City schools finish head count for state aid
By Bobbi Mlynar
Originally published 12:50 p.m., October 18, 2007
Updated 12:50 p.m., October 18, 2007
Preliminary full-time-equivalency enrollment figures have been submitted to the state and are awaiting an audit that will come later in the year.
The district on Sept. 20 had done a head count of students that was part of a state-wide count done by all school districts on that date. Then, a total of 4,921 students were tallied, which was 45 less than the 2006-07 head count.
The FTE figure submitted last week bears significance for the district because the state uses the FTE, including added weighting for certain groups and circumstances, to determine the amount of state aid that will be given to the district for the current school year. Weighting factors in additional FTE numbers, which translate into additional money for the district.
Several other factors also influence FTE, as reported earlier. Kindergarten in Emporia schools is a full-time class for most students; however, the state considers it a half-time class and consequently gives approximately half FTE credit for kindergartners.
The FTE for the district was 4,589.5 for this year, 331.5 fewer than the actual head count in September. The FTE number, however, does not include weighting for students such as English language learners, special education, and other categories. For 2007-08 and 2008-09, the district also will receive weighted credit for student use of the new fitness and weight rooms at Emporia High School, according to Superintendent John Heim.
With the weighting included, the district is projected to receive $31,183,996 from the state for the current school year, pending results of the state’s own audit of the figures. If the figures are accepted, the Emporia school district will receive $31,183,996 — $1,684,136 more than the past school year.
Weighting of certain students, transportation, and projects helps equalize the costs of education in the district.
“This system is more fair in assigning costs and revenue to students who really need the help,” Heim said.
With the added funds, the district has been able to add .8 “specials” teacher, such as physical education or art, four instructional coaches, two elementary teachers, six instructional strategists, 4.5 English Language Acquisition teachers, and one payroll clerk, as well as fund a 3.9 percent across-the-board salary increase. The additional staff are intended to help students reach district and other goals for achievement.
“That’s why that weighting is so important to us,” he said.
Heim said that the Legislature also provided an increase in funds for at-risk programs this year.
“It’s kids who receive free lunches and kids who don’t receive free lunches but score at less-than-proficient on the state assessment,” he explained.
The number of students who were not proficient on the assessments was fewer this year, he said, but the state provided additional allowances that were worth more than in the past.
“I want to give the Legislature some credit,” Heim said.
The FTE submitted last week is unaudited and the figure may change after the state has completed its own checks of the figures.
“So we still don’t know that for sure,” he said. “We won’t know that until the auditors come. Sometimes they come in November, sometimes they come in May. You just never know.”
emporialifer (anonymous) says...
I'm trying to understand this. Enrollment is down 377 students from last year, but the district is receiving 5.4% more money this year? I'm also confused on the weighting - in one line it said weighting was taken into consideration for groups, but that "The FTE number, however, does not include weighting for students such as English language learners, special education, and other categories", so will there be a revised FTE number with those included or does the gov't not consider those categories important enough to weigh? I would hope these would be weighted categories - more so than students using the weight room.
October 18, 2007 at 2:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
I'm trying to figure out where you got the figure 377.
This is what I read, "Then, a total of 4,921 students were tallied, which was 45 less than the 2006-07 head count."
I agree with you about the weighted categories being used. Those using the weight room should not be worth more than special education or ELL, that's for sure.
October 18, 2007 at 3:57 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
emporialifer (anonymous) says...
Create -
This article was kinda tricky - I had to read over it several times and I'm still not sure about a few things. Here is how I got the number 377 (which of course could be wrong since I was a little confused). They gave the Sept. '07 headcount of 4921, which is 45 less than last year - so I added 45 to 4921 to get last year's number, so last year's number would be 4966. A couple paragraphs later, it said the FTE for the district was 4589.5, so I subtracted that number from what I consider last year's number of 4966 and got 377 (I took off the half student - but would love to know how they calculate a 1/2 student).
October 19, 2007 at 2:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
create (anonymous) says...
emporialifer --
Gotcha. Good explanation, too. Thanks. Half student calculations likely come about as a result of counting .5 for some offerings like special ed, or free and reduced lunch, that sort of thing. Don't forget the kindergarten count. Topeka pays half FTE credit for Kinders. You're right about the article. It is tricky to read. As a former teacher, I understand some of this, but it changes every year, especially in view of the No Child Left Behind Act.
October 19, 2007 at 6:41 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )