Education funding panel nears finish line
Commission to recommend framework for school districts to get state money
Statistics in a final trove of data given recently to a statewide education study group — like the fact that the English-learner population in Pittsburgh schools has increased 33% in about five years — highlight some big financial challenges facing basic education in Pennsylvania.
The data given to the state’s Basic Education Funding Commission also showed that on average, Pennsylvania school districts say it costs 56% more to educate an English-learner student and 42% more to educate an economically disadvantaged student. Combining those numbers, it is easy to see how Pittsburgh and similar districts are getting squeezed, money-wise.
The 15-member commission is scheduled to produce a report by Jan. 11, and its recommendations are greatly anticipated. A judge in February last year ruled Pennsylvania’s current funding formula for basic education is unconstitutional.
Any recommendations also are likely to be part of the next budget address, set to be delivered in February by Gov. Josh Shapiro. A legislative staffer close to the commission said “a lot of high-level discussions” have to happen before Jan. 11.
The potential impact on state finances is vast. The first witness at the commission’s first hearing on Sept. 12 — education funding researcher Matthew Kelly of Penn State University — testified there was a $6.2 billion “funding adequacy” gap statewide. That prompted one lawmaker to say the figure could trigger “by far the largest tax increase in the history of Pennsylvania.”
At one hearing, Allegheny Intermediate Unit Executive Director Robert Scherrer cautioned the commission to maintain a baseline in its new funding formula to make sure districts do not end up getting less money.
At its final public session on Dec. 14, the commission was given data on educating English-learners and economically disadvantaged students. The data came from a survey of school districts and charter schools in October, led by the state Independent Fiscal Office and similar to one done in 2015.
“One of the differences that we found is that the concentration of economically disadvantaged, or ED, and English language learners, or EL’s, had increased between the two surveys,” IFO Director Matthew Knittel told the commission. He added, “When we compare the two years, there are more ED students, there are more EL students, and the concentration of those students have increased in certain school districts. They tend to be larger school districts and they tend to be lower performing school districts.”
The survey also contained the data on districts’ estimates of how much more it costs to educate those groups of students. Knittel’s summary of the survey to the commission included the following:
The highest-performing schools had much lower concentrations of economically disadvantaged students.
■ Lower-performing schools had a higher proportion of English-learner students.
■ Higher performing-schools have a higher taxable income per student in the district.
A commission member, Sen. Nick Miller, D-Allentown, said the study highlights the conditions that led to the landmark court case. “The underlying themes of that data match the lawsuit and the court opinion of the lawsuit,” said Miller, who was an Allentown school board member until he joined the General Assembly a year ago.
Miller said that the underfunding of school districts is a continuous theme and that it is “time for the state to step up in a significant fashion.”
Another commission member, Republican Rep. Jesse Topper of Bedford County, said the study’s findings on the “cost multiplier” involved in educating English-learners and economically disadvantaged students did not surprise anyone.
At the same time, he said, the data is under consideration by the commission.
“Those are definitely going to be considerations in terms of the formula,” Topper said. Agreement that those should factor into the commission’s final product, he said, is “broad-based.”
Basic education funding is the single largest stream of money in the state budget that is targeted to support school districts, with $7.87 billion allocated this year by lawmakers and the governor.
The commission was created in 2014 to address funding inequities and bolster access for children to a quality education. It held 15 hearings during 2014-15 and recommended that state lawmakers come up with a new funding formula.
Lawmakers did that, but only a portion of state education money is run through the new formula. And most education money in Pennsylvania — about 55% — comes from local sources, not the state.
An average of slightly more than $10,000 in education spending per student is derived solely from property taxes in Pennsylvania. School funding formula expert Michael Griffin testified to the commission that the figure is the third highest in the nation, and the national average is about $5,100 per student.
Those challenges — coupled with the February ruling from Commonwealth Court Judge Renee Cohn Jubilerer that said students in lower-income districts are deprived of opportunities that go to students in wealthier ones — gave the second iteration of the commission a tall order.
And beyond pure education funding is the issue of aging school buildings. The commission was told that about 71% of the state’s 500 school districts have buildings in need of major repairs.
Miller, whose home school district has a middle school that is about 150 years old, said the facilities portion of the commission’s conversation is “going to be a big piece for me.”
The commission expects to make the report public when it is complete. Shapiro’s budget address is scheduled for Feb. 6.
“We hope that we are able to come to consensus on recommendations to the General Assembly,” Topper said. “We are working very diligently.”