January 30, 2023
How Our Children's Future is Funded
While the doors of the House chamber are locked by obstructionist Democrats, the House Republican Policy Committee continues to hold public hearings to inform representatives on important issues the Legislature intends to address this session. The hearing held on January 30 in the Capitol was intended to act as a precursor to the needed legislative actions to come. The hearing, titled “How Our Children’s Future is Funded,” brought to light disparities in school funding, opportunities for our children through Public Charter Schools and Cyber Schools, and provided clarity to representatives and the public on how exactly the tax dollars from our pockets make their way to our educational institutions.
The testifiers that joined the committee were as follows:
| School Funding Overview Panel: |
Nathan Benefield - Senior Vice President, Commonwealth Foundation
Michael A. Whisman – CPA, Founder and Executive Officer, Charter Choices |
| School Funding Utilization Panel: |
Lawrence F. Jones, Jr., M.Ed. - Chief Executive Officer, Richard Allen Preparatory Charter School, Former President, PA Coalition of Public Charter Schools, Founding Team Member, African American Charter School Coalition
Beth Jones, M.Ed., M.B.A. - SPHR Chief Operating Officer/Interim Chief Financial Officer, Insight PA Cyber Charter School
Brian Hayden - Chief Executive Officer, PA Cyber |
| School Funding Overview Panel: |
Nathan Benefield, Senior Vice President of the Commonwealth Foundation, began the hearing by sharing how PA’s traditional public school funding compares to other states. On average, a PA school district spent $19,900 per student during the 2020-21 school year. Average per-student funding in PA ranks the state as eighth in the nation, with $4,000 more per student than the national average. The element that enables PA’s traditional public schools to utilize significantly more money per student than other states is almost solely due to local school taxes, even though state and federal funding has increased nearly every year of the last two decades.
Most alarmingly, school funding via federal, state and local dollars has increased even when traditional public school enrollment has dropped 6.6% in two decades and federal COVID-related school funding remains untouched. At the same time as school enrollment was dropping, traditional public school employment grew 8.7% over 20 years, with new hires mainly consisting of “administrators,” “coordinators” and “non-teacher professional staff.” Salaries for traditional public school teachers in PA rank 11th in the nation, with the average K-12 teacher receiving nearly $72,000 during the 2020-21 school year. A growing wave of teacher retirements has resulted in a new financial obstacle, paying off past unfunded pension liabilities (debt). Even with the current per-student expenditures being what they are, a 2022 report from the Independent Fiscal Office found that “the data suggests there is little or no correlation between the current expenditures spent per student and the share of students that score proficient or above on standardized tests.” So, the challenge we face is not how much money can be provided to our traditional public schools, but instead we should ask how our traditional public schools can better use the ample resources they’re currently provided.
“We need to move towards a student-based funding model”
Nathan Benefield - Senior Vice President, Commonwealth Foundation |
Michael A. Whisman then joined the panel to explain how public charter schools are funded, and who they serve. In short, public charter schools do more with less. Charter schools average $15,751 per student, which is more than $2,000 less than the per-student expenditures of traditional public schools. The demographics of public charter schools are nearly the opposite of traditional public schools, with 63% of public charter school students coming from economically disadvantaged homes and 68% of public charter school students being non-white. Student achievement varies, but by-and-large public charter school students achieve better academic performance than students at comparable traditional public schools within the area.
The public tax dollars that would be utilized for a student’s public K-12 education, nearly $20,000 per student, is transferred with the student to the public charter school of their choice if the local traditional Public School is not ideal for the needs of the child. The tax dollars do not belong to the local school district, but rather the student, and thus the student can use nearly that entire $20,000 to pursue an education in a different environment. The existing funding formula does not require the traditional public school to transfer 100% of the student’s funding allocation to their new school, which forces public charter schools to do more with less based on this factor alone. Because the transfer of a student’s education funds is not 100% there is even greater financial inequality for special education students considering their per-student allocation averages $25,000 to $50,000 per year, depending on the range of their service needs. This substantial range in service needs, and the requirement that public charter schools provide all of the needed supports within a student’s Individualized Education Program (IEP), are difficult to achieve when the available funding for schools differs in these scenarios. The committee was asked to investigate this disparity further and fix this issue through revamping our existing legislation.
“Public School district and Public Charter School funding are fundamentally different. As are the students they serve.”
Michael A. Whisman – CPA, Founder and Executive Officer, Charter Choices |
| School Funding Utilization Panel: |
Once information was shared concerning how our public schools are funded and how much money makes its way to educating each child, the next question needed to be answered… how exactly is that money utilized by our schools? Lawrence F. Jones, CEO of Richard Allen Preparatory Charter School, joined the committee to share his insight on effectively utilizing the funds received at his public charter school.
Previous testifiers shared that public charter schools perform equal to or better than nearby traditional public K-12 schools even with less per-student spending. Public charter schools, which serve a greater number of impoverished and minority communities than traditional K-12 schools, struggle with school funding being so intimately attached to local property taxes. With local tax bases, and the existing funding formula, public charter schools have still proven to be a valuable resource, particularly for minority and disadvantaged students who just need a change of venue to achieve their full potential. Rep. Craig Williams (R-Chester/Delaware), summarized the necessity of school choice and called for “Lifeline Scholarships” by stating, “giving these families a choice gives them an immediate opportunity to change the outcome for that child.”
“There is a word that we don’t use a lot when we talk about education these days, when it used to be used all the time. That word is CHILDREN. As educators we need to be more child focused.”
Lawrence F. Jones, Jr., M.Ed. - Chief Executive Officer, Richard Allen Preparatory Charter School, Former President, PA Coalition of Public Charter Schools, Founding Team Member, African American Charter School Coalition |
Beth Jones, Board President of PA Coalition of Public Charter Schools, joined the panel to share the process behind granting a charter and gave clarity on the true definition of a public Charter School. Mrs. Jones made the following points:
| |
• |
Charter Schools are Public Schools. |
| |
• |
Charter Schools are non-profit entities. |
| |
• |
Charter Schools do not charge tuition fees. |
| |
• |
Charter Schools have enrollment, not admissions. All students may enroll. |
| |
• |
Charter Schools are held accountable by parents, students, the Department of Education, and the authorizer that grants the charter and monitors their performance. |
Mrs. Jones then shared the story of Insight PA, a public Cyber Charter School that first attempted to be granted a charter in 2014. The charter process, which requires approval from the PA Department of Education, took two years and an appeals process before the Commonwealth Court of PA ruled that a charter must be granted to Insight PA. This authorization process is absolutely necessary but is currently onerous and biased towards existing traditional K-12 public schools. Chairman Kail used the opportunity to share a common phrase applicable towards these publicly available virtual and charter educational opportunities, “Regardless of ZIP code, a child should have access to quality education, and school choice allows us to do that.”
“The process to authorize a charter or allow a public charter school to open rests with the public school district in which the proposed charter is located. This process is like allowing the McDonalds’ of the world to permit or deny the opening of a Chick-fil-A.”
Beth Jones, M.Ed., M.B.A. - SPHR Chief Operating Officer/Interim Chief Financial Officer, Insight PA Cyber Charter School |
The final testifier within the School Funding Utilization Panel, Brian Hayden, shared insight into PA cyber charter schools and their manner of operation. PA cyber charter schools have been accessible to all students throughout the Commonwealth for 22 years, and currently enroll 11,000 students.
Public cyber charter schools are reimbursed to different degrees depending on the home school district of the students, which means that all 500 public school districts throughout the state must be approached each year to address how much funding “their” student will receive to pursue a public cyber charter education. This is the case because tax dollars do not belong to the school boards, but rather they belong to the students regardless of where they choose to attend school. Public cyber charter schools, because they receive public tax dollar funding, are held to the same standards as traditional public K-12 schools and brick-and-mortar public charter schools. A public cyber charter school must be subject to audits by the attorney general’s office, and adhere to Sunshine Laws, Right-to-Know laws, and audits of their curriculum and standardized testing.
The nature of a “cyber” school necessitates standardized technologies for each student. Public cyber charter schools use the funds provided by taxpayers not only to prepare classroom materials and pay teaching staff, but also to provide every student with a laptop, camera, printer and, if needed, even an internet connection. These material needs must be met before teaching can even begin, which forces public cyber charter schools to be expert stewards of their students’ funding. Furthermore, brick-and-mortar locations are owned and utilized by PA Cyber for teachers and students to use for non-virtual activities and to better facilitate some virtual interactions. Even with the costs associated with these resources, $12,500 is budgeted yearly for regular education student costs, and $24,000 is budgeted for special education student costs. Though public cyber charter schools achieve so much for our students with lesser funding than traditional public K-12 institutions, Mr. Hayden stressed that it is unfair to argue a “cyber student” is worth less than a traditional public-school student as the funding should travel with the student, and not be locked to a location.
“All our students have access to the same teachers, curriculum, support systems, and extracurricular activities – regardless of where they live”
Brian Hayden - Chief Executive Officer, PA Cyber |
To conclude the hearing Rep. Mike Jones (R-York) noted that the differences in performance and methods within public charter schools, both positive and negative, are a benefit to all education because, “Public charter schools were never intended to be just like traditional public schools. They are meant to be creative and try new methods for our students.” Not all students learn in the same manner, or at the same pace, and the House Republican Policy Committee heard sound arguments in favor of expanding school choice and empowering our students to pursue the educational environment and experience that best suits their needs. Pennsylvanians expend a significant amount of tax dollars on our children’s education, nearly $20,000 per student, and it is the duty of the Legislature and our public institutions to assure that money is well utilized and that we are preparing the next generation for our shared future.