Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education

Commissioner's Newsletter

March 1, 2002

Dear School Administrator:

This letter includes some important and timely information to assist you with your budget planning for next year.

ESTIMATES FOR 2002-2003 STATE FUNDING

School officials across the state are building their proposed budgets for the coming year and wondering what action the legislature will take in regard to appropriations for the Foundation Program. We are in the same position. While the governor and legislative leaders remain committed to the goal of full funding for the formula next year, there is intense competition among different interests for a limited amount of new revenue. In addition, there appears to be little consensus among lawmakers about various proposals to expand existing revenue sources or to create new sources of revenue.

This week, the House of Representatives approved a bill (HB 1711) that modifies the existing formula and calls for an increase of about $175 million over this year’s funding level. If finally adopted, this bill would reduce the cost of "full funding" by modifying the definition of the Guaranteed Tax Base (GTB) calculation, so that it is the average of the assessed valuation per eligible pupil for the third and fourth preceding years multiplied by 2.167. HB 1711 also averages the first and second preceding year assessed valuation of the district in Line 2B of the basic formula calculation.

Our School Finance Section sent you information about this bill last month, along with instructions on how to calculate projections of your district’s state aid for next year. Our staff has developed a calculation tool, available on the Web, to assist you with formula projections. (www.dese.mo.gov/divadm/finance/formula/)

We urge you to prepare this calculation for your district, using the modifications included in HB 1711 along with these factors:

• GTB $139,507

• Line 2 Average your 2000 and 2001 assessed valuation

• Proration factors 1.00 on Lines 1A, 1B, 14A and 14 B

But what if the legislature is unable to reach agreement on a full-funding plan and there is no increase in foundation aid? Many school administrators have asked us to help them project their funding for next year based on this scenario.

If the Foundation Program is "level-funded" next year (zero increase above this year’s amount), and HB 1711 is not enacted, we estimate that the following factors will be in place:

• GTB $144,162

• Line 2 2001 assessed valuation

• Proration factors .95 for Lines 1A and 14A
  .90 for Lines 1B and 14B

We recommend that you prepare this calculation for your district and use it as a conservative basis for working on your 2002-03 budget.

Unfortunately, we are not able to give you solid predictions about what to expect as you plan your budget. The state’s revenue picture is still tenuous. We cannot tell if the legislature will approve any new revenue sources or how it will allocate funds in the final appropriations bills. It seems quite likely that we will not know the answers to these questions until the last minute. We can only advise you to follow the legislative debate carefully – and be conservative in your projections for next year.

IMPORTANT! STATE BOARD APPROVES PLAN TO LIMIT SUMMER SCHOOL INCENTIVE FUNDS

At its regular meeting last week (February 21), the State Board of Education approved a PROPOSED change in our current regulations concerning summer school funding. Because of the state’s difficult financial situation, and because of the desire to fully fund the Foundation Program, I recommended that the Board take this action in order to help slow the rate of growth in summer school costs.

As you know, school districts currently may "double-count" their average daily attendance in summer school for state aid purposes – up to a maximum of 5% of the average daily attendance during the regular term.

We are proposing to reduce this ceiling to 3%. We estimate this would reduce reimbursements for summer school programs by about $8 million statewide. Further, we estimate that this change would reduce the incentive funding for about one-third of the districts that offer summer school.

The growth of summer school programs across Missouri has been one of the most tangible and positive results of the Outstanding Schools Act of 1993. The 1993 changes in the Foundation Program included a strong incentive for school districts to expand summer programming, and that incentive has worked extremely well.

In light of the state’s difficult financial situation, however, we believe it is necessary to limit the rapid growth in summer school costs so that more money will be available for basic aid during the regular school year.

We do not want to eliminate the financial incentive for school districts to provide quality summer programs. Moreover, I believe summer school may become increasingly important to school districts in the future as they try to respond to rising accountability demands.

I realize this proposal may come as a surprise, and I am sorry for that. Nonetheless, we think it is necessary to take whatever steps we can to respond to the state’s budget problems and protect basic aid to districts through the Foundation Program. If this amended regulation is adopted this summer, it could affect your state aid for summer school during the coming year. The majority of districts will NOT be affected by this change, according to our estimates.

If you wish to comment about this proposal, please send written comments or suggestions to Gerri Ogle, Associate Commissioner for Administrative and Financial Services.

Under the state’s formal rulemaking process, the Board will consider comments and suggestions before it takes final action (probably in May) to adopt any change in the current policy regarding summer school funding.

CLARIFICATION ON "DISTINCTION IN PERFORMANCE"

We have noticed several instances recently in which school districts are referring to themselves as "Accredited with Distinction" – based on the data included in their Annual Performance Report. In the third cycle of MSIP, we will not be using the "Accredited with Distinction" label any longer. Instead, we have adopted the ANNUAL designation of "Distinction in Performance."

While the criteria for the annual Distinction in Performance award are based on the same performance indicators used in the MSIP process, this designation is separate from the district’s accreditation status.

Nearly 200 school districts recently qualified for the Distinction in Performance honor. We will be recognizing those districts at a series of regional banquets during March and April. The State Board of Education and senior staff from our Department will be taking part in these events.

For districts that want to celebrate this award, we suggest using a phrase such as "Recognized for Distinction in Performance, 2002" as opposed to "accredited" with distinction.

SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAMS

Lack of adequate food for children has been connected to poor school performance and high risk for health problems. During the school year, the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) offers nutritious meals at free or reduced prices. Many children from households that experience hunger and food insecurity participate in the NSLP. During the summer break, however, many of these children may not receive an adequate diet.

Continuing to offer the NSLP and Breakfast Program for schools with summer sessions provides a real boost for those students participating. For schools that have at least 50% of their enrollment eligible for free or reduced-priced meals, the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), administered by the Missouri Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS), is available. The program provides meals to children age 18 and under and to mentally or physically disabled adults over the age of 18 who participate in a school program for the mentally or physically disabled during the summer months. If you would like to learn more about SFSP and find out if your school qualifies, please call the DHSS at 888-435-1464.

BRAIN RESEARCH SEMINAR

In the "Mail Bag" packet that was sent to superintendents this week (February 27), you received an invitation to a special Brain Research Seminar that will be held April 26 in conjunction with the Practical Parenting Partnerships annual "Family Festival" conference. Gov. and Mrs. Holden are expected to participate in this event, and I wanted to call this information to your attention.

This will be a follow-up to the "Work in Progress" seminar that was held in March of 2001. This program features several of the nation’s leading figures in the field of brain research. I hope you will consider participating or sharing the materials you received with appropriate members of your staff.

² ² ² ² ²

As winter fades and spring approaches, superintendents turn their thought to budgets, salaries, staffing, MAP tests, and the glut of end-of-school activities. With the great uncertainty about budgets, you may be unable to finalize salary proposals for a while. With the shortage of teachers, your decisions on staffing will be difficult. And with the many banquets, recognition programs and other special end-of-year events, you may be very tired.

In many cases, what these end-of-school activities really represent are the positive educational results of last spring’s decisions: How was the money spent? Did we select and train good staff? Did we focus on helping ALL students succeed? I hope you can remember that recognizing students’ accomplishments is really about validating our efforts to do the right things for them.

I hope this perspective is somewhat helpful as you deal with all your educational decisions at this time of year – and when so many issues may appear to be out of your control.

Sincerely,

D. Kent King