CITY BUDGET INFO

SCHOOL BUDGET OPTIONS

Proposed City Budget for School Year 2006-07

            The Mayor’s Executive Budget was released on May 4th. Because of the on-time state budget, it reflected more accurate estimates of school aid for New York City. For the first time in two years there are significant funding increases for instruction, though some of the increases merely reflect the UFT collective bargaining agreement on new salary levels and a transfer of programs and their associated funding from categorical units of appropriation. The share of the education budget going to instruction increases from 43.09 percent to 47.09 percent under the Executive budget plan, but when all funding for children’s instruction and services are combined (instruction + categorical programs), the share decreases from 62.46 percent to 60.95 percent.

            City officials and government agencies tend to compare the Executive Budget to the most recently modified budget (the budget is amended throughout the year to reflect new estimates of costs and revenues). The Educational Priorities Panel makes year-to-year comparisons of the budget for education in order to better understand broad trends in resource allocations. Below is a comparison of funding for different school system functions as reported in the Department of Education Agency Expense Budget Summary of NYC Office of Management and Budget’s report Expense, Revenue, Contract. A more detailed breakdown is available on EPP’s web site, edpriorities.org. (Rounding makes some summary calculations inexact.)

            The city budget does not clearly identify the proportion of state funding supporting the different functions of the school system other than smaller amounts of discrete program or grant funding in the “categorical program” units of appropriation. Most federal funding, however, is reflected in these “categorical program” units of appropriation (481 and 482). There will be a decrease of $22 million in Title 1 funds in the next school year.

            Under the Mayor’s Executive Budget the proportion of the overall city funds going to the public system increases slightly and can be presented in two ways. If pension contributions and debt service are included, as of July 2005 it was estimated that a 23.23 percent share of the city’s funds were to go to education in FY 2005-06 and under the Mayor’s Executive Budget proposal for FY 2006-07, the share is estimated to be 23.83 percent. If all pension and capital costs are excluded from calculations, then 19.99 percent of city funds were to be dedicated to the public school system when the budget was adopted for FY 06, and the Executive Budget for FY 07 proposes to dedicate 20.43 percent to this function.

Chancellor’s Budget Initiatives and Estimates

            The Executive Budget reflects additional funds for new or expanded programs as well as re-estimates of the costs of current functions.

Initiatives

• $2 million for translation and interpretation services
• $11.7 million for 286 new school safety agents
• $15.1 million to help over-age students graduate
• $19.1 million to open 41 schools and close 18 under-performing schools
• $39.5 million for various initiatives, such as lead teacher, attendance teachers, etc.
• $59.7 million for new charter schools and register growth at older charter schools

Total: $147.1 million

Re-estimates of costs

• $9.5 million for maintaining school facilities
• $20 million for special education services and paraprofessionals
• $26.3 million for leases and energy
• $36.9 million for special education pre-kindergarten transportation and instruction
• $79.4 million for special education school busing to private schools
• $83.6 million for school busing, including extended time adjustments
• $122 million for fringe benefit costs

Total:   $377.7 million, including a total of $199.9 million for increased transportation          costs (52 percent)

City Council Budget Initiatives

            The 1989 revision in the New York City Charter, essentially the operating manual for the city, created a very strong executive, top-down budgeting system for the city. In most years, the City Council makes few changes in the Mayor’s planned allocations for the school system or in other parts of the budget. For the past decade, the City Council has added less than 2% to the allocations for public education through negotiations with the Mayor. In contrast, the NYS Legislature has often doubled the Governor’s planned allocations for public education. The difference between these two legislative bodies is that the NYS Legislature can arrive at its own revenue estimates, while the City Council cannot. Nevertheless, at the end of negotiations with the Mayor, the Council has often secured a slightly better revenue estimate or a reduction in funds dedicated to pre-payments of debt or savings to be carried over for the next year. Absent this overall agreement on additional revenues, Councilmembers must then fund increases for public education from other “savings” in the city budget.

            The most significant education funding initiative undertaken by the City Council (in conjunction with the Board of Estimate) was the reduction of class sizes from first grade to third grade to from an average of 29 students to 25 students. The three-year plan began in 1984 and cost $60 million. Last year, the City Council was able to restore $16 million in cuts to the Teachers Choice program (supplies) and to increase this program’s funding by $1.7 million. The City Council negotiations also resulted in adding $11.7 million to the Department of Education’s budget, but more than half of these additions were for not-for-profit contracts and member items. Speaker Quinn has stated that she seeks to reform the budget negotiations process so that the city legislature can play a more meaningful role.

NYC Council Majority Speaker Christine Quinn

• $45 million (total $135 million in a three-year phase in) to convert all half-day pre-kindergarten programs for four-year old children into full-day programs. (Pre-kindergarten programs are primarily funded by the state, with projected funding of $171 million for the next school year.) Currently, most of the 40,000 children in pre-k programs are in half-day programs. A majority of four-year olds are in community based programs (CBO’s) that may charge parents fees for the unsubsidized portion of the day. In CBO programs that are open from 8 am to 6 pm, the City Council initiative would subsidize two thirds of the day, potentially reducing parent fees.

Rationale: Provide children with preparation for kindergarten. Help working parents, who have difficulties making child care arrangements around half-day programs.

Supporters: Low-income children will be exposed to a more verbal environment, more structured play, and less television. Potentially, these children will be more prepared for kindergarten. More parents would be interested in this program if it were full-day. Since there is a three-year phase in, enough space exists in CBO programs and some underutilized public schools in the first phase, and there is enough lead time to develop strategies for creating more capacity for the out years of this plan.

Questions: If public schools convert to full-day programs that are close to capacity, fewer classrooms will be available for k-to-5 grades and this will increase their average class sizes, which are already the largest in the state. Gains made by four-year olds may be lessened by crowded kindergarten classes, nearly all of which are above the NYC Department of Health standards for child-adult ratios for five-year olds. (After more than a decade of litigation on this issue, Mayor Giuliani succeeded in securing an exemption for the public school system from DOH codes).

Response: In order to avoid the adverse effect of increasing class sizes in grades k-5, the Speaker is supporting this expansion from half-day to full-day in CBO's as well as public schools. Approximately 65% of pre-kindergarten programs are currently housed in CBO's. The goal is to increase programs that have the capacity to do so without displacing students in other grades or increasing their class sizes.

Note: Data problems exist as to how many students are currently in full-day programs in the public schools and in community-based programs.

• $21 million to add preventive services to 21 more Beacon schools.

Rationale: Prevent child deaths and child abuse by adding this service component to Beacon schools.

Supporters: Effective intervention services for families in crisis may prevent tragedies like the death of Nixzmary Brown.

Questions: Has there been an evaluation of the effectiveness of preventive services currently housed in Beacon schools? Could $21 million for additional staffing be used more effectively by the Agency for Child Services or the Police Department?

Response: Beacons serve as ideal centers for the provision of preventive health and social services, particularly those located in high-need neighborhoods. Currently, only 16 buildings with Beacons have preventive service programs, since they are in areas of high rates of child neglect. Advocates and DYCD estimate that there are at least 21 more Beacons that could benefit from this program. It is funded 65%/35% through State/City funding. A general investment in ACS or NYPD would not draw down such matching funds from the state. Moreover, this initiative enhances preventive services. NYPD and ACS usually work with families once there has been an incident of child abuse/neglect. This program can help identify high-risk families and prevent incidents from occurring. Finally, a 2002 Youth Development Institute evaluation of found that the Beacon Program was an underused resource.

• $1 million to provide education specialists for the 311 program

Rationale: Help parents better navigate the public school system.

Supporters: The 311 phone response system currently does not have the expertise to answer questions, other than the most basic, from the public about school programs and problems.

Questions: Could these funds be better used for an education ombudsperson at the NYC Department of Education or Public Advocates Office? Could not-for-profit organizations, independent from government, be given contracts to handle these inquiries?

Response: Government should provide the public with comprehensive and accurate information about public services. Historically, 311 has not always provided correct information about the public school system. This initiative would improve the information that is provided by 311 and would also expand their ability to answer more complex calls. New Yorkers use 311: the line receives over 40,000 calls a day from people in need of assistance. The high visibility and existing infrastructure of 311 should be taken advantage of to provide New Yorkers with accurate information about the school system. No other hotline number at a non-profit or independent office could ever be as well known as 311. Moreover, a non-profit or independent office could not handle the volume of calls about the school system. If 311 is not providing accurate information about the school system, they should be provided with the training and resources needed to provide accurate information. Enhancing 311’s ability to respond to education inquiries does not diminish the relevance of independent education hotlines, rather it allows them to handle more advocacy oriented and specialized calls.

NYC City Council Education Chair Robert Jackson

• $15 million for Educational Opportunities Enrichment Initiative These contracts for not-for-profit organizations in the education field are intended to enrich the quality of educational services for students, parents, teachers and principals in the New York City public school system. Program areas targeted by this initiative include: the creation and continued funding of 32 small high schools, summer programs, teacher grants, public and underserved school advocacy, guidance and counseling for youth, community based achievement curricula, dropout prevention, an education hotline, and English language education services.  This initiative provides a unique opportunity to engage a variety of education advocates and to foster a cooperative approach to the myriad education issues facing the City.

• Advocates for Children, $1 million
• Computers for Youth, $300 thousand
• Directions for Our Youth, $200 thousand
• Donor’s Choose, $510 thousand
• Institute for Student Achievement, $1.5 million
• New Visions for Public Schools, $1.6 million
• New York Immigration Coalition, $5 million
• National Foundation for Teaching Entrepreneurship, $610 thousand
• NYC Outward Bound, $250 thousand
• United Way, $1.5 million
• Urban Advantage, $2 million
• Young Women’s Leadership Foundation, $500 thousand

Education Advocates Initiatives

New York Immigration Coalition

• $12.5 million increase to provide summer school for English Language Learners (ELL’s) high school students.

Rationale: High school students classified as ELL have a 50.4 % graduation rate after seven years. Summer school would provide them with additional time to master English, to prepare for Regents tests, and to earn course credits towards graduation.

Supporters: Students still in the process of learning English, especially those who arrived in the county as teenagers or who have had interrupted schooling before they came to New York, have difficulties earning sufficient course credits and passing Regents tests. Summer school programs will lower their high dropout rate and help more of these students succeed and graduate. College and career readiness workshops would also provide these students with more motivation to graduate.

Questions: State aid formulas provided New York City with a $13.8 million increase through a new Limited English Proficiency formula and a $43.3 million increase through a new Supplemental Extraordinary Needs Aid (based, in part, on a count of ELL students). The Department of Education could initiate these programs with these state funds and begin to improve the low graduation rate of these struggling students.

Response: We need significant investments from the state and thecity to curb the alarming dropout crisis. The city needs to contribute its fair share to solving this problem. High school students who are still in the process of mastering English or have had interrupted schooling need more instructional time in order to catch up and to graduate. Summer school would provide them with this catch-up time.

• $7.5 million increase to hire 100 ESL and bilingual teachers for small high schools.

Rationale: Small new high schools educate far fewer ELL students than other high schools and often reject these students because they do not have the staff to provide them with instruction.

Supporters: This ELL Capacity Building initiative would create 100 new English-as-a-Second-Language and bilingual teacher positions to help small high schools to begin to provide state-mandated ELL instructional services.

Questions: Increased state funding targeted to ELL students could be used for these initiatives. Some small high schools may not welcome this added capacity because they do not want to serve students who are less likely to score well on Regents tests.

Response: Public schools in New York City are mandated to provide appropriate instructional services to English language learners. This additional city investment will ensure that the Mayor’s signature reform effort of creating smaller high schools does not leave out subsets of the student population, particularly those with the greatest need.

Educational Priorities Panel

• $15.3 million (total $46 million for a three-year phase in) to 1) hire an additional 400 more kindergarten teachers to limit class sizes in kindergarten to 20 students in most schools, 2) hire 80 more cluster teachers to provide class coverage for teacher preparation periods for the additional classes, and 3) hire 100 education paraprofessionals for overcrowded schools so they can begin to meet NYS Department of Health adult-to-child standards in kindergarten classes.

Rationale: Provide all five-year olds with the personal attention that young children need, achieve the norm for kindergarten class sizes in the rest of the state, and preserve the learning gains made by children in pre-kindergarten classes.

Supporters: There is no shortage of qualified applicants for kindergarten positions.Yet, a 2006 audit by the NYS Comptroller found that 39,734 five-year old students are in classes above 20 students, while only 24,647 five-year olds are in class sizes of 20 or fewer students. By capping class sizes to a limit of 20 students, the average class sizes for kindergarten classes would be reduced to an average of between 17 and 18 students, the norm for the state. Kindergarten classes in overcrowded schools should at least meet the NYC Department of Health adult-to-child ratios, requirements which were eliminated for public schools under the Giuliani administration. Without attention to class size in kindergarten, many of the benefits of pre-kindergarten are lost. The Department of Education should target high-need schools first, because 1) students from low-income families, especially boys, make significant learning gains when their first experience in school is in a smaller class size and 2) this prevents the problem of the “brain drain” of experienced teachers in high-need schools by providing them with an incentive to remain in hard-to-staff schools.

Questions: The New York City school district receives over $140 million a year in state and federal funds to reduce class size which could be used for the purpose of capping kindergarten class sizes. The NYS Comptroller’s audit of state funding found that the city average class sizes in the early grades has increased, despite this funding. Compliance with state budgetary requirements by the NYC Department of Education could substantially reduce class sizes without an added investment by the city.

Response: The1984 City Council initiative to reduce average class sizes from first to third grade to 25 students proved to be more effective than the state-funded initiative because the city investment resulted in city oversight. Neither the state or the federal program provides funding for paraprofessionals, so only city funds are available for the $3.5 needed for paraprofessionals in overcrowded schools so they can begin meeting NYC DOH codes for adult-child ratios for five-year olds.

Note: Data problems exists as to average class sizes.

• $59.1 million (total $236.4 million for a four-year phase in) to provide more out-of-classroom staffing for elementary schools, middle, and high schools. (The City Council’s Basic School Staffing initiative was discontinued in 1991. It was geared to ensuring adequate administrative support for principals based on a formula pegged to school size and student enrollment.)

Rationale: Inadequate tax levy funding for school secretaries, assistant principals, librarians, counselors, and aides has resulted in an increase in average class sizes because instructional funding is being used to cover the cost of these positions.

Supporters: Besides funding for a principal and a school secretary, elementary schools only get $86 dollars per pupil for all other staff, an amount that is supplemented this year by only an additional $30 per pupil to reflect the UFT salary agreement. For a school with 600 students, this funding totals $69,600. The per-capita amount for middle schools is $200 (with a $20 supplement), and for high schools the per-capita amount is $450 (with a $45 supplement). Well-run schools depend on a team of administrators and service providers who can enhance learning and school climate and who can allow principals to function as instructional leaders and allow parent coordinators to communicate with parents. Elementary schools, in particular, receive such low amounts of funding for out-of-classroom staffing that dollars that are suppose to fund teachers are often used for the salaries of assistant principals and school secretaries.

Questions: Until there is full state compliance with the court rulings in the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit, there is insufficient per-pupil funding for school administrative functions. Class sizes can be reduced and programs preserved through a new requirement for principals to seek formal waivers if they use teacher allocations or categorical program funds for out-of-classroom positions.

Response: A waiver requirement is unrealistic, because elementary and middle schools with an enrollment of more than 300 students cannot function with just a principal and one school secretary. The city needs to provide adequate allocations to its own schools for out-of-classroom staffing. A four-year phase in is in line with the pattern of incremental increases in funding for schools and should not have to depend on a CFE settlement.

Class Size Matters

• $200 million, half to be redirected from funding for charter schools and half to be redirected from funding for safety agents to reduce average class sizes in middle schools and high schools.

Rationale: Improve poor middle-school and high-school student achievement, which has been stagnant over the last decade, and to increase the four-year graduate rate, which at 43%, is the third lowest of any large school district in the nation.

Supporters: New York City has the largest class sizes in the state and among the largest in the nation at these grades levels, which are often 34 or more students. High school math classes are 60% larger than the state average. As a result, middle and high school students are deprived of the individual attention they need in the classroom. The teacher retention rate and quality could also be improved by smaller classes because fewer teachers would quit or transfer to suburban schools. A 2000 U. S. Department of Education study, after controlling for student background, found that the only objective factor positively correlated with student performance was class size, not school size, not teacher qualifications, nor any other variable that the researchers could identify, and this was even more true in the upper grades rather than lower grades. A study by the National Testing Service also found a clear correlation between student achievement in middle and high schools and small class sizes.

Questions: While systemwide middle schools have 45,000 more seats than students, it would be difficult to identify sufficient classroom space to implement this initiative at the high school level, especially in Queens. In the long run, smaller class sizes will reduce the high quit rate of teachers, but the most immediate problem is that there are insufficient math teachers even for the current large middle and high class sizes. Where would these extra math teachers come from? Research does show a correlation between smaller classes and student achievement in the higher grades, but these students may have benefited from being in smaller classes in their elementary schools. Both Tennessee STAR and Wisconsin SAGE research shows that the immersion of students in smaller classes for just one-year has no immediate or lasting benefit. This may be one of the reasons why standardized test scores at the eighth grade level have not improved as a result of a one-year reduction in eighth grade class sizes.

Response: Many small high schools could be created in a matter of months through leasing. The Millennium High School in lower Manhattan is a good example of the speed with which schools can be created where there is a will to do so. Governor's Island could be the site for seven or more high schools, accessible to all boroughs by waterway. In addition, parochial schools that have been closed can be rapidly converted to high school uses. As for teacher staffing, there are many more applicants to Teach for America and the Teaching Fellows programs than those hired – and these applicants often have good knowledge of math even if they are not initially certified as math teachers. And if smaller classes significantly reduce first year and second year teacher attrition, it would enlarge the pool of experienced teachers very quickly. Class size reduction in the eighth grade was never uniformly implemented. New York City class sizes for this grade remain the highest in the state, so test score outcomes are an irrelevant measurement of effectiveness for a policy that was never put into place with any consistency.

[ Budget Info | FAQ NYC Students/Schools | State Funding Equity | Smaller Class Sizes | Facilities | Standards | Emergency Campaign Against Vouchers | Historical Facts | Lingo Translations | Best Schools/School Performance ]