Unformatted text preview: Wolfram, G. 1999. Report of Hillsdale Policy Group on Michigan Charter Schools.
Hillsdale, Mich.: Hillsdale Policy Group. (Visited 2/9/00)
<http://www.charterschools.org/whatsnew/pr/domore0899.html> 95 Venturesome Capital: State Charter School Finance Systems Wynn, M. 1995. “New Jersey.” Public School Finance Programs of the United States and
Canada, 1993-94. Ed. Gold, S., Smith, D., Lawton, S. New York: Nelson Rockefeller
Institute of Government, State University of New York.
Zigmond, N. 1999. “Special Education Revisited: A Response to Zollers and
Ramanathan.” Phi Delta Kappan 80: 228-234.
Zollers, N., Ramanathan, A. 1998. “For-Profit Charters and Students with Disabilities: The
Sordid Side of the Business of Schooling.” Phi Delta Kappan 79: 297-304 96 Appendix Appendix
This appendix contains the state profiles that formed the basis of the analysis provided in
this report. They detail each state’s finance system as well as information on expected
funding levels for charter schools in a variety of circumstances. The tables provide a
breakdown of how different pupil characteristics affect overall funding and how funding
varies across type of school. State officials were consulted during this process, and they
reviewed each profile.
The text entries describe funding practices and issues related to finance such as financial
reporting, participation in state retirement systems, and asset ownership issues. The tables
illustrate how charter schools generate a per-pupil amount of funding (expressed as
funding per member rather than funding per pupil served by a specific program) in a
variety of circumstances that depend primarily on variations in the type of students
enrolled. Each table provides funding estimates for three hypothetical charter schools
(described fully in the methodology section of this report). The hypothetical basic
elementary charter school enrolls no special needs or at-risk students and is generally
located in a district with state average geographic and financial characteristics. The
hypothetical middle cost K-12 charter school is located in the same district as the basic
elementary charter school, but has a population closely matching the state average student
population regarding grade level, at-risk and special needs characteristics. In most
instances, the hypothetical at-risk upper grade charter school has double the state
average enrollment of special needs and at-risk students and is located in a big city.
Generally, each hypothetical charter school has a population of 100 students (a number that
allows easy conversion to percentages). In instances where funding varies by school size,
the population sometimes varies from 100 students to highlight the impact of school size
on funding levels. Arizona, for example, has 500 students enrolled in the hypothetical
basic elementary school. In the first section of each state table, the column FTE (full-time
equivalent) or WFTE (weighted full-time equivalent) provides an enrollment breakdown
by student type. Because FTE students are sometimes counted twice (e.g., first as a regular
student and then as a special education student), the breakdown of FTE students does not
necessarily add up to 100. Appendix 97 Venturesome Capital: State Charter School Finance...
View Full Document
This note was uploaded on 02/11/2013 for the course ECON 101 taught by Professor Smith during the Spring '09 term at Harvard.
- Spring '09