CMS has posted its latest chart of calculations on per-pupil spending by school, as board members prepare to start figuring out where to slash tens of millions of dollars for the coming year.
Eric Frazier, efrazier@charlotteobserver.com, is doing the story on the numbers. Since we're still working getting him hooked up on this blog, I'll share the good and bad news for those who like to do their own number-crunching.
The good: CMS is sharing great info about spending, academic performance, student/teacher ratios, teacher experience, poverty and race. And they've included enough detail that you can see how the staff did their calculations.
The bad: It's nearly impossible to read on the PDF files they've posted. (If you know any tips for making that work better, please share.)
The good: The public information office sent us an Excel version and is checking out the N.C. Department of Public Instruction's system that lets users download data in Excel.
Eric and I can pass along the Excel version with those of you who want to study the chart. Contact Eric if you want to discuss issues for the story; if you just want the geek sheet, I can help at ahelms@charlotteobserver.com
Friday, January 7, 2011
Geek alert: CMS per-pupil spending
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
42 comments:
Just a little reminder.
Compare Providence Springs ES to Hickory Grove and Hornets Nest.
Compare Allenbrook ES to Shamrock ES.
Bolyn McClung
Pineville
It would be great just to have a ranking of schools by annual average cost per pupil served among peer schools. The far column could be how they ranked academically among peers. In other words, a chart like this:
$Rank School $ per Pupil Acad.Rank
That would give us a great summary. It is clear that the worst performing schools cost us the most, have the least amount of parental involvement, are located in areas that generate the least amount of tax revenue to support schools but generate the loudest complaints and protests. They are the victims in all of this. We're not giving enough. Just ridiculous.
Actual Excel spreadsheet. You can filter and sort to your heart's content!
http://www.cms.k12.nc.us/cmsdepartments/accountability/spr/Documents/Per%20Pupil%20Expenditure%20Report.xls
Good find, restsofstory! Man, you dug through some layer of clicks to get to that one; it took me several tries to figure out the path even working backward from the web address. Also weird that you get the CMS intranet prompt for a sign-in, but can just cancel it and get through anyway. Strange system.
THIS IS CRIMINAL. MPHS is the largest high school but "the least amt per student" is spent there. Another example of how the NAACP and their lawsuit HOLDS NO WATER! What a joke!
One very interesting thing that you can see right off the bat is that those school activity funds (fund raising monies), which some activists have been claiming for years give low poverty schools a big advantage, rarely provide more than $100 more per pupil in any of those low poverty schools. In no way does that equalize spending. For instance, Selwyn and Shamrock are right next to each other on the chart. Selwyn's parents are great fund raisers but according to the chart with the student activity fund each Selwyn student gets $5447. Without the funds they would get $5315, a difference of $132. Shamrock students get $8684. They have no activity fund so their "without funds" number is also $8684. Some of the information for middle and high schools seem to be missing on the Excel version (J & K -- attendance numbers and per pupil expenditure with funds)so haven't looked at that carefully but elementary info is very clear.
I think everyone recognizes that higher poverty schools are going to need some additional funding, but over the years some have been so insistent that high poverty schools were doing with less and that wealthier parents didn't care, that many in the community have come to believe that. This has led to terrible divisiveness. I hope we can now have an honest examination of who gets what, get rid of the myth making, and stop demonizing schools that are doing well.
To followup on 2:31 pm, what you do not see also is the amount the low poverty schools parents volunteer, tutor, do clothing drives and share fundraising proceeds with many of the high poverty schools.
The school activity funds do not include PTA money, according to the public information office. But you're right about the basic idea: Even a real powerhouse PTA isn't going to budge the needle by more than about $100 per student.
Ann, If the School Activity Fund doesn't include PTA funds where do those funds come from? Am I mistaken that most fund raising is done by PTAs? Looking at Selwyn, I was at a meeting last year when the then Head of Communities in Schools mentioned that wealthier schools had a big leg up because their PTAs could raise so much money. He used Selwyn as an example, saying they raised over $100,000. That looks like the number that's posted on the spread sheet for their student activity funds. (He also commented that it was unfair because a school like Billlingsville could not raise money--what he obviously didn't know was that Selwyn gave about 10% of what they raised to Billingsville). I can understand that high school activity funds would come from numerous sources--band boosters, choral boosters, etc. But in elementary school--isn't it PTA funds?
Yeah, BIG second to the finding out what "school activity funds" means and where they come from -- or do not.
Do they come from tax dollars? Y/N would be a start. Are they matched in any way?
Frankly if CMS is not the ultimate source of the funds, I cannot imagine why you would include them in a breakdown of school funding.
I think it is very important for the community to get the real story and have the entire spreadsheet on spending printed on the hard copy version of the Observer. Too many untruths have been reported, particularly by the Observer's editorial staff ,who still contend that we spend less money on our high poverty kids. Couldn't be further from the truth!
This information about per pupil spending has been available for a long time, although it required a little digging. Why are we just now hearing about this? And the PTA funds issue--many of us have been able to see for a long time that even $80,000 in fund raising for a school of 800 kids was only going to increase per pupil spending by $100. It's a shame we've let these inequality myths fester for so long.
Does everyone also forget that many schools that have big PTSA fundraisers also give 10 - 20 of all funds to an Adopted school (Selwyn for Billingslville is a good example)
On clarifying school activity fund: Yes, it's important. I've asked Eric to post an answer as soon as he gets one. (OK, as soon as he gets one and finishes filing his story.)
On printing charts in the paper: Would love to do it and think it'd be well read. But have you seen the size of our news space? Even the quick-read version we posted with the online story would eat a huge chunk of space. We will refer print readers back to the online charts tomorrow morning.
On timing: This is an annual thing. I did a story on the 2008-09 numbers several months ago, which showed the same trends. This is first I've seen the 2009-10 report.
I know you don't control placement Ann, but it's obvious from comments here and from the many comments already posted for the online story that people are extremely interested in this. So will this be on the front page? Surely it won't be buried in the middle of the local section. And has anyone told the editorial board about this yet? :)
Someone else has already pointed this out but the editoial staff rely on the "uneducated" to help push their liberal agenda. So they may get push back to actually publishing this real information. BUT, (and I cap it on purpose) due to the dire financial situation of CMS and BOCC and the dire circumstances of most taxpayers, we should push the CO hard to help all of this be totally transparent. Additionally, all these extra things like low poverty schools assisting high poverty schools, business and church sponsors, etc. need to be waved in front of everyone's face.
Also Ann, I have all of this on one excel spreadsheet from school year 2006-2007 to present.
Additionally, school progress reports this year now include a metric called return on investment (ROI) to reflect the per pupil expenditure compared to the student growth. It makes the wastefulness of these dollars spent even more obvious.
$ per 20th Day Rank* Perf Comp Rank*
Takes all that confusion and detail out but answers the question of - If you get average $ and performance is average, you can see where the $ are not producing the performance.
These schools outperform the peers (sorted by best perf per $):
Elem:
POLO RIDGE
ELIZABETH LANE
ELON PARK
BAIN
TORRENCE CREEK
HAWK RIDGE
BALLANTYNE
PROVIDENCE SPRINGS
J. V. WASHAM
SHARON
MATTHEWS
BARNETTE
HIGHLAND CREEK
DAVIDSON
OLDE PROVIDENCE
ENDHAVEN
CORNELIUS
RIVER GATE
JOHN M MOREHEAD
MYERS PARK TRADITIONAL
SELWYN
HUNTERSVILLE
WINGET PARK
COLLINSWOOD
EASTOVER
CROWN POINT
CROFT COMMUNITY
PARK ROAD
MALLARD CREEK
MOUNTAIN ISLAND
CHANTILLY MONTESSORI
CLEAR CREEK
ELIZABETH TRADITIONAL
TUCKASEEGEE
STONEY CREEK
BEVERLY WOODS
VILLA HEIGHTS
LANSDOWNE
LEGETTE BLYTHE
RIVER OAKS
PINEVILLE
BEREWICK
DILWORTH
IDLEWILD
STEELE CREEK
DAVID COX ROAD
MCKEE ROAD
LONG CREEK
GREENWAY PARK
JOSEPH W GRIER ACADEMY
MCALPINE
PINEY GROVE
--------------------
These schools underperform the peers (sorted by worst perf per $):
Elem:
THOMASBORO
FIRST WARD
DRUID HILLS
PAWTUCKETT
WALTER G BEYERS
WESTERLY HILLS
LINCOLN HEIGHTS
BILLINGSVILLE
ASHLEY PARK
REID PARK
SEDGEFIELD
ALLENBROOK
BRUNS
HIGHLAND RENAISSANCE
SHAMROCK GARDENS
MONTCLAIRE
STATESVILLE ROAD
PINEWOOD
BRIARWOOD
RAMA ROAD
IRWIN AVE. OPEN
BARRINGER
DEVONSHIRE
MERRY OAKS
STERLING
ALBEMARLE ROAD
WINTERFIELD
NATIONS FORD
OAKHURST
HICKORY GROVE
HIDDEN VALLEY
PAW CREEK
BERRYHILL
HORNETS NEST
OAKLAWN
NEWELL
J. H. GUNN
WINDING SPRINGS
HUNTINGTOWNE FARMS
UNIVERSITY PARK
SMITHFIELD
HIGHLAND MILL MONTESSORI
NATHANIEL ALEXANDER
REEDY CREEK
OAKDALE
WHITEWATER
COTSWOLD
WINDSOR PARK
UNIVERSITY MEADOWS
LEBANON ROAD
LAKE WYLIE
These schools outperform the peers (sorted by best perf per $):
Middle:
COMMUNITY HOUSE
SOUTH CHARLOTTE
JAY M ROBINSON
PIEDMONT OPEN
BAILEY SCHOOL
MINT HILL
CRESTDALE
RIDGE ROAD
RANDOLPH
SOUTHWEST
FRANCIS BRADLEY
ALEXANDER GRAHAM
CARMEL
SMITH SCHOOL
DAVIDSON IB
QUAIL HOLLOW
NORTHEAST
--------------------
These schools underperform the peers (sorted by worst perf per $):
Middle:
J. T. WILLIAMS
SPAUGH
SEDGEFIELD
EASTWAY
WILSON
MARTIN LUTHER KING
COCHRANE
RANSON
WHITEWATER
ALBEMARLE ROAD
MCCLINTOCK
COULWOOD
ALEXANDER
JAMES MARTIN
KENNEDY
NORTHRIDGE
These schools outperform the peers (sorted by best perf per $):
High:
ARDREY KELL HIGH
PROVIDENCE
RENAISSANCE SCHOOL AT OLYMPIC HIGH
MYERS PARK
NEW TECHNLOGY AT GARINGER HIGH
DAVID W BUTLER
SOUTH MECKLENBURG
MALLARD CREEK HIGH
CATO MIDDLE COLLEGE HIGH
HOPEWELL
NORTH MECKLENBURG
INTL BUSINESS & COMM. STUDIES AT OLYMPIC HIGH
MATH, ENG., TECH. & SCIENCE AT OLYMPIC HIGH
INDEPENDENCE
INTL STUDIES & GLOBAL ECON. AT OLYMPIC HIGH
PHILLIP O BERRY ACADEMY
--------------------
These schools underperform the peers (sorted by worst perf per $):
High:
MIDWOOD HIGH
MARIE G DAVIS MILITARY AND GLOBAL LEADERSHIP ACADEMY
E.E. WADDELL
MATH AND SCIENCE AT GARINGER HIGH
LEADERSHIP AND PUBLIC SERVICE AT GARINGER HIGH
PERFORMANCE LEARNING CENTER
ZEBULON B VANCE
WEST CHARLOTTE
BUSINESS AND FINANCE AT GARINGER HIGH
WEST MECKLENBURG
HARDING UNIVERSITY
NORTHWEST
BIOTECH, HEALTH & PUBLIC ADMIN AT OLYMPIC HIGH
INTERNATIONAL STUDIES AT GARINGER HIGH
EAST MECKLENBURG
I understand that the Observer has only so much room to post the per pupil spending data, so how about posting it by school level: first day post elementary spending, second day middle school spending and the third day post the high school spending. If that requires too much space, post, for example, the top 10 (pick a number that is feasible to print) and the bottom 10 pupil spending schools. You are savvy enough to figure out how to get this important data into the paper even if it takes some fighting with your editor. It's time another arm of the Observer bust the myths propagated by your editorial writers! Facts speak louder than words.
Per pupil spending article is nowhere to be seen in today's (Saturday's) paper. What's going on? Will it be a headliner in the Sunday paper? Seems strange that the article would be on-line on Friday but not show up in print until Sunday. But it will be even stranger (and very disturbing) if the article never makes it to the paper at all.
Um, very good question, 8:08. When Eric and I left last night, the story was going in the paper. No one called him to say it was being held -- he's checking now to make sure it runs.
It's sort of a running joke with us how often there are parallels between CMS and the Observer. Sometimes it looks like CMS is hiding something and folks there insist it was just a snag in communications or process. Well ... I can promise you no one on the editorial board came over and said "Suppress that story!" But I do hate to see stories held after they've been posted online.
Eric Frazier here: There was some sort of late-night snafu with the print version of the story last night (Friday night). It will be in Sunday's paper.
Snafu meaning that the Editorial Board got their hands on this? Wouldn't want it to douse their unfounded suppositions!
Well, obviously it wasn't going to be on the front page, was it? I can't imagine there could be that big of a snafu. Nor can I imagine a snafu keeping it off the headlines of the local section. Is this story going to be buried?
Update No. 2: The story's now going to run in the paper on Monday. The editors want to make sure it runs on the Local front, and there isn't space for it on tomorrow's local front. It could run inside Local, but it's too important not to be on a section front.
I hate to sound cynical, but I was surprised yesterday when the blog so quickly left the topic of per pupil spending and moved on to the lottery when it appeared there was quite a bit of interest in the spending piece. Then when the article didn't show up in the paper this morning I had to wonder--why are they trying to get rid of this topic?
Eric, Will this be the same story that we saw on-line with links to per pupil data? I'll have to say that this whole situation seems very peculiar. And sorry, but we all know that these results do not fit the favored storyline for the paper's editorial staff. I know news is totally separate from editorial, but between the quick change of topic on the blog and the stalling of publishing of the article something just doesn't seem right.
Re change of topic on the blog: I don't look at posting a new item as canceling out a prior post. Obviously, comments on this item are continuing just fine -- and most of the comments on the newer item are also about per-pupil spending.
It would be kind of amusing to imagine Taylor Batten holding a gun to my head and ordering me to post a new item, but truth is, I just came across the state "about the lottery" link and decided to bang that out quickly before I forget. Middle-age brain clog is a much bigger challenge for me than anyone imposing bias.
Unfortunately, we see from the comments that there is a lack of trust in the Observer because there has been a history of burying information if it doesn't go along with their agenda. Even when information cannot be buried, too many times it will appear in the continuation of the article on another page or "below the fold". When we see how unilateral the editorial board is on making sure the public still thinks that CMS has not done nearly enough for our poor students, you can understand the energy of these blog responses. We need more balance (some, would be nice) in our editorial board. Why has there been no effort to do so?
What the public will soon learn is these numbers do not reflect what is truly being spent in the poorer schools. It is all smoke screens and mirrors. CMS has worked very hard to undermind all of it's schools. How does Providence get more money per student than Myers Park? Could this be a "White on White crime"?
Regarding the previous comment: "What the public will soon learn is these numbers do not reflect what is truly being spent in the poorer schools. It is all smoke screens and mirrors."
Anonymous, how could you possibly know this? And...what a surprise? Someone's pulling the race card yet again to deflect from the facts. Fannie Flono, is that you?
Here's how to equalize per pupil spending at all schools.
Most of the money comes from staff salaries so make sure you have an equal mix of teachers in terms of:
years experience,
advanced degrees
national board certification.
Also,make sure all principals and other staff are paid the same amount of money.
Next differential is the federal monies so make sure you have an equal number of the following categories of students in each school:
Exceptional Children (EC)
English as Second Language ESL)
McKinney-Vento (Homeless)
Free and Reduced Lunch (FRL)
Make sure no school is Title I then the feds won't pay for extra staffing.
Until CMS dis-aggregates the data in all of the terms above, it's only purpose is to foment discord among sections of the population in order to achieve Gorman's hidden agenda and destroy this school system.
That's the way it has always been in this country, make middle class and poor whites think that minorities are taking something away from them so their latent racist attitudes can burst forth.
So it leaves the all little guys (middle and lower class whites, blacks and Hispanics)fighting over a little sliver of the pie while 99% of that pie is in the pockets of a very few. They sit in their ivory towers laughing at us and marveling how this works every time.
We all need to band together and ask for a real accounting of all funds in this school system. We used to get a budget, before Gorman, that told us where every penny came from and where it went. Demand it now Charlotte and uncover the lies!
So anybody ready for us yet?
www.Deconsolidate.com
We tried to get this going a few years ago but the uptown crowd got a bad bunch of press going and stopped it. But at least not the media is being honest this time around.
Or at at least we need to get vouchers so the power is back in the hands of the parents. www.WestCharlotte.com
Either group is working for the same goal of getting the rights back where they should be.
Nice job hiding the per pupil issue in the paper today.
Why was the story hidden? This is important information everyone in Mecklenburg county should be aware of. Highly disappointed in the Observer! So much for any change. How much more can CMS cut from the suburban schools? Can you squeeze 40 in a grade school class to accommodate the inner city schools of 12 per room?
Interesting that the article about the Courage exhibit, which mentions that CMS is being investigated for civil rights complaints alleging discrimination against blacks and Hispanics, ran on the front page, while this article was at the bottom of the Local section. I think they should have run side by side. Talk about irony!
You see the influence the Levines have to what and where stuff is printed. The CO editorial staff wanted to be sure they did not "embarass" the Levines.
One has to wonder how the Observer's editors can justify what has just happened. The community has been at odds for years over school resources, with so much misinformation floating around. Here we finally have a story detailing exactly how our money is being spent and showing that high poverty schools have not been underfunded in favor of suburban schools (underfunding of high poverty schools being a favorite theme of several of the editorial page writers and apparently believed by many in the community). The story looks good when first posted on-line, with excellent charts to go along with it. Then it doesn't make the paper the next day (Saturday), supposedly due to a "snafu". After some squawking by some on-line readers we're told it won't be published on Sunday because it would only fit inside the local section and it was "too important' for that--wait for Monday. Then it shows up Sunday after all, but at the very bottom of the local page, and with no accompanying charts. And of course on the section A front page we have a story that includes alleged civil right violations against minorities (with no mention whatsoever of the funding differential). Ann, Eric, could we please have an honest explanation about what has been going on here? Why was this not considered as important as the Levine Museum story when there's been so much dissension over the years over this? Should we all just give up on getting a fair shake from the Observer? It's beginning to look that way!
We absolutely have to pour more resources into the traditionally black schools. White folks don't need any help, those two parent households produce leaders, and children that are naturally disposed towards learning. Black households, if you can call them that, are more stilted towards poverty. We must pour more and more of our hard earned resources towards saving this society. These folks typically don't work so it is up to us that do to support them, and their children. They were scammed into property that they couldn't afford, so the foreclosures are also related to this. This is why again, we must pour more hard earned tax dollars towards helping these folks. They are the true victems of those of use who work and support society.
8:21, I really enjoy your sarcasm.
Post a Comment