The Ideal District IS SMALL!

For most of my life I learned in small school districts.  For most of my professional life I have worked in small districts.  For more almost a quarter century I have devoted myself academically to researching the benefits of small districts over large districts.  I have written a book about the topic and have another book being published soon that champions the power of small districts. Through good fortune and a passion about the topic I have been able to communicate with other educators from across our state and country about the advantages of small districts over large districts.  I am a champion of small!

I am also a champion of great schools.  I am a champion of small class size, a strong focus on academics, opportunity for all students to achieve and thrive, and a school system that opens doors for kids rather than shuts them.

If you ask me, would I rather have 2000 kids in a district or 1500, I pick 1500?! Would I rather have 1200 than 1500? I pick 1200!  A 1000 is better than 1200, and 800 is better than 1000.  AS LONG AS we maintain a great school, with reasonable class size, a strong focus on academics, with an opportunity for all students to achieve and thrive in a school system that open doors for kids rather than shuts them.  I pick small every time as long as it does not hurt kids.  AND, I am very suspect of big schools and big districts…so you have to work pretty hard to convince me that big is better.  There needs to be strong evidence that getting bigger will help kids before you catch me advocating for an increase in size.

An Analysis of the Financial Impacts of a Resident Only School District

The Board has made a priority of examining our facilities and planning for the future.  I have examined the fiscal impacts of bringing in additional students and posted those analysis before, but given that a huge piece of determining our infrastructure needs is calculating the necessary revenues to provide the type of educational programing we strive to deliver, it is appropriate to revisit this topic.
Further, I consistently hear some people in the community wondering why we are as big as we are.  The “wonderings” usually take the form of questions or statements like, “Shouldn’t we go back to our size before we started bringing in students from out of district?”  Even without the Board’s commitment to analyzing our facility needs, these questions from members of our community need to be addressed and I am happy to look at the feasibility of simplifying this operation by just teaching our resident students!

Lets Imagine

Lets imagine that every transfer student, every student who got into Corbett School District via the HB 3681 lottery, and every out of district Charter student was suddenly gone.   What would happen to our revenue projections?

Revenue Projections in a Resident Only District

    Our revenue would shrink to around $4,953,572.  (You can download a pdf of the data used to make this revenue projections by clicking Resident Only Calculations pdf.)

    This revenue projection details what our funding levels would be if we only had the 663 resident students on campus this year.  There may be a few other revenue sources such as facilities use, donations, and medicaid but this is by far the bulk of the revenue we would receive in this situation.

What Would Happen With Fixed Expenses?

When you eliminate all transfers, all HB 3681 students, and all Charter students there are some savings in addition to the loss of revenue.  Expenses come in two forms for schools.  There are the fixed costs that have very little to do with our number of students and there are personnel costs that fluctuate dramatically with regard to our student numbers.

    First, we need to examine fixed costs. This analysis represents the average for each category over the last two years.  Each category has been pro-rated, when appropriate, to represent the hypothetical change of student population from what we have on campus now to what we would have if we only had our 663 residents.

   Our fixed costs in this scenario would be around $1,221,000.  (You can download a pdf of the data used to make this projection by clicking Resident Only Calculations pdf.)

So, our fixed expenses total a little over $1.2 Million each year.  This represents a part of our budget that we have very little control over and that we can not make significant changes to through efficiencies.   For instance the cost of our annual audit stays the about the same without regard to our student population, as does our insurance cost, and the amount of fuel we use for district vehicles, tires on buses, professional technical services, cleaning services, etc.  These costs are largely fixed.

If we subtract these fixed costs from our revenues we have about $3,732 million to pay for our biggest expense; personnel.

What Will Happen With Personnel Requirements?

Education is a people intensive business.  Unlike steel mills, automotive plants, timber mills, oil fields, and many other businesses the bulk of our costs have very little to do with “products” or “overhead”…instead they have to do with people.  People such as teachers, aides, bus drivers, principals, office staff who meet you at the door, coaches, superintendents, business managers, groundskeepers, foodservice managers, custodians, substitutes, and others make up the cadre of humans that make a school work.
If All of the non-residents were gone from our district I would still advocate that we provide the best educational environment possible for our resident students, two of which are my own children.  In this scenario ALL of the Charter teachers are gone and a good number of our District Teachers have also been cut along with all school administration.  I am calculating an average class size of 25 students, providing lunch, transportation, special education, maintaining a minimal level of facilities’ maintenance and custodial services, a reduction in music, a reduction in intervention, as well as a reduction in all full-time administration. Essentially this is a plan that maintains as close as possible what we currently have available to resident students while almost totally cutting administration and intervention support for struggling students.

Under this plan we will need about $5,094,450 to fund our resident only teaching staff minus all school level administrators and intervention.  (You can download a pdf of the data used to make this projection by clicking Resident Only Calculations pdf.)
So What is the Bottom Line?

The question is will our revenues in a resident only school meet the needs of those residents?  The math indicates that the revenues will not meet the requirements; in fact it is not close.

How Do You Handle a Deficit of $1,361,878?
In the most simple of terms there are two ways to approach this type of deficit.  You can control the revenue side or the expense side of the equation.  For this exercise lets pretend like we are only going to work on the expense side of the equation.  In other words we are going to look to make $1,361,878 in cuts.

Cuts to Fixed Costs
We can start with Fixed Costs.  The District has already managed this portion of the puzzle.  For example we have made cuts to our utilities expenditures by looking for efficiencies, and changing carriers.  We utilize volunteers to help with community advertising.  We limit supply budgets. We have community partners, such as the PTA and Boosters, who help offset budget needs by donating money to supply budgets.  In short we have managed fixed costs until they are very efficient.  But lets pretend we can find another 10% of efficiencies in our fixed costs.  Which would be a cut of about $120,000.  This will leave about $1,241,000 to be cut from personnel expenses.

Cuts to Personnel Requirements

    In order to cut an additional $1,241,000 from personnel costs things will change dramatically.   First to be clear, every single charter teacher is already gone as well as all school level administration and all intervention services.  In grades K-5 the loss of charter teachers does not impinge on district student experiences, in middle school enrichment opportunities will be reduced, and at the high school level half of the teachers will be gone.  Clearly the cutting of intervention hurts struggling students and the loss of administration hurts all students and staff.

But we need to make another $1,241,000 of cuts to Corbett District staff.  (You can download a pdf of the data used to make this projection by clicking Resident Only Calculations pdf.)

• Cut 1.5 Primary Teachers
  • Class Size 44

• Cut 1.5 Elementary Teachers
  • Class Size 44

• Cut 1.5 Middle School Teachers
  • Class Size 44

• Cut 3 High School Teachers
  • Class Size 40
  • Reduce Diploma Requirement to State Minimum
  • Eliminate Virtually All Student Choice

• Cut All Music Instruction
  • Loss of All Music

• Cut School Level Administrative Positions and Make Each Position a Teaching Position
  • No Administrative Support

• Cut 20% of District Office Expenditures
  • Reduction in District Support
  • Superintendent Teaches Half Time

• Eliminate All Paid Coaches and District Sponsored Athletic Travel
  • No District Sponsored Athletic Program

• All Intervention Support is Eliminated
  • No extra support for struggling students

• Reduce School Year for Students to State Minimums
  • Primary Students Reduced by Approximately 4 weeks
  • Elementary Students Reduced by Approximately 2 weeks
• Eliminate all School Level Administration
  • No administrative support for students, parents or staff.

• Cut Pre-School
  • No Pre School

This represents a dramatically different educational experience from the one our 663 resident students currently enjoy.  When I imagine my son and daughter sitting in a class with 44 people, not being able to enjoy music instruction, learning in an environment where there is virtually no administrative support, suffering through a shortened school year,  and looking forward to a high school experience where they will only earn the state’s minimum diploma I am not excited about subjecting my children, or any children to this experience.
Further, when I look at these projections and think about it from an employees perspective I am even more worried.  In this scenario a huge percentage of the staff has been eliminated leaving a mountain of work for those who remain.  Huge class sizes, no support outside of the classroom, and less resources inside the classroom.  It is a recipe that will lead to the loss of current personnel because many of them will leave to find work in a more supportive environment.

Final Analysis

I want to end where I started.

I am a champion of small!

I am also a champion of great schools.  I am a champion of small class size, a strong focus on academics, opportunity for all students to achieve and thrive, and a school system that opens doors for kids rather than shuts them.

   I pick small every time as long as it does not hurt kids.  AND, I am very suspect of big schools and big districts…so you have to work pretty hard to convince me that big is better.  There needs to be strong evidence that getting bigger will help kids before you catch me advocating for an increase in size.

Frankly, I do not think that a resident only district can be supported.  If you were able to support it, I am not sure many people would want to go to school there, or work there.  I am convinced that our current student population is what is required to maintain the type of educational experience we want for our resident kids.

With that said, I will continue to advocate for small.  I hope the educational climate changes, I hope that funding levels increase faster than costs for the first time in more than decade, I will work to continue to find ways to operate more efficiently.

I am a champion of small and I will strive to keep our district as small as possible while maintaining the learning environment I know all of us want for our kids.

Randy Trani
Superintendent