Funding Per Pupil
Date posted: 05/20/2009
Quick Data Links
Chart Directory:
Colorado school funding comes from state and local sources:
- Two local sources of revenues are incorporated into the Public School Finance Act of 1994 (as amended): property taxes and specific ownership (vehicle registration) taxes.
- Funding from the state (State Share) is provided to each school district when local shares are insufficient to fully fund program costs. Monthly payments are funded primarily by state income tax (personal and corporate) and sales and use tax revenues.
- Adopted in 2001, Amendment 23 required that the state legislature increase the base per pupil funding annually by inflation plus one percent.
The Colorado State Legislature sets funding for school districts based on October pupil counts and formulas determined by the legislature. A formula calculates a base per-pupil amount plus additional funds to recognize district-by-district variances in cost of living, personnel cost, and the size factor. Total program cost also includes additional funding for at-risk pupils. All these factors are given weight in determining district funding.
The enrollment share formula is in the form of a "J" curve providing greater funding to small districts (at the top of the curve), with mid-sized districts generally receiving the least (at the bottom of the curve) and large districts receiving a bit more (on the upswing of the curve). For example, 2008-09 per pupil funds in Ouray School District (a small, rural district in the southwest part of the state) was $10,829. Thompson School District funding (mid-sized district) was set at $6,530, while Denver was at $7,258. Mid-sized districts end up at the bottom of the curve as the formulas and weighting benefit the ends of the curve. An example of this would be a small district which receives additional funding due to the size factor and perhaps at-risk pupil count. The large districts tend to have the highest at-risk counts and receive extra funds. The mid-sized districts generally lose on both of these factors, thereby falling at the low end of the curve.
What this chart shows: Total Funding Per Pupil in Colorado & Larimer County School Districts
, 2001-02 to 2008-09
Data Source: Colorado Department of Education
What this chart shows: Total Program Funding by School District, 2001-02 to 2008-09
Data Source: Colorado Department of Education
What this chart shows: Per Pupil Funding by Source - Colorado and Larimer County School Districts, 2008-09
Data Source: Colorado Department of Education
What these data tell us:
From 2001 to 2008, both Per Pupil funding and Total Program funding increased in all three school districts. Although Total Program funding increased 36.5% in Poudre School District and 14.3% in Park School District, the difference in Per Pupil funding was much smaller at 27.9% and 27.4%, respectively. Per Pupil funding for the 2008-09 school year for Thompson and Poudre School Districts was lower than the statewide average.Approximately two-thirds of Thompson's funding for 2008-09 was provided by the State Share and a third from property taxes, which was similar to the state average. Poudre School District's Per Pupil funding of $6,530 equaled that of Thompson School District. However, the state contributed only 58% of funding for the Poudre School District, requiring 39% to be covered by property taxes. This lower percentage of state funding for Poudre School District, in comparison to Thompson School District, is a factor of the formulas set by the Legislature as described above.
As a "land rich" district, meaning there is a higher ratio of assessed value of taxable property per pupil, Park School District's property tax portion is higher than other Larimer County districts. Higher assessed property values, coupled with lower student enrollment, enables the district to cover most of its expenses with property taxes. Park receives a much smaller State Share than the other two districts because the State Share of pupil funding is based on a district's ability to pay expenses with local funds.
Additional Information:
On Compass -
- ACT Scores
- Average Teacher Salary
- CSAP Scores
- Dropout Rates
- Enrollment - Ethnicity
- Enrollment - Public Schools
- Enrollment - Public, Private, and Home Schooling
- Enrollment - Special Education
- High School Graduation Rates ( Ethnicity, School District)
- Pupil/ Teacher Ratio
- Teachers by Ethnicity & Gender
Outside Compass -
- Colorado Department of Education
- National Center for Educational Statistics
- Park School District
- Poudre School District
- Thompson School District x
- Understanding Colorado School Finance
Additional Definitions:
- Base Funding -- the base amount of funding for each pupil was $5,270 in budget year 2008-09. To this amount was added funding based on the specific factors as outlined below to arrive at a Total Per-pupil Funding amount.
- Cost of Living Factor -- the cost of living factor reflects the differences in the costs of housing, goods, and services among each of the 178 school districts in the State. The cost of living calculation changed in FY 2004-05, replacing inflation with the increase in household income level. A district's cost of living factor is increased based on its cost of living increase above the household income increase, rather than its increase above inflation.
- Personnel Costs Factor -- the personnel costs factor varies by school district based on enrollment. For all districts, employee salaries and benefits represent the largest single expense. As such, the formula directs funding based on these costs, using historical information and incorporating the above cost of living factor. This factor is projected to range from 79.91% to 90.50% in 2008-09.
- Size Factor -- the size factor is determined using an enrollment-based calculation and is unique to each school district. This factor is included to recognize purchasing power differences among districts. "Smaller" districts (fewer than 4,023 pupils) receive a greater factor, thus, more funding than do "medium-sized or large" districts (greater than 4,023).
- Total Program Funding - the total program funding is determined by multiplying the number of students enrolled on October 1 each year by the total per-pupil funding amount plus additional money for at-risk and on-line funding.
Eligibility for participation in the federal free lunch program is used as a proxy of each school district's at-risk pupil population. Increased funding is provided to recognize that expenses among districts vary, as pupil populations vary, especially at-risk populations. For each at-risk pupil, a district receives funding equal to at least 12% (increased from 11.2% in school year 2005-06), but no more than 30%, of its Total Per-pupil Funding. As a district's percentage of at-risk population increases above the statewide average (31.47%), an increased amount of at-risk funding is provided. Beginning in school year 2005-06 the definition of at-risk students is expanded to include students whose CSAP scores are not included in calculating a school's performance grade because the student's dominant language is not English and who are also not eligible for free lunch.
Each school district is required to impose a property tax levy to finance its Local Share of Total Program. The ability to raise money from property taxes varies widely among districts. Differences in tax bases (assessed property values) result in differences in revenues collected, using a given mill levy. Nonetheless, no district's property tax revenues are transferred to any other district; instead, moneys raised remain in the district which imposes the tax. Statewide across all school districts, property taxes are projected to provide $2,306 per pupil, or about 34% of Total Program funding.
Vehicle registration taxes are collected by counties and are shared with school districts. Each district's local share includes an amount of specific ownership tax revenue equal to the prior budget year's actual amount received. Statewide across all school districts, specific ownership taxes are projected to provide $208 per pupil, or about 3% of Total Program funding.
Funding from the state (State Share) is provided to each school district whose Local Share is insufficient to fully fund its Total Program. Payments of State Share moneys are made monthly to districts and are funded primarily from state income taxes (personal and corporate) and sales and use tax revenues. In school year 2008-09, State Share financing ranged from $119 per pupil to $11,862 per pupil. (Each district was guaranteed at least $119 per pupil.) Statewide across all school districts, State Share provided $4,392 per pupil, or about 63% of Total Program funding.
Standards or Target: N/A
Per-Pupil Funding in Larimer County School Districts
|
Year |
Park |
Poudre |
Thompson |
|
2001-02 |
$5,453 |
$5,105 |
$5,103 |
|
2002-03 |
$5,973 |
$5,437 |
$5,441 |
|
2003-04 |
$6,145 |
$5,589 |
$5,595 |
|
2004-05 |
$6,287 |
$5,709 |
$5,721 |
|
2005-06 |
$6,359 |
$5,784 |
$5,798 |
|
2006-07 |
$6,596 |
$5,990 |
$5,988 |
|
2007-08 |
$6,902 |
$6,279 |
$6,279 |
|
2008-09 |
$7,162 |
$6,530 |
$6,530 |
Total Program Funding by Larimer County School District
|
Year |
Park |
Poudre |
Thompson |
|
2001-02 |
$ 7,466,094 |
$119,250,882 |
$ 73,149,840 |
|
2002-03 |
$ 8,123,412 |
$127,746,252 |
$ 78,833,471 |
|
2003-04 |
$8,189,464 |
$131,209,413 |
$80,816,028 |
|
2004-05 |
$8,188,933 |
$134,500,261 |
$82,114,049 |
|
2005-06 |
$8,105,538 |
$137,446,348 |
$86,243,394 |
|
2006-07 |
$8,174,785 |
$144,846,062 |
$90,977,901 |
|
2007-08 |
$8,289,159 |
$154,101,376 |
$90,533,185 |
|
2008-09 |
$8,536,148 |
$162,806,506 |
$94,592,715 |
Per Pupil Funding by Share - Colorado & Larimer County School Districts
|
Colorado |
Park |
Poudre |
Thompson |
|
|
State Share |
$4,368 |
$778 |
$3,768 |
$4,308 |
|
Property Taxes |
$2,306 |
$5,899 |
$2,544 |
$2,037 |
|
Ownership |
$208 |
$486 |
$218 |
$185 |
|
Total Per Pupil |
$6,882 |
$7,163 |
$6,530 |
$6,530 |
|
Per Pupil Funding by Source |
||||
|
2008-09 |
Colorado |
Park |
Poudre |
Thompson |
|
State Share |
63% |
11% |
58% |
66% |
|
Property Taxes |
34% |
82% |
39% |
31% |
|
Ownership |
3% |
7% |
3% |
3% |