School Finance

Indiana superintendents praise funding hike but worry about poor schools

PHOTO: Hayleigh Colombo
Indiana House Speaker Brian Bosma, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Tim Brown, Indianapolis Public Schools Superintendent Lewis Ferebee and Northwest Allen County Schools Superintendent Chris Himsel participated in a January forum on school funding organized by Chalkbeat.

Indiana superintendents have a message for state budget-makers: All schools need more funding, but it can’t come at the expense of the state’s poorest districts.

The Indiana Senate’s school funding subcommittee, chaired by Sen. Ryan Mishler, R-Bremen, today heard testimony on proposed changes to school funding, including comments from 11 superintendents who testified on the Indiana House’s proposed budget. The budget, House Bill 1001, would give K-12 schools statewide a 4.7 percent increase through 2017. Overall, state dollars for public schools will increase by $469 million to a record high of $6.9 billion.

That record increase would be accompanied by major changes, however. The plan includes adding more money to the basic tuition amount for each student, which benefits all schools in the state. But extra money earmarked to help poor students who often start school academically behind their peers, has been changed.

Going forward, just students from families that are poor enough to qualify for free lunch will be counted in for extra state aid. In the past, the poverty aid has also been calculated to provide extra money for students who are slightly less poor but still qualify for special assistance, such as free textbooks or reduced-price lunch. For districts like Indianapolis Public Schools, where a large majority of students come from families who are poor enough to qualify for free and reduced-price lunch, this could mean huge losses in state aid.

“We believe these reductions are too volatile, the pace of change is too fast, for any corporation to either gain or lose a significant amount of funding over a short period of time,” Indianapolis Public Schools Superintendent Lewis Ferebee said.

To qualify for the lunch program this year, children from a family of four must have annual income of less than $43,500. Last year, about 78 percent of IPS students came from families that were poor enough to qualify for free lunch, but that number is expected to drop to about 71 percent this year. Ferebee said that shouldn’t be interpreted to mean that IPS has fewer students in poverty — rather, families are not as readily applying for the free lunch program. This year IPS got a federal grant money that provides free lunch to all students regardless of income, reducing urgency for families to fill out paperwork. Their kids will get free lunch whether they officially enroll or not.

Kathy Friend, the chief financial officer of Fort Wayne schools who spoke on behalf of the Indiana Urban Schools Association, said all schools will see some reduction in dollars to support poor children, but that the state’s poorest districts will be hit the hardest. As a result, more basic state aid dollars intended to support all children will need to be channeled toward poor kids to make up for the lost poverty aid in districts with more poor children.

Much of this year’s legislative debate around school funding has centered on the disparity between the state’s lowest-funded districts, often those with higher state test scores, and the highest-funded districts, which tend to be high poverty districts that also tend to have more students with special needs and those learning English as a second language.

Chris Himsel, superintendent in Northwest Allen County Schools in suburban Fort Wayne and an advocate for increased aid for suburban districts, said the trade-off between increased basic state aid for all students while also giving less extra money for poor students is unacceptable. His district comes out slightly ahead based on the proposed changes to the funding formula, but that still isn’t enough, he said. Northwest Allen shouldn’t gain if it means others must lose, he said.

“All of our kids throughout our state need more funding,” Himsel said. “To do the things that we are being asked to do with what we currently receive is not enough … I am interested in helping our kids. I am not interested in destroying other kids to do it.”

Superintendents from districts as diverse as East Chicago, Batesville, Greene County, Elkhart and Zionsville said they simply can’t make ends meet, even with the proposed increase in basic state aid. The state needs to do more, they said, whether that means even more basic state aid for all schools, reducing poverty aid more slowly over time or sticking with the current method for calculating poverty aid.

East Chicago superintendent Youssef Yomtoob implored lawmakers to at least slow the reduction in poverty aid so it won’t hit as hard right away.

“Grandfather us in,” Yomtoob said. “I don’t want more money, but do not take $4 million. That’s over 20 percent of my budget. I can’t live like that.”

Superintendents from districts where enrollment is growing, such as Hamilton Southeastern and Carmel, were generally more supportive of the proposed budget, which tends to be favorable to districts taking in more students. Allen Bourff, superintendent at Hamilton Southeastern, said he understands there are many concerns for urban schools, but the problems his district is facing are valid, too.

“I applaud the work of the House members to craft a bill that would address some of the issues that we have faced in Hamilton Southeastern over the years,” Bourff said.

The budget will again go before the Senate Appropriations Committee, chaired by Sen. Luke Kenley, R-Noblesville, on April 9.

Getting through college

KIPP Memphis gets $40,000 to start fund that helps college students pay for unexpected costs

PHOTO: (Mike Brown/The Commercial Appeal)
A KIPP Memphis Collegiate Middle school 8th-grader Cameron Guy, 13, dances in front of his class in 2014.

A charter school network in Memphis is getting into the college scholarship game with the help of a national grant.

KIPP Memphis Collegiate Schools was one of four charter networks nationwide selected for a $40,000 grant to launch a “college persistence fund,” which will provide small, emergency grants to help KIPP Memphis graduates pay for college.

“Sometimes, an increase in room and board or an unexpected lab fee may leave a college student unable to pay their tuition bills, and possibly lead to them dropping out,” a KIPP spokeswoman said in a statement.

The Memphis network runs seven schools, one of which is a high school. KIPP Memphis Collegiate High School saw 80 percent of its graduates last year go on to a post-secondary institution. That’s 20 percentage points higher than the district average.

KIPP Bay Area Public Schools, KIPP NYC Public Schools, and KIPP Philadelphia Public Schools were also selected by the Ludwig Family Foundation to receive grants. The DC-based foundation launched a similar college fund with KIPP DC in 2014.

The DC KIPP chapter has seen success with the small grants, the KIPP Foundation’s leader, Richard Barth, wrote on Monday in a column for Forbes. Over the last four years, KIPP DC has offered 39 persistence grants to alumni in college, and 95 percent of those grant recipients are still in college or have graduated.

“These awards, which average around $3,200, provide critical support, like helping KIPP alumni take summer courses to fill credits and accelerate towards graduation or covering living expenses that can derail a college degree,” Barth wrote.

Indiana's 2019 legislative session

As Indiana’s teacher pay debate heats up, some lawmakers say schools spend too much outside the classroom

PHOTO: Allen Underwood, Courtesy of Wayne Township Schools
A teacher helps a student during classroom instruction at McClelland Elementary School.

Facing a tight budget year and widespread calls for teacher pay raises, some Indiana politicians are questioning whether school districts are spending too little of the funding that they already receive in the classroom and too much on administration.

The lawmakers point to statistics from the Office of Management and Budget showing that 57 percent of the $11.9 billion state dollars schools spent in 2016 were used in the classroom. And a report using data from the National Center for Education Statistics shows personnel hiring across the country has dramatically outpaced enrollment, with non-teacher hiring dwarfing that of full-time teachers.

“While the number of teachers and students in our public schools have essentially flatlined, administration and non-teaching staff have ballooned,” House Speaker Brian Bosma, a Republican from Indianapolis, told fellow lawmakers in November.

But school districts — eager to receive more money for teacher pay increases that will make them competitive with neighboring states — are pushing back on the characterization that they aren’t using funding as efficiently or responsibly as possible. Trimming administrative payroll alone won’t be enough to raise money for higher teacher salaries.

“When people make broad brush stroke comments about funding, it’s easy to take a shot at administrators,” said Flora Reichanadter, superintendent of Pike Township schools. “There’s this misconception … that (districts) just kind of squandered their money, which is an absolutely inaccurate statement.”

But just figuring out how much of what Indiana spends on schools directly affects students is a complicated endeavor — and figuring out what share goes solely to teachers is even harder. We know that in 2015, the most recent year available, 38 percent of Indiana’s K-12 staff members were full-time teachers. But Rep. Bob Behning, chairman of the House Education Committee, said Indiana can’t isolate teacher salaries and benefits from those of other licensed educators in order to see how much schools and districts spend on them alone.

“Part of our discussion has been trying to isolate those numbers and trying to figure out exactly what that is,” Behning said. “We’ve had difficulty getting data … The fact that teacher by definition is not just a classroom instructor, but could be a librarian or any number of things.”

During last month’s ceremonial first day of the legislative session, Bosma said lawmakers and education advocates, including the state teachers unions, were working on a plan to ensure teacher raises are part of the state’s next two-year budget — mirroring efforts underway to raise teacher pay across the nation. Gov. Eric Holcomb said he also plans to address teacher compensation — in the short- and long-term — though it’s not yet clear whether that means any action in 2019.

But numerous interests are fighting for limited state budget dollars this year, so lawmakers are scrutinizing how existing state funds are being spent by school districts.

“I think we need to have an open discussion about how do we have efficiencies and drive dollars to the classroom,” Behning said. “There’s no question there are things we can do … how do we do more to streamline the operations of the system?”

As an example of cost savings, Behning said that many districts, some of them small and rural, have their own bus depots and maintenance teams — services that could be combined with other districts or cities and towns to reduce spending.

A 2017 report from EdChoice, a national pro-school choice organization based in Indianapolis, criticized school districts for increasing spending on non-teaching staff instead of using the dollars on teacher salaries. Marty Lueken, director of fiscal policy and analysis for EdChoice, questions whether that has helped students.

“Whenever I hear someone say that schools are struggling with large classes, or need more resources for schools or classrooms, or teachers should be paid more, I think about these hiring practices,” he added. “We could have had those other things, like smaller classes or higher take-home pay for teachers, if district leaders made different personnel decisions.”

But only looking at staffing and comparing spending on full-time teachers and to spending on non-teacher leaves a lot out of the picture, said Dennis Costerison, executive director for the Indiana Association of School Business Officials. On its face, that comparison underestimates what schools spend on other adults, such as counselors and principals, who work directly with students, and part-time instructors, who are often cheaper and easier to hire than full-time educators.

“Administrator,” too, is a finicky term, Costerison said. Sometimes, the term includes department heads, who might also be full-time teachers.

Money not spent on teacher salaries also funds resources necessary to ensuring clean and safe schools, such as custodians, accountants, human resources staff, and school safety officers.

Reichanadter, who previously led Franklin Township schools, said school funding has not kept pace with the cost of living, and even if it had, cutting administrative positions isn’t enough to add up to teacher raises.

“There’s only so much you can cut,” she said. “There’s only one of me. There’s 500 teachers. Divide my salary up between 500 teachers and we’re talking about maybe a cup of coffee.”

Administrators, she cautions, also do work that otherwise would fall to principals or teachers, who should be spending their time in the classroom or guiding instructions, she said, not doing payroll or buying supplies. And while some administrative work seems far removed from student learning, the tasks add up to an environment and a system where learning can be the priority, she said. Plus, she added, some non-teaching roles have naturally increased as schools have added services for vulnerable students, such as nurses, occupational therapists, and interpreters.

“It’s ludicrous for some of the legislators to conclude that we didn’t pay attention to this,” Reichanadter said. “I have to be a really good steward of my resources because if I don’t and I don’t compete with my local area, then I’m going to lose teachers and have a lot of turnaround … and that affects learning.”

Costerison added that a portion of a district’s non-teaching costs are the result of mandates made by the very legislature that is critiquing school spending, such as requirements around school safety, testing, and teacher training.

“Whenever bills are passed and laws are enacted, some of them do have repercussions from the standpoint of additional staffing and additional responsibilities for administrators and teachers,” Costerison said.

The state’s most recent 2016 report on classroom spending from the Office of Management and Budget estimates about 57 percent of state dollars go to the classroom — a figure that includes teacher and principal salaries, dollars spent on materials and textbooks, and pay for counselors and similar staff. But that percentage not spent on classrooms includes funding that state law currently says can’t be spent on instruction, Costerison said.

Those off-limits categories include money for building maintenance and debt service — money that, until changes in the state laws about district budgeting take effect next year, couldn’t go toward teacher salaries even if districts wanted.

Lawmakers will have a tough time come January deciding which funding asks to prioritize in the face of shrinking state revenue and several urgent competing issues, including the need to better fund the Department of Child Services.

“When you look at the revenue that exists, the funding, quite frankly, isn’t there at the moment,” said Sen. Jeff Raatz, the new chairman of the Senate Education Committee. “The reality is that we have some significant hurdles we have to overcome to get where we need to go.”