School finance policy choices at the federal, state, and district levels systematically stack the deck against students who need the most support from their schools, according to a report released today by the Education Trust.
The report, Funding Gaps 2006, builds on the Education Trust’s annual studies of funding gaps among school districts within states. For the first time the report includes data and analysis on:
- How federal Title I funds widen rather than narrow the education funding gaps that separate wealthy states from poor states; and,
- How funding choices at the school district level provide enhanced funding to schools serving higher concentrations of affluent students and white students at the expense of schools that serve low-income students and students of color.
Wisconsin’s Title 1 allocation per “poor child” is $1,577.00 [PDF Report]. One interesting piece of data: Wisconsin school district receipts from federal sources are 6.1% of total revenues. The state average is 8.9%. (Minnesota is 6% while Illinois is 8.6% and Iowa is 8.3%). The State of Wisconsin provides, on average 52.2% of district revenues (above the federal average of 47.1%). Local tax receipts are, on average 41.7% of district revenues (national average is 43.9%).
I have a question. In MMSD is the Title ! money received per child in those schools that qualify in addition to the funding the school receives from other revenue sources. In other words, do the Title 1 schools receive more money than non-Title 1 schools, which would make sense?
Does the Board have an idea of what a “baseline” of support is for a child’s education in Madison?
As far as I can tell, Barb, the answer is no. Title money comes in per child, but then gets pooled downtown and redistributed. For example, Black Hawk Middle has a bunch of kids that bring in Title $$, but the school doesn’t get a dime- it all goes to elementary schools, or at least that’s what we were told when we asked 2 years ago. Jill Jokela might be able to expound on this more.
Thanks, David. I think/thought there are Title I schools based upon the percentage of kids who are low-income in a school. For example, when my daughter was a student at Franklin Elementary, the percentage of low-income students in the school qualified Franklin for Title I funding. I don’t believe the school currently qualifies for Title I funding, because the percentage of low income students has declined below a certain number.
If I remember discussions from last spring, the admin. does look at all schools to make sure resources were where they were needed for all kids. This might show up in those schools that get Title I money not getting as much money from other non-Federal sources.
My understanding from the Board’s beginning budget discussion on Monday night, board members will be looking more closely at this issue. I appreciate the Board members taking more control of the budget and the allocation of resources in accordance with the Board’s policies and district demographics. I think this oversight and public discussion is critically important when finances are tight.
The last time I asked anyone downtown about Title 1 funding was a couple of years ago, because Alan Harris was wondering why he didn’t have any Title 1 money in his budget at Black Hawk. That’s when we found out that the district has chosen to direct all Title 1 monies received to elementary school programming and none to middle school or high school. I’m not exactly sure the reasoning behind this decision. I think it is something that should be re-evaluated, but I think part of the reason might be that schools that don’t use Title 1 funds are not subject to sanction under No Child Left Behind….so even though East has not met some of the criteria for ‘adequate yearly progress’ for NCLB, we can’t be sanctioned because no Title 1 $$ are used. Of course, Alan Harris, being the kind of principal that he is, said he’d rather have the Title 1 money to put into programming and be held accountable under NCLB.
I know that a couple of years ago Ruth requested a breakdown of the Title 1 budget and how it was spent. Mary G. gave me a copy. Seems to me that a fair amount of money went into summer school and transportation, but I don’t remember all the details. I don’t know if any Board members have requested anything similar since.
I found Title I guidelines on DPI’s website – document search Title I eligibility on http://dpi.wi.gov. and you will get a link to a Title 1 guidelines document just written.
Within these guidelines there is a link to the Department of Education and more information on Title I guidelines.
One piece I found interesting in DPI’s interpretation of the Title I requirements – “Schools must design their programs in consultation with parents and the district. Factors such as desired educational programs or type of service delivery system cannot override the federal requirement to allocate per pupil amounts to schools in rank order by poverty level.”
A certain amount of Title I money is to be used in partnerships with parents. As part of my work on the Partnership Committee and our work on parent partnerships, I’ve asked for the breakout of Title I funds in this category. I haven’t gotten the information yet. However, I think this money may be used to fund some of the School Improvement Planning work.