Charter Schools
5 min read

8. What funding can charter schools receive?

8. What funding can charter schools receive?
Written by
Susan Perkins Weston
Published on
May 11, 2022

In 2022, House Bill 9 added rules for funding Kentucky charter schools. Those new provisions call for each charter school to share in most of federal, state, and local revenue available in their “district of location.” With that intent quite clear, the implementation is still going to be challenging. My big suggestion for working on the challenges is that we start building prototypes: models of what sample charter schools might receive based on the students they serve and the districts where they are located. Here, I’m going just dive in and show my understanding of key calculations, starting with SEEK base funding.

SEEK Base Basics

SEEK is short for Support Education Excellence in Kentucky, our main formula for funding public education. With only small modifications, we’ve used this approach since 1990, with a base guarantee for every pupil and a set of add-on amounts for students with additional needs. Here’s an illustration for an imaginary district. It starts with total students, counted based on average daily attendance, and then shows each group of students that receives an add-on. For simplicity, it uses the $4,000 guarantee amount being used this fiscal year.

Local school boards use their taxing powers to raise 30¢ for every $100 of taxable property in their districts, and that taxation raises varying amounts depending on districts’ assessed property values. The state then pays whatever is needed to complete the guarantee, which means state contributions are higher in districts with less property wealth and lower in districts with more.

SEEK Base For Charter Schools

Under HB 9, a public charter school is to receive:

“The amount that is proportional to the public charter school's enrollment or average daily attendance in comparison with the overall district qualifying numbers for:Funds that are related to students' attendance and enrollment and allocated to the district of location pursuant to KRS 157.360.”

KRS 157.360 is the statute that sets up the base part of the SEEK formula, so here’s my prototype of that step for two imaginary charter schools. These schools have matching numbers of total students but quite different student needs. Like the district numbers above, it begins with total students in average daily attendance and follows with the add-on amounts that go with the current $4,000 base guarantee.

This part of the funding will be the same everywhere in the state, though in future years the amounts per pupil will likely be at least little higher. Each charter school will receive these dollars from its “district of location,” but the amounts won’t vary based on the school’s address.

Tier 1 Optional Equalization

In addition to the guaranteed base, the SEEK formula allows districts to get some further state equalization called Tier 1, up to a maximum of 15% of the district’s SEEK base total. All districts are taking that maximum. The part the district puts in depends once again on its taxable property, but this time I want to illustrate how that works at three different levels of property wealth:

Because of the equalization, the property wealth doesn’t matter to what districts receive. Will it matter when districts pass dollars to charters? Maybe.

Tier 1 for Charter Schools

When Tier 1 dollars are shared out:

  • Will charter schools get shares based on qualified enrollment with all the weighting, giving Charter A 6% or the revenue and Charter B 3.8%? That would add about $283 thousand for Charter A and $179 thousand for Charter B.
  • Or will each get 5% and $236 thousand, based just on the count of pupils and ignoring the add on needs?
  • Or (take a deep breath), will they get the state dollars based on qualified enrollment and the local dollars per pupil? If it’s done that way, the district’s property assessments will matter. The richer the district, the more revenue will be local. The more the revenue is local and handed out without weights, the less the Charter A’s higher need students will receive.

As an advocate for equity that meets student needs, I definitely prefer the qualifying enrollment approach.Here’s the thing: after a week of reading HB 9’s funding provisions over and over again, I see how others could argue for either of the other methods. xI also think the stakes are big enough that key players are likely to argue hard for the version that works best for the students they expect to serve. Here's a table showing how differently the three approaches could work.

Other Puzzles

For each other part of school funding, my hunch is that there will be other puzzles to work through. Those other parts include:

  • SEEK transportation
  • SEEK Tier 2 (unequalized local dollars capped at 30% of base plus Tier 1)
  • SEEK-funded stipends for National Board Certified Teachers
  • SEEK funds for a variety of facilities costs
  • State funding for school technology
  • State funding for other categorical programs
  • Federal funding for categorical programs

Each of these streams is worth prototyping the charter allocations and discussing with care. This is about big money and there will be big concerns. The best time to start working on those big issues is now, with maximum time to think through implications, consider any proposals to clarify the legal language, and (if possible) dependable information for all concerned.

Impact on Other Schools

None of this is going to be easy for any district where families choose a charter option. For example:

  • Districts have multi-year commitments to staff, equipment, utilities and building upkeep, and none of those commitments will shrink by 5% if enrollment changes by that proportion.
  • For any “district of location” where a charter school opens, in addition to amounts to be paid, there will be timing issues. Local revenue often comes from property taxes paid between November and January, so it will matter how much has to be paid out to each charter school before that November cash flow arrives.
  • For those districts of location, there will also be the disruption of having their local tax revenue divided up to pay for students whose homes (and family tax contributions) are in other school districts.
  • For other districts, when students leave to go to charter schools in other areas, there will also be disruptions. Eligibility for each kind of state and federal funding may decline. If local revenue is stable, that will offer the most cushioning to districts where the highest taxable property produces the largest local contribution.

At least for moment, try thinking of this as similar to the financial implications of a divorce with children involved. To give just one example, even if the division of property and income is done perfectly, the money that paid for one home will not pay for two homes at the same level of comfort. Dividing education revenue among more schools is going to require stretching the same dollars to cover more spaces and equipment and sorting out those changes will involve new negotiations, drafts and revisions, compromises and conflicts.Some readers are sure to think charters will have benefits worth the effort. Others are sure to think they won’t. Over time, some on either side may move toward the other view. For now, I want to offer a simpler point: funding charter schools is going to take effort. There are puzzles to be solved, and those solutions are likely to generate more puzzles. That work is right in front of us, and it needs attention.Adding a caveat: The prototype possibilities shared above are the best I can figure out on my own. It’s completely possible that readers who follow school funding will immediately see flaws in my reasoning. That’s kind of the point of sharing a prototype: it lets us find the glitches early. So please, bring on the questions, concerns, and alternate views of how this will work.

Legal sources: In 2022's House Bill 9, Section 7 has the rules for funding charter schools. (See pages 30 to 35). KRS 157.360 shows most of the rules for SEEK base funding, with the add-on for students with limited English proficiency shown only in budget legislation like 2022’s House Bill 1. House Bill 1 also provides that the SEEK base guarantee will move up from $4,000 to $4,100 next year and $4,200 the year after: the calculations above kept the $4,000 figure because it makes the arithmetic easier to follow. KRS 157.440 shows the Tier 1 and Tier 2 rules.

Series Links:

Charter schools: taking on the questions (Introduction)

1. What is a charter school?

2. What student results are charter schools expected to deliver?

3. Which school laws do charter schools have to follow?

4. How can students be admitted to charter schools?

5. Who can authorize charter schools?

6. Who can apply to start a charter school?

7. How can charter schools be closed if they do not deliver?

8. What funding can charter schools receive?

Adding new questions about charter schools (Conclusion)

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay up to date with our work.

By subscribing, you consent to receive updates from The Prichard Committee.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

Recent posts

Kentucky Test Scores Show Slight Improvement
5 min read

Kentucky Test Scores Show Slight Improvement

Kentucky has seen improvement in four of the measures that the Prichard Committee most closely tracks.

Oct. 3, 2024

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Lisa McKinney

lisa@prichardcommittee.org

(cell) 859-475-7202

Kentucky Test Scores Show Slight Improvement

Community Accountability Necessary to Quicken the Pace

A statement from Brigitte Blom, President and CEO

LEXINGTON, Ky -- In the new public school learning results data released today by the Kentucky Department of Education, Kentucky has seen improvement in four of the measures that the Prichard Committee most closely tracks. Compared to 2023, the new data release shows:

  • A 2% increase in the kindergarten readiness of students entering school last fall
  • A 1% increase in grade 3 students scoring proficient or above in reading
  • A 1% increase in grade 8 mathematics proficiency
  • A 1% increase in the four-year high school graduation rate

There was no progress on two other priority measures:

  • No increase in grade 3 mathematics proficiency
  • A 3% decline in grade 8 reading proficiency

Even the measures that have improved remain far from Kentucky’s long-term goals. For example, only 47% of 2024 third-grade students were proficient or above in reading. If we continue improving at a pace of 1% each year, it could take 53 years to get all Kentucky students to the proficient level in that foundational subject.The results released today also confirm the urgency of Kentucky’s work to ensure that students of all backgrounds thrive in our schools:

  • Even as grade 3 reading proficiency rose overall, it declined for English learners and for students with disabilities and showed no improvement for economically disadvantaged students and Hispanic or Latino students.  
  • Grade 8 math results also rose overall, but showed no improvement for African American, Hispanic or Latino students and English learners. In slightly better news, economically disadvantaged students and students with disabilities did see grade 8 mathematics improvement that was a bit stronger than that of their classmates.
  • The other indicators provide similar evidence that we have not yet moved beyond our historic failures in closing achievement gaps.

The Prichard Committee will be doing further analysis on postsecondary readiness. It is difficult to compare this year’s 81% readiness rate directly to last year’s 79% rate, because this is the first year that readiness includes students who have been successful in work-based learning. While including that data going forward is beneficial, our analysis will need to consider how it affects year-to-year comparisons. We are also concerned to see that the percent of students reaching ACT benchmarks has declined and look forward to studying those patterns in more depth. If graduation rates remain steady or increase while postsecondary readiness measures decrease, that raises questions about how meaningful Kentucky’s high school diplomas are for preparing students for post-graduation life.

In response to today’s new data, the Prichard Committee urges Kentuckians in every community to review the results and develop new local efforts to ensure that our public schools offer all learners the full opportunities and supports they need to flourish. As a starting point, communities can work together on active family and community engagement, expanded and enriched learning times, integrated supports, and collaborative leadership and practices to support high-quality teaching.

The Prichard Committee also urges stronger state-level policy efforts and financial investments in our public schools. The new LETRS (Read to Succeed) program is off to a promising start, and added funding for kindergarten and school transportation are important starting points, but we need to do more as a commonwealth. Kentucky must deepen our efforts on teaching quality, working conditions, and shortages, and we must strengthen state SEEK funding, including meeting full transportation costs. Now is the time to invest appropriately in public education and ensure public dollars are not being diverted from the public schools that educate the vast majority of Kentucky students.

Overall, Kentucky’s future demands renewed and strengthened commitment to public schools that can equip each and every graduate has the durable skills and the depth of knowledge to succeed as adult learners, as workforce participants, and as contributors to our communities. It is every community members’ responsibility to help build a Big, Bold Future for the commonwealth with education at its core. Let’s get to work.

2024 SNAPSHOTS OF KENTUCKY K-12 RESULTS
5 min read

2024 SNAPSHOTS OF KENTUCKY K-12 RESULTS

This morning, the Kentucky Department of Education released important Kentucky State Assessment (KSA) results...

This morning, the Kentucky Department of Education released important Kentucky State Assessment (KSA) results and other indicators that matter for our public schools. As an added way to see some of the major patterns in that data, the Prichard Committee has created a 2023-24 Snapshot approach to statewide elementary school, middle school, and high school data and showing:

  • The statewide percent of students who scored proficient or distinguished in reading, mathematics, science, social studies, and writing on the 2023 KSA
  • Results for all students, for students who are and are not identified as English learners, for students with and without identified disabilities, for students with and without economic disadvantage, for students in seven groups by race and ethnicity, and for female and male students
  • A single page display for elementary school results and for middle school results
  • A two page display for high school results, with one page for KSA and another for ACT results, graduation rate, and postsecondary readiness rate

Unsurprisingly, the results shows that we have important work ahead to reach 100% proficiency and readiness, and they continue to show differences in how well we are serving students with different backgrounds and needs. For example, here’s a quick look at elementary school reading results, combining grades 3,4, and 5.

If we engage this data with candor and concern, it can strengthen our work to ensure that all Kentucky learners are welcome, respected, and empowered in our public schools.

As communities and as a commonwealth, we need public schools to equip every student in our rising generation to play a full role in Kentucky’s Big Bold Future.

Please do take a look at the new Snapshot data for each level.

The Prichard Committee releases analysis of ‘school choice’ Amendment 2
5 min read

The Prichard Committee releases analysis of ‘school choice’ Amendment 2

The Prichard Committee for Academic Excellence today released an analysis of Amendment 2

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Aug. 20, 2024

Contact: Lisa McKinney

(cell) 859-475-7202

lisa@prichardcommittee.org

The Prichard Committee releases analysis of ‘school choice’ Amendment 2

Committee issues statement of opposition to the amendment

(LEXINGTON, Ky) --The Prichard Committee for Academic Excellence today released an analysis of Amendment 2, a proposed amendment to Kentucky’s Constitution that would allow the allocation of public funds to school choice options beyond traditional public schools. The analysis, which outlines the potential financial and education outcomes of the amendment, found that funding private K12 educational institutions is not an appropriate or effective use of public funds.  

Amendment 2 will appear on ballots in November.  

“An amendment to Kentucky’s constitution that opens the door to private school choice with public dollars is likely to have significantly negative consequences for Kentucky’s long-standing march to improve education outcomes,” said Prichard Committee President/CEO Brigitte Blom. “Diverting public dollars to private school choice options creates the conditions for an unregulated market with no accountability to the taxpayers who fund it, and no durable research that warrants such an investment.”

The amendment's passage would allow the legislature to direct public funds to support private schools (including parochial schools), homeschooling, and charter schools through various financial mechanisms like vouchers, tax credits and education savings accounts.

Diverting funds to private schools is shown to spread scarce resources across more providers, thereby reducing overall access and improvement to quality in education, especially in areas where there is population decline. This will certainly be true in rural areas of the state and could likely be true for the state as a whole with population decline forecasted in the years to come.  

Additionally, Amendment 2 would open the door to the state investing in education options that create barriers for accountability. Public schools are held to accountability standards of which private and parochial schools, as well as homeschools, are currently exempt.    

Research shows that in states with high participation in school choice programs, a significant portion of funds frequently benefit wealthier families, leaving low- and middle-income families with less funding for the public schools these families rely on. Ensuring public funds stay within the public education system supports a fair distribution of resources to help ensure better outcomes for all students, the analysis found.  

Additionally, public schools are required to serve all students, including those with disabilities and the need for additional support. Many private schools are not required to guarantee the same level of support for students with learning differences, and the requirement to serve all children falls back to the public system, with fewer resources.

“Investing state dollars in what works is critical, and even more so in a state like Kentucky where we've risen from the bottom of the national rankings since the 1990s to roughly the middle today,” said Blom. “While there is clearly more work to be done to continue to improve education outcomes - and parents can and must demand that improvement - now is not the time to spend shared public dollars on strategies with no durable outcomes at best - and negative outcomes at worst.”  

Read the Prichard Committee’s full analysis here.