Waffling on Student Funding Reform

Full Size Photo: Jim Rex and Sandy Smith were against reform before they were for it (but only once they knew it wouldn’t pass)

In the South Carolina House, Representative Jeff Duncan has been a leading advocate of the common-sense reform called “smart funding” which aims to allocate money exclusively on a per-child basis. This formula, also termed “backpacking” is designed to ensure that public resources follow the child as he or she ascends through the grades, moves from one school into the next, or transfers between schools.

On the other end of the spectrum, Superintendent Jim Rex is taking the position that ever more money with ever less oversight is the only solution to the countless problems plaguing his one-size-fits-all government schools.

The fact is, funding levels do not, and never have, correlated with public school performance in South Carolina, despite the fact that failing schools (those termed “dropout factories” by Jim Rex) spend nearly $20,000.00 per student. Still, a simplification the irrational and wasteful funding “mechanism” is long overdue.

Smart funding would be a good first step in the right direction.

K-12 Education Legislation Update

“Laws are like sausages, it is better not to see them being made.”

H. 3352, relating to school district flexibility, received first reading in the Senate and was referred to the Finance Committee (4/24). Earlier, a compromised amendment was reached that ensures flexibility after providing information that shows 65% of their money is going to the classrooms, but the new amendment details exactly what accounts for classroom funds (2/18). While greater autonomy for school districts is important, this is not a truly smart-funding proposal.

H. 3175, giving priority enrollment to siblings of pupils already enrolled in a charter school, was amended and received second reading in the House. The amendment provides that the student currently at the school must have attended the school at least one academic year before their sibling may attend.

S. 442, revises the Aiken county of education board’s authority with regard to administrative area offices and area advisory councils, received second reading in the Senate (4/25).

Another $75 million state budget shortfall?

If just 1-in-10 parents pull their kids out of private schools to save their family money it will cost the public schools  in South Carolina $75 million.

Families in South Carolina are tightening their budgets.

They are looking closely at their monthly spending, trying to find places to cut back.

Some parents with children in private schools are thinking seriously about pulling their kids out -even just for a year or two- and having them attend public schools.

While the average private school tuition is just $6,600.00 per student (or half of per-student spending at public schools) this can make a big impact in a family’s budget.

But the real fiscal impact of K-12 education transfers will be felt by the public schools -and the taxpayers who fund them.

Jim Rex endorses SCRG funding proposal

The Associated Press has just released an article detailing Jim Rex’s new plan for greater local autonomy in school budgeting.

According to the initial story, “Rex spokesman Jim Foster said districts want freedom from following some state mandates including holding classes for 180 days.”

But there is much more to this story.

Time and again, department officials have gone before the Ways and Means Education Funding Act Study Committee trying to halt similar reforms.

In fact, while SCRG President Randy Page has argued for smart-funding or so-called weighted student “back-packing” there has been sharp resistance from Jim Rex’s budget director John Cooley and other top officials at the Education Department.

Mr. Page of SCRG has made the case for a streamlined weighted student formula on editorial pages of the Greenville News (7/9/08), the Times and Democrat (7/22) and the State Newspaper (8/4). This sort of common sense reform would bypass the tight programmatic and categorical funding limitations that have been developed by state bureaucrats in Columbia.

Speaking of the announcement by Jim Rex, Randy Page explained:

“It is encouraging to hear that despite years of finger pointing, state officials have finally concluded that teachers and principals need the freedom and authority to make their own decisions about money and instruction. We expect Mr. Rex to formally support a streamlined single weighted formula for per-pupil spending once the legislature convenes in January.”

Bureaucrats defend spoils style funding

Well-paid bureaucrats and political appointees continue to resist child-centered funding reforms.

Since early summer, the Ways and Means Education Funding Act Study Committee has been working on a plan to reform the state’s messy, inequitable, and ineffective public school funding laws.

The obvious solution to the problems is “smart funding” which allocates money directly to schools on a per-student basis, rather than to districts on a per-program basis.

But bureaucrats have pushed back. That’s because there is a lot at stake for them. As it stands, a mere 45 cents per allocated dollar actually reaches the classroom in the form of instructional spending. Smart funding threatens to raise the figure, leaving less for the high-dollar and heavily-politicized staff apparatus sitting in administration buildings across the state.

Tuesday the bureaucrats went before the Funding Act Study Committee (again) to plead their case.

John Cooley of the Education Department took up the case of protecting important bureaucratic spending, his own $113,000 salary not withstanding

Bureaucrats look to derail K-12 funding reform

State Department of Education wants to ensure money stays with administrators, doesn’t trickle down to teachers and principals.

Lawmakers are looking to clean-up South Carolina’s outdated and confusing K-12 education funding system.

The dominant proposal at this point is to collapse all the complicated program, grant, categorical, and initiative funding streams into one single and simple formula.

With more than $11,400 allocated per child, the problem is not a lack of money, it is making sure that money actually reaches the kids.

Rather than finance dozens of specific fiefdoms and esoteric programs, each student would have a single dollar total “attached” to them, that would follow the child through the school system. It would take into account the characteristics of the child (such as low-income or special needs) but would follow them if they moved districts, finished elementary school, transfered to a charter, or enrolled at a magnet school.

While this type of “smart funding” or “back-packing” proposal has been advocated by policy experts across the nation, education bureaucrats are fighting back.

Proven: No rhyme or reason to school funding

School district funding “patterns” defy logic, analysis.

This week we have been investigating student funding at SC public schools.

Readers were shocked to hear South Carolina public schools spend an average of $11,480 per student, despite years of sustained underperformance.

Equally surprising was the fact that a mere 44 cents per dollar of that huge sum reaches the classroom.

Wednesday, we showed that despite the huge statewide average, there are massive spending gaps between districts, often within the same county. This intra-county comparison showed that poor districts received more money (despite Jim Rex’s claim otherwise), but statewide the pattern is less clear.

This left us wondering – how can you explain gaps of $10,000 between districts. Do lawmakers give money to districts based on enrollment? Performance? Student composition? Is there any rhyme or reason at all to the current funding formula(s)?

Money Talks in K-12 Funding Debate

We have long complained that public schools in South Carolina waste tons of money. Current estimates hold that only 44 cents on the dollar reaches the classroom. Part of the problem is how the state funding mechanism works. Lawmakers are now (somewhat hesitantly) considering solutions.

Here is a sampling of what is being reported on the effort to clean up South Carolina’s backward web of public school money.

“Ease off those guys, legislatin’ is hard” by Brian Hicks in the Charleston Post and Courier

“…To show you how important [education funding] is, here’s an interesting statistic: Education costs make up close to half the state’s $7 billion annual budget, making it by far South Carolina’s biggest expense.

You might wonder why, if it’s such a big part of what the state does, legislators didn’t focus on it during the five solid months they spent in Columbia the first part of the year… “

“SC lawmakers grapple with education funding” by FITS News

“Several committees charged with examining South Carolina’s wasteful and convoluted education funding formulas could end up proposing sweeping changes to the way we pay for our children’s schooling.

According to several lawmakers engaged in the debate, the changes could pave the way for a simpler, more cost-effective method of disbursing education dollars – one that provides local schools with greatly-enhanced flexibility over their budgets…”

“Do public educators hate SC children?” by the Garnet Spy

“…The state invests funds and children’s futures into a system and with people who repeatedly fail to deliver. Taxpayers are fleeced annually by self-serving education “professionals” whose true motives – at this point in history – need to be carefully scrutinized.”

“Goal is to fix school funding formula” by John O’Connor in the State Newspaper

“State Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-Laurens, said he had three objectives in changing the way the state pays for public schools:

• Simplify: Produce a plan that is easy for the public, school administrators and lawmakers to understand and explain.

• Remain flexible: The plan should allow school districts to shift money to where it is needed most.

• Be equitable: The ideal plan also would provide more money for poorer districts or students with learning disabilities.

“It’s something we can’t ignore,” Duncan said. “Each child is different.”

The S.C. Association of School Administrators said it needs to study the idea more before endorsing or rejecting it.

‘Backpacking’ is a first step toward complete state funding of K-12 education, Duncan said. State money would help balance the amount poor and wealthy districts spend on education.”

.