Here are the increases from 2003-04 actual to the 2006-07 budget:
- Cost per student $1,960.69
- Student enrollment: +233
- Transportation: $422,656
- Buildings & Grounds: $520,088
- Information Technology: $468,255
- Asst. Superintendent: $209,245 (figure doubled)
- Salaries & Benefits: $6,164,454
- Total Expenditures: $11,319,665
- All Schools: increase of $72,419 - with 233 more students enrolled.
- HS: $38,484 - increase of 133
- MS: $12,419 - decrease of 3
- Bushkill: $9,632 -
- Lower Nazareth: $10,323 -
- Shafer: $1,561 -
I recognize that the district is growing, but based on the figures in the budget it seems that the spending is far exceeding the actual growth. Each new student during this period has cost the district an additional $48,582.25, with salary and benefits (all employees not teachers only) accounting for 55% of this increase.
What do you think? Does it seem to you that the spending is out pacing the new enrollments? Are we focusing the money where it needs to be spent? What areas do you see where the district can save money? Considering my child is in Shafer, I also find it interesting that Shafer has received very little increase in budget compared to the other schools. Thoughts? Comments?
Have a great weekend!
6 comments:
I will have to look at the budgets a little closer when I have more time. However, if you look at the total expenditure per student $11,395 (as you said, up nearly $2,000) that represents an approximate 5% increase/year from 2003/2004.
Is that out of line with other districts? Inflation? I don't know, I haven't had a chance to look closer but at first glance, it doesn't seem too bad. As they say "the devil is in the details" so this would warrant a closer look.
I find the increase of spending in proportion to the enrollment to outrageous. If this were a publicly traded company, the board of directors would be out the door.
We have accountability for student test scores, but none for the actual running of the schools and how monies are collected and spent.
Maybe a system of reporting similar to the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation need to be put in place to force accountability of our schools from a financial perspective. After all, in a sense, we the tax payers are really the "share holders" in our public school system.
Going back to an earlier topic posted on this forum (last month I believe) regarding where the district plans on spending its money, the focus should be only on those items critical to educating our children (schools, books, technology, etc.) and not on all the nice to have items (pool, new athletic fields, etc.).
What really needs to happen is to have an outside consulting firm come in (one that has zero ties to the district and Nazareth area) and do a deep analysis of the day to day operations of the district from every aspect (transportation, administration, food services, outside vendors, etc.) and determine where cost savings can easily be achieved. Business Process Re-engineering has been going on for a long time and is can easily be applied to a school district as it has to the corporate world.
Of course, the draw back will be that people will lose jobs and everybody (including students and parents) would need to adjust to a shift in how "business" is conducted.
Anon 9:57-
You just hit on two (!) topics near and dear(?) to me..
Sarbanes-Oxley (SOX) and Consultants. Both were/are very entrenched here where I work and both have been completely overdone.
The SOX requirements for the size of company I work at are ridiculous and do nothing to improve the "bottom line". If anything, more time is spent trying to determine whether or not you comply than actually booking and executing new business. Of course, SOX just breeds the need for consultants. In most cases, they are just blood-sucking leeches that again bring nothing to the "bottom line".
Sorry to get off topic.
SOX doesn't improve the bottom line, only puts tight controls around financial reporting.
Regarding the consultants, I was refering to those that come into an organization, evaluate all aspects of it, then make change proposals to streamline the business and overall reduce costs by eliminating overlaping/unnecessary areas.
Every business does things that can be improved or eliminated in trying to improve the bottom line, but my experience has been if it is done internally or by someone with any connection to the organization being evaluated, the results are seldom good.
When they are from the outside, they are not affraid to say elimate so-and-so's job.
As for SOX being oppressive, you are right, but we have to thank the idiots at Enron et al for imposing these rules on us. I am not suggesting that the district should have that stringent of a process, but from an accountability standpoint, something needs to be there.
The breakdown of budget increases by school is interesting.
Not surprising to see a larger budget increase in the Bushkill and Lower Nazareth elementary schools given the amount of new housing construction in these townships.
Just a guess here, but I imagine LNES had the lion's share of the increase due to erecting 3 portables on their grounds and reconfiguring the parking lot to accomodate the increasing parent pickup/drop-off line of cars. A sidenote: we have been told that LNES cannot be expanded at this time because there is an on-site septic system as opposed to public sewer and that expanding the school would exceed the capacity of the current septic system. Instead, portables have been added and student enrollment continues to increase. The additional students are using the same existing septic system :o)
Some of these expenditures are bandaids to fix problems without addressing the root cause:
* Portables added to an already overcrowded school (yet we continue to redirect students from Stockertown and Tatamy all the way over to LNES)
* Expand the parking lot at LNES to remove the line of cars from Newburg Road (yet we continue to add more buses and watch them arrive/leave at 50% or less capacity)
Given the growth, it sounds like we need to redistrict and change boundary lines so that we can also determine where and how to best plan and build new schools. An additional middle school and high school is inevitable.
The MS is running out of space even though the enrollment, according to the previous post, has decreased by 3. I know of cases where they have run out of lockers for students on the floor where their grade is located, so they are using lockers on a different floor requiring special passes to enter classrooms late.
Our students deserve better.
I'm not certain, but I think these are annual operating costs (maybe someone more familiar or who was at the budget meetings could give some insight).
As noted my return to this budget was to look up the cost per student and transportation costs, but in light of the deadline approaching for the fact finder and the districts building plans, it seems we will really need to have our house in order and this budget is the place to start.
As you say the students should be the primary focus, therefore items critical to education should be where the money is spent and those not should be where we work to save as much as possible.
Have a great weekend!
Post a Comment