School budget sunshine

It's school budget time, and our district has invited public input on budget issues at public sessions later this month and next month. Because the district already possesses the taxing authority to raise property taxes significantly to cover the shortfall created by this year's substantial state education funding cuts and the district's perennial operating budget deficit, these public discussions are intended to gauge the balance that the district should strike between budget cuts and tax increases. This could be an invaluable opportunity for people to express, and for the district and school board to hear, what people are willing to fund, or to forgo, when it comes to spending on schools, but a full picture of the district's budget situation is essential for making the most of this opportunity. So, in the spirit of this week's Sunshine Week, here's a budget information wish list:

1. The proposed 2010-2011 budget.

Budget-related discussions have focused on the $30 million funding gap, and budget discussions are on the calendar, but the actual proposed 2010-2011 budget needs to be made available (School Information System has provided assiduous coverage of this issue and overall budget news). The current year's budget, in "citizen's budget" format, was published last week, and the proposed budget for 2010-2011 should be made available in that format as well. In the meantime, here's a treemap comparison of the 2009-10 citizen's budget with the 2007-08 citizen's budget:

This shows relative spending allocations and changes in them over the two periods for which we have budget information in citizen's budget format. However, I am not sure that this budget incorporates ARRA (federal stimulus) expenditures for 2009-10, and it should be updated to include this year's stimulus-funded expenditures if not already accounted for here.

2. Expenditure and budget reduction history.
Here are a couple of charts showing the history of spending increases and budget cuts since property tax limits were enacted in Wisconsin in 1993. It would be useful to bring these charts current with proposed budget information (in addition, the expenditure numbers for the past few years in the first chart below need to be updated to "actuals," which I don't have).

3. Future funding issues.  Long-term and short-term budget projections that include:

• Contingency plans to address the likelihood of future deficits and unfunded liabilities for the state and Milwaukee Public Schools and their impact on state funding for our district, and competing demands on the taxpayer from other taxing authorities, local through federal. 
• Specifics of all "funding cliffs" (from the stimulus and all other limited-term funding sources) that are embedded in the proposed budget. 
• Disclosure of the 2010-2011 and permanent budget commitment and funding assumptions for 4-year-old kindergarten (which the district was rushed into adopting in order to meet the deadline for the state's failed Race to the Top bid).
• Descriptions and explanations of (consistent with GASB) how non-pension retirement benefits are being addressed.

4. Program evaluation. Which programs work well, which not so well, and what is their cost? This should be a continual, year-round process, not one that comes to the fore only at budget time.

5. Data access. RSS feeds for budget information updates, and data in slice-and-dice-able format, please!

[Updated 3/28/10 to include subsequently obtained actuals for 2007-08 and 2008-09.]

Race to the Top snapshots

In anticipation of the first-round Race to the Top finalists being announced this week, here's an assortment of data points which may be of interest (without being too much like the blind men patting down random regions of the elephant, I hope), as rough indicators of how much RttT help is needed (achievement gap), how well the RttT applications are targeted (students in poverty), how much "buy-in" was received (MOU signoffs), and who may have (or not) an inside track via a Gates Foundation boost.



Italicized states did not submit a Race to the Top application in Phase 1.

Scale scores: 2007 NAEP Reading Grade 4:
(better) = significantly better than national gap

(worse) = significantly worse than national gap

Source: U.S. Department of Education Report NCES 2009-455, "Achievement Gaps: How Black and White Students in Public Schools Perform in Mathematics and Reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress / Statistical Analysis Report," July 2009.

MOU participation percentages: from states' Race to the Top applications, as posted by U.S. Department of Education.

Gates Foundation Technical Assistance (from Foundation announcement and EdWeek Politics K-12 blog):
Pre-selected 1st 15: among the 15 states pre-selected for technical assistance

Selected in 2nd round: selected for technical assistance after applications opened to remaining states

Not selected: unsuccessful application for technical assistance

Did not apply: did not apply for technical assistance

Updated 3/4/2010: the 16 first-round finalists as announced by the US Department of Education are highlighted in yellow above.


Further updated 3/29/2010: the first-round winners (Delaware and Tennessee) are highlighted in blue above; final scores and rankings also added.

Further updated 7/28/2010: Phase 2 finalists are highlighted in green above (light green for first-time finalists, dark green for states that were also finalists in Phase 1). Column noting status of states' adoption of common standards also added.

Special Education Stimulus Spending

Last year's stimulus legislation (American Recovery and Recovery Act of 2009, a/k/a "ARRA") provides a one-time boost (to be spent for the 2009-10 and 2010-2011 school years) in federal funding for students with disabilities in elementary and secondary schools under IDEA (the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act), Part B.

According to the State of Wisconsin's stimulus tracker web site, IDEA Special Education Grants to the states under ARRA totaled $11.3 billion (for context, "regular" IDEA Part B appropriations were $11.51 billion in 2009 and in 2010, according to the New America Foundation's 2010 Education Appropriations Guide). Wisconsin has received ARRA IDEA Part B funding of $208.2 million, with $6.199 million to the Madison Metropolitan School District.

Madison's plans for special education stimulus funds (summarized from the district's ARRA funding report to the Board of Education):

Wisconsin's Department of Public Instruction's FAQ page on special education stimulus funding includes the following guidance [the acronym "LEA" below means "local educational agency," i.e. school district]:

B3. How should the IDEA Recovery funds be used?

These funds should be spent in ways likely to improve results for students, produce long-term gains in LEA capacity and effectiveness, accelerate reform, and foster continuous improvement. LEAs are cautioned to invest one-time IDEA Recovery funds thoughtfully to minimize what the federal government is calling the “funding cliff.” The funds should be invested in ways that do not result in unsustainable continuing commitments after the funding expires. Suggested strategies for using IDEA Recovery funds in conjunction with other funding sources to accomplish ARRA’s goals may be found at http://dpi.wi.gov/recovery/pdf/uses-strategies2009-05-05.pdf.

How are your state and school district using their special education stimulus funds?