money money money

Advocacy groups to Colorado elected officials: Step up and fund our schools

PHOTO: Nicholas Garcia
A student at Lumberg Elementary School in Edgewater raises her hand for assistance while students work on their iPads.

A coalition of education advocacy groups has fired the first shot in what’s shaping up to be a brutal battle at the statehouse next year over school funding.

Led by Great Education Colorado, a nonprofit group that advocates for more resources for schools, the coalition is calling on Gov. John Hickenlooper, the legislature and the State Board of Education to create a three-year plan “restoring total funding, which will require a 2017-18 budget that does not allow average per pupil funding to fall farther behind inflation.”

“We’re calling on everyone to step it up,” said Lisa Weil, Great Education Colorado’s executive director. “It’s just not sustainable to think our current trajectory of school funding will produce graduates ready for the workforce to support the economy we all want and expect.”

Recent budget forecasts have painted a gloomy outlook for the state’s finances, which could mean cuts for schools across the state.

The governor’s office will submit its proposed budget to lawmakers Nov. 1, giving school districts their first look at what to expect for the 2017-18 school year.

If the governor’s budget calls for across-the-board cuts, it would be the first time since 2012 that state spending for schools has not increased. Last year was the first year that the state’s average funding per student exceeded pre-Great Recession levels. But advocates and school leaders continue to argue funding should be much higher — by about a billion dollars.

School funding has always been a touchy subject in Colorado, a low-tax state in which lawmakers have little say over funding priorities and tax levels. Several constitutional amendments do that for them.

“This issue is much bigger than just the legislature and the governor,” said state Rep. Brittany Pettersen, a Lakewood Democrat and chairwoman of the House Education Committee. “If we could actually vote on something in the legislature that would take care of this, I think we’d have that opportunity. But we’re very limited.”

Weil said she hopes lawmakers and the governor, who is entering his last two years in office, get creative. But her organization is stopping short of specific recommendations — for now.

“What we know,” she said, “is that it’s going to require every legislator on both sides of the aisle in both chambers to make this their own personal mission to figure out how to do right by the students in our schools today.”

Read the coalition’s letter here:

October 27, 2016

An Open Letter to State Leaders:

As representatives of statewide and community organizations, we know what our children and communities require to thrive:

  • Vibrant public schools with qualified, well-prepared and culturally competent teachers for every student regardless of where they live or how they learn;
  • Learning opportunities that meet the needs and curiosity of each and every child;
  • Individual attention, support and mental health services that ensure that no child’s future is defined by deprivations, challenges, or trauma.

We also know that every year these student needs go unfulfilled is a year that our students cannot replace or redo. The urgency of now could not be greater.

We appreciate that the coming legislative year poses significant challenges for you.  Despite having one of the strongest economies in the nation, the Colorado constitution requires that you hold back funds from the fundamental services that help our communities thrive – vibrant public schools, public health and safety, affordable college, safe roads – in order to fund small, individual taxpayer rebates.

Now is the time for us to consider the building blocks necessary to ensure prosperity in the future.  Colorado’s rapid economic and population growth requires investment in the Coloradans whom we hope will lead, serve and work in our communities in the decades to come.

Education is the bedrock of our strength as a state. It is in that context that the undersigned organizations call on you to apply the following minimum standards to your consideration of budget and education policy this year. We ask that you:

  1. Place Colorado on a three-year path to restoring total funding, which will require a 2017-18 budget that does not allow average per pupil funding to fall farther behind inflation.
  2. Reject policies that exacerbate or increase the already existing inequities between districts. This includes rejecting unfunded mandates.
  3. Reject policies that will pit children against each other.  Address the inequities in learning opportunities to Colorado’s children through significant additional resources.
  4. Ensure that the all-too-scarce public dollars allocated to K-12 education are only used for public schools.

We do not accept – and hope that you will not accept – the notion that adequate and equitable support for school funding is something that is simply beyond your authority or Colorado’s ability.  Education serves as the foundation of individual opportunity, community vitality and economic prosperity. We ask for the children of Colorado and for the future of our great state that our elected leaders be bold, visionary and united in addressing this funding crisis.

Thank you for keeping the future of Colorado in your minds as you propose and consider the state budget.

Sincerely,

American Federation of Teachers-Colorado
The Arc of Arapahoe and Douglas Counties
Colorado Council of Churches
Colorado Education Association
Coloradans for Educational Excellence
Colorado Latino Leadership, Advocacy and Research Organization
Colorado Parent Teacher Association
Colorado School Finance Project
Colorado Statewide Parent Coalition
Great Education Colorado
NAACP CO MT WY State-Area Conference
Padres Unidos
Project VOYCE
Support Jeffco Kids
Urban League of Metropolitan Denver

$$ and schools

Memphis philanthropists, school leaders talk funding strategies at D.C. forum

PHOTO: Marta W. Aldrich
Philanthropic and education leaders from 16 cities, including Memphis, attended a forum Oct. 5 in the nation's capital hosted by the DC Public Education Fund.

Memphis school and philanthropic leaders were in the nation’s capital Thursday to hear how a local philanthropic group has raised $120 million for school initiatives in Washington, D.C.

The Memphis contingent joined representatives from 16 other cities at a one-day forum hosted by the DC Public Education Fund on its 10th anniversary. The goal was to learn about how private donors have contributed to a decade of growth in District of Columbia Public Schools, its organizers said.

Memphis has an active philanthropic community seeking to improve the quality of public education through Shelby County Schools, the state-run Achievement School District, and the city’s charter schools. Millions of dollars in education grants from national organizations like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and Walton Family Foundation also have flowed into the city. This month, the last of a $90 million Gates grant that launched in 2009 for teacher and leader development will dry up for Shelby County Schools. (The Gates and Walton foundations also support Chalkbeat.)


Here’s how $90 million from Bill Gates spurred sweeping changes in Memphis


In recent years, Memphis philanthropists have sought to become more coordinated in their investments through the Memphis Education Fund, formerly known as Teacher Town. It’s considered a younger peer to the DC Public Education Fund, and both act as an intermediaries between their cities’ school systems and philanthropies. The older D.C. organization works closely with D.C. Public Schools to identify needs and fill them in collaboration with foundations.

The forum’s speakers included D.C. Public Schools Chancellor Antwan Wilson and two of his predecessors, Michelle Rhee and Kaya Henderson, who brought sweeping reforms to the district from 2007 to 2016.

The forum was meant to “reflect on a decade of transformation and to celebrate DCPS’ progress as the fastest-improving school district in the nation,” said Jessica Rauch, executive director and president of the DC fund. “Other cities are coming to learn from our partnership model and, we hope, will be inspired to implement some parts of our approach in their home cities.”

That means more than just writing checks. The agenda included strategies for supporting innovations in curriculum, celebrating excellent educators, empowering males of color, and partnering with families to accelerate student learning.

The gathering of philanthropic and school leaders took place at the newly modernized Paul Laurence Dunbar High School, the nation’s first public high school for black students.

study says...

Democratic governors boost funding for schools with more black, Hispanic students. (Test scores, not so much.)

PHOTO: Andy Cross, The Denver Post

Elections have consequences, goes the common saying — and that turns out to be true in schools.

A new study finds that electing a Democrat for governor leads to more money being spent in districts with more students of color, though there’s no evidence that meant higher test scores or smaller achievement gaps.

“School districts with a high share of minority students receive significantly greater transfers from the state government than other districts when a Democrat is elected,” write researchers Andrew Hill and Daniel Jones in the peer-reviewed Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization.

It’s one of only a few studies to directly examine how politicians’ partisan affiliation affects education policy. Another recent analysis found that Democratic school board members in North Carolina led to more racially integrated schools.

Of course, state governors don’t unilaterally make education policy, but they are likely to have significant sway, as this study suggests.

In order to isolate the effect of electing a Democrat versus a Republican, the latest study looks at governors’ races between 1990 and 2013; the paper focuses on 67 closely decided races of the nearly 300 elections. The idea of this common research approach is that the results of a narrowly decided election are essentially random.

First the researchers look at whether a governor’s party led to a greater overall increase in education spending. The effects here were modest: Democratic governors increased K-12 spending by about $100 per person more than Republicans, though there was no difference in higher education expenditures.

But when looking at how resources were distributed — rather than how much money was spent overall — the results were more stark.

Electing a Democratic governor led to an increase of about $500 per student for districts with a majority of black and Hispanic students, relative to whiter districts, simply because under them the money was distributed evenly between high-minority and whiter districts. In contrast, under Republicans total spending was higher in whiter districts.

Similarly, the study finds that Democratic governors targeted additional money to colleges and universities that serve more students of color.

So did this this distribution of spending lead to higher achievement or smaller test score gaps? Apparently not, according to the researchers’ analysis of the federal NAEP test.

“We find no evidence that a Democratic governor leads to higher NAEP scores during her term,” Hill and Jones write. “Moreover, despite the large shift in funds to school districts with a large share of minority students, we do not observe a shrinkage of the black-white score gap.”

It’s not clear why that’s the case — and perhaps surprising in light of recent research showing that students benefit when more money is spent on schools.

It could be that other policy changes by governors swamp school spending effects, that gains from school spending take several years to manifest on NAEP, or that spending went to areas that might be beneficial but don’t show up in test scores. It’s also possible that the increase in spending was simply not an effective way to improve schools.

The paper also examines why governors from different parties distribute money differently — is it based on politics or policy? It looks to be more the latter. Democrats were not any more likely to send money to districts with higher share of Democratic voters or electorally competitive districts.

But in other respects governors do seem to be affected by politics. “Lame duck” Democrats — those in their final years in office who could not run for re-election — seemed to lead to a greater increase in overall spending.

K-12 education spending “increases when a Democratic governor is elected, and this increase is substantially larger during ‘lame duck’ terms,” the study says. “It seems as if governors are constrained by political considerations when increasing spending on elementary and secondary education; although it increases, their preferences might be for even larger increases.”