The DOE Funding Formula
My name is Richard Snyder. I am the Executive Director of a grassroots advocacy group we call Dollar$ and Sense. Our role is to provide constructive solutions.
From the very beginning of Dr.Augenblick's presentation to the Joint Legislative Committee for School Funding Reform it was apparent that this was a very bright person with very good ideas. There was no doubt that we were listening to the basis for New Jersey's new school funding formula. The concept of establishing a model district, designed by professionals from within our schools and our state had the appeal of having appropriate experts in decision making positions.
The critical needs of this process are the recognition of the academic needs, the student support needs, and the fiscal needs of each location in our state. This includes what we provide, what is the cost to provide this, and how the funds are to be allocated. I have read the report called "Report on the Cost of Education". I am comfortable with the "what" we provide. I am very uncomfortable with two aspects of how costs are determined. The method to determine cost will become the basis for the new funding formula.
I have had two opportunities, in public forums, to ask the same question of Commissioner Davy (one a GSCS breakfast, and the other the closing session of the recent spring NJASA Conference in Atlantic City). I asked if we would see an adjustment for regional cost differences in the new funding formula. Each time the answer was yes. I have not found this in the current report.
The key to the success of Dr. Augenblick's plan is having the correct and complete adjustment factors applied to the model district. This establishes costs for districts and accounts for the specific differences demographics give us. It levels the playing field. The cost of living and the cost of delivering a public education and specific services varies greatly across the state. Morris County is not the same as Atlantic County, suburban is not the same as urban. If an accurate number is to be determined for the cost in each part of this state, regardless of zip code, this must be accounted for. The information needed to provide this adjustment is readily available. Dollar$ and Sense will be glad to assist in this effort, if it is requested.
Our second area of concern is the use of the median salary for teachers and staff. Salaries are clearly the largest single part of costing the model district. A median number is not consistently representative. As example of this:
District A has 3 employees with $25,000 salaries, 3 employees with $50,000 salaries, and 1 employee with a $30,000 salary. The median salary is $30,000.
District B has 3 employees with $25,000 salaries, 3 employees with $100,000 salaries, and 1 employee with a $30,000 salary. The median salary is $30,000.
Both districts have a $30,000 median, but this is not a proper representation of one districts needs. My home district has an average salary of approximately $64,000. Our median salary is $52,000. For the purpose of costing the model, we believe a weighted average that adjusted for part time staff would offer a truer representation.
We recognize that the distribution of education funding is not the subject of this report. However, as this is determined, we ask you to be cognizant of regional cost differentials. Earning more doesn't mean that we don't need to spend more to accomplish the same goals. We also ask that wealth of a county be determined by many factors including weighted averages, so that a few very wealthy don't skew the results. This has been done wrong before. Now is the time to do it right.
From the very beginning of Dr.Augenblick's presentation to the Joint Legislative Committee for School Funding Reform it was apparent that this was a very bright person with very good ideas. There was no doubt that we were listening to the basis for New Jersey's new school funding formula. The concept of establishing a model district, designed by professionals from within our schools and our state had the appeal of having appropriate experts in decision making positions.
The critical needs of this process are the recognition of the academic needs, the student support needs, and the fiscal needs of each location in our state. This includes what we provide, what is the cost to provide this, and how the funds are to be allocated. I have read the report called "Report on the Cost of Education". I am comfortable with the "what" we provide. I am very uncomfortable with two aspects of how costs are determined. The method to determine cost will become the basis for the new funding formula.
I have had two opportunities, in public forums, to ask the same question of Commissioner Davy (one a GSCS breakfast, and the other the closing session of the recent spring NJASA Conference in Atlantic City). I asked if we would see an adjustment for regional cost differences in the new funding formula. Each time the answer was yes. I have not found this in the current report.
The key to the success of Dr. Augenblick's plan is having the correct and complete adjustment factors applied to the model district. This establishes costs for districts and accounts for the specific differences demographics give us. It levels the playing field. The cost of living and the cost of delivering a public education and specific services varies greatly across the state. Morris County is not the same as Atlantic County, suburban is not the same as urban. If an accurate number is to be determined for the cost in each part of this state, regardless of zip code, this must be accounted for. The information needed to provide this adjustment is readily available. Dollar$ and Sense will be glad to assist in this effort, if it is requested.
Our second area of concern is the use of the median salary for teachers and staff. Salaries are clearly the largest single part of costing the model district. A median number is not consistently representative. As example of this:
District A has 3 employees with $25,000 salaries, 3 employees with $50,000 salaries, and 1 employee with a $30,000 salary. The median salary is $30,000.
District B has 3 employees with $25,000 salaries, 3 employees with $100,000 salaries, and 1 employee with a $30,000 salary. The median salary is $30,000.
Both districts have a $30,000 median, but this is not a proper representation of one districts needs. My home district has an average salary of approximately $64,000. Our median salary is $52,000. For the purpose of costing the model, we believe a weighted average that adjusted for part time staff would offer a truer representation.
We recognize that the distribution of education funding is not the subject of this report. However, as this is determined, we ask you to be cognizant of regional cost differentials. Earning more doesn't mean that we don't need to spend more to accomplish the same goals. We also ask that wealth of a county be determined by many factors including weighted averages, so that a few very wealthy don't skew the results. This has been done wrong before. Now is the time to do it right.
Comment
© 2010 Created by Dollar$ and Sense.
Powered by 
.
You need to be a member of Dollar$ & Sense Education Advocacy to add comments!
Join Dollar$ & Sense Education Advocacy