HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-06-1997 - 3 f
1
Y Orange County
Board of County Commissioners
Action Agenda
Item No - -
Action Agenda Item Abstract
Meeting Date: May 6, 1997
Subject: Equity in School Funding
Department Public Hearing Yes No_x
Budget Office Budget Amendment
Needed Yes No_x
Attachment(s) Information Contact
Sally Kost ext. 2151
Equity Snapshot Telephone and Extension Number
Hillsborough 732-8181
Chapel Hill 968-4501
Durham 688-7331
Mebane 227-2031
Purpose
a) To review the definition of funding equity to determine whether or not changes should be
made to the definition.
b) To report to the Board of County Commissioners the current status of funding equity
between the Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools and the Orange County Schools.
Background
The Board of Commissioners periodically review the status of funding equity for the two
school systems to determine how close the funding is to the equity definition. In 1989, the
Board of County Commissioners established the following definition for funding equity:
Equity will have been accomplished when the total funding per student of
one system is not more than four to five percent greater than that of the
other system. The definition of equity depends on the consideration of all
major revenues to a school system, rather than only County-funded
revenues.
2
Recently, the Finance Directors from the two School systems and the County Budget Director
met to determine the best approach to determine funding equity. To ensure that a fair
comparison between the two School systems is made, staff determined that the audited actual
revenues should be adjusted. The following programs were subtracted from the revenues:
(1) Community Schools
(2) Transportation Garage (since funds for both schools pass only through the Orange
County Schools)
(3) Outreach (This is a pass through federal program administered by the Chapel
Hill/Carrboro City Schools for students not in the Chapel Hill/Carrboro City
School District.)
The annual audit was the source of the information, with School Staff providing the adjustment
numbers and enrollment numbers. Capital was not included in the snapshot. Enrollment is
based on the State's allotment, which for 1991-92 through 1995-96 was the average of the
three highest enrollment months out of the first four months of the school year. Beginning in
1996-97, the State is using the higher enrollment month of the two months of the school year
for allocating funds.
As you will see from the tables and graphs on the following pages, the difference between the
two school systems in per pupil expenditures in 1991-92 was $383. The Orange County School
District's actual per pupil expenditure was 92.3 percent of the Chapel Hill/Carrboro City
School District expenditures. In 1992-93 the difference in the actual expenditures between the
two schools dropped to $173 with the Orange County Schools' actual per pupil expenditure at
just over 96 percent of the Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools expenditure. This dramatic
change was a result of an unusually large amount of Orange County Schools fund balance
being expended in that year. The Orange County Schools audit shows that the District spent
$862,327 in fund balance, or $166 per student. The Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools spent
no fund balance in 1992-93.
A separate graph shows the current budget for both school systems. Note that the difference
between budgeted numbers is larger than the actual expenditures for each of the five years
prior. I caution you that these are budgeted numbers. These numbers may change by the end of
the fiscal year depending on the actual percentage of the budget spent. Also note that there was
a 3.6 cent increase in the district tax rate, effective July 1, 1996, changing the tax rate from
15.4 cents to 19.0 cents. This increase was due to the operating costs of East Chapel Hill High
School. This increase in the district tax rate equals approximately $144 per student.
Recommendation
The Manager recommends that the Board of County Commissioners receive this equity
snapshot as information only.
r
3
3
Summary
91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-9T,Budget
OCS $ 4,590 $ 4,681 $ 4,658 $ 5,119 $ 5,174 51486 ;
CHCCS $ 4,973 $ 4,858 $- 5,250 $ 5,436 $ 5,584 6;310
Difference $ 383 $ 177 $ 592 $ 317 $ 410 $! 824
%age 92.3% 96.4% 88.7% 94.2% 92.7% 86.9%'
4 -
` N �
0000 M
t0
LO
co m co
(moo O �t N M ti LO
0000 N co ((o O
Vi N CO <! (D 0) Go
r
r N
69 t!9 d9 �1 Ei9 69 � �R
N
LO I i cal � �! V) Vi M cc � It
to) co O (o 00 b
00 (n co N N co O
L � r M n
N
6% fP} 69 b9 69 E9 69 tH
C14 00 (D to CD
CY) m Go M tD Go N
m co coo Co cc 000 0 (too,
Ch ti r 0) 00
— N •" N
d9 69 09 69 b9 FA 69
r to (n e- I C O CN to
U („) � Oct rn o t000 ono r`
2 rn coo m N ems} 000 N M IT
(� � r 1� (o (o e
CD CV)r N CO) N M w
69 619 69 619 64 69 if!
00
N � LO 0 (D C) O O m
a) O (D n m N M
Om Oo LO M O v
.r M M
A69 W, 09 69 69 W, 69 if!
.Z7
U
0
L
L
U
m
m g
a E c
Q a�i M L. x
3 U- c (7 c o o w
o
S c V v E t c w W
�+ C U ° C O ° Q
U i tT N E w d Cl)
N
CL
a m vm w E :ffi 3 w U) L-
0 O U) 0 F-° Q 0 U H U) m m a
S
ar « rn cf) a
C4 Cc
c7 cQ m c� M
cM.i o
LO rn
r N to
T- 69 6Q 69 tH 69 69 i9 4
tM 000 tM LO O � ti
(O O to O O O 0 M U) r
LO� N N cn O � to
to Oct N 0 O n v n
to 0 O C V — tb'
N N N
6H 6% 64 to EA to K to
O
Co
0 00 N M 0 0 0 O It r
O Ono O f N t� � 0 M
� r
I� O CD d t7f
0 N N v N
69 69 69 to EA tf? `9 6q
LO C% Co) O M M top
V) OMO tt i 000 00f n0 000 CV)
to
M to 00 t0 O CD Ch C�
n n.- N N
d9 69 64 6sl Ef? 69 `9 tf!
Go U ch M O 000 V r N top
O CA CO cn LO w V) O N O O to
CA r
to to tp
w co N N
VS. to tR "1 tH 631 4sl if;• M
O O Co Cf CD to to 0 O
N O en- cc tOp_ eat} O t0ff
rn
06 O 6 tnD tc! to a
I� O � N to c7 M
O) CD r N N
69 64). 6H 64 69 69 to iA
U
O
V
0) �
N N 'fl C O
t0 O C
O O t m
N
O co j � IT � X
LL. C N � Q C O O W
O W W
E O O O Q
` N N E d M d
d cc E c0 'Q ` ')
N
0 O CL ° in O �°- Q H U N M M a
6
Historical Adjusted Per Pupil Expenditures
For CHCCS and OCS
MOOS MCHCCS
Thousands
6
i
I
4
i
....... ....... ....... ....... .......
....... ....... ....... ....... .......
3 ....... ...... .......
....... ....... .......
....... ....... ....... .......
....... ....... ....... ....... .......
....... ....... ....... ....... .......
i
....... ....... ....... .......
....... ....... ....... ......._.... .......
0 E €
91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96
Gap in Actual Per Pupil Expenditures for
CHCCS and OCS
$700
$600 $592
$500 -
$400 $383 17 $410
$300
$200
$100
$0
91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96
Current Adjusted Per Pupil Budgeted
Expenditures for CHCCS and OCS
Thousands
$7.000 $6.310
$6.000
$5.486
_ .
$5.000 _
.........__
tt�
$4.000 4,
$3.000
__
$2.000
$1.000 way z;
Yy
$0.000
OCS CHCCS
Gap in Current Year Budgeted Per Pupil
Expenditures for CHCCS and OCS
$1000 $824
.
$800
,K
RM
$600
$400
$200 .
I
$0
Gap