I’ve been looking at the Interactive Illinois Report Card for District 150. Here are the total expenditures of District 150 for a period of eleven years, 1997-2008; in the last column, I converted all the amounts into constant 2008 dollars to make it easier to compare apples to apples:
|
 |
Looking at the inflation-adjusted dollars, and acknowledging that it does appear to have started a downward trend, you’ll nevertheless notice that from 1997 to 2008, operational expense per student has increased over 17%. However, if you look at enrollment over roughly the same period (1998-2009), the trend is different:
|
 |
I wanted to include the 2008-2009 data so you could see that enrollment did go up slightly that year. Nevertheless, enrollment from 1998 through 2009 fell by 9.4%. As a result, operating expense per student has increased over 24% — from $9,184 in 1997 (in inflation-adjusted dollars) to $11,398 in 2008.
Questions: Why have operational expenses continued to climb while enrollment has been decreasing? Why are expenses $25.4 million more in 2008 than in 1997 (in inflation-adjusted dollars) when enrollment fell by over 1,400 students? Where is the money going?
I wonder what the trends are for other districts in the area? It makes me appreciate the fact that I don’t live in Peoria and pay property taxes to this black whole…if not for District 150 I would live in Peoria.
Hummm — good work, CJ. Good questions, too. If D150 had been properly managed over the years it likely would not have considered closing Woodruff HS, supposedly to save money. Or blaming the deficit on Woodruff, or the state, or the teachers.
Another question comes to my mind. How much money goes to each school? How is the money spent once it gets to the school? I have a feeling (just a feeling) that sometimes the way money is spent by the principals is, also, part of the problem–not the whole problem. I believe there is considerable latitude as to how the money is spent–and it can be spent on expenditures that have little to do with the main mission of a school–teaching.
I hate to say it – but I think the numbers make sense. Most of the costs of educating are not strictly variable. I don’t remember massive layoffs or a large number of school closings over this period – and that would be the only way for costs to go down.
So there were likely was an decrease in the student/teacher ratio. Also, I am not sure what rate you used for inflation but if it was the actual inflation rate it is probably less than contractual pay increases for teachers – and almost certainly less than the administrative pay creep that occurred between administrations. Then you also likely have healthcare cost increase.
Also, if payments to the retirement system are included I would imagine the rich retirement plans negotiated 10 years ago or so are probably having an impact too.
The cost per student has gone up too much – but if you look at the reasonable assumptions based on how the district has been managed I don’t think it is a truly unpredictable result.
CJ – Remember not to confuse operational expenses with total expenses. The figures you are quoting are total expenses – which include capital expenditures, bond repayments, adult ed, and summer school. For example, in 2007/8 FE, over $4.5MM of the $166.5mm spent was due to capital projects, whereas in 1997/8 FE, there were $0 in capital expenditures.
I find it helpful to analyze many of these numbers on a per pupil basis. One of the key figures is the pupil to certified staff ratio. (certified staff includes both teachers and most administrators) In 1997/98 the ratio was 13.2 pupils per certified staff, but that ratio has decreased to 12.2 in 2007/8. In a district with nearly 14,000 students, that equates to an additional 87 certified staff. Most of those 87 are teachers – probably a high proportion of special ed teachers, but also an increase in administrators.
For those extra 87 certified staff, salary is only part of the story. Assuming an average $60k (slightly more than the current teacher average salary of $55k – to account for more higher paid administrators) and a likely “fringe” cost of 35% (for benefits), and you have an additional $7MM + expense for that additional staff. I am fairly certain that during this time period, the number of students classified as special needs has increased substantially, thus requiring more teachers. (only recently is the % of students classified as special needs beginning to decrease) Further, the rules and regulations to comply with federal and state guidelines have increased, thus requiring more administrators.
Average teacher and administrator salaries have increased LESS than the total and operational expense cost during this period. However, I am certain that benefit costs, particularly health care, have skyrocketed. The report card data doesn’t breakdown benefit costs the way it does salaries, but I bet total per employee costs have increased more than inflation – primarily due to the huge increases in health care costs that are almost entirely borne by the district (unlike many private company plans, where the increased costs are shared by the employer and employee)
Lastly, a declining enrollment requires a decrease in fixed costs – in other words, maintaining the same number of school buildings for a smaller population will increase average costs.
You can’t equate costs and enrollment quite so simply. Most costs are not distributed on a per-student basis, so it makes little sense to use that as your only metric.
Transportation costs, energy costs, and health care costs have all risen much faster than inflation, and they are for the most part independent of enrollment. It costs just about as much to operate a primary school building with 400 students as it does to operate one with 350 students. You can consolidate schools, but that increases transportation costs, and then there’s the transition costs. No Child Left Behind increased federal compliance costs starting in 2001 or so. Demand for more technology in the classroom has increased, but technology does not reduce the need for teachers, so computers and smartboards and internet access are just additional costs, not ways to save money, which is how most businesses justify investing in technology.
I know PSD150 has higher per-student costs than a lot of the surrounding districts, and there are various reasons for that, too (good and bad). But it would be useful to see how the per-student costs have changed over the same time period for Dunlap, Washington, Metamora, Pekin, etc.
When teacher salaries are listed, does the figure include health and retirement benefit figures? Samer is offering all the usual “suspects.” I know that as one of those retirees that benefited from the contract of 10 years ago, I am curious to know how much longer we will be blamed for 150’s financial woes–do we have to wait until the last one of us is dead? 🙂 These might well be the deciding factors, but I appreciate your efforts, C.J., to get the “for sure,” not just the “I think” explanations.
There are caveats to comparing just one year to another (in this case 1997/8 to 2007/8) but here are some comparisons.
Ignoring inflation, the per pupil operational costs increased as follows:
Peoria 150: 63.9%
Morton: 58.3%
Washington (high school only): 35.8%
Washingon #51 (central primary and middle): 43.6%
Metamora (high school only): 55.9%
Dunlap: 35.4%
State Average: 55.9%
(I did these too quickly, so I’ve been editing them the last ten minutes)
Today’s PJS reveals a new way District 150 plans to spend money–rent the Civic Center for all high school graduations. The board seems to believe that not having to pay custodians will pay for the event. First of all, why shouldn’t district employees receive the pay instead of giving the money to the Civic Center?
Several people that the PJS contacted have some good reasons for not wanting the change. However, when the board gets their idea in print, I have seldom seen them back track. My guess is that “yes” is their vote without any further input from parents and/or teachers.
If nothing else, I think the board should stop giving the public the idea that they aren’t serious when they say the district is short on money–they always find a way to fund their pet projects. Also, how insensitive are these people to the fact that some (maybe many) families (still lucky enough to have a “neighborhood” high school)would find it easier to get to the school? Also, all who drive will have to pay parking, won’t they? Oh, maybe the district can use school buses to meet parents at the school and then transport them to graduation. 🙂
I predict a MAJOR full court press from Richwoods parents to stop the gradation at the Civic Center.
I don’t have a problem with moving graduations to the Civic Center…better parking, air conditioning, more seating. I think $5,000.00 is a small price to pay for the convenience.
As the parent of two D150 high school students I am opposed to a district-wide graduation ceremony. Which school my children attend is irrelevant. I would like to propose that the board make available an on-line survey and consider the opinions of ALL D150 parents/guardians before making this decision. Or maybe do something really innovative and poll the students!
Our school administration has nothing to do with the students… why is this a surprise to anyone? They exist for themselves.
Walk of Shame–if it’s a small price to pay, maybe the parents would like to have to buy tickets for graduation. Just joking! Undoubtedly, it’s better for the taxpayers to pick up the tab. How much will the Civic Center make on just parking.
I do have to add though that having an air-conditioned place for graduation is a plus. That might be a deal breaker. The district has all kinds of equipment that enables them to communicate with parents–maybe they should take a poll.
According to the PJS article, June 4th, Saturday, is on the district’s calendar for graduation. The decision appears to be made. Perhaps it is an effort to “unify” the district and revitalize downtown Peoria. wink. wink.
BTW: My D150 school calendar says “June 7 Tuesday Last Day of School for Students (if no emergency days” last line: “June 4 Wednesday Last Day for Teachers (if no emergency days)”. sigh.
There would not be one district wide graduation…there would be different ceremonies for the different schools.
TR64–I think you meant June 8, last day for teachers. So high school teachers only are obligated to add this new expense to all the money they already contribute for classroom supplies, etc. They will undoubtedly have to pay for parking at graduation. Yes, I am curious as to how the board gets by with making so many decisions without voting in public. Well, they might vote Monday night (although they didn’t vote on the decision to end televised public comment), but the decision appears to have been made.
Sharon–I’m just repeating what my Peoria Public School District 150 2010-2011 School Calendar says:
Second to last line: “June 7 Tuesday…”
Last line: “June 4 Wednesday…”
And repeated again in bold and italicized print beneath that: “If emergency days are not used … and June 4 will be a Teachers’ Institute.”
TR64–Perhaps yet another misprint–I was looking at the one-page list of holidays,
My guess is that someone recognized the error and corrected the on-line version as follows:
June 7 – Tuesday Last Day of School for Students
(If Emergency Days Are Not Used)
June 8 – Wednesday Last Day for Teachers 8:00 – 1:00 Institute
If emergency days are not used, June 9, 10, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21 and 22 shall, by Board Resolution, be used as
special Holidays for students; and June 8 will be a Teachers’ Institute.
I do have one more plus for graduation at the Civic Center–parents could actually sit in chairs instead of on bleachers.
Looks like a good idea for me. Change comes hard for many people.
If parking fees are an issue, all of CityLink’s buses stop at the transit center across the street from the Civic Center parking lot… or there’s always carpooling… or the other parking decks nearby (Commerce Bank, Associated Bank, Niagara Deck) that are usually open for free on weekends…
A rough estimate (13825 students / 12 grades) yields about 1150 seniors this year in D150. Using the PJStar’s estimate of $5100 for using the Civic Center, that means D150 is paying less than $4.50 per senior to use the Civic Center. That’s not really a lot of money per pupil.
From a downtown standpoint, I think this will be a good thing. Let all the families who come downtown for graduation patronize the (small number of) downtown restaurants to celebrate.
I went to a public high school in the Chicago area, and our graduation ceremonies were never held on-campus. My graduation ceremony was held in the gymnasium of the local community college about half an hour away from the school. I don’t feel that it cheapened my graduating experience at all.
Have any of the students commented one way or another about the changes? If I were a student, I’d probably rather walk across the stage at a packed excited Carver Arena than a hot, non-air conditioned high school gymnasium that they’ve spent the past four years at anyway.
Yeah, the students may very well like it–a totally different venue to celebrate their graduation–air conditioned, cushioned seats, no limit on seating, etc. Maybe even utilize the new video scoreboard. Something new and different–something special. NOT the same old gym they saw every day of their high school experience.
As for the cost, I wouldn’t think getting a sponsor would be a problem. Graduation by Pepsi!
Sam: Please, Richwoods parents? Air Conditioning, padded seats, easy parking, more room for grandma and grandpa, big deal auditorium, better atmosphere, they will eat it up. Great idea School Board who whoever, why don’t you think this hard on monetary projects and something for the kids before they graduate!
Depending on how many students graduate from each of the 3 high schools next spring, it’s possible that the 3 graduation exercises could be held in Exhibit Hall D. It’s pretty large, easy to get to, and can hold at least 2,500. It also would be cheaper than the Arena.
I wonder what the number of non-teacher administrative positions have done during the same time period? (I shouldn’t wonder about it. I think we all know the answer.)
This is the kind of brainstorming and consensus building (I can’t believe I’m using that phrase I learned to hate so much) that District 150 should initiate before making a decision: a lengthy pro and con list and then make a decision. I am wondering if the Civic Center is giving up a large facility for all day for $5,100. Hopefully, this year’s graduating class at Manual will be larger with the added Woodruff students. Last year’s class og 114 would probably fit in the smaller room, but I’m not so sure about PHS or RHS. I am warming up to the idea–cost of the Civic Center and parking is the only major negative that I see, but I still have to remember that cost should be driving all 150 decisions. $5,100 would buy some copy paper, and I guarantee that in a few weeks teachers will be complaining because there isn’t enough copy paper.
It’s not D150’s graduation. Let the students vote. (Sorry, Grandma.)
Surprisingly, I am actually in favor (slightly) of this idea, although I too wish there had been some outside input before it was put out as a done deal. My gut first reaction was negative but then I considered some issues.
1. A selfish issue. Is is really HOT in the PHS gym on graduation nights!! Most of the staff end up standing for 2-plus hours, as our small staff seating area gets filled up by “disabled” persons (about 40% of whom are legit) and their entourages (supposed to be one person each)after a full school day. We want to be there for the kids but it is a difficult night.
2. I am fairly sure the graduations will NOT be in the arena part of the Civic Center. Probably one of the Exhibit Halls like the one where the district-wide in-service was held last week. There are several rooms including the grand ballroom. My understanding is that the graduations will be separate and held at different times. Whether all will be held in one hall or in 3 separate halls is still a question as there is a charge for each hall. If they are all in the same hall there would need to be turn-around time to change school colors, etc. I also have a concern about graduation practice, which is important for multiple reasons.
3. The Civic Center can waive parking fees for events in their lots if they choose.
4. I know that graduation at Peoria High this year would have to severely limit the number of tickets each graduate gets (like in the 1970s) as the gym only holds so many people. That would definitely be problematic!!
5. I also remember that my husband’s parents had grandchildren at different high schools and my parents were traveling from Chicago and had to be at work the next day. With the midweek, same-time graduations that was hard. This would alleviate that, at least.
I would agree that students (and school administrators and personnel)should be polled and their opinions should be taken into account. They should also be told, though, that their family attendance will be limited at the high schools before they vote.
One more thing: the seating in the exhibit halls is lightly padded individual (but connected) chairs. They can be set up in multiple configurations. Not having to climb bleachers is a huge plus for many older individuals (and some not so old LOL!)
The brainstorming was good–I think I would end up voting “yes” because of the seating and the air-conditioning. Bleachers are a problem for many.
Notre Dame has their graduation at the Civic Center. It’s very nice. I have an issue with it being on a Saturday. YUK!!!
Perhaps the city could arrange for Park ‘n Ride service from the respective high school parking lots for the people who might not like to park downtown.
Thanks Jon for digging up the numbers for the surrounding districts. Peoria’s growth in costs is higher, but it’s important to note they are the one district among the ones listed that has shrunk in enrollment. So honestly it doesn’t seem like it’s out of line at all.
Last year at Peoria High, we were squished on those bleachers like sardines. People talked and screamed during the entire ceremony just inches from the back of our heads. It was so uncomfortable for everyone. I think this is a great idea. Maybe in a different invironment people will have manners. Welcome to civilization!
Speaking of Dist. 150 and the Civic Center: if anyone’s still interested in seeing the staff Kick-Off Rally from Aug. 30, it will be on Comcast Cable 22 this Sunday at 5 pm, and Wednesday, Sept. 15 at 7 pm, on CAPtions. Also, got a clip in there from April’s Education Summit with
U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan taking part in a panel discussion with Lathan, Ardis, and the Mayor of Springfield.
But getting back to the graduations…if they set up Exhibit Hall D for the graduations like they did for the Kick-Off Rally (with some carpeting added); had start times like at 10 am, 1 pm and 4 pm….that would give each school enough time to get people in and out before the next ceremony.
I know $5k is a lot, but I would be interested in knowing how much would be saved from paying staff at the individual schools. I’m sure the Civic Center could be talked into offering free parking.
Right Dennis, I think the free parking thing will happen. I still think they could also get a “sponsor” of the graduations to defray costs.
Dennis, I doubt seriously that the custodial staff (probably the only employees who might have to be paid for extra hours) will cost anywhere close to $5,000. Besides all schools have custodians who work during the evening hours any way. I’m not against the idea–it has three positives: air conditioning, seating, and the plan of having all high schools at the same location. Money, however, is still a drawback for a district that keeps saying they are broke.
I think that once we add in the 3-4 janitors per school to set-up, the extra utility costs and the extra security that is present at all high school graduations, we will see that holding the ceremonies at Civic Center will be the best option. PHS’s gym is not big enough to hold all those students+ their families. They would need to hold their ceremony elsewhere and if that happened you can bet that the RHS parents would want the same thing for their precious children, heaven forbid someone get something that they don’t have.
I am inclined to agree yet again (this time with Boblee) that the Civic Center is a good idea because it just might set a new tone for graduation.
Why do we have to spend $5,000 to hope that bad behavior miraculously improves?
I have never been to a D150 graduation, but I hear they are hot and crowded and I know that bleachers are not comfortable. Maybe some people will step up and donate the 5000.
I have been to many, and they are hot and crowded events even on a relatively cool night for May. As to the noise factor, I wasn’t too critical of the noise because, after all, graduation is held in a gym with bleacher seating–the same place where basketball games are held. It is very difficult to turn a gym setting into a solemn ceremony. I am still concerned about the cost, but it’s starting to seem minimal compared to the advantages. If there had been a choice between spending the money on the August 30 event or graduation, I believe graduation should have won out.
We could have had graduation the next 4 years if we did not have that donut party.
Well, Jeez Louise, PRIORITIES, Man!
Where can you find the salaries for District 150 Non-certified Administrators for the 2010 – 2011 school year? I saw the 2009 – 2010 on their website but I didn’t see one for 2010 – 2011.
I am looking for salaries of the administrators that aren’t considered educational/certified administrators for District 150. I am interested in several new administrators that were hired at larger salaries than the ones that just retired from those positions.
Thanks
With all of that extra room now the high school graduates can bring all of their babies to see them graduate from high school.
Johnnie, you may have to FOIA that info, but I am interested in the same.
Phony Maury Povich, some snide comments just aren’t necessary–only my opinion.
Info from a FOIA request: For anyone still interested, this was the cost of the August 30 Civic Center event:
Civic Center rental – $2,800.00
Continental Breakfast
By Centerplate 20,119.00
(includes $3,069 service
Charge)
Transportation of
employees to event 978.90
Total 23,897.90
Donation by Methodist 5,000.00
Donation by K2 Benefits 1,500.00
Donation by Proctor 1,500.00
Remaining cost $15,897.80
It is interesting that under the upcoming agenda is a speaker who explained the 30-plus point decline from 5th to 8th grade (for the past five years) in ISAT reading scores by claiming the cut scores were changed 4-5 years ago by M. McGee. That sounds soooooo good, except for the inconvenient fact that Dr. McGee hasn’t been at the ISBE since the close of 2001 (when the decline was in line with the national average of 12 points). Please stop throwing around big words like “respect”. This is another example that illustrates why FOIA is necessary: the requester has a formal request in writing that requires, by law, a formal response in writing. Wouldn’t communications be particularly tough to dispute when done so via e-mail (D150 server)?