Following the release of findings from the Basic Education Funding Commission in June–you can read about our take on the findings here and here–comes a report titled “Lifting All Students” from the Campaign for Fair Education Funding. The report decries the holdup in acting on the Commission’s call for a new funding formula and would also like to see a $410 million boost in funding overall. The report also compares what districts would receive in addition to what they receive now on the $410 million ask and a $100 million that was proposed in the budget that was vetoed by the Governor. The appendix of the report breaks out districts by county, including the 43 districts in Allegheny County.
What amount would Highlands want–$477k or $202k? How about Penn Hills–$2.2 million or $264k? Any school district administration or school board or parents in the district will likely select the amount based off of the $410 million plan. But how does the additional money solve the funding disparity that the Campaign decries? Because in 2013-14 based on total revenue per-pupil the top five districts in Allegheny County were Duquesne, North Allegheny, Wilkinsburg, Pittsburgh and Quaker Valley, and after the $410 million was divvied up the top five districts in the County would be Duquesne, North Allegheny, Wilkinsburg, Pittsburgh, and Quaker Valley.
But the Campaign seems to think that is a new formula is put into place then poorer districts will get more state money. Truth is they already do. As we pointed out last March when the state Auditor General held a hearing in the North Hills School District, that district was on the low end of state funding per-pupil and would significantly benefit if the state were to raise 50% of school funding in each district. That means the typical North Hills student would get much more from the state than students in poorer districts as they are either near or above getting 50% from state funds.
Let’s revisit North Hills in light of the new study, since the district has per-pupil revenue ($16,246) that is just about the average in the County ($16,873) for 2013-14. The Campaign’s report shows that if the $410 million plan were enacted, the amount per student would increase $75.22 (to $16,322) and if the $100 million plan were enacted the amount per student would increase $31.56 (to $16,278). Neighboring district Northgate would get $92 more per pupil than North Hills by layering more money on top of current revenue from the $410 million plan.
So how would a new formula that the Campaign advocates for change this? Would North Hills get less so that Northgate could get even more? Do they both get the same dollar amount from the state? That’s equitable but what if North Hills can raise more locally because of its local tax base (right now 77% of total revenue in North Hills comes from local sources, whereas 61% in Northgate comes from local sources)? And what’s the answer if a student in North Hills gets less from the formula but performance is still better than a student in Northgate? Then what does the group advocate for next?
