HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-26-2016 - 2B - Public School Forum Local School Finance Study , `
It . - 1 -N .t•
bp:4111t- -t-s._, , __ ,
FINANCE STUDY `. ". f:•
111112
01
�� OPT I N G 7p =-
47 99
4 1986 2016 ,,+
PUBLIC SCHOOL
FORUM.,=-
> INTRODUCTION
Under North Carolina's school finance instructional expenses,accounting for while simultaneously making less taxing
system, born more than eight decades ago, 25 percent of the combined federal,state, effort. Because wealthier counties have
it is the state's responsibility to pay for and local total.Counties provided funding more taxable resources,they can keep
instructional expenses(including personnel) for 994 principals and assistant principals taxes low while still generating significant
while county governments pay for capital (19.0 percent of the total),6,567 teachers revenues.Conversely,counties with fewer
expenses(buildings and maintenance). (6.9 percent of the total),2,196 teacher taxable resources need to make greater
assistants (9.5 percent of the total),and taxing effort to support their schools.
During the Great Depression,through the 3,104 professional instructional support Second,there is a widening gap between
1933 School Machinery Act,the General personnel (20.7percent of the total). counties with many taxable resources and
Assembly attempted to"relieve"counties those with few,and as a result,a widening
of the responsibility for operating and For more than 25 years,the Public School gap in counties'school spending patterns.
maintaining public schools. In 1975,the Forum of North Carolina has isolated local
School Budget and Fiscal Control Act spending from state and federal spending State policy decisions made during the
reinforced the primacy of state support, to examine the capacity and actual effort last 25 years have blunted the impact of
setting forth the state's policy of using of counties to support public schools.The these trends, narrowing the educational
state revenue sources for instructional annual Local School Finance Study focuses investment gap by providing additional
expenses for current operations while not only on the amount that counties spend funds for the state's smallest and lowest-
expecting county governments to meet on schools,but also on each county's wealth counties. However,even with
public schools'facilities requirements. investment in the context of that county's these important, positive policy steps,
taxable resources. investments in North Carolina schools still
Over time, however, the lines drawn in vary dramatically by zip code.As a result,
the 1933 and 1975 laws have become From the early years of the Study,two young people born into one of the state's
blurred, and the local role in funding trends have become evident that have economically thriving counties will have
school operations has increased. In deepened over time. First,wealthier levels of investment in their education not
2013-14,counties spent$3 billion to fund counties are able to spend more on schools shared elsewhere in the state.
INTRODUCTION APPENDICES
2013-14 SPENDING PER STUDENT 13 TABLE 1:RANKINGS OF ADJUSTED PROPERTY
VALUATIONS PER STUDENT
WHAT'S NEW IN THE 2016 STUDY? 14 TABLE 2:ACTUAL EFFORT
15 TABLE 2A:SIX-YEAR AVERAGE OF CAPITAL
W 2016 RANKINGS-AT-A-GLANCE OUTLAY AND DEBT SERVICE
16 TABLE 3:ACTUAL EFFORT WITH SUPPLEMENTAL
0 A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE FUNDING FOR LOW-WEALTH AND SMALL COUNTIES
Z 17 TABLE 4:ABILITY TO PAY
S WHO PAYS FOR WHAT? 18 TABLE 5:RELATIVE EFFORT
0
U 10 GAPS AND TRENDS 2016 19 GLOSSARY
12 NOTES ON METHODOLOGY 20 DATA SOURCES&ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
i<
> INTRODUCTION (CONTINUED)
Disparities in resources available to ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................,
counties can be illustrated by dividing the REAL ESTATE WEALTH AVAILABLE PER STUDENT
state into quartiles according to adjusted
property wealth available per child.The
top quartile includes high-growth Piedmont
t500,000
and mountain and beach resort areas,
which had an average of$1,397,519 real $1,397,519
estate wealth available per child—$636,628 t,000,000
above the state average.The bottom $760,891 STATE AVERAGE
quartile has $405,683 real estate wealth $725,127
available per child—$355,208 below the soo,000
state average.The map illustrates where $515,235 $405,683
counties in each quartile are located
throughout the state.In 2013-14,34 counties TOP QUARTILE SECOND QUARTILE THIRD QUARTILE BOTTOM QUARTILE
were above the state average property wealth
of$760,890 available per child, while 68
counties were below the state average.
DISPARITIES IN REAL ESTATE WEALTH
,
Watauga Ashe Alleghany�■-.■ 1 ` `' ,1
F Warren ��OF
ga g a�4uimo
Mikhail Avery ��■ Orange 1114,o,
Yancey Dar am
Madison Y
wpm/ Wake Dare \
Chatham on
Ha d Buncombe
Haywood
■
treene 4 Hyde
Graham Jackson
Trans vani ariiiipaqs-
ir Polk
Cherokee Macon Yl
Clay Pamlico
Carteret
▪ TOP QUARTILE
• SECOND QUARTILE Y�mc,°'
❑ THIRD QUARTILE 'oo
Brunswick
❑
BOTTOM QUARTILE
>z
2013-14 TOTAL LOCAL CURRENT SPENDING PER STUDENT
Alamance $1,317
Alexander $1,028
Alleghany $1,722
Anson $1,071
Ashe 9
Avery $1,828
Beaufort $1,718
Bertie $961
Bladen $1,237
Brunswick $2,393
Buncombe $2,116
Burke $1,068
Cabarrus $1,623
Caldwell $1,201
Camden $902
Carteret $2,191
Caswell $847
Catawba 78
Chatham $2,822
Cherokee $1,644
Chowan $1,548
Clay $884
Cleveland $1
Columbus $760
Craven $1,313
Cumberland 1478
Currituck $2,310
Dare $3,983
Davidson $1,269
Davie $1,463
Duplin $938
Durham $3,119
Edgecombe $957
Forsyth $1,982
Franklin $1,409
Gaston $1,305
Gates $1,708
Graham-$628
Granville $1,416
Greene $688
Guilford $2,351
Halifax $1,040
Harnett $1,032
Haywood $1,938
Henderson $1,527
Hertford $1
Hoke $533 STATE AVERAGE
Hyde $2,026 ($1,500)
Iredell $1,568 $1 ..7
Jackson $1,712
Johnston 1,507
Jones $1,2
Lee $1,541
Lenoir $1,062
Lincoln $1,
Macon $1,802
Madison $941
Martin 63
McDowell $1,204
Mecklenburg $2,312
Mitchell $1,080
Montgomery $1,203
Moore $1,850
Nash $1,295
New Hanover $2,490
Northampton $1,345
Onslow $1,616
Orange $4,355
Pamlico $1,681
Pasquotank $1,771
Pender 487
Perquimans $1,24
Person $1,607
Pitt 79
Polk $2,015
Randolph $1,169
Richmond $911
Robeson $522
Rockingham $1,185
Rowan $1,604
Rutherford $1,192
Sampson $998
Scotland $1,686
Stanly $1,087
Stokes $1,557
Surry $1,191
Swain-$383
Transylvania $2,643
Tyrrell $1,001
Union $1,867
Vance $980
Wake $2,033
Warren 85
Washington $902
Watauga $2,694
Wayne $995
Wilkes $1,098
Wilson $1
Yadkin $1,062
Yancey $1,2
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500 2750 3000 3250 3500 3750 4000 4250 4500 4750 5000
3<
> WHAT'S NEW IN THE 2016 LOCAL SCHOOL FINANCE STUDY?
Long-time readers of the annual Local School Finance from Tables 1-5 in a single table,ordered by the Table 5 Relative
Study noticed a new look beginning with the 2014 Effort rank.The table is accompanied by a brief explanation of
Study, which continues this year. "Under the hood," the rankings,which also serves as an introduction to the more
however, the study is largely the same as in earlier detailed tables included in the appendices.
years, with a few notable exceptions. The rankings in these five columns are calculated in the five
tables included in the appendices to this report.
Most significantly,since 2014,the study has included charter school
enrollment in each county's total Average Daily Membership Property Value Rank:The first column shows county rankings
(ADM).Charter schools receive funding based on their ADM, based on the real estate wealth available in each county. Most
just as district schools do.The change reflects that each county's local funding for schools comes from property taxes.Counties
funding for instructional expenses is divided approximately ranked higher on this measure have more property available
equally among all district and charter school students residing for potential taxation to support education.(See Table 1)
in the county.
Actual Effort Rank: Rankings in the second column reflect the
For most counties,the new calculation resulted in little change actual dollar effort of counties to fund schools,without taking
to the study data. For some counties with large percentages of into account property wealth.Counties that spend the most per
students attending charter schools, however,substantial shifts student rank highest on this measure.(See Table 2)
occurred.For instance, Person, Pamlico,and Northampton Counties,
each with more than 10 percent of their public school students Actual Effort Rank II:The rankings in the third column serve
enrolled in charter schools,saw significant changes in their the same purpose as the second column but take into account
rankings in several of the finance study tables compared to 2013 supplemental state funding provided for low wealth and small
and earlier studies. More detail about the change and its impact counties.Counties that spend the most per student based on
can be found in the report's "Notes on Methodology" section. county spending combined with low wealth and small county
supplemental state funding rank highest on this measure.This
Also new since 2014,the state average per capita income used column can be analyzed alongside the second column to show the
in Table 4 is the statewide average from the U.S. Bureau of impact of supplemental funding on counties' relative rankings.
Economic Analysis.Aside from this and the inclusion of charter (See Table 3)
school enrollments,the study's methodology is unchanged.
The five main data tables included in past years'studies appear Ability to Pay Rank:The fourth column's rankings reflect an
again in this year's study as appendices.The tables appear in analysis of each county's fiscal capacity to support public
the same order as in past years, to facilitate comparison with schools,taking into account property values(from the first
previous studies.The capital outlay and debt service averages, column,adjusted using the state's average effective property
which appeared in Tables 2 and 5 prior to the 2014 study,and tax rate)and non-property tax revenues. Large, urban counties
did not factor into the rankings, now appear as a separate that combine high adjusted property valuations with broad-
Table 2A,with counties ranked to mirror the order in Table 2 based economic activity and high per capita incomes tend to
to facilitate comparison with previous studies.Also since 2014, receive high rankings on this measure.(See Table 4)
several redundant table columns have been omitted and others Relative Effort Rank:The final column compares Actual Effort
reordered to facilitate readability.
(from Table 2)and Ability to Pay(from Table 4). Low-wealth
Finally,the 2014 Local School Finance Study pioneered a new counties with comparatively high spending levels tend to rank
summary table,which we include again this year: Local School highest in this measure.(See Table 5)
Finance Study Rankings-at-a-Glance,which collects the rankings
404wpow
'r !
1
�+ .. }f -•
- - r
Alb
•
LOCAL SCHOOL FINANCE STUDY RANKINGS-AT-A-GLANCE
FROM TABLE 1 FROM TABLE 2 FROM TABLE 3 FROM TABLE 4 FROM TABLE 5
COUNTY PROPERTY VALUE RANK: ACTUAL EFFORT RANK: ACTUAL EFFORT RANK II: ABILITY TO RELATIVE EFFORT RANK:
Adjusted Property Total Current Spending Total Current Spending Per ADM with PAY RANK: Current Spending as Percentage
Tax Base Per ADM Per ADM Low Wealth and Small County Funding Revenue Per ADM of Revenue per Student
Dare 1 2 4 1 93
Jackson 2 26 55 3 98
Avery 3 21 14 7 95
Watauga 4 5 11 4 84
Brunswick 5 8 16 5 89
Hyde 6 15 1 9 91
Macon 7 22 50 8 94
Carteret 8 12 27 2 96
W Transylvania 9 6 12 11 68
—I Currituck 10 11 22 6 90
I- Ashe 11 49 43 21 85
O: Clay 12 93 35 27 97
Q New Hanover 13 7
7 15 10 79
O Pamlico 14 29 8 16 86
0. Polk 15 16 13 18 77
O Yancey 16 61 37 26 87
Alleghany 17 24 10 22 74
Graham 18 97 32 32 99
Perquimans 19 63 25 23 92
Buncombe 20 13 31 17 71
Chatham 21 4 9 12 60
Haywood 22 18 39 24 54
Mitchell 23 74 42 39 81
Warren 24 42 26 38 56
Madison 25 88 66 42 88
Moore 26 20 46 20 80
Henderson 27 39 73 25 78
Cherokee 28 30 59 43 31
Tyrrell 29 82 2 45 82
Northampton 30 52 20 48 51
Durham 31 3 7 15 25
Orange 32 1 3 13 4
41 Mecklenburg 33 10 21 14 69
I Beaufort 34 25 49 31 50
1 Swain 35 100 99 47 100
Q Person 36 33 52 40 44
D Wake 37 14 33 19 76
O Jones 38 59 5 37 73
O Pender 39 41 56 50 36
Z Iredell 40 35 67 28 72
O
u Montgomery 41 66 83 53 63
W Chowan 42 37 17 46 40
N Lincoln 43 53 91 41 65
Catawba 44 45 80 36 61
Davie 45 47 74 34 66
Rutherford 46 68 76 65 46
Guilford 47 9 19 30 13
Craven 48 56 95 35 75
Forsyth 49 17 36 33 29
Pasquotank 50 23 34 49 15
Rowan 51 34 48 58 11
McDowell 52 65 63 73 26
Wilkes 53 72 93 64 53
Stokes 54 36 40 70 6
Onslow 55 32 64 29 67
Bladen 56 64 61 71 27
Cabarrus 57 31 62 44 32
Martin 58 46 23 57 21
Iv Camden 59 92 41 54 83
J- Caswell 60 94 53 89 62
I-
ll Stanly 61 73 90 62 58
Q Washington 62 91 29 83 57
• Lee 63 38 54 56 18
O Rockingham 64 70 71 66 41
Cr Yadkin 65 77 87 76 42
Cr= Caldwell 66 67 57 78 19
1— Davidson 67 62 84 63 37
Alamance 68 55 75 51 49
Union 69 19 38 55 8
Alexander 70 81 97 81 43
Pitt 71 43 58 52 33
Gates 72 27 6 87 2
Burke 73 76 94 74 45
Cleveland 74 54 60 80 10
Franklin 75 50 51 86 5
Wilson 76 58 70 60 35
Hertford 77 51 18 82 9
Anson 78 75 30 90 24
Surry 79 69 77 61 48
Randolph 80 71 69 79 23
Halifax 81 79 88 84 38
Granville 82 48 44 77 7
W Gaston 83 57 92 69 22
Edgecombe 84 87 81 88 47
I- Bertie 85 86 28 94 20
O: Lenoir 86 78 85 67 52
Q
7 Cumberland 87 44 79 59 16
O Duplin 88 89 78 75 59
f Nash 89 60 65 68 28
O Wayne 90 84 89 72 55
F Columbus 91 95 96 91 64
O Johnston 92 40 47 85 3
m Richmond 93 90 82 92 34
Harnett 94 80 72 95 14
Hoke 95 98 100 98 70
Sampson 96 83 68 93 17
Scotland 97 28 24 97 1
Greene 98 96 45 99 39
Vance 99 85 86 96 12
Robeson 100 99 98 100 30
5<
> STATE AND LOCAL SCHOOL FUNDING IN NORTH CAROLINA:
A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
North Carolina's first state constitution in 1776 included _ sUN
an education provision that stated, "A School or Schools ,19 zn
J l enr
shall be established by the Legislature for the convenient 4 �\
Instruction of Youth." The legislature provided no financial ra
support for schools.
A century later, the constitution adopted after the Civil War `
required the state to provide funding for all children ages 6-21
to attend school tuition-free. In 1901, the General Assembly 1
appropriated $100,000 for public schools, marking the first \
time there was a direct appropriation of tax revenue for public A •
schools. Today, the constitution mandates that the state „09 ,
provide a "general and uniform system of free public schools" � . v.
mo
and that the state legislature may assign counties "such 72!V."
responsibility for the financial support of the free public -
schools as it may deem appropriate." N.C. Const. art. IX, \'`
T
§ 2 (see note, "Sources of Local School Finance Law: The rig.
North Carolina State Constitution"). 4 1 _
migid-ii ---- ,
The constitution adopted after the Civil War required ,-
the state to provide funding for all children ages 6-21 1;
to attend school tuition-free.
/ r - 1
ISOURCES OF LOCAL SCHOOL FINANCE LAW:
THE NORTH CAROLINA STATE CONSTITUTION
Article IX, Sec.2. Uniform system of schools.
(1) General and uniform system:term.The General Assembly shall provide by taxation and otherwise for a general
and uniform system of free public schools,which shall be maintained at least nine months in every year, and wherein
equal opportunities shall be provided for all students. (2) Local responsibility.The General Assembly may assign
to units of local government such responsibility for the financial support of the free public schools as it may deem
appropriate.The governing boards of units of local government with financial responsibility for public education
may use local revenues to add to or supplement any public school or post-secondary school program.
>6
Apart from the constitutional provisions,a major change in the As noted in the introduction,over time the delineations proscribed
school funding structure occurred during the Great Depression. by the School Machinery Acts and the School Budget and Fiscal
Under the School Machinery Act (enacted in 1931 and amended Control Act have given way to increased local investment in
in 1933),the state assumed responsibility for all current expenses instructional expenses. Even so,the North Carolina Supreme
necessary to maintain a minimum eight-month school term Court has made clear that it is the state that bears responsibility
and an educational program of basic content and quality for fulfilling the constitutional obligation to guard and maintain
(instructional and program expenses). In exchange for the the right of every North Carolina child to receive a "sound basic
state's expanded role,local governments assumed responsibility education." Leandro v. North Carolina,346 N.C.336(1997).
for school construction and maintenance(capital expenses).
The School Machinery Act established counties as the basic
unit for operating public schools,which is maintained today The North Carolina Supreme Court has made
with large county-wide school systems,except in the 11 counties clear that it is the state that bears responsibility
that also have city school systems. for fulfilling the constitutional obligation to guard
In 1975,the General Assembly enacted the School Budget and maintain the right of every North Carolina
and Fiscal Control Act,which delineated responsibility for child to receive a "sound basic education."
school funding:
To ensure a quality education for every child in North Carolina has been engaged in litigation defending its system
North Carolina, and to assure that the necessary of school finance for almost twenty years.The legal action was
resources are provided, it is the policy of the State instigated in part by spending inequities between low-wealth
of North Carolina to provide from State revenue and higher-wealth counties.These inequities persist today. In
sources the instructional expenses for current 2013-14,the state's ten highest-spending counties spent an average
operations of the public school system as defined of$57,497 more per classroom than the ten lowest-spending
in the standard course of study. It is the policy counties.This large gap exists primarily because of the variation
of the State of North Carolina that the facilities in property wealth across the state.The wealthiest counties
requirements for a public education system will have$1,877,434 in real estate capacity available per student,
be met by county governments. compared with the poorest counties,which have approximately
$355,534 in real estate capacity available per student.This gap
has widened by over$1 million since the North Carolina Supreme
Court's Leandro decision in 1997.
ISOURCES OF LOCAL SCHOOL FINANCE LAW:
THE LEANDRO CASE
"Because the North Carolina Constitution expressly states that units of local governments with financial
responsibility for public education may provide additional funding to supplement the educational programs
provided by the state,there can be nothing unconstitutional about their doing so or in any inequality of
opportunity occurring as a result...Clearly then,a county with greater financial resources will be able to
supplement its programs to a greater degree than less wealthy counties, resulting in enhanced educational
opportunity for its students."
Leandro v. State,488 S.E.2d 249(N.C.1997).
7<
> SCHOOL FUNDING: WHO PAYS FOR WHAT?
North Carolina public schools spent$12.2 billion on instructional ...............................................................................................................................................................................
expenses in the 2013-14 school year, using a combination of state, WHO PAYS FOR SCHOOL PERSONNEL? 2013-14
federal,and local resources.State funding accounted for 63 percent
of expenditures,federal funding accounted for 12 percent,and
local funding accounted for 25 percent of spending.
.
100,000
SOURCES OF FUNDS FOR SCHOOLS IN NC, 2013-14
STATE:
LOCAL:
6,704
FEDERAL:
FEDERAL LOCAL 7,063
$1.42 $3.01 Source:DPI,Financial 80,000
BILLION BILLION &Business Services, z TOTAL:
(12%) (25%) Statistical Profile, 0 98,858
z
Table 22—North Carolina D
L_
Current Expense ,_
STATE Expenditures by 0
$7.73 BILLION Source of Funds
ce
(63%) pD 60,000
v,
>-
m
d
w
°z STATE:
D 17,104
STATE FUNDS LOCAL:
LOCAL:
0 40,000 2,246 STATE:
In 2013-14, the state provided $7.7 billion to operate 2,679 district, o FEDERAL: 10,868
charter, and regional schools in 115 school systems across 100 o 4,640 LOCAL:
counties for nearly 1.5 million students.Approximately 93 percent STATE: TOTAL: 3,123
m 4462 23,990 FEDERAL:
of state funds were spent on salaries and benefits for 137,455
state-funded school personnel. Z 1,007E TOTAL:
20,000
FEDERAL: 15,288
State funding for operations continually increased from $3.44 22
billion in 1992-93 to$7.7 billion in 2012-13,and held steady at that TOTAL:
5,491
level in 2013-14. But while the level of funding has increased _
over time, the percentage of the state's General Fund dedicated
to education has continually declined. In 2013-14, 37.3 percent PRINCIPALS TEACHERS TEACHER PROFESSIONAL
of the state's General Fund was appropriated for K-12 public &ASSISTANT ASSISTANTS INSTRUCTIONAL
PRINCIPALS SUPPORT PERSONNEL
education,a significant drop from 1970,when it was 52.5 percent.
If public education were funded at the same percentage of the Source:North Carolina Department of Public Instruction,Statistical Profile
General Fund as in 1970, districts and schools would have an
additional $3.05 billion to educate our students.
State funding for capital outlays has been relatively small compared
with the state's investment in operations,and compared with what ...............................................................................................................................................................................
counties invest in facilities. In 2013-14,the state spent$9.2 million
on capital outlays,which was 2.1 percent of the combined local, FUNDING FOR SCHOOL BUILDINGS, 2013-14
state, and federal total.This was a significant drop from 2012-13,
when the state spent$32 million on capital outlays (5.8 percent
of the combined local,state, and federal total). STATE FEDERAL
$9.6 MILLION $1.3 MILLION
....................................................................................................................................i...i...i...i...i...i...i.................. (2.1%) (0.3 0/0)
K-12 SPENDING (%OF GENERAL OPERATING BUDGET)
60%
52.5%
50°' K-12 education spending
represents the largest LOCAL
40% 37.3% part of the state budget, $443.8 MILLION
but its share of the state (97.6%)
budget has declined
30% sharply since 1970.
1970-71 2013-14 Source:North Carolina Department of Public Instruction,Statistical Profile.
>8
LOCAL FUNDS
The nearly century-old division of state and local responsibility
for school funding still shapes the way North Carolina pays for LOCAL SCHOOL FUNDING:
public education today, with 63 percent of instructional IMPACTS ON SCHOOLS
expenditures coming from the state and 97.6 percent of
capital expenses paid at the local level. However, the division AND CLASSROOMS
has eroded somewhat, with counties funding 18.3 percent . .
of principal and assistant principal positions, 6.8 percent of
teachers, 9.4 percent of teacher assistants, and 20.4 percent Differences in counties' levels of investment in their
of professional instructional support personnel; and with school systems translate into dramatically different
the state paying 2.1 percent of capital expenses. options at the school and classroom level.As an
illustration,at a statewide average class size of 26
Considering local expenditures on programs and personnel students per classroom,the ten counties that spend
in 2013-14, the ten counties that spent the most per student the most per student would spend,on average,
averaged $2,916 per student compared to the ten that spent $75,824 per classroom. By contrast,the ten counties
the least, which averaged $705 per student. That represents that spend the least per child would spend,on average,
a gap of$2,211.Sixty counties are below the state average of $18,327 per classroom—a difference of$57,497 per
$1,500.Orange County alone spends about the same amount classroom.At the state's average elementary school
as the bottom six counties combined. size of 497 students,that translates to a difference
of$1,099,082 per elementary school.At the state's
One of the primary challenges from the five low-wealth average high school size of 837, it translates to a
plaintiffs in the Leandro case dealt with the inequities between difference of$1,850,969 per high school.
varying levels of county support for schools. However,the state
Supreme Court ruled in 1997 that"the'equal opportunities'clause
of Article IX, Section 2(1) of the North Carolina Constitution FEDERAL FUNDS
does not require substantially equal funding or educational
advantages in all school districts. Consequently, the provisions Resources from the federal government accounted for 11.7
of the current state system for funding schools which require percent of North Carolina public education spending on instruc-
or allow counties to help finance their school systems and tional expenses in 2013-14,and totaled $1,421,857,482. Federal
result in unequal funding among the school districts of the resources are given to states in the form of direct grants,state
state do not violate constitutional principles." applications, state plans,or a combination of the three.
' iii, 0 RACE TO THE TOP'S ROLE IN THE 2016
I FINANCE STUDY
T + .
• `y Race to the Top(RttT) is a federal competitive grant awarded
il ' - �' • to North Carolina,focused on creating conditions for education•2,4' ' - �', , innovation and reform, implementing ambitious plans in four
_ education reform areas,and achieving significant improvement
ie ^. •`.s ■ ' — Az- in student outcomes(U.S. Department of Education, Race to the
�� ? .yam v .;; y Top Executive Summary,2009). North Carolina was one of 12
states to receive an RttT grant in 2010.The grant includes$400
� 1 , :.. _ million dollars to be used over four years on the state's public
,
W.. ;�,[ I �,- ` school system. Half of the grant is designated for use by local
1 education agencies for their own initiatives that support the
..s.Vall IP North Carolina RttT plan. North Carolina received RttT funding
during the school year analyzed in the 2016 Local School Finance
IIL le Study(2013-14).
9<
> LOCAL SCHOOL FINANCE STUDY 2016: GAPS AND TRENDS
The primary source of revenue for county government is local capacity of$355,534 per student.This gap of$1.52 million is
property taxes,and this year the study once again revealed wide smaller than last year's($1.69 million gap in 2012-13),a trend
variation between the property values of the state's wealthiest that has continued for the last three years of the Local School
and poorest counties,and resulting disparities in revenues Finance Study. Major factors narrowing the gap include
generated.This year also saw the continuation of marked reductions in real estate wealth in the wealthiest counties,
differences in spending per child between North Carolina's some counties'2011 revaluations, and increases in student
highest-and lowest-spending counties. enrollment in several counties.
POOREST COUNTIES TAXED THEMSELVES The ten poorest counties taxed themselves at nearly double the
AT HIGHER RATES, BUT STILL GENERATED rate of the ten wealthiest counties—$0.83 compared to$0.43,
SUBSTANTIALLY LESS FROM PROPERTY TAX a 40-cent difference. In spite of this, because of the disparity in
Coastal and mountain counties have the highest real estate real estate wealth capacity,the revenue the poorest counties
wealth capacity in the state. In 2013-14,every county in the top could generate,even at the higher tax rate,was substantially
ten had a per student real estate wealth capacity above$1.56 lower than what the wealthier counties could generate at lower
million,and together had an average five times greater than the rates.The poorest counties continue raising their tax rates,while
bottom ten counties.The ten wealthiest counties had an average the wealthiest counties lower theirs,and yet the substantial
real estate capacity of$1,877,434 per student,compared with revenue disparity persists.
the ten poorest counties,which had,on average,a real estate
LOW- VS. HIGH-WEALTH COUNTIES
TAXABLE REAL ESTATE WEALTH PER CHILD SPENDING PER STUDENT
2,500,000 3,000
2,500 $2,916
2,000,000 $1,877,434
2,000
1,500,000
1,500
1,000,000
1,000
500,000 $705
500
$355,534
TEN TEN TEN TEN
WEALTHIEST POOREST HIGHEST-SPENDING LOWEST-SPENDING
COUNTIES COUNTIES COUNTIES COUNTIES
The wealthiest counties have more than five times the taxable Annual per-student county spending on programs and personnel was
property wealth per child available to the ten poorest counties.As $2,211 higher in the ten highest-spending counties than in the ten
a result,even though the ten poorest counties tax themselves at lowest-spending counties.This gap is wider than last year,when it
double the rate of the wealthiest counties,the revenue they generate was$2,183 per student.
through taxation is substantially lower.
>10
LARGE SPENDING DISPARITIES REMAIN
REAL ESTATE WEALTH GAP This year's study found a larger gap between the highest-and
lowest-spending counties:$2,211 per student,compared with
$2,183 last year.Orange County,at the top of the list,spends
2,500,000 more than eleven times more per student than Swain County at
the bottom.The ten highest-spending counties spend 4.14 times
more per child ($2,916 per child)than the ten lowest-spending
2,000,000 counties($705 per child).On average,the highest-spending
counties increased their spending by about 2 percent more
per child this year since last year($61 more per student).The
1,500,000 lowest-spending counties increased their average spending per
student by 4.9 percent($33 per student).
000,000 SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING REMAINS CRUCIAL
In 1991,the state enacted supplemental funds for low-wealth and
small counties, in part to address the limited capacity that some
500,000 counties have to raise revenues through taxation because of their
limited local resources and size. In 2013-14 the General Assembly
provided an appropriation of$212 million for 69 low-wealth counties
(79 districts)and$45 million for 27 small counties.
e 00 v e 00 a e, e, e 00 e°<1'e 5C'e o\P
Low-wealth supplemental funding is provided to systems whose
The difference in real estate wealth capacity between the ten wealthiest ability to generate local revenue per student is below the state
and ten poorest counties has grown from$477,477 in 1997 to average.Some of the factors used to determine eligibility are
$1,521,899 in 2013. county adjusted property tax base,square miles in the county,
and per capita income. In 2013-14, low-wealth eligible counties
received total low-wealth supplemental funding ranging from
$24,299 to$17.6 million. Per-student dollars ranged from $8
(Cabarrus)to$742(Robeson).
WIDENING SPENDING GAP Small county supplemental funding was provided in 2013-14 to
those county school systems with average daily membership
(ADM) less than 3,239 or to county school systems with ADM
between 3,239 and 4,080 whose county adjusted property tax base
per student was below the state adjusted property tax base per
student. In 2013-14,eligible counties received between$1.42 and
2,500
$1.89 million in small-county supplemental funding. Per-student
dollars ranged from$451 (Anson)to$3,165(Tyrrell).
2,000 SPENDING DISPARITIES
$4,000 CASWELL$847
ORANGE$4,355
soo COLUMBUS$760
$3,000
GREENE$688
$2,000 GRAHAM $628
HOKE$533
$1,000 ROBESON $522
��'�1�a10�oio'vooO�oo��oo'1'voo"voO�oO�oO��oO�„cob O�'vo'��,„,, vole 1'�e SWAIN$383
If the bottom seven counties'total current spending were combined,
The spending gap between the top ten-spending and bottom ten-spending they would still only spend$6 more per child than Orange County
counties has grown from$1,094 in 1997 to$2,211 in 2014. spends by itself.
n<
> NOTES ON METHODOLOGY
CHARTER SCHOOL ENROLLMENT SALES/ASSESSMENT RATIO
The Department of Public Instruction's Division of School Business' In North Carolina,most residential and commercial property is
Report on Average Daily Membership and Membership Last revalued once every eight years. Prior to 1984, it was difficult
Day by LEA (ADM & MLD) provides estimates of charter school to compare tax wealth and effort because of this impediment
enrollment in each county.Adding charter school enrollments to to estimating the market value of property valuations. In 1984,
the ADM of the county in which each charter school is located the Department of Revenue completed its first statewide Sales/
produces a base calculation of total ADM for each county. However, Assessment Ratio Study,comparing the market value of recently
charter schools may enroll students from across county lines, sold property with its assessed value. Using the ratio of assessed
with local funding flowing from each student's district of residence property value to market value,the Department calculated an
to the charter school he or she attends(this is different from adjusted property tax rate for each county.The longer it has
state ADM funding for charter schools).These cross-district been since a county has undergone reevaluation,the more likely
enrollments are not captured by the ADM & MLD report. it is that the market value of property in the county exceeds its
assessed valuation.
Therefore,the 2016 Local School Finance Study relies on results
of a survey of districts conducted by the Division of School Rapidly growing communities have numerous demands on public
Business in 2014 to account for all students within each district services,and the demands tend to outstrip land value increases.
who attend charter schools.Survey data are provided at the Therefore,to meet the increase in demands for additional services,
Office of Charter Schools website for information only and are local officials must either revalue property more often or raise
not used for any financial or budget purposes. taxes. In an effort to make this study as accurate as possible,a
three-year weighted average is used to calculate the adjusted
CAPITAL SPENDING property valuation.This approach is intended to result in more
Data from the North Carolina Department of State Treasurer's accurate valuations for small,rural counties where relatively few
Report on County Spending on Public School Capital Outlays land transactions might have taken place during any given year.
was used to calculate a six-year average of county appropriations OTHER REVENUE SOURCES
for capital outlay,interest on debt for school construction,and
the net change in capital reserves.Withdrawals from the Public The primary source of local revenue is property taxes. In addition
School Building Capital Fund,Grants from the Public School to property taxes,this study includes a county's share of local
Building Bond Fund,and the North Carolina Education Lottery option sales taxes and fines and forfeitures.Allotments from the
Funds have been removed from the county total.The debt service ADM fund and grants for school construction have been removed
includes expenditures for school bond repayment and lease to isolate capital spending. Finally,11 counties have supplemental
purchase agreements.The capital outlay is actual spending on school taxes, with additional revenue totaling$62.9 million in
capital projects or equipment for buildings. 2013-14.
a
, .
•
•
y . i
' \
IP rr
14,
Y
r
>12
TABLE 1: RANKING OF ADJUSTED PROPERTY VALUATIONS PER STUDENT
This table reflects the real estate wealth available to counties to support education.The ranking is based on the total adjusted property valuation for each county,divided by
the number of students attending public school in the county.The property valuation was adjusted using a three-year weighted average of the Sales/Assessment Ratios.
COUNTIES RANK PREVIOUS LAST YEAR EFFECTIVE COUNTY 2012-13 ADJUSTED 2012-13 ADJUSTED PROPERTY
YEAR'S RANK REVALUED TAX RATE PROPERTY TAX BASE FINAL ADM TAX BASE PER ADM
Dare 1 1 2013 $0.40 $13,508,705,219.00 4,970 $2,718,049.34
Jackson 2 2 2008 $0.38 $8,660,677,400.00 3,925 $2,206,542.01
Avery 3 4 2010 $0.41 $4,488,947,875.00 2,174 $2,064,833.43
Watauga 4 5 2006 $0.32 $8,910,703,347.00 4,478 $1,989,884.62
Brunswick 5 6 2011 $0.47 $23,374,581,987.00 13,185 $1,772,816.23
Hyde 6 7 2009 $0.72 $1,032,166,418.00 592 $1,743,524.35
Macon 7 8 2007 $0.35 $7,558,664,110.00 4,352 $1,736,825.39
Carteret 8 9 2011 $0.32 $14,153,242,356.00 8,604 $1,644,960.76
Transylvania 9 10 2009 $0.45 $5,905,904,836.00 3,725 $1,585,477.81
Currituck 10 3 2013 $0.46 $6,069497,414.00 3,884 $1,562,743.93
Ashe 11 11 2011 $0.43 $3,861,129,810.00 3,157 $1,223,037.63
Clay 12 12 2010 $0.48 $1,607,935,584.00 1,332 $1,207,158.85
New Hanover 13 14 2012 $0.53 $30,376,594,402.00 25,998 $1,168,420.43
Pamlico 14 21 2012 $0.55 $1,778,740,793.00 1,524 $1,167,152.75
Polk 15 13 2009 $0.52 $2,755,851,260.00 2,375 $1,160,358.43
Yancey 16 16 2008 $0.49 $2,652,057,382.00 2,311 $1,147,580.00
Alleghany 17 15 2007 $0.54 $1,606,325,907.00 1,434 $1,120,171.48
Graham 18 17 2010 $0.46 $1,249,331,781.00 1,190 $1,049,858.64
Perquimans 19 28 2008 $0.56 $1,746,316,461.00 1,771 $986,062.37
Buncombe 20 18 2013 $0.54 $29,820,223,860.00 30,493 $977,936.70
Chatham 21 19 2009 $0.65 $8,852,346,386.00 9,054 $977,727.68
Haywood 22 22 2011 $0.56 $7,088,381,783.00 7,426 $954,535.66
Mitchell 23 25 2009 $0.42 $1,870,217,464.00 1,965 $951,764.61
Warren 24 20 2009 $0.74 $2,317,246,355.00 2,543 $911,225.46
Madison 25 26 2012 $0.46 $2,289,657,781.00 2,518 $909,316.04
Moore 26 23 2007 $0.48 $11,844,605,732.00 13,198 $897,454.59
Henderson 27 24 2011 $0.52 $12,186,741,200.00 13,716 $888,505.48
Cherokee 28 27 2012 $0.54 $2,926,788,835.00 3,486 $839,583.72
Tyrrell 29 29 2009 $0.78 $449,190,749.00 537 $836,481.84
Northampton 30 35 2011 $0.98 $1,946,648,025.00 2,351 $828,008.52
Durham 31 30 2008 $0.80 $30,027,873,661.00 37,860 $793,129.26
Orange 32 32 2009 $0.88 $15,859,315,581.00 20,205 $784,920.35
Mecklenburg 33 31 2011 $0.79 $119,287,967,842.00 153,193 $778,677.67
Beaufort 34 33 2010 $0.58 $5,533,780,555.00 7,244 $763,912.28
Swain 35 37 2013 $0.36 $1,550,907,992.00 2,058 $753,599.61
Person 36 39 2013 $0.71 $4,236,216,641.00 5,625 $753,105.18
Wake 37 36 2008 $0.57 $117,432,195,440.00 159,357 $736,912.69
Jones 38 42 2006 $0.74 $801,816,571.00 1,099 $729,587.42
Pender 39 34 2011 $0.53 $6,232,289,281.00 8,704 $716,025.88
Iredell 40 38 2011 $0.50 $20,291,936,406.00 28,555 $710,626.38
Montgomery 41 40 2012 $0.60 $2,822,492,694.00 4,157 $678,973.46
Chowan 42 48 2006 $0.71 $1,475,718,495.00 2,211 $667,443.91
Lincoln 43 44 2011 $0.62 $8,214,512,128.00 12,313 $667,141.41 LI J
Catawba 44 45 2011 $0.54 $16,031,880,376.00 24,121 $664,644.10 V
Davie 45 41 2013 $0.68 $4,036,818,240.00 6,380 $632,730.13
Rutherford 46 50 2012 $0.62 $5,916,509,015.00 9,438 $626,881.65 Q
Guilford 47 46 2012 $0.76 $46,675,847,548.00 75,340 $619,536.07
Craven 48 47 2010 $0.52 $8,922,183,481.00 14,433 $618,179.41 Z
Forsyth 49 43 2013 $0.71 $32,013,247,973.00 55,608 $575,695.01 LI J
Pasquotank 50 56 2006 $0.68 $3,199,099,080.00 5,648 $566,412.73 a
Rowan 51 49 2011 $0.66 $11,219,269,985.00 19,813 $566,258.01
McDowell 52 52 2011 $0.53 $3,526,448,741.00 6,359 $554,560.27 a
Wilkes 53 51 2013 $0.64 $5,478,182,157.00 9,900 $553,351.73 Q
Stokes 54 53 2013 $0.61 $3,611,508,297.00 6,558 $550,702.70
Onslow 55 57 2010 $0.59 $13,779,514,547.00 25,084 $549,334.82 n
Bladen 56 60 2007 $0.72 $2,685,287,249.00 5,002 $536,842.71
Cabarrus 57 54 2012 $0.69 $19,443,610,879.00 36,285 $535,858.09
Martin 58 81 2009 $0.76 $1,965,809,368.00 3,677 $534,623.16
Camden 59 55 2007 $0.73 $1,004,097,152.00 1,888 $531,831.12
Caswell 60 59 2008 $0.65 $1,547,308,689.00 2,916 $530,627.12
Stanly 61 67 2013 $0.64 $4,511,398,511.00 8,808 $512,193.29
Washington 62 69 2013 $0.82 $861,800,981.00 1,690 $509,941.41
Lee 63 62 2013 $0.72 $5,048,868,559.00 9,954 $507,220.07
Rockingham 64 64 2011 $0.72 $6,773,967,243.00 13,361 $506,995.53
Yadkin 65 70 2009 $0.72 $2,760,343,214.00 5,463 $505,279.74
Caldwell 66 77 2013 $0.60 $6,106,676,762.00 12,094 $504,934.41
Davidson 67 65 2007 $0.57 $12,682,817,537.00 25,222 $502,847.42
Alamance 68 61 2009 $0.58 $11,781,303,048.00 23,523 $500,841.86
Union 69 63 2008 $0.76 $21,270,977,915.00 42,640 $498,850.33
Alexander 70 68 2007 $0.61 $2,568,497,465.00 5,251 $489,144.44
Pitt 71 72 2012 $0.68 $11,491,347,524.00 23,711 $484,642.04
Gates 72 73 2009 $0.83 $797,127,405.00 1,650 $483,107.52
Burke 73 58 2013 $0.69 $6,210,896,159.00 12,944 $479,828.20
Cleveland 74 76 2008 $0.77 $7,548,409,296.00 15,821 $477,113.29
Franklin 75 75 2012 $0.84 $4,405,255,447.00 9,295 $473,938.19
Wilson 76 66 2008 $0.80 $6,224,807,713.00 13,151 $473,333.41
Hertford 77 71 2011 $0.93 $1,417,535,893.00 3,029 $467,988.08
Anson 78 78 2010 $0.84 $1,651,554,649.00 3,578 $461,585.98
Surry 79 79 2012 $0.58 $5,341,637,659.00 11,634 $459,140.25
Randolph 80 83 2007 $0.62 $10,307,903,697.00 22,934 $449,459.48
Halifax 81 84 2007 $0.69 $3,619,518,390.00 8,055 $449,350.51
Granville 82 80 2010 $0.87 $3,908,176,226.00 8,749 $446,699.76
Gaston 83 82 2007 $0.94 $14,346,103,880.00 32,732 $438,289.87
Edgecombe 84 87 2009 $0.89 $3,031,774,343.00 6,966 $435,224.57
Bertie 85 74 2012 $0.81 $1,118,378,138.00 2,604 $429,484.69
Lenoir 86 88 2009 $0.83 $3,978,786,169.00 9,325 $426,679.48
Cumberland 87 86 2009 $0.77 $21,824,328,648.00 51,558 $423,296.65
Duplin 88 85 2009 $0.69 $4,055,529,623.00 9,598 $422,539.03
Nash 89 89 2009 $0.67 $7,054,852,541.00 16,918 $417,002.75
Wayne 90 90 2011 $0.67 $7,830,354,109.00 19,104 $409,880.34
Columbus 91 93 2013 $0.75 $3,641,269,021.00 9,086 $400,756.00
Johnston 92 92 2011 $0.78 $13,804,483,327.00 34,511 $400,002.41
Richmond 93 91 2008 $0.84 $3,023,791,477.00 7,599 $397,919.66
Harnett 94 94 2009 $0.75 $7,714,777,197.00 20,122 $383,400.12
Hoke 95 95 2006 $0.71 $3,033,359,657.00 8,393 $361,415.42
Sampson 96 96 2011 $0.81 $4,052,644,739.00 11,518 $351,853.16
Scotland 97 97 2011 $1.08 $2,001,667,553.00 6,013 $332,890.00
Greene 98 98 2013 $0.82 $1,025,478,631.00 3,150 $325,548.77
Vance 99 99 2008 $1.01 $2,369,333,515.00 7,349 $322,402.17
Robeson 100 100 2010 $0.76 $6,066,402,474.00 23,704 $255,923.16
State Total/Average 0.654 $984,977,404,911.00 1,492,106 $760,890.67
13<
TABLE 2: ACTUAL EFFORT
This table reflects the actual dollar effort of communities to fund schools,without taking into account property wealth.This ranking is based on 2013-14 total current
spending for each county(including supplemental school taxes),divided by the number of students attending public school in the county.High-wealth communities with
corresponding high levels of spending tend to rank highest in this measure.
COUNTIES RANK PREVIOUS 2013-14 2013-14 2013-14 2012-13 TOTAL 2013-14 2013-14
THIS YEAR'S CURRENT CURRENT SPENDING SUPPLEMENTAL CURRENT SPENDING FINAL TOTAL CURRENT
YEAR RANK SPENDING PER ADM SCHOOL TAXES (WITH SUPPLEMENTAL) ADM SPENDING PER ADM
Orange 1 1 $66,067,252.00 3,270 $21,933,520 $88,000,772 20,205 $4,355
Dare 2 2 $19,796,968.00 $3,983 $0 $19,796,968 4,970 $3,983
Durham 3 3 $118,073,439.00 $3,119 $0 $118,073,439 37,860 $3,119
Chatham 4 4 $25,551,130.00 $2,822 $0 $25,551,130 9,054 $2,822
Watauga 5 5 $12,062,834.00 $2,694 $0 $12,062,834 4,478 $2,694
Transylvania 6 6 $9,845,374.00 $2,643 $0 $9,845,374 3,725 $2,643
New Hanover 7 7 $64,740,640.00 $2,490 $0 $64,740,640 25,998 $2,490
Brunswick 8 8 $31,554,919.00 $2,393 $0 $31,554,919 13,185 $2,393
Guilford 9 9 $177,130,398.00 $2,351 $0 $177,130,398 75,340 $2,351
Mecklenburg 10 11 $354,244,548.00 $2,312 $0 $354,244,548 153,193 $2,312
Currituck 11 10 $8,971,907.00 $2,310 $0 $8,971,907 3,884 $2,310
Carteret 12 13 $18,850,000.00 $2,191 $0 $18,850,000 8,604 $2,191
Buncombe 13 14 $56,388,063.00 $1,849 $8,142,348 $64,530,411 30,493 $2,116
Wake 14 15 $323,966,127.00 $2,033 $0 $323,966,127 159,357 $2,033
Hyde 15 12 $1,199,568.00 $2,026 $0 $1,199,568 592 $2,026
Polk 16 18 $4,784,788.00 $2,015 $0 $4,784,788 2,375 $2,015
Forsyth 17 16 $110,221,384.00 $1,982 $0 $110,221,384 55,608 $1,982
Haywood 18 20 $14,391,679.00 $1,938 $0 $14,391,679 7,426 $1,938
Union 19 19 $79,597,759.00 $1,867 $0 $79,597,759 42,640 $1,867
Moore 20 17 $24,414,510.00 $1,850 $0 $24,414,510 13,198 $1,850
Avery 21 21 $3,973,725.00 $1,828 $0 $3,973,725 2,174 $1,828
Macon 22 24 $7,842,793.00 $1,802 $0 $7,842,793 4,352 $1,802
Pasquotank 23 22 $10,004,858.00 $1,771 $0 $10,004,858 5,648 $1,771
Alleghany 24 23 $2,468,742.00 $1,722 $0 $2,468,742 1,434 $1,722
Beaufort 25 26 $12,445,150.00 $1,718 $0 $12,445,150 7,244 $1,718
Jackson 26 29 $6,720,774.00 $1,712 $0 $6,720,774 3,925 $1,712
Gates 27 32 $2,818,696.00 $1,708 $0 $2,818,696 1,650 $1,708
Scotland 28 25 $10,139,325.00 $1,686 $0 $10,139,325 6,013 $1,686
Pamlico 29 40 $2,562,453.00 $1,681 $0 $2,562,453 1,524 $1,681
Cherokee 30 49 $5,729,338.00 $1,644 $0 $5,729,338 3,486 $1,644
Cabarrus 31 31 $58,896,196.00 $1,623 $0 $58,896,196 36,285 $1,623
Onslow 32 28 $40,529,260.00 $1,616 $0 $40,529,260 25,084 $1,616
Person 33 33 $9,038,798.00 $1,607 $0 $9,038,798 5,625 $1,607
Rowan 34 30 $31,789,444.00 $1,604 $0 $31,789,444 19,813 $1,604
Iredell 35 34 $38,601,912.00 $1,352 $6,160,623 $44,762,535 28,555 $1,568
Stokes 36 39 $10,211,763.00 $1,557 $0 $10,211,763 6,558 $1,557
Chowan 37 38 $3,421,929.00 $1,548 $0 $3,421,929 2,211 $1,548
Lee 38 27 $15,338,050.00 $1,541 $0 $15,338,050 9,954 $1,541
Henderson 39 37 $20,943,846.00 $1,527 $0 $20,943,846 13,716 $1,527
N Johnston 40 35 $52,000,000.00 $1,507 $0 $52,000,000 34,511 $1,507
LyJ Pender 41 36 $12,942,622.00 $1,487 $0 $12,942,622 8,704 $1,487
U Warren 42 61 $3,775,219.00 $1,485 $0 $3,775,219 2,543 $1,485
Pitt 43 43 $35,076,287.00 $1,479 $0 $35,076,287 23,711 $1,479
- Cumberland 44 42 $76,220,676.00 $1,478 $0 $76,220,676 51,558 $1,478
Catawba 45 44 $35,652,126.00 $1,478 $0 $35,652,126 24,121 $1,478
Z Martin 46 45 $5,380,044.00 $1,463 $0 $5,380,044 3,677 $1,463
w Davie 47 41 $9,333,832.00 $1,463 $0 $9,333,832 6,380 $1,463
a Granville 48 47 $12,385,287.00 $1,416 $0 $12,385,287 8,749 $1,416
Ashe 49 55 $4,448,032.00 $1,409 $0 $4,448,032 3,157 $1,409
CL Franklin 50 52 $13,094,566.00 $1,409 $0 $13,094,566 9,295 $1,409
Q Hertford 51 48 $4,173,524.00 $1,378 $0 $4,173,524 3,029 $1,378
Northampton 52 58 $3,161,538.00 $1,345 $0 $3,161,538 2,351 $1,345
J. Lincoln 53 53 $16,548,422.00 $1,344 $0 $16,548,422 12,313 $1,344
Cleveland 54 51 $9,849,570.00 $623 $11,207,024 $21,056,594 15,821 $1,331
Alamance 55 50 $30,977,274.00 $1,317 $0 $30,977,274 23,523 $1,317
Craven 56 62 $18,951,126.00 $1,313 $0 $18,951,126 14,433 $1,313
Gaston 57 54 $42,726,704.00 $1,305 $0 $42,726,704 32,732 $1,305
Wilson 58 59 $17,155,274.00 $1,304 $0 $17,155,274 13,151 $1,304
Jones 59 66 $1,425,292.00 $1,297 $0 $1,425,292 1,099 $1,297
Nash 60 57 $21,182,431.00 $1,252 $725,000 $21,907,431 16,918 $1,295
Yancey 61 60 $2,968,141.00 $1,284 $0 $2,968,141 2,311 $1,284
Davidson 62 63 $29,152,488.00 $1,156 $2,865,065 $32,017,553 25,222 $1,269
Perquimans 63 64 $2,200,000.00 $1,242 $0 $2,200,000 1,771 $1,242
Bladen 64 71 $6,189,970.00 $1,237 $0 $6,189,970 5,002 $1,237
McDowell 65 70 $7,653,263.00 $1,204 $0 $7,653,263 6,359 $1,204
Montgomery 66 46 $4,998,796.00 $1,203 $0 $4,998,796 4,157 $1,203
Caldwell 67 67 $14,525,000.00 $1,201 $0 $14,525,000 12,094 $1,201
Rutherford 68 56 $11,246,442.00 $1,192 $0 $11,246,442 9,438 $1,192
Surry 69 65 $12,177,164.00 $1,047 $1,675,566 $13,852,730 11,634 $1,191
Rockingham 70 68 $15,834,840.00 $1,185 $0 $15,834,840 13,361 $1,185
Randolph 71 69 $21,664,017.00 $945 $5,154,180 $26,818,197 22,934 $1,169
Wilkes 72 73 $10,873,988.00 $1,098 $0 $10,873,988 9,900 $1,098
Stanly 73 77 $9,570,868.00 $1,087 $0 $9,570,868 8,808 $1,087
Mitchell 74 78 $2,122,622.00 $1,080 $0 $2,122,622 1,965 $1,080
Anson 75 83 $3,832,250.00 $1,071 $0 $3,832,250 3,578 $1,071
Burke 76 82 $13,828,400.00 $1,068 $0 $13,828,400 12,944 $1,068
Yadkin 77 74 $5,800,431.00 $1,062 $0 $5,800,431 5,463 $1,062
Lenoir 78 75 $9,900,000.00 $1,062 $0 $9,900,000 9,325 $1,062
Halifax 79 84 $5,202,229.00 $646 $3,176,862 $8,379,091 8,055 $1,040
Harnett 80 76 $20,523,700.00 $1,020 $243,385 $20,767,085 20,122 $1,032
Alexander 81 87 $5,400,000.00 $1,028 $0 $5,400,000 5,251 $1,028
Tyrrell 82 86 $537,320.00 $1,001 $0 $537,320 537 $1,001
Sampson 83 81 $9,916,357.00 $861 $1,581,052 $11,497,409 11,518 $998
Wayne 84 80 $19,017,994.00 $995 $0 $19,017,994 19,104 $995
Vance 85 85 $7,202,440.00 $980 $0 $7,202,440 7,349 $980
Bertie 86 72 $2,503,000.00 $961 $0 $2,503,000 2,604 $961
Edgecombe 87 88 $6,666,857.00 $957 $0 $6,666,857 6,966 $957
Madison 88 92 $2,368,901.00 $941 $0 $2,368,901 2,518 $941
Duplin 89 79 $9,000,000.00 $938 $0 $9,000,000 9,598 $938
Richmond 90 89 $6,924,932.00 $911 $0 $6,924,932 7,599 $911
Washington 91 91 $1,525,000.00 $902 $0 $1,525,000 1,690 $902
Camden 92 90 $1,703,000.00 $902 $0 $1,703,000 1,888 $902
Clay 93 96 $1,177,191.00 $884 $0 $1,177,191 1,332 $884
Caswell 94 93 $2,469,413.00 $847 $0 $2,469,413 2,916 $847
Columbus 95 94 $6,902,401.00 $760 $0 $6,902,401 9,086 $760
Greene 96 95 $2,168,000.00 $688 $0 $2,168,000 3,150 $688
Graham 97 97 $747,383.00 $628 $0 $747,383 1,190 $628
Hoke 98 98 $4,469,874.00 $533 $0 $4,469,874 8,393 $533
Robeson 99 99 $12,375,000.00 $522 $0 $12,375,000 23,704 $522
Swain 100 100 $788,843.00 $383 $0 $788,843 2,058 $383
State Total/Average $25,559,187.00 $1,466 $62,864,625 $2,618,783,325 1,492,106 $1,500
>14
TABLE 2A: SIX-YEAR AVERAGE OF CAPITAL OUTLAY AND DEBT SERVICE
This table provides a six-year average of capital outlay and debt service,ordered according to the rankings from Table 2.In previous years'studies,this data was
included in Table 2.
COUNTIES ACTUAL EFFORT 2013-14 TOTAL SIX-YEAR SIX-YEAR 2013-14 CAPITAL DEBT
RANK THIS YEAR CURRENT SPENDING PER CAPITAL OUTLAY CAPITAL DEBT FINAL OUTLAY SPENDING PER SERVICE
(FROM TABLE 2) ADM(FROM TABLE 2) AVERAGE SERVICE AVERAGE ADM ADM PER ADM
Orange 1 $4,355 $11,458,484 $17,033,885 20,205 567.11 843.05
Dare 2 $3,983 $1,635,945 $9,175,247 4,970 329.16 1846.13
Durham 3 $3,119 $35,639,969 $15,484,235 37,860 941.36 408.99
Chatham 4 $2,822 $5,540,464 $4,063,260 9,054 611.94 448.78
Watauga 5 $2,694 $7,188,997 $6,921,069 4,478 1605.4 1545.57
Transylvania 6 $2,643 $1,503,951 $2,475,950 3,725 403.75 664.68
New Hanover 7 $2,490 $12,430,240 $18,875,351 25,998 478.12 726.03
Brunswick 8 $2,393 $7,806,481 $5,476,520 13,185 592.07 415.36
Guilford 9 $2,351 $54,357,112 $46,054,850 75,340 721.49 611.29
Mecklenburg 10 $2,312 $93,761,364 $132,116,138 153,193 612.05 862.42
Currituck 11 $2,310 $2,440,642 $1,820,416 3,884 628.38 468.7
Carteret 12 $2,191 $6,278,881 $6,500,123 8,604 729.76 755.48
Buncombe 13 $2,116 $19,437,537 $11,505,421 30,493 637.44 377.31
Wake 14 $2,033 $114,109,764 $154,376,638 159,357 716.06 968.75
Hyde 15 $2,026 $736,076 $71,381 592 1243.37 120.58
Polk 16 $2,015 $337,715 $961,537 2,375 142.2 404.86
Forsyth 17 $1,982 $38,924,383 $26,700,723 55,608 699.98 480.16
Haywood 18 $1,938 $800,338 $2,332,666 7,426 107.78 314.12
Union 19 $1,867 $17,222,131 $45,839,637 42,640 403.9 1075.04
Moore 20 $1,850 $5,104,385 $6,163,310 13,198 386.75 466.99
Avery 21 $1,828 $1,906,631 $1,510,120 2,174 877.02 694.63
Macon 22 $1,802 $5,472,949 $4,235,168 4,352 1257.57 973.15
Pasquotank 23 $1,771 $706,764 $2,443,765 5,648 125.14 432.68
Alleghany 24 $1,722 $906,178 $605,317 1,434 631.92 422.12
Beaufort 25 $1,718 $1,174,553 $2,078,847 7,244 162.14 286.97
Jackson 26 $1,712 $3,251,357 $1,855,762 3,925 828.37 472.81
Gates 27 $1,708 $910,055 $809,389 1,650 551.55 490.54
Scotland 28 $1,686 $877,001 $528,620 6,013 145.85 87.91
Pamlico 29 $1,681 $193,394 $471,303 1,524 126.9 309.25
Cherokee 30 $1,644 $1,320,167 $1,053,714 3,486 378.71 302.27
Cabarrus 31 $1,623 $15,896,838 $27,958,350 36,285 438.11 770.52
Onslow 32 $1,616 $6,369,826 $7,915,063 25,084 253.94 315.54
Person 33 $1,607 $1,440,471 $2,610,201 5,625 256.08 464.04
Rowan 34 $1,604 $2,349,587 $9,397,776 19,813 118.59 474.32
Iredell 35 $1,568 $19,897,290 $24,825,161 28,555 696.81 869.38
Stokes 36 $1,557 $5,191,399 $2,093,597 6,558 791.61 319.24
Chowan 37 $1,548 $108,210 $802,239 2,211 48.94 362.84
Lee 38 $1,541 $5,684,211 $6,721,298 9,954 571.05 675.24
Henderson 39 $1,527 $6,153,588 $4,966,146 13,716 448.64 362.07
Johnston 40 $1,507 $12,330,030 $30,133,677 34,511 357.28 873.16 (n
Pender 41 $1,487 $3,325,470 $5,309,325 8,704 382.06 609.99 W
Warren 42 $1,485 $500,382 $475,058 2,543 196.77 186.81
Pitt 43 $1,479 $8,579,514 $8,248,697 23,711 361.84 347.88 U
Cumberland 44 $1,478 $17,873,809 $4,957,854 51,558 346.67 96.16 -
Catawba 45 $1,478 $18,430,017 $19,041,420 24,121 764.07 789.41 CI
Martin 46 $1,463 $3,054,375 $717,957 3,677 830.67 195.26 Z
Davie 47 $1,463 $1,814,633 $2,094,909 6,380 284.43 328.36 W
Granville 48 $1,416 $1,849,118 $4,386,225 8,749 211.35 501.34
Ashe 49 $1,409 $690,842 $1,507,169 3,157 218.83 477.41 a
Franklin 50 $1,409 $9,367,517 $6,173,073 9,295 1007.8 664.13 a
Hertford 51 $1,378 $834,628 $- 3,029 275.55 0
Northampton 52 $1,345 $263,035 $776,265 2,351 111.88 330.19 Q
Lincoln 53 $1,344 $3,870,375 $7,360,260 12,313 314.33 597.76 n
Cleveland 54 $1,331 $7,142,928 $1,298,838 15,821 451.48 82.1
Alamance 55 $1,317 $2,048,253 $6,176,470 23523 87.07 262.57
Craven 56 $1,313 $1,596,175 $5,116,811 14,433 110.59 354.52
Gaston 57 $1,305 $22,135,280 $7,539,259 32,732 676.26 230.33
Wilson 58 $1,304 $1,915,258 $4,022,265 13,151 145.64 305.85
Jones 59 $1,297 $105,142 $16,736 1,099 95.67 15.23
Nash 60 $1,295 $9,995,729 $1,658,057 16,918 590.83 98.01
Yancey 61 $1,284 $567,234 $- 2,311 245.45 0
Davidson 62 $1,269 $10,827,468 $7,101,752 25,222 429.29 281.57
Perquimans 63 $1,242 $859,149 $603,783 1,771 485.12 340.93
Bladen 64 $1,237 $450,801 $1,376,935 5,002 90.12 275.28
McDowell 65 $1,204 $2,075,981 $1,000,595 6,359 326.46 157.35
Montgomery 66 $1,203 $807,504 $897,796 4,157 194.25 215.97
Caldwell 67 $1,201 $1,941,115 $2,304,801 12,094 160.5 190.57
Rutherford 68 $1,192 $2,115,380 $5,419,373 9,438 224.13 574.21
Surry 69 $1,191 $4,471,587 $3,997,848 11,634 384.36 343.63
Rockingham 70 $1,185 $3,783,901 $2,968,231 13,361 283.2 222.16
Randolph 71 $1,169 $7,072,680 $10,930,612 22,934 308.39 476.61
Wilkes 72 $1,098 $2,276,994 $4,025,897 9,900 230 406.66
Stanly 73 $1,087 $4,103,023 $1,863,573 8,808 465.83 211.58
Mitchell 74 $1,080 $450,319 $494,255 1,965 229.17 251.53
Anson 75 $1,071 $82,945 $693,435 3,578 23.18 193.81
Burke 76 $1,068 $2,353,523 $4,408,399 12,944 181.82 340.57
Yadkin 77 $1,062 $3,431,483 $1,442,019 5,463 628.13 263.96
Lenoir 78 $1,062 $5,944,721 $1,198,767 9,325 637.5 128.55
Halifax 79 $1,040 $1,474,013 $1,325,110 8,055 182.99 164.51
Harnett 80 $1,032 $10,390,428 $8,379,821 20,122 516.37 416.45
Alexander 81 $1,028 $163,662 $1,191,839 5,251 31.17 226.97
Tyrrell 82 $1,001 $85,196 $72,084 537 158.65 134.23
Sampson 83 $998 $4,630,466 $6,389,904 11,518 402.02 554.78
Wayne 84 $995 $5,120,209 $638,973 19,104 268.02 33.45
Vance 85 $980 $3,692,621 $1,525,078 7,349 502.47 207.52
Bertie 86 $961 $539,134 $483,147 2,604 207.04 185.54
Edgecombe 87 $957 $1,433,745 $795,665 6,966 205.82 114.22
Madison 88 $941 $380,691 $273,366 2518 151.19 108.56
Duplin 89 $938 $1,695,794 $1,185,551 9,598 176.68 123.52
Richmond 90 $911 $2,971,100 $471,165 7,599 390.99 62
Washington 91 $902 $519,304 $185,399 1,690 307.28 109.7
Camden 92 $902 $102,415 $243,477 1,888 54.25 128.96
Clay 93 $884 $245,858 $97,674 1,332 184.58 73.33
Caswell 94 $847 $395,514 $569,480 2,916 135.64 195.29
Columbus 95 $760 $1,717,769 $191,313 9,086 189.06 21.06
Greene 96 $688 $2,546,830 $352,365 3,150 808.52 111.86
Graham 97 $628 $13,946 $342,090 1,190 11.72 287.47
Hoke 98 $533 $4,001,016 $1,253,047 8,393 476.71 149.3
Robeson 99 $522 $4,379,564 $- 23,704 184.76 0
Swain 100 $383 $475,563 $720,072 2,058 231.08 349.89
State Total/Average $1,500 $744,838,484 $811,255,209 1,492,106 $404 $389
15<
- TABLE 3:ACTUAL EFFORT WITH SUPPLEMENTAL FUNDING FOR LOW-WEALTH AND SMALL COUNTIES -
This table uses many of the same figures as Table 2,but adds state supplemental funding for low-wealth and small counties to the total current spending.Counties are
ranked based on their total current spending combined with low-wealth and small county supplemental funding.
COUNTY RANK PREVIOUS 2013-14 2013-14 2013-14 2013-14 SMALL 2013-14 TOTAL 2013-14 2013-14 TOTAL CHANGE IN SPENDING
YEAR'S TOTAL CURRENT TOTAL CURRENT LOW-WEALTH COUNTY FUNDING CURRENT SPENDING FINAL CURRENT SPENDING PER PER ADM W/LOW
RANK SPENDING(FROM SPENDING FUNDING W/LOW WEALTH& ADM ADM W/LOW WEALTH WEALTH&SMALL
TABLE 2) PER ADM SMALL COUNTY &SMALL COUNTY COUNTY
Hyde 1 1 $1,199,568.00 $2,026 $0 $1,662,659 $2,862,227.00 592 $4,835 $2,809
Tyrrell 2 2 $537,320.00 $1,001 $163,984 $1,699,726 $2,401,030.00 537 $4,471 $3,471
Orange 3 3 $88,000,772.00 $4,355 $0 $88,000,772.00 20,205 $4,355 $0
Dare 4 4 $19,796,968.00 $3,983 $0 $19,796,968.00 4,970 $3,983 $0
Jones 5 5 $1,425,292.00 $1,297 $233,858 $1,891,496 $3,550,646.00 1,099 $3,231 $1,934
Gates 6 7 $2,818,696.00 $1,708 $884,216 $1,581,165 $5,284,077.00 1,650 $3,202 $1,494
Durham 7 6 $118,073,439.00 $3,119 $0 $118,073,439.00 37,860 $3,119 $0
Pamlico 8 15 $2,562,453.00 $1,681 $0 $1,833,233 $4,395,686.00 1,524 $2,884 $1,203
Chatham 9 8 $25,551,130.00 $2,822 $0 $25,551,130.00 9,054 $2,822 $0
Alleghany 10 9 $2,468,742.00 $1,722 $0 $1,539,027 $4,007,769.00 1,434 $2,795 $1,073
Watauga 11 11 $12,062,834.00 $2,694 $0 $12,062,834.00 4,478 $2,694 $0
Transylvania 12 13 $9,845,374.00 $2,643 $0 $9,845,374.00 3,725 $2,643 $0
Polk 13 10 $4,784,788.00 $2,015 $0 $1,423,270 $6,208,058.00 2,375 $2,614 $599
Avery 14 12 $3,973,725.00 $1,828 $0 $1,494,888 $5,468,613.00 2,174 $2,515 $688
New Hanover 15 14 $64,740,640.00 $2,490 $0 $64,740,640.00 25,998 $2,490 $0
Brunswick 16 16 $31,554,919.00 $2,393 $0 $31,554,919.00 13,185 $2,393 $0
Chowan 17 20 $3,421,929.00 $1,548 $192,088 $1,638,696 $5,252,713.00 2,211 $2,376 $828
Hertford 18 17 $4,173,524.00 $1,378 $1,388,338 $1,561,230 $7,123,092.00 3,029 $2,352 $974
Guilford 19 18 $177,130,398.00 $2,351 $0 $177,130,398.00 75,340 $2,351 $0
Northampton 20 27 $3,161,538.00 $1,345 $810,222 $1,536,170 $5,507,930.00 2,351 $2,343 $998
Mecklenburg 21 21 $354,244,548.00 $2,312 $0 $354,244,548.00 153,193 $2,312 $0
Currituck 22 19 $8,971,907.00 $2,310 $0 $8,971,907.00 3,884 $2,310 $0
Martin 23 25 $5,380,044.00 $1,463 $1,335,845 $1,659,704 $8,375,593.00 3,677 $2,278 $815
Scotland 24 22 $10,139,325.00 $1,686 $3,443,380 $13,582,705.00 6,013 $2,259 $573
Perquimans 25 26 $2,200,000.00 $1,242 $143,122 $1,588,936 $3,932,058.00 1,771 $2,220 $978
Warren 26 33 $3,775,219.00 $1,485 $311,082 $1,516,053 $5,602,354.00 2,543 $2,203 $718
Carteret 27 28 $18,850,000.00 $2,191 $0 $18,850,000.00 8,604 $2,191 $0
Bertie 28 24 $2,503,000.00 $961 $1,725,438 $1,460,938 $5,689,376.00 2,604 $2,185 $1,224
Washington 29 23 $1,525,000.00 $902 $709,833 $1,436,417 $3,671,250.00 1,690 $2,172 $1,270
Anson 30 37 $3,832,250.00 $1,071 $2,137,245 $1,616,107 $7,585,602.00 3,578 $2,120 $1,049
Buncombe 31 29 $64,530,411.00 $2,116 $0 $64,530,411.00 30,493 $2,116 $0
Graham 32 35 $747,383.00 $628 $24,299 $1,742,449 $2,514,131.00 1,190 $2,113 $1,485
Wake 33 30 $323,966,127.00 $2,033 $0 $323,966,127.00 159,357 $2,033 $0
Pasquotank 34 36 $10,004,858.00 $1,771 $1,434,189 $11,439,047.00 5,648 $2,025 $254
Clay 35 47 $1,177,191.00 $884 $0 $1,518,021 $2,695,212.00 1,332 $2,023 $1,140
Forsyth 36 31 $110,221,384.00 $1,982 $0 $110,221,384.00 55,608 $1,982 $0
Yancey 37 39 $2,968,141.00 $1,284 $0 $1,525,416 $4,493,557.00 2,311 $1,944 $660
Union 38 32 $79,597,759.00 $1,867 $3,081,805 $82,679,564.00 42,640 $1,939 $72
Haywood 39 45 $14,391,679.00 $1,938 $0 $14,391,679.00 7,426 $1,938 $0
Stokes 40 44 $10,211,763.00 $1,557 $2,465,094 $12,676,857.00 6,558 $1,933 $376
( ) Camden 41 38 $1,703,000.00 $902 $420,422 $1,514,863 $3,638,285.00 1,888 $1,927 $1,025
W Mitchell 42 46 $2,122,622.00 $1,080 $83,654 $1,562,421 $3,768,697.00 1,965 $1,918 $838
Ashe 43 49 $4,448,032.00 $1,409 $0 $1,547,456 $5,995,488.00 3,157 $1,899 $490
U Granville 44 42 $12,385,287.00 $1,416 $4,129,171 $16,514,458.00 8,749 $1,888 $472
Greene 45 43 $2,168,000.00 $688 $2,125,703 $1,581,364 $5,875,067.00 3,150 $1,865 $1,177
Moore 46 34 $24,414,510.00 $1,850 $0 $24,414,510.00 13,198 $1,850 $0
Z Johnston 47 41 $52,000,000.00 $1,507 $11,717,323 $63,717,323.00 34,511 $1,846 $340
W Rowan 48 48 $31,789,444.00 $1,604 $4,611,044 $36,400,488.00 19,813 $1,837 $233
Beaufort 49 51 $12,445,150.00 $1,718 $682,431 $13,127,581.00 7,244 $1,812 $94
d Macon 50 59 $7,842,793.00 $1,802 $0 $7,842,793.00 4,352 $1,802 $0
a Franklin 51 55 $13,094,566.00 $1,409 $3,346,833 $16,441,399.00 9,295 $1,769 $360
< Person 52 53 $9,038,798.00 $1,607 $888,230 $9,927,028.00 5,625 $1,765 $158
Caswell 53 52 $2,469,413.00 $847 $1,090,134 $1,561,405 $5,120,952.00 2,916 $1,756 $909
Lee 54 40 $15,338,050.00 $1,541 $2,130,585 $17,468,635.00 9,954 $1,755 $214
Jackson 55 60 $6,720,774.00 $1,712 $0 $6,720,774.00 3,925 $1,712 $0
Pender 56 56 $12,942,622.00 $1,487 $1,678,058 $14,620,680.00 8,704 $1,680 $193
Caldwell 57 62 $14,525,000.00 $1,201 $5,668,245 $20,193,245.00 12,094 $1,670 $469
Pitt 58 57 $35,076,287.00 $1,479 $4,512,905 $39,589,192.00 23,711 $1,670 $190
Cherokee 59 92 $5,729,338.00 $1,644 $80,878 $5,810,216.00 3,486 $1,667 $23
Cleveland 60 54 $21,056,594.00 $1,331 $5,248,921 $26,305,515.00 15,821 $1,663 $332
Bladen 61 74 $6,189,970.00 $1,237 $2,011,049 $8,201,019.00 5,002 $1,640 $402
Cabarrus 62 64 $58,896,196.00 $1,623 $287,886 $59,184,082.00 36,285 $1,631 $8
McDowell 63 81 $7,653,263.00 $1,204 $2,654,754 $10,308,017.00 6,359 $1,621 $417
Onslow 64 58 $40,529,260.00 $1,616 $0 $40,529,260.00 25,084 $1,616 $0
Nash 65 61 $21,907,431.00 $1,295 $5,421,412 $27,328,843.00 16,918 $1,615 $320
Madison 66 79 $2,368,901.00 $941 $113,805 $1,558,937 $4,041,643.00 2,518 $1,605 $664
Iredell 67 67 $44,762,535.00 $1,568 $0 $44,762,535.00 28,555 $1,568 $0
Sampson 68 63 $11,497,409.00 $998 $6,455,722 $17,953,131.00 11,518 $1,559 $560
Randolph 69 66 $26,818,197.00 $1,169 $8,777,065 $35,595,262.00 22,934 $1,552 $383
Wilson 70 78 $17,155,274.00 $1,304 $3,224,477 $20,379,751.00 13,151 $1,550 $245
Rockingham 71 72 $15,834,840.00 $1,185 $4,869,752 $20,704,592.00 13,361 $1,550 $364
Harnett 72 65 $20,767,085.00 $1,032 $10,376,113 $31,143,198.00 20,122 $1,548 $516
Henderson 73 75 $20,943,846.00 $1,527 $0 $20,943,846.00 13,716 $1,527 $0
Davie 74 69 $9,333,832.00 $1,463 $405,043 $9,738,875.00 6,380 $1,526 $63
Alamance 75 73 $30,977,274.00 $1,317 $4,241,003 $35,218,277.00 23,523 $1,497 $180
Rutherford 76 71 $11,246,442.00 $1,192 $2,835,706 $14,082,148.00 9,438 $1,492 $300
Surry 77 70 $13,852,730.00 $1,191 $3,491,896 $17,344,626.00 11,634 $1,491 $300
Duplin 78 68 $9,000,000.00 $938 $5,268,017 $14,268,017.00 9,598 $1,487 $549
Cumberland 79 76 $76,220,676.00 $1,478 $0 $76,220,676.00 51,558 $1,478 $0
Catawba 80 82 $35,652,126.00 $1,478 $0 $35,652,126.00 24,121 $1,478 $0
Edgecombe 81 87 $6,666,857.00 $957 $3,579,276 $10,246,133.00 6,966 $1,471 $514
Richmond 82 77 $6,924,932.00 $911 $4,239,418 $11,164,350.00 7,599 $1,469 $558
Montgomery 83 50 $4,998,796.00 $1,203 $1,084,951 $6,083,747.00 4,157 $1,463 $261
Davidson 84 84 $32,017,553.00 $1,269 $4,782,748 $36,800,301.00 25,222 $1,459 $190
Lenoir 85 83 $9,900,000.00 $1,062 $3,609,901 $13,509,901.00 9,325 $1,449 $387
Vance 86 88 $7,202,440.00 $980 $3,420,570 $10,623,010.00 7,349 $1,446 $465
Yadkin 87 80 $5,800,431.00 $1,062 $2,086,358 $7,886,789.00 5,463 $1,444 $382
Halifax 88 85 $8,379,091.00 $1,040 $3,136,483 $11,515,574.00 8,055 $1,430 $389
Wayne 89 86 $19,017,994.00 $995 $8,036,684 $27,054,678.00 19,104 $1,416 $421
Stanly 90 89 $9,570,868.00 $1,087 $2,625,597 $12,196,465.00 8,808 $1,385 $298
Lincoln 91 93 $16,548,422.00 $1,344 $416,994 $16,965,416.00 12,313 $1,378 $34
Gaston 92 90 $42,726,704.00 $1,305 $2,343,683 $45,070,387.00 32,732 $1,377 $72
Wilkes 93 91 $10,873,988.00 $1,098 $2,733,672 $13,607,660.00 9,900 $1,375 $276
Burke 94 96 $13,828,400.00 $1,068 $3,840,032 $17,668,432.00 12,944 $1,365 $297
Craven 95 95 $18,951,126.00 $1,313 $672,878 $19,624,004.00 14,433 $1,360 $47
Columbus 96 98 $6,902,401.00 $760 $4,770,236 $11,672,637.00 9,086 $1,285 $525
Alexander 97 94 $5,400,000.00 $1,028 $1,316,275 $6,716,275.00 5,251 $1,279 $251
Robeson 98 97 $12,375,000.00 $522 $17,592,114 $29,967,114.00 23,704 $1,264 $742
Swain 99 99 $788,843.00 $383 $128,648 $1,618,884 $2,536,375.00 2,058 $1,232 $849
Hoke 100 100 $4,469,874.00 $533 $4,403,073 $8,872,947.00 8,393 $1,057 $525
State Total/Average $2,618,783,325 $1,500 $204,151,866 $42,870,931 $2,865,806,122 1,492,106 $1,970 $470
>16
TABLE 4: ABILITY TO PAY
This is a measure of a county's per student fiscal capacity to support public schools.It is a combined measure of revenue that would have been generated at the state
average tax rate based on 2013-14 property valuations per student(adjusted to reflect current market prices and to account for differences in income levels)and the value
of non-property tax revenues.Each county's mandated social services payments were also subtracted from total adjusted revenues.Large,urban counties combining high
adjusted property valuations with broad-based economic activity and high per capita incomes tend to rank highest on this measure.
COUNTY RANK PREVIOUS 201314 2013-14 ADJUSTED 2013-14 2013-14 2013-14 TOTAL 2013 PER PERCENT 2013-14 201314 2013-14
YEAR'S ADJUSTED PROPERTY TAX REVENUE NON-PROPERTY MANDATED REVENUES LESS CAPITA OF STATE INCOME FINAL ADM REVENUE
RANK TAX BASE (BASED ON STATE AVG. TAX REVENUE SOCIAL SERVICES SOCIAL SECURITY INCOME** AVERAGE ADJUSTED PER ADM
EFFECTIVE PROPERTY PAYMENTS* PAYMENTS PER CAPITA TOTAL
TAX RATE OF 0.6540) INCOME REVENUES
Dare 1 1 $13,508,705,219 $88,346,932 $22,998,012 $4,854,554 $106,490,390 $43,095 114.10% $121,491,062 4,970 $24,445
Carteret 2 3 $14,153,242,356 $92,562,205 $20,411,939 $4,571,621 $108,402,522 $42,515 112.60% $122,008,081 8,604 $14,180
Jackson 3 4 $8,660,677,400 $56,640,830 $9,249,657 $2,551,598 $63,338,889 $29,583 78.30% $49,604,341 3,925 $12,638
Watauga 4 6 $8510,703547 $58,276,000 $14550566 $2,347,951 $70,478,915 $29,828 79.00% $55,653,229 4,478 $12,428
Brunswick 5 5 $23,374,581,987 $152,869,766 $28,096,280 $6,630,641 $174,335,405 $34,311 90.80% $158,352,890 13,185 $12,010
Currituck 6 2 $6,069,697,414 $39595,821 $8,252,030 $2,316,095 $45,631,756 $38,129 100.90% $46,060,603 3,884 $11,859
Avery 7 8 $4,488,947,875 $29,357,719 $4,505,614 $1,491,840 $32,371,493 $29,072 77.00% $24,914,069 2,174 $11,460
Macon 8 9 $7,558,664,110 $49,433,663 $9,084,364 $2,064,706 $56,453,321 $32,556 86.20% $48,655,009 4,352 $11,180
Hyde 9 7 $1,032,166,418 $6,750,368 $1,430,864 $792,316 $7,388,916 $31,764 84.10% $6,213,309 592 $10,495
New Hanover 10 11 $30,376,594,402 $198,662,927 $76,052,779 $16,727,703 $257,988,004 $38,965 103.20% $266,122,268 25,998 $10,236
Transylvania 11 12 $5,905,904,836 $38,624,618 $6,873,459 $2,307,932 $43,190,145 $31,976 84.70% $36,560,811 3,725 $9,815
Chatham 12 10 $8,852,346,386 $57,894,345 $11,585,948 $4,098,013 $65,382,281 $50,044 132.50% $86,620,185 9,054 $9,567
Orange 13 15 $15,859,315,581 $103,719,924 $36,806,745 $10,156,177 $130,370,492 $51,675 136.80% $178,347,413 20,205 $8,827
Mecklenburg 14 13 $119,287,967,842 $780,143,310 $366,952,787 $77,269,827 $1,069,826,270 $47,201 125.00% $1,336,815,529 153,193 $8,726
Durham 15 18 $30,027,873,661 $196,382,294 $111,611,289 $23,814,653 $284,178,930 $41,684 110.40% $313,594,390 37,860 $8,283
Pamlico 16 20 $1,778,740,793 $11,632,965 $2,159,181 $1564530 $12,427,816 $37,210 98.50% $12,242557 1,524 $8,033
Buncombe 17 16 $29,820,223,860 $195,024,264 $83,227,104 $27,613,429 $250,637,939 $36,834 97.50% $244,400,854 30,493 $8,015
Polk 18 14 $2,755,851,260 $18,023,267 $3,211,284 $1,458,826 $19,775,725 $36,265 96.00% $18585,722 2,375 $7,994
Wake 19 19 $117,432,195,440 $768,006,558 $264,121,512 $39,497,455 $992,630,615 $48,396 128.10% $1,271,757,061 159,357 $7,981
Moore 20 17 $11,844,605,732 $77,463,721 $23,607,833 $5,012,659 $96,058,895 $40,547 107.30% $103,110,606 13,198 $7,813
As he 21 21 $3,861,129,810 $25,251,789 $5,186,851 $3,996,841 $26,441,799 $30,077 79.60% $21,053,899 3,157 $6,669
Alleghany 22 22 $1,606525,907 $10,505,371 $1,870,089 $815,295 $11,560,166 $30,917 81.80% $9,461,684 1,434 $6,598
Perquimans 23 29 $1,746,316,461 $11,420,910 $1,897,032 $834,717 $12,483,225 $34,859 92.30% $11,519,901 1,771 $6,505
Haywood 24 24 $7,088,381,783 $46,358,017 $15,156,070 $6,834,108 $54,679,979 $32,796 86.80% $47,474,045 7,426 $6,393
Henderson 25 23 $12,186,741,200 $79,701,287 $23,464,931 $8,620,281 $94,545,938 $34,315 90.80% $85,888,279 13,716 $6,262
Yancey 26 27 $2,652557582 $17,344,455 $3,134,864 $1,730,131 $18,749,188 $28,674 75.90% $14,232,388 2,311 $6,159
Clay 27 25 $1,607,935,584 $10,515,899 $1,784,915 $1,104,288 $11,196,526 $27,133 71.80% $8,042,445 1,332 $6,038
Iredell 28 32 $20,291536,406 $132,709,264 $42,580,451 $10,652,003 $164,637,712 $38,913 103.00% $169,602,036 28,555 $5,939
Onslow 29 26 $13,779,514,547 $90,118,025 $46,991,870 $10,703,644 $126,406,251 $44,124 116.80% $147,655,779 25,084 $5,886
Guilford 30 30 $46,675,847,548 $305,260,043 $134,857,749 $29,948,070 $410,169,722 $38,923 103.00% $422,646,161 75,340 $5,610
Beaufort 31 31 $5,533,780,555 $36,190,925 $10,517,561 $4,805,825 $41,902,660 $35,666 94.40% $39,564,258 7,244 $5,462
Graham 32 35 $1,249,331,781 $8,170,630 $1,582,703 $814,243 $8,939,090 $26,876 71.10% $6560,115 1,190 $5,345
Forsyth 33 28 $32,013,247,973 $209,366,642 $91,338,062 $20,365,779 $280,338,925 $39,938 105.70% $296,399,005 55,608 $5,330
Davie 34 33 $4,036,818,240 $26,400,791 $7,902,038 $2,118,876 $32,183,953 $38,846 102.80% $33,097,311 6,380 $5,188
Craven 35 36 $8,922,183,481 $58,351,080 $21,727,963 $7,296,825 $72,782,219 $38,166 101.00% $73,537,517 14,433 $5,095
Catawba 36 43 $16,031,880,376 $104,848,498 $44,224,001 $19,655,572 $129,416,927 $35,289 93.40% $120,903,106 24,121 $5,012
Jones 37 45 $801,816,571 $5,243,880 $1,259,874 $933,740 $5,570,015 $37,023 98.00% $5,459,275 1,099 $4,967
Warren 38 34 $2,317,246,355 $15,154,791 $4,966,951 $2,112,869 $18,008573 $26,258 69.50% $12518584 2,543 $4,923
Mitchell 39 46 $1,870,217,464 $12,231,222 $3,361,541 $3,013,890 $12,578,873 $28,359 75.10% $9,443,646 1,965 $4,806 N
Person 40 51 $4,236,216,641 $27,704,857 $7,750,999 $3,672,245 $31,783,611 $31,922 84.50% $26,859,650 5,625 $4,775
Lincoln 41 38 $8,214,512,128 $53,722,909 $15,181,011 $4,685,088 $64,218,833 $33,973 89.90% $57,756,827 12,313 $4,691 W
Madison 42 37 $2,289,657,781 $14,974,362 $2,960,213 $1,957,960 $15,976,614 $27,884 73.80% $11,793,612 2,518 $4,684 U
Cherokee 43 41 $2,926,788,835 $19,141,199 $5,857,066 $2,690,089 $22,308,176 $27,132 71.80% $16,023,335 3,486 $4,596
Cabarrus 44 39 $19,443,610,879 $127,161,215 $56,312,075 $15,287,695 $168,185,595 $37,022 98.00% $164,837,378 36,285 $4,543 Q
Tyrrell 45 42 $449,190,749 $2,937,708 $726,205 $513,524 $3,150,388 $29,155 77.20% $2,431,555 537 $4,528 Z
Chowan 46 47 $1,475,718,495 $9,651,199 $2,772,988 $1,280,047 $11,144,140 $33,743 89.30% $9,954,908 2,211 $4502
Swain 47 49 $1,550,907,992 $10,142,938 $2,949,879 $1,092,285 $12,000,533 $28,834 76.30% $9,160,358 2,058 $4,451 W
Northampton 48 50 $1,946,648,025 $12,731,078 $2,780,042 $2,803,499 $12,707,622 $30,429 80.60% $10,236,677 2,351 $4,354 a
Pasquotank 49 61 $3,199,099,080 $20,922,108 $9,675,557 $3,471,837 $27,125,828 $33,644 89.10% $24,160,040 5,648 $4,278 a
Pender 50 44 $6,232,289,281 $40,759,172 $9,239,524 $4,707,230 $45,291,465 $30539 80.80% $36,616,616 8,704 $4,207
Alamance 51 54 $11,781,303,048 $77,049,722 $40,622,003 $7,918,055 $109,753,669 $33,615 89.00% $97,669,550 23,523 $4,152 Q
Pitt 52 52 $11,491,347,524 $75,153,413 $44,083560 $10,840,087 $108,396,885 $34,216 90.60% $98,186,790 23,711 $4,141 ■
Montgomery 53 55 $2,822,492,694 $18,459,102 $4,910,133 $2,121,841 $21,247,395 $30,560 80.90% $17,189,611 4,157 $4,135
Camden 54 48 $1,004,097,152 $6,566,795 $1,538,082 $588,100 $7,516,777 $39,122 103.60% $7,785,020 1,888 $4,123
Union 55 56 $21,270,977,915 $139,112,196 $38,758,865 $11,515,331 $166,355,730 $39,415 104.30% $173,582,652 42,640 $4,071
Lee 56 58 $5,048,868,559 $33,019,600 $14,986,424 $3,744,201 $44,261,823 $33,524 88.70% $39,281,870 9,954 $3,946
Martin 57 73 $1,965,809,368 $12,856,393 $5,454,267 $2,357,841 $15,952,820 $33,146 87.70% $13,998,310 3,677 $3,807
Rowan 58 57 $11,219,269,985 $73,374,026 $28,270,254 $7,888,007 $93,756,272 $30,294 80.20% $75,190,674 19,813 $3,795
Cumberland 59 40 $21,824,328,648 $142,731,109 $86,394,072 $28,133,772 $200,991,409 $36,420 96.40% $193,786,920 51,558 $3,759
Wilson 60 59 $6,224,807,713 $40,710,242 $19,335,256 $7,837,383 $52,208,115 $35,065 92.80% $48,463,958 13,151 $3,685
Surry 61 64 $5,341,637,659 $34,934,310 $19,562,611 $4,107,812 $50,389,109 $31,958 84.60% $42,630,782 11,634 $3,664
Stanly 62 63 $4,511,398,511 $29,504,546 $12,494,175 $3,317,430 $38,681,291 $31,203 82.60% $31,952,463 8,808 $3,628
Davidson 63 60 $12,682,817,537 $82,945,627 $28,006,844 $7,517,653 $103,434,818 $33,274 88.10% $91,112,674 25,222 $3,612
Wilkes 64 53 $5,478,182,157 $35,827,311 $14,949,408 $5,182,162 $45,594,557 $29,525 78.20% $35,637,722 9,900 $3,600
Rutherford 65 66 $5,916,509,015 $38,693,969 $13,076,340 $4,861,540 $46,908,769 $27,265 72.20% $33,858,410 9,438 $3,587
Rockingham 66 68 $6,773,967,243 $44,301,746 $17,205,277 $5,694,293 $55,812,730 $31,362 83.00% $46,338,721 13,361 $3,468
Lenoir 67 70 $3,978,786,169 $26,021,262 $12,654,910 $4,545,119 $34,131,053 $35,781 94.70% $32,330,259 9,325 $3,467
Nash 68 67 $7,054,852,541 $46,138,736 $22,090,409 $6,662,579 $61,566,566 $35,942 95.20% $58,580,651 16,918 $3,463
Gaston 69 69 $14,346,103,880 $93,823,519 $43,797,115 $17,490,419 $120,130,215 $34,986 92.60% $111,263,719 32,732 $3,399
Stokes 70 65 $3,611,508,297 $23,619,264 $6,337,811 $2,610,695 $27,346,380 $30,310 80.20% $21,942,839 6,558 $3,346
Bladen 71 78 $2,685,287,249 $17,561,779 $5,780,226 $3,531,237 $19,810,768 $31,522 83.40% $16,531,874 5,002 $3,305
Wayne 72 72 $7,830,354,109 $51,210,516 $25,778,517 $7,352,208 $69,636,825 $34,066 90.20% $62,801,083 19,104 $3,287
McDowell 73 76 $3,526,448,741 $23,062,975 $8,534,023 $3,723,048 $27,873,950 $27,686 73.30% $20,429,877 6,359 $3,213
Burke 74 62 $6,210,896,159 $40,619,261 $16,234,322 $5,275,945 $51,577,638 $30,369 80.40% $41,466,651 12,944 $3,204
Duplin 75 84 $4,055,529,623 $26,523,164 $10,930,530 $3,203,406 $34,250,287 $33,508 88.70% $30,382,237 9,598 $3,165
Yadkin 76 75 $2,760,343,214 $18,052,645 $5,974,818 $2,712,543 $21,314,919 $30,404 80.50% $17,156,213 5,463 $3,140
Granville 77 83 $3,908,176,226 $25,559,473 $9,000,366 $2,939,547 $31,620,291 $32,209 85.30% $26,961,877 8,749 $3,082
Caldwell 78 87 $6,106,676,762 $39,937,666 $14,928,880 $5,789,978 $49,076,568 $28,645 75.80% $37,216,030 12,094 $3,077
Randolph 79 80 $10,307,903,697 $67,413,690 $27,039,310 $7,261,797 $87,191,203 $30,500 80.70% $70,401,115 22,934 $3,070
Cleveland 80 74 $7,548,409,296 $49,366,597 $19,334,858 $8,521,562 $60,179,893 $30,482 80.70% $48,562,596 15,821 $3,070
Alexander 81 77 $2,568,497,465 $16,797,973 $5,678,035 $3,019,090 $19,456,919 $31,071 82.30% $16,004,287 5,251 $3,048
Hertford 82 79 $1,417,535,893 $9,270,685 $5,632,629 $2,326,689 $12,576,625 $27,555 72.90% $9,174,271 3,029 $3,029
Washington 83 86 $861,800,981 $5,636,178 $2,241,069 $1,849,426 $6,027,821 $31,852 84.30% $5,082,813 1,690 $3,008
Halifax 84 85 $3,619,518,390 $23,671,650 $11,658,296 $6,566,244 $28,763,703 $31,600 83.70% $24,062,398 8,055 $2,987
Johnston 85 81 $13,804,483,327 $90,281,321 $34,599,968 $10,430,624 $114,450,664 $33,862 89.60% $102,597,776 34,511 $2,973
Franklin 86 82 $4,405,255,447 $28,810,371 $9,503,056 $4,281,597 $34,031,830 $30,610 81.00% $27,577,549 9,295 $2,967
Gates 87 89 $797,127,405 $5,213,213 $1,455,957 $828,077 $5,841,093 $31,571 83.60% $4,881,907 1,650 $2,959
Edgecombe 88 92 $3,031,774,343 $19,827,804 $10,194,266 $5,208,283 $24,813,787 $30,872 81.70% $20,279,855 6,966 $2,911
Caswell 89 71 $1,547,308,689 $10,119,399 $2,636,755 $1,555,380 $11,200,774 $28,258 74.80% $8,379,083 2,916 $2,873
Anson 90 95 $1,651,554,649 $10,801,167 $4,138,463 $1,810,448 $13,129,182 $29,202 77.30% $10,149,796 3,578 $2,837
Columbus 91 94 $3,641,269,021 $23,813,899 $10,104,669 $4,255,687 $29,662,881 $30,403 80.50% $23,874,638 9,086 $2,628
Richmond 92 90 $3,023,791,477 $19,775,596 $8,888,731 $2,920,373 $25,743,955 $28,650 75.80% $19,525,713 7,599 $2,570
Sampson 93 91 $4,052,644,739 $26,504,297 $11,785,840 $5,238,174 $33,051,962 $33,632 89.00% $29,427,744 11518 $2,555
Bertie 94 88 $1,118,378,138 $7,314,193 $2,735,276 $2,057,353 $7,992,115 $30,633 81.10% $6,481,243 2,604 $2,489
Harnett 95 93 $7,714,777,197 $50,454,643 $17,897,183 $6,535,125 $61,816,701 $30,296 80.20% $49,579,043 20,122 $2,464
Vance 96 97 $2,369,333,515 $15,495,441 $10,258,102 $3,671,630 $22,081,913 $29,179 77.20% $17,057,451 7,349 $2,321
Scotland 97 98 $2,001,667,553 $13,090,906 $7,134,956 $2,888,077 $17,337,784 $28,116 74.40% $12,904,886 6,013 $2,146
Hoke 98 96 $3,033,359,657 $19,838,172 $6,361,292 $3,290,496 $22,908,968 $27,838 73.70% $16,883,037 8,393 $2,012
Greene 99 99 $1,025,478,631 $6,706,630 $3,036,877 $1,525,716 $8,217,791 $28,962 76.70% $6,300,727 3,150 $2,000
Robeson 100 100 $6,066,402,474 $39,674,272 $25,385,824 $14,655,952 $50,404,144 $25,872 68.50% $34,522,582 23,704 $1,456
State Total/Average $984,977404,911 $6,441,752,228 $2,494,191,532 $695,620,852 $8,240,322,902 $33,395 $84,936,400 1,492,106 $5,325
*Beginning with 2016 study,includes only WC302 report.Medicaid payments from WD667 no longer included. **County and state averages from the Bureau of Economic Analysis 17<
TABLE 5: RELATIVE EFFORT
This is a measure comparing Actual Effort(from Table 2)and Ability to Pay(from Table 4).Actual effort includes county appropriations for current expenses,and,when
appropriate,supplemental tax levies for schools.Low-wealth counties with comparatively high spending levels have tended to rank highest on this measure.
COUNTY RELATIVE EFFORT ABILITY REVENUE EFFORT TOTAL EFFORT AS PERCENTAGE
RANK:CURRENT RANK PER ADM RANK CURRENT SPENDING OF REVENUE PER STUDENT:
SPENDING PER ADM CURRENT SPENDING
Scotland 1 97 $2,146 28 $1,686.23 78.60%
Gates 2 87 $2,959 27 $1,708.30 57.70%
Johnston 3 85 $2,973 40 $1506.77 50.70%
Orange 4 13 $8,827 1 $4,355.40 49.30%
Franklin 5 86 $2,967 50 $1,408.78 47.50%
Stokes 6 70 $3,346 36 $1557.15 46.50%
Granville 7 77 $3,082 48 $1,415.62 45.90%
Union 8 55 $4,071 19 $1,866.74 45.90%
Hertford 9 82 $3,029 51 $1,377.86 45.50%
Cleveland 10 80 $3,070 54 $1,330.93 43.40%
Rowan 11 58 $3,795 34 $1,604.47 42.30%
Vance 12 96 $2,321 85 $980.06 42.20%
Guilford 13 30 $5,610 9 $2,351.08 41.90%
Harnett 14 95 $2,464 80 $1,032.06 41.90%
Pasquotank 15 49 $4,278 23 $1,771.40 41.40%
Cumberland 16 59 $3,759 44 $1,478.35 39.30%
Sampson 17 93 $2,555 83 $998.21 39.10%
Lee 18 56 $3,946 38 $1,540.89 39.00%
Caldwell 19 78 $3,077 67 $1,201.01 39.00%
Bertie 20 94 $2,489 86 $961.21 38.60%
Martin 21 57 $3,807 46 $1,463.16 38.40%
Gaston 22 69 $3,399 57 $1,305.35 38.40%
Randolph 23 79 $3,070 71 $1,169.36 38.10%
Anson 24 90 $2,837 75 $1,071.06 37.80%
Durham 25 15 $8,283 3 53,118.69 37.70%
McDowell 26 73 $3,213 65 $1,203.53 37.50%
Bladen 27 71 $3,305 64 $1,237.50 37.40%
Nash 28 68 $3,463 60 $1,294.92 37.40%
Forsyth 29 33 $5,330 17 $1,982.11 37.20%
Robeson 30 100 $1,456 99 $522.06 35.80%
Cherokee 31 43 $4,596 30 $1,643.53 35.80%
Cabarrus 32 44 $4,543 31 $1,623.16 35.70%
Pitt 33 52 $4,141 43 $1,479.33 35.70%
Richmond 34 92 $2,570 90 $911.30 35.50%
Wilson 35 60 $3,685 58 $1,304.48 35.40%
Pender 36 50 $4,207 41 $1,486.97 35.30%
Davidson 37 63 $3,612 62 $1,269.43 35.10%
Halifax 38 84 $2,987 79 $1,040.23 34.80%
Greene 39 99 $2,000 96 $688.25 34.40%
Chowan 40 46 $4,502 37 $1,547.68 34.40%
0 Rockingham 41 66 $3,468 70 $1,185.15 34.20%
I-1-1 Yadkin 42 76 $3,140 77 $1,061.77 33.80%
Alexander 43 81 $3,048 81 $1,028.38 33.70%
U Person 44 40 $4,775 33 $1,606.90 33.70%
Burke 45 74 $3,204 76 $1,068.33 33.30%
Q Rutherford 46 65 $3,587 68 $1,191.61 33.20%
Z Edgecombe 47 88 $2,911 87 $957.06 32.90%
Surry 48 61 $3,664 69 $1,190.71 32.50%
W Alamance 49 51 $4,152 55 $1,316.89 31.70%
CI_ Beaufort 50 31 $5,462 25 $1,717.99 31.50%
a Northampton 51 48 $4,354 52 $1,344.76 30.90%
Q Lenoir 52 67 $3,467 78 $1,061.66 30.60%
Wilkes 53 64 $3,600 72 $1,098.38 30.50%
^ Haywood 54 24 $6,393 18 $1,938.01 30.30%
Wayne 55 72 $3,287 84 $995.50 30.30%
Warren 56 38 $4,923 42 $1,484.55 30.20%
Washington 57 83 $3,008 91 $902.37 30.00%
Stanly 58 62 $3,628 73 $1,086.61 30.00%
Duplin 59 75 $3,165 89 $937.70 29.60%
Chatham 60 12 $9,567 4 $2,822.08 29.50%
Catawba 61 36 $5,012 45 $1,478.05 29.50%
Caswell 62 89 $2,873 94 $846.85 29.50%
Montgomery 63 53 $4,135 66 $1,202.50 29.10%
Columbus 64 91 $2,628 95 $759.67 28.90%
Lincoln 65 41 $4,691 53 $1,343.98 28.70%
Davie 66 34 $5,188 47 $1,462.98 28.20%
Onslow 67 29 $5,886 32 $1,615.74 27.40%
Transylvania 68 11 $9,815 6 $2,643.05 26.90%
Mecklenburg 69 14 $8,726 10 $2,312.41 26.50%
Hoke 70 98 $2,012 98 $532.57 26.50%
Buncombe 71 17 $8,015 13 $2,116.24 26.40%
Iredell 72 28 $5,939 35 $1,567.59 26.40%
Jones 73 37 $4,967 59 $1,296.90 26.10%
Alleghany 74 22 $6,598 24 $1,721.58 26.10%
Craven 75 35 $5,095 56 $1,313.04 25.80%
Wake 76 19 $7,981 14 $2,032.96 25.50%
Polk 77 18 $7,994 16 $2,014.65 25.20%
Henderson 78 25 $6,262 39 $1,526.96 24.40%
New Hanover 79 10 $10,236 7 $2,490.22 24.30%
Moore 80 20 $7,813 20 $1,849.86 23.70%
Mitchell 81 39 $4,806 74 $1,080.21 22.50%
Tyrrell 82 45 $4,528 82 $1,000.60 22.10%
Camden 83 54 $4,123 92 $902.01 21.90%
Watauga 84 4 $12,428 5 $2,693.80 21.70%
Ashe 85 21 $6,669 49 $1,408.94 21.10%
Pamlico 86 16 $8,033 29 $1,681.40 20.90%
Yancey 87 26 $6,159 61 $1,284.35 20.90%
Madison 88 42 $4,684 88 $940.79 20.10%
Brunswick 89 5 $12,010 8 $2,393.24 19.90%
Currituck 90 6 $11,859 11 $2,309.97 19.50%
Hyde 91 9 $10,495 15 $2,026.30 19.30%
Perquimans 92 23 $6,505 63 $1,242.24 19.10%
Dare 93 1 $24,445 2 $3,983.29 16.30%
Macon 94 8 $11,180 22 $1,802.11 16.10%
Avery 95 7 $11,460 21 $1,827.84 15.90%
Carteret 96 2 $14,180 12 $2,190.84 15.40%
Clay 97 27 $6,038 93 $883.78 14.60%
Jackson 98 3 $12,638 26 $1,712.30 13.50%
Graham 99 32 $5,345 97 $628.05 11.80%
Swain 100 47 $4,451 100 $383.31 8.60%
State Total/Average $5,325 $1,500 32%
>18
> GLOSSARY
Ability to Pay:A measure of a county's per student fiscal capacity sources to fund school bond repayments and lease purchase
to support local public schools.It is a combined measure of revenue agreements. Using the Public School Capital Outlay report,
that would have been generated at the state average tax rate based withdrawals from the Public School Building Capital Fund and
on 2013-14 property valuations per student(adjusted to reflect North Carolina Education Lottery Funds have been removed
current market prices and to account for differences in income from the county total.
levels)and the value of non-property tax revenues,such as the
county's share of local option sales tax,local tax aid(including Debt Service per ADM:Six-year average of debt service spending
reimbursements for inventory tax revenues,homestead exclusions, for a county divided by the ADM for the county.
food stamp distribution,and the intangibles tax),and fines and Income-Adjusted Total Revenues:The total revenues for a county,
forfeitures.Each county's mandated social service payments were minus the amount paid in mandated social security payments,
subtracted from the total adjusted revenues.(See Table 4.) multiplied by the percent of state average per capita income.
Actual Effort: Includes 2013-14 current expenses(including Low-Wealth Funding: Supplemental state funding intended
supplemental school taxes); reflects the actual dollar effort
of counties to fund local public schools without taking into to enhance instructional programs in counties designated
account property wealth.(See Tables 2 and 3.) as low-wealth based on a formula that examines the ability
to generate revenue per student below the state average. In
Adjusted Tax Base:The total valuation of real,tangible,and public addition,the formula takes into account county adjusted property
utility property for a county,adjusted using a three-year weighted tax base, square miles in the county and per capita income.
average of the sales assessment ratio. Notes about adjustment Mandated Social Services Payments:The amount of money
and weighted average:In North Carolina,residential and commercial each county pays in the health and human services categories
property typically is revalued once every eight years.The longer it mandated by the state.These categories include public assistance
has been since properties in a county have been revalued,the more and Work First services. In previous studies,the Mandated Social
likely it is that the market value of property exceeds the assessed Services Payments reported in Table 4 included county Medicaid
valuation.To help remedy this difficulty of estimating the market payments in addition to other required social services payments.
value of property valuations,the Department of Revenue computes This year's study does not include Medicaid payments as part of the
an adjusted property tax rate for each county by using the ratio overall Mandated Social Services Payments.The WD667 report
of assessed property value to market value.Typically,the longer from the NC Department of Health and Human Services Office of
the gap between revaluations,the larger the difference between the Controller,which includes county Medicaid payments,was not
market and assessed value. In effort to be as accurate as possible, available for the 2013-14 year. In almost every county,the Medicaid
this study uses a three-year weighted average to calculate the total from the WD667 in previous years was less than 0.5%of
adjusted property valuation. the total Mandated Social Services Payments,which itself is a
Average Daily Membership(ADM):The sum of the number of days small piece of the revenue calculation in Table 4.
in membership for all students in each county's local public schools, Non-Property Tax Revenue:Sources of revenue for the county
divided by the number of school days in the term.City school
other than property taxes. Examples include the sales tax,fines/
districts are combined with the county system and charter school forfeitures,and local tax aid.
enrollment is included(see Charter School Enrollment under
"Notes on Methodology"). Relative Effort:A measure comparing the Actual Effort of a county
to its Ability to Pay.In general,low-wealth districts with comparatively
Capital Outlay:A six year average of public school capital outlay high spending levels rank highest in this measure.(See Table 5)
using proceeds from local option sales taxes and other sources to
fund actual spending on capital projects or equipment for buildings. Small County Funding:Supplemental state funding provided
Withdrawals from the Public School Building Capital Fund,Grants to two categories of local education agencies:those with less
from the Public School Building Bond Fund,and the North Carolina than 3,239 ADM,and those with 3,239-4,080 ADM who have an
Education Lottery Funds have been removed from the county total. adjusted property tax base less than the state average.
Capital Outlay per ADM:Six-year average of capital outlay State Average Effective Property Tax:The average of all 100
spending for a county divided by the ADM for the county. counties'adjusted tax rates.
Current Spending:The most recent current expense appropriation Supplemental School Taxes:According to GS 115C-501(a),"a
by the county to the public schools, as reported in the audited special tax to supplement the funds from State and county
financial statement of the local board(s)of education. allotments and thereby operate schools of a higher standard by
Current Spending per ADM:The total amount of spending for
supplementing any item of expenditure in the school budget."
a county divided by the ADM for the county. Total Current Spending per ADM:The sum of the current expense
and the supplemental school taxes for a county,divided by the
Debt Service:A six-year average of public school debt service county's ADM.
outlay using proceeds from local option sales taxes and other
19<
> DATA SOURCES ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The 2016 Local School Finance Study examines data from the This year's study was authored by Emma Swift Lee and
2013-14 school year. Every effort has been made to verify that Joe Ableidinger,with research assistance from Allison
the data included in this year's study is accurate and reflects Hawkins.The authors thank Keith Poston, Forum President
what it intends to measure. and Executive Director; Lauren Bock,Senior Policy Analyst;
The primary source of financial information is the Division of Dr. Michael Priddy, Forum Board Chair;and Aaron Beaulieu,
School Business at the Department of Public Instruction,which Forum Member,for their guidance and thought partnership
provided data on non-property tax revenue,low-wealth and throughout the research and drafting processes that
small county supplemental funding information,final average
resulted in the new study format in 2014.The Forum also
daily membership(except as noted above for charter school thanks the following individuals for their insights and
enrollments),effective county tax rate,adjusted revenue tax contributions to the study:Alesha Daughtrey, Kendall
base,current expense,and other data found in the Division's Hageman, Kesha B. Howell, Preeta Nayak,Alexis Schauss,
helpful Facts& Figures, Highlights of the NC Public School and Deanna Townsend Smith.All errors are our own.
Budget,and online Statistical Profile. The 2016 Local School Finance Study and prior years'
Other sources include the North Carolina Department of versions are available online at http://www.ncforum.org.
Revenue's County Property Tax Rates and Revaluation Schedules Contact the Forum to inquire about pricing information
and Sales Assessment Ratio Studies,which provided the for hard copies of the study.
2013-14 property tax valuations and tax rates;the Department
of Revenue's data on Local Government Sales and Use Tax
Distribution;and the North Carolina Department of State
Treasurer's Report on County Spending on Public School
Capital Outlays.The North Carolina Department of Health
and Human Services provided data for the mandated social
services expenditures,and the North Carolina Administrative
Office of the Courts provided data on fines and forfeitures.
Per capita income was obtained through the United States
Bureau of Economic Analysis.
BPS I N G 30
.)w
ke
, 1986 2
C 016 on
PUBLIC SCHOOL
FO RU M of north carolina
Public School Forum of North Carolina
3739 National Drive,Suite 100,Raleigh,NC 27612
Phone:919.781.6833 Fax:919.781.6527
www.ncforum.orq