1. Public School Finance Colorado Department of Education May, 2011
Leanne Emm
Assistant Commissioner

2. CDE’s Strategic Initiatives
Standards
Assessments
Accountability and Support
Educator Effectiveness
Training and Awareness
Innovation and Choice

5. 2011 Legislative Session SB11-230 – as amended in House
Very simple School Finance Bill for
Reduces the original appropriation from by $227.5 million
Applies a negative factor (currently known as budget stabilization factor)
12.97%
Sets the total program for to $5.211 billion

6. 2011 Legislative Session House Amendment also:
Identified $67.5 million as potentially available next year
Based on excess revenues if available
Would be used to fund changes in enrollment, at-risk, assessed values and specific ownership tax
Would need to go through the supplemental appropriation process – next legislative session
Not available until appropriated!

7. 2011 Legislative Session SB11-230 as amended
Changes the date in which the limit to bonded indebtedness is determined
Mainly benefits those districts that are hitting their limit and is declining in assessed value
Changes the date to measure the limit to previous December valuation

8. Financing of Public Schools
2011 Legislative Session
SB As Amended
Financing of Public Schools
Total Program Funding Original Amount
– HB
$5,438,295,823
Less amount identified in SB11-230
($227,500,000)
Total Program Funding – SB11-230
$5,210,795,823

9. Financing of Public Schools
2011 Legislative Session
SB As Amended
Financing of Public Schools
Total Program Funding
IF FULLY FUNDED
$5,987,109,016
Less amount identified in
SB11-230
– NEGATIVE FACTOR
($776,313,193)
– SB11-230
$5,210,795,823

10. 2011 Legislative Session SB11-230 as amended – sets target
Actual student counts, at-risk counts, assessed values, specific ownership tax will change throughout the year
Creates supplemental appropriations which increase or decrease the original

12. Per Pupil Funding - Base
2010/2011
Base Funding - $5,529.71
Increase of $22.03 from prior year
Inflation of % Amendment 23 = .4%
2011/2012
Base Funding - $5,634.77
Increase of $ from prior year
Inflation of 1.9%
Amendment 23 1% is no long in effect in 2011/2012
We will review the total program funding formula that is based on per pupil funding.
The state’s base per pupil funding for 2010/2011 is $5, The base funding is calculated annually and has been increasing by inflation plus 1% as required by Amendment 23.
The inflation rate (or consumer price index – CPI) in 2010 was a negative 1.9%.
The 1.9% sets the base per pupil funding for schools for budget year 2011/2012.

13. Per Pupil Funding - Factors
Base funding is adjusted by factors
Cost of Living
Personnel costs
Size of district
At-risk funding
On-Line funding
Creates Total Program
2010/2011 & 2011/2012
State Budget Stabilization Factor
SB230 renames to Negative Factor
Once the base funding has been set, the base has factors applied. These factors determine the per pupil funding amount by district and each district is different.
Cost of living – factor that attempts to reflect the differences between districts for the cost of housing, goods and services. Aspen has a higher cost of living factor than a small rural district.
Personnel costs factor – based on enrollment and incorporates cost of living for personnel.
Size factor – driven by enrollment and attempts to reflect purchasing power within districts. Small districts have greater size factor adjustments.
At-risk funding – based on the numbers of students qualifying for free lunches
On-Line funding – based on the number of students enrolled in an online program within the district. There are various rules that make a student eligible to be counted.
Once these factors are applied to the base, a total per pupil funding amount is determined for district. This amount is then multiplied by the districts funded pupil count to arrive at total program funding.
2010/2011 & 2011/2012 and each year thereafter:
State Budget Stabilization Factor (Renamed to Negative Factor in SB230) – this will be a negative factor that is intended to reduce total program funding across the state. Basically, this particular factor will be applied after a district’s total program is determined using base funding and incorporating the above factors.

14. Colorado Summary Statistics 2010/2011
District enrollments range from 49 to 81,192 funded students
Total funded students in the state: 798,676
Growth of over 37,000 students in three years!
Average district total program per pupil funding
Per formula - $7,290
AFTER 2010/2011 budget rescission- $6,811
2010/2011 average per pupil cut - $479
There are 178 school districts within the state of Colorado. Funded pupil counts across districts range from 49 to over 81,000 for 2010/ The total number of funded students in the state was 798,676. There has been growth of over 37,000 funded students in three years.
The average total program per pupil across the state is $7,290 based on the amount of funding required for total program funding. However, with the budget reductions in 2010/2011, this average declined by $479 to $6,811.
A budget rescission is an act by the legislature that pulls money back from districts. This causes the funding to districts to become less than what is required by the School Finance Act. The rescission may be done for various reasons – the most current rescission was done in order to help balance the state budget. For 2010/2011, the total rescissions for almost every district in the state represented a 6.55% decline in total program funding and will go to 13.34% in 2011/2012.

15. Average Total Program Funding Per Pupil Estimates for 2011/2012
Average total program per pupil funding
Per formula - $7,429
Proposed - $6,467 (School Finance Act SB as amended)
Proposed changes from formula
SB as amended - $962 per pupil less than full funding
For 2011/2012, there are proposed per pupil funding amounts. If the School Finance Act was fully funded prior to any legislated adjustments, the average total program per pupil statewide would be $7,429. SB (the School Finance Act) reflects average funding per pupil of $6,467 or $962 less than what fully funding the school finance act would require.

16. Total Program Funding

17. Local Share Estimates 2011-2012 2010-2011 2011-2012 Change
Assessed Values
$91.08B
$84.504B
($6.57 B) (7.2%)
Property Taxes
$1.88B
$1.74B
($.142B)
(7.6%)
Specific Ownership Taxes
$.138B
-0-

18. Implications of Total Program Funding
Revenue to schools lower than the prior year – extremely rare
Options for school districts:
Increase revenue through mill levy override election or other means
Winning competitive grants
Decrease expenditures
Use reserves
Combination of all of the above
Now we will look at the implications of these policies to school districts. In 2010/2011 and 2011/2012, revenue to schools is actually lower than the prior year – this is extremely rare.
The options that districts have in order to deal with this decline in revenue are somewhat limited.
They include:
increasing revenue to the district through a mill levy override election or other means such as raising fees
winning competitive grants through the federal government – limited funding source with time limits
decreasing expenditures
using district reserves (or savings)
combination of all of the above

19. Other Legislation of Interest
HB – Facilities for Charter Schools – PI
HB – Charter School Grant Applications - Signed
HB1115 – Construction Retainage – Concur to pass
HB – Statutory Changes - Concur to pass
SB – Knowledge Based Economy Fund – PI
SB & 079 – PERA Contribution Rates & Bids for non-instructional support – PI
SB – Income tax check-off – passed House with amendments - negligible
SB – Mill levy override incentive – PI
SB – Background Checks – School Contractors – Concur to pass

20. SFSF & EdJobs Ideally funds spent by June 30, 2011
If carryforward to September 30 – MORE REPORTING
Ed Jobs could go longer, but not encouraged!
Documentation for expenditures
Submit Request for Funds for reimbursement
This does not come automatically
Website:
Contact: Elizabeth Conway –

21. IDEA ARRA Funds Ideally - funds spent by June 30, 2011
If carryforward to September 30 – MORE REPORTING
May need to reclassify expenditures to spend funds
Strategy:
spend ARRA first, then General Fund then regular IDEA
Website:
Contact: Vicki Graham –

22. Alternative School Finance Models
Pilot program authorized by HB to encourage school districts and charter schools to collect data that will be used to compare the effects of alternative school finance funding models with those of the current funding method.
Districts/charter schools apply to participate – applications available in early Fall
No applications received in 2010
What would it take to incentivize a district/charter school to participate in the study?

23. Date Reminders Financial Policies & Procedures
June 24 – Jeffco
Grants Fiscal & ESLU – IDEA – see SCOOP
June 14 – BOCES
June 15 – Large AUs
June 16 – Small AUs

24. Date Reminders Financial Policies & Procedures
June 24 – Jeffco
Grants Fiscal & ESLU – IDEA – see SCOOP
June 14 – BOCES
June 15 – Large AUs
June 16 – Small AUs

25. Resources Colorado Department of Education – www.cde.state.co.us
Colorado Legislative Council –
Colorado Associate of School Executives –
Colorado Association of School Boards –
Colorado School Finance Project –
Great Education Colorado -
EdNews Colorado -
The Bell Policy Center –
This list of resources has more in depth information regarding Colorado school finance. It is not all encompassing. There are other statewide initiatives within the state that are exploring school finance, taxation and Colorado’s sustainable future.