|
LOCAL FUNDS
<br /> The nearly century-old division of state and local responsibility
<br /> for school funding still shapes the way North Carolina pays for LOCAL SCHOOL FUNDING:
<br /> public education today, with 63 percent of instructional IMPACTS ON SCHOOLS
<br /> expenditures coming from the state and 97.6 percent of
<br /> capital expenses paid at the local level. However, the division AND CLASSROOMS
<br /> has eroded somewhat, with counties funding 18.3 percent . .
<br /> of principal and assistant principal positions, 6.8 percent of
<br /> teachers, 9.4 percent of teacher assistants, and 20.4 percent Differences in counties' levels of investment in their
<br /> of professional instructional support personnel; and with school systems translate into dramatically different
<br /> the state paying 2.1 percent of capital expenses. options at the school and classroom level.As an
<br /> illustration,at a statewide average class size of 26
<br /> Considering local expenditures on programs and personnel students per classroom,the ten counties that spend
<br /> in 2013-14, the ten counties that spent the most per student the most per student would spend,on average,
<br /> averaged $2,916 per student compared to the ten that spent $75,824 per classroom. By contrast,the ten counties
<br /> the least, which averaged $705 per student. That represents that spend the least per child would spend,on average,
<br /> a gap of$2,211.Sixty counties are below the state average of $18,327 per classroom—a difference of$57,497 per
<br /> $1,500.Orange County alone spends about the same amount classroom.At the state's average elementary school
<br /> as the bottom six counties combined. size of 497 students,that translates to a difference
<br /> of$1,099,082 per elementary school.At the state's
<br /> One of the primary challenges from the five low-wealth average high school size of 837, it translates to a
<br /> plaintiffs in the Leandro case dealt with the inequities between difference of$1,850,969 per high school.
<br /> varying levels of county support for schools. However,the state
<br /> Supreme Court ruled in 1997 that"the'equal opportunities'clause
<br /> of Article IX, Section 2(1) of the North Carolina Constitution FEDERAL FUNDS
<br /> does not require substantially equal funding or educational
<br /> advantages in all school districts. Consequently, the provisions Resources from the federal government accounted for 11.7
<br /> of the current state system for funding schools which require percent of North Carolina public education spending on instruc-
<br /> or allow counties to help finance their school systems and tional expenses in 2013-14,and totaled $1,421,857,482. Federal
<br /> result in unequal funding among the school districts of the resources are given to states in the form of direct grants,state
<br /> state do not violate constitutional principles." applications, state plans,or a combination of the three.
<br /> ' iii, 0 RACE TO THE TOP'S ROLE IN THE 2016
<br /> I FINANCE STUDY
<br /> T + .
<br /> • `y Race to the Top(RttT) is a federal competitive grant awarded
<br /> il ' - �' • to North Carolina,focused on creating conditions for education•2,4' ' - �', , innovation and reform, implementing ambitious plans in four
<br /> _ education reform areas,and achieving significant improvement
<br /> ie ^. •`.s ■ ' — Az- in student outcomes(U.S. Department of Education, Race to the
<br /> �� ? .yam v .;; y Top Executive Summary,2009). North Carolina was one of 12
<br /> states to receive an RttT grant in 2010.The grant includes$400
<br /> � 1 , :.. _ million dollars to be used over four years on the state's public
<br /> ,
<br /> W.. ;�,[ I �,- ` school system. Half of the grant is designated for use by local
<br /> 1 education agencies for their own initiatives that support the
<br /> ..s.Vall IP North Carolina RttT plan. North Carolina received RttT funding
<br /> during the school year analyzed in the 2016 Local School Finance
<br /> IIL le Study(2013-14).
<br /> 9<
<br />
|