Venturesome Capital- State Charter School Finance Systems

If the charter school population is dissimilar

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: rter schools receive funding based primarily on the student characteristics of the school district, usually with the expectation that each charter school will enroll a 30 Overview of Charter School Funding student population similar to the district’s. If the charter school population is dissimilar, charter schools receive either generous or insufficient funding. TABLE 2 Basis of Per-pupil Funding Revenue of District Spending of District State Average District Budget Formula Alaska,1 Arizona,2 California, Colorado,1 Florida, Michigan, New Jersey,5 New Mexico,6 North Carolina, Texas Delaware, District of Columbia, Illinois,3 Louisiana, Massachusetts, Milwaukee, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island,5 South Carolina Connecticut, Minnesota Connecticut,4 Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Massachusetts,4 Wisconsin 1 In Alaska, charter schools negotiate with school districts over indirect costs, which can range from 0 to 22 percent. Charter schools in Colorado are guaranteed 80 percent of school districts’ per-pupil operating revenue, but the guarantee increases to 95 percent in 2000-2001. The range of funding varies considerably, with more than a third of charter schools receiving more than 100 percent funding. 2 District-authorized schools; state-authorized schools treated as independent school districts. 3 In Illinois, negotiated funding ranges between 75 percent and 125 percent of per-capita tuition. 4 Horace Mann charter schools in Massachusetts and district-sponsored charter schools in Connecticut. 5 New Mexico charter schools are guaranteed state revenue. Local revenue is subject to district allocation. 6 Charter schools receive 95 percent of spending in Rhode Island and 90 percent of revenue in New Jersey. Expenditure-based states usually refine the calculation of per-pupil expenditure through regulatory and administrative procedures to promote funding fairness. Pennsylvania subtracts special education expenditures and adds them back based on the actual enrollment of special needs students in charter schools. Other expenditure items usually excluded from base funding calculations include transportation, community service, adult education, most programs with other school districts and private schools, school lunch and federal programs. In a number of states, school districts have some control over the amount of funding that charter schools receive, or the funding is subject to negotiations between school districts and charter schools. School district discretion could lead to the underfunding of charter schools—a persistent complaint of charter school operators. However, such funding arrangements also give school districts flexibility in providing funding for the specific needs of charter schools including higher costs associated with particular programs or student populations. In states where school districts negotiate base funding with charter schools—most notably Alaska, Colorado and Illinois—the provision of school district services varies charter by charter, making it difficult to use basic revenue totals to compare charter schools. For example, a charter school that received $4...
View Full Document

Ask a homework question - tutors are online