Minimum funding required for an adequate education for all public K-12 students in Arkansas should increase 2 percent in each of the next two fiscal years, the state Senate and House education committees decided in a joint meeting Thursday, setting policy goals for school funding.
A 10th of the new money will go to to help school districts pay health-insurance premiums for their employees; lawmakers recently voted to increase the amount of money school districts must contribute for their employees’ health insurance.
The committees also decided that outside funding categories covering English-language programs, alternative learning environments and professional development programs should each increase 1.8 percent.
The committees also called for changing the way about $200 million is funneled to school districts with larger numbers of economically disadvantaged students.
The new model, if enacted into law, would provide more money for students receiving free lunches than for students receiving reduced-price lunches.
The action of the committees was essentially what state Sen. Johnny Key, R-Mountain Home, called a “broad policy goal.”
“We can back that policy up based on evidence,” Key said after the meeting. “We know that’s where we wantto be.”
The actual legislation “could pass or fail,” he added. “It will greatly depend on some of the questions you heard today: ‘How’s implementation going to affect the districts?’”
The 2 percent inflation adjustment in funding falls within the range of 1.8 percent to 2.5 percent the two committees recommended last fall, based on projections provided by the Bureau of Legislative Research.
That “foundation funding” is now $6,267 per student. It would go up to $6,393 per student in fiscal 2014, which begins July 1, and to $6,521 per student in fiscal 2015.
The new policy goal of extra funding for school districts with high percentages of economically disadvantaged students sparked the most discussion.
As Rep. Les Carnine, R-Rogers, put it, “There are going to be winners and losers.” Some districts will have less money under the new formula and some districts will have more.
Nobody knows the exact district-by-district effect yet.
“It’s hard to take action when we don’t know the impact on our districts,” said state Rep. John Catlett, D-Rover.
“The danger is setting policy dependent upon what is happening now,” Key responded.
Tom Kimbrell, the commissioner of the Arkansas Department of Education,said the department was ready to implement the new formula, assuming it is adopted, beginning July 1.
But Carnine and others suggested that the new distribution formula be phased in over four years to ease the loss of money for some districts.
The new formula is a product of educational adequacy hearings held last year and data presented by the bureau and Gary Ritter, director of the Office of Education Policy at the University of Arkansas.
The bureau said the extra funding for districts with economically disadvantaged students represents just 3 percent of all K-12 funding, that its funding levels were not associated with achievement gains from 2006-2011 and that school districts are allowed to use the money they receive for disadvantaged students in more than 30 different categories.
The bureau “suggested that spreading this funding across such a wide range of interventions may dilute the impact of the funding,” according to a supplemental report on educational adequacy distributed Thursday.
The existing formula has three categories of funding. Districts with less than 70 percent economically disadvantaged students received $517 per student and districts with 90 percent or more low-income students receive $1,549 per pupil. Districts inthe middle receive $1,033 for each student.
Ritter’s office noted that the categories for some school districts represented funding cliffs. For instance, the difference between a district with 69 percent of its students identified as economically disadvantaged and one with 70 percent was $516 per student.
Ritter recommended a smoother distribution model with no cliffs. He also recommended more regulation of the funding so it is more focused.
Arkansas, Pages 9 on 03/29/2013