salary/Benefits by Category
2010-2011 Budge t 2011-2012 Budge t Sa la ry/Be ne fits Cha nge
De scription Sa la ry/Be ne fits Othe r Tota l Sa la ry/Be ne fits Othe r Tota l $ %
Instruction (Schools) $292,266,934 $21,904,772 314,171,706 $332,869,712 $22,984,653 355,854,365 $40,602,778 13.9%
Board and Administration* 18,365,583 9,695,981 28,061,564 18,956,476 8,839,585 27,796,061 590,893 3.2%
Instructional Support 12,095,169 542,752 12,637,921 13,267,139 510,306 13,777,445 1,171,970 9.7%
Construction & Maintenance 19,953,486 25,924,880 45,878,366 20,709,811 25,320,435 46,030,246 756,325 3.8%
Transportation 434,568 16,912,873 17,347,441 454,010 12,367,993 12,822,003 19,442 4.5%
Other 20,167,547 20,167,547 19,922,514 19,922,514 0 n/a
Contingency 690,000 690,000 690,000 690,000 0 n/a
School Generated Funds 15,713,000 15,713,000 15,844,422 15,844,422 0 n/a
Tota l $343,115,740 $111,551,805 $454,667,545 $386,257,148 $106,479,908 $492,737,056 $43,141,408 12.6%
* Includes Central Of f ice positions assigned to provide school-based s ervices (e.g., School Computer Technic ians, Sc hool A ccounting Of f icers, etc.) as w ell as Sabbaticals f or District-w ide teachers
Page | 35
b) 2011-2012 Salary/Benefits by Employee Type

2010-2011 Budget 2011-2012 Budget Change 2010-2011 Budget 2011-2012 Budget
Salary/Benefits Salary/Benefits 2010-2011 to 2011-2012 Percentage of Percentage of
Salaries/Benefits By Employee Type Total Total
$ % % %
Salary - Administration (Certificated) 1 $1,986,216 $2,089,054 $102,838 5.2% 0.6% 0.5%
Salary - Supervisors, Consultants & District 6,594,017 6,799,536 205,519 3.1% 1.9% 1.8%
level Coordinating Teachers
Salary - Teachers (Certificated) 1 229,236,427 241,510,572 12,274,145 5.4% 66.8% 62.6%
Salary - Guest Teachers 6,867,013 7,121,463 254,450 3.7% 2.0% 1.8%
Honoraria 18,130 18,130 0 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Salary - Clerical/Secretarial/Aides 28,900,273 30,111,526 1,211,253 4.2% 8.5% 7.8%
Salary - Administration Uncertificated 2 15,749,184 16,726,782 977,598 6.2% 4.6% 4.3%
Trustees Honoraria (Taxable) 161,535 165,145 3,610 2.2% 0.0% 0.0%
Wages - Caretaking & Maintenance 14,328,467 14,826,411 497,944 3.5% 4.2% 3.8%
Employee Benefits 37,796,963 66,059,205 28,262,242 74.8% 11.0% 17.2%
Sabbatical Leaves 3 1,477,515 829,324 -648,191 (43.9%) 0.4% 0.2%
TOTAL $343,115,740 $386,257,148 $43,141,408 12.6% 100.0% 100.0%
1 Certificated means the employees have a valid Alberta Teacher Certificate and are required to have one to perform their job function.
2 Includes positions in Central Office departments assigned to provide instructional support to schools (Instructional Services Department) and to provide other school-based services (e.g., Page
School | 36
Computer Technicians, School Accounting Officers, School Psychologists, etc.).
3 Sabbatical Leaves are for District-wide teachers (including school-based) as required by the ATA Collective Agreement.
Appendix K - Glossary of Terms

Accumulated Operating Surplus (AOS): This is a Government term used to describe the total of the Operating Reserves and the Unrestricted
Operating Surplus.
Alberta Initiative for School Improvement (AISI): A program designed to support the improvement of student learning by encouraging teachers, parents
and the community to work collaboratively to introduce innovative initiatives based on local needs and circumstances.
Change in Unrestricted Operating Surplus: The Change in Unrestricted Operating Surplus represents the impact for the year on the Accumulated
Surplus. If the Change in Unrestricted Operating Surplus is a positive amount (or a surplus), the Accumulated Surplus will be increased by this amount. If
the Change in Unrestricted Operating Surplus is a negative amount (or a deficit), the Accumulated Surplus will be reduced by this amount.
Credit Enrolment Units (CEU): Credit Enrolment Units are utilized to measure successful completion of High School courses. Funding is provided by
the Government for each CEU earned rather than for each student attending as is the case in the lower grades.
Net Deficit/Surplus: A Net Deficit/Surplus is equal to the Operating Deficit/Surplus plus the Transfer to Net Investment in Capital Assets. The Transfer
to Net Investment in Capital Assets relates to capital transactions made with operating funds.
Operating Deficit/Surplus: An “Operating” Deficit occurs when revenues received during the year are less than expenditures during the year. An
“Operating” Surplus occurs when revenues received during the year are more than expenditures during the year. Savings or other one-time funds
acquired in previous years are not considered to be revenues received during the year, but can be used to fund Operating (and Net) Deficits.
Small Class Size Initiative: Funding provided to school jurisdictions by the Government to hire additional teachers in order to lower class size averages
to those recommended by the Alberta Commission on Learning (ACOL).
Student Health Initiative: A partnership to improve access to and enhance the provision of integrated health and related support services for school
children with special health needs to allow them to participate fully in their educational program.
Teachers’ Retirement Fund: Beginning in 2011-2012 budget, the Government contributions to the Teachers’ Retirement Fund are required to reflect
Alberta Education’s annual support for the teacher pension contributions as both revenue and expense. Alberta Education indicates this change is
intended to provide the reader of the financial statements with a better picture of the full cost of certificated benefits.
Page | 37
Transfer to Net Investment in Capital Assets: the Transfer to Net Investment in Capital Assets is an accounting requirement related to the purchase of
assets using operating (rather than capital) funds and the depreciation related to assets previously purchased using operating funds. The transfer is
difficult to estimate.
If the expenditures on capital assets in a given year are less than the depreciation expense related to district assets, then there will be a decrease to the
Net Deficit (or an increase to the Net Surplus). To illustrate this situation, in the 2010-2011 Budget, it is anticipated that the depreciation expense will be
$3.0 million, compared to $1.0 million of assets purchased from operations, resulting in a $2.0 million decrease to the Net Deficit.
If the expenditures on capital assets in a given year are greater than the depreciation expense related to district assets, then there could be an increase to
the Net Deficit (or a decrease to a Net Surplus).
Transfer from (to) Reserves: Operating and Capital Reserves are funds set-aside or appropriated in previous years that came from the district’s ability to
accumulate surpluses, in part, as a result of under-expenditures (actual revenues exceeded actual expenditures). Operating and Capital Reserves are
surpluses that have been set-aside for a specific or “restricted” purpose (e.g., Instruction, POM, Administration). As a result, they are considered to be
“restricted” funds.
Note that Capital Reserves can only be spent on capital purchases. They were created from the proceeds from the sale of capital assets previously
purchased from operations.
Unfunded Deficit: A net deficit which is larger than the Accumulated Operating Surplus of the district. An Unfunded Deficit is only allowed by permission
of the Minister of Education and requires a three year deficit reduction plan to be submitted to the Minister.
Unrestricted Operating Surplus: This is another term for Accumulated Surplus.
Page | 38

2011-12 Calgary Catholic School District Operating Budget

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

2011-12 Calgary Catholic School District Operating Budget

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2011­2012

Budget Planning Assumptions .................................................................................................................................................... 3

Uncontrollable/Mandated Cost Increases and Prioritization of Expenditures ......................................................................... 8

One-Time Savings ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10

2011 – 2012 Budgeted Revenues ............................................................................................................................................... 11

2011-2012 Budgeted Expenditures ............................................................................................................................................ 13

Appendix A - Projected and Actual Enrolments ....................................................................................................................... 15

Appendix B – Stakeholder Priorities .......................................................................................................................................... 19

Appendix C - Highlights of Government Funding Rates .......................................................................................................... 20

Appendix D - District Usage of One-Time Funds ...................................................................................................................... 21

Appendix E - Surplus and Available One-Time Funds ............................................................................................................. 23

Appendix F - Historical Pupil-Teacher Ratio (PTR)................................................................................................................... 24

Appendix G - Budget Detail ........................................................................................................................................................ 26

Appendix H - 2011-2012 Budgeted Revenues ........................................................................................................................... 31

Appendix I - 2011-2012 Budgeted Expenditures ....................................................................................................................... 32

Appendix J – 2011-2012 Salaries and Benefits ......................................................................................................................... 35

Appendix K - Glossary of Terms ................................................................................................................................................ 37

2010-2011 differential grants.

Revenue 2011-2012 Budget

School Generated Funds2 15,844,422 3.3%

TOTAL REVENUE 477,681,900 100.0%

1. Provincial Grants include local Property Taxes.

2011-2012 Budget Expense by Function

Budget Planning Assumptions

The most significant of the 2011-2012 Budget planning assumptions follow:

SAVINGS AND DEFICIT ASSUMPTIONS

FUNDING ENVELOPES, ALLOCATIONS AND TARGETED REVENUE ASSUMPTIONS

Uncontrollable/Mandated Cost Increases and Prioritization of Expenditures

2010-2011 BUDGET AND 2010-2011 PROJECTIONS

ONE-TIME SAVINGS REMAINING AT AUGUST 31, 2011

ONE-TIME SAVINGS REMAINING AT AUGUST 31, 2012

2011 – 2012 Budgeted Revenues

CLASS SIZE INITIATIVE

PLANT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE (POM)

2011-2012 Budgeted Expenditures

SCHOOLS AND INSTRUCTION

 $1.2 million increase in uncertificated salaries due to grid increase;

PLANT OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE

 $0.7 million decrease in utility costs.

Appendix A - Projected and Actual Enrolments

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

T o ta l S p e c i a l E d u c a ti o n 730 760 722 681 683 738 671

In c r e a s e / ( D e c r e a s e ) ( H C ) (1 3 6 ) 173 (1 8 9 ) (1 0 5 ) 678 576 688

In c r e a s e /( D e c r e a s e ) ( F T E ) (1 2 7 ) 230 (2 0 9 ) (1 6 3 ) 608 489 647

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

G ra d e 1 3,3 70 3 ,53 0 3,5 80 3 ,63 0 3,6 65

G ra d e 7 3,4 68 3 ,35 0 3,3 80 3 ,51 0 3,5 25

G ra d e 1 0 3,5 26 3 ,46 5 3,6 40 3 ,59 5 3,5 80

T o t a l S p e c ia l E d u c a t io n 671 700 700 700 700

T o ta l H e a d C o u n t (H C ) 4 6,3 43 46 ,74 0 4 7,1 75 47 ,87 5 4 8,6 45

T o ta l F T E 's 4 4,5 88 45 ,00 3 4 5,4 13 46 ,09 5 4 6,8 45

In c re a s e / (D e c re a s e ) [ H C ] 610 397 435 700 770

In c re a s e / (D e c re a s e ) [ F T E ] 535 415 410 682 750

20,000 Gra de 7

Appendix B – Stakeholder Priorities

Identify your top three priorities

Staff Parents and School Councils

1. Maintain current class size. 1. Maintain investment in technology.

Identify your bottom three priorities

Staff Parents and School Councils

1. Maintain full-day kindergarten. 1. Maintain full-day kindergarten.

2. Maintain a “safety net” of savings. 2. Maintain a “safety net” of savings.

Appendix C - Highlights of Government Funding Rates

Appendix D - District Usage of One-Time Funds

20112012

$1.2 million increase in uncertificated salaries due to grid increase;

$0.7 million decrease in utility costs.