Budget breakdown: A look at how city schools fared this budget season
Update June 1: So far, I have confirmed that Northwestern, City, Patterson, Roland Park also noted among the largest decreases--Patterson with the most at $1.2 million. More information to come on the losses/gains. Was also told that getting losses/gains for all 200 schools is nearly impossible (at least in a timely manner). I can post percentages as well.
The Baltimore city school board adopted a $1.3 billion budget for next year, in which the amount being allocated to schools will increase by about 1 percent from last year.
However, principals will receive millions less in "flexible" money, which gives schools the autonomy to staff their schools and provide resources for their students. School officials said the funding squeeze came as a result of more funding designated for specific purposes, like special ed; rising costs, particularly in salaries and benefits; and revenues remaining flat while enrollment increased.
This has resulted in various schools facing difficult decisions, and worrying that they will lose momentum in their progress.
Due to time constraints (the budget was presented in a piece-meal format with Powerpoints, and not released in its entirety until four days before the board vote), there wasn't much dialogue about the impact of this year's challenges.
Below, I have compiled some information about how schools fared this budget season, including how many schools are losing/gaining and on average how much. You can also take a look at the top 5 schools that lost/gained the most funding for next year, and how school officials explain whether the city's neighborhood and struggling schools can sustain under the current funding model.
A few weeks ago, the school system provided a summary of how many schools gained and how many lost this year. According to that data, 103 schools experienced funding decreases, with the losses averaging about $231,302; 77 schools saw an increase in funding next year, at an average gain of $394,195.
But many schools noted changes that were well beyond the average, and the pain was spread throughout the city.
Arundel Elementary/Middle School, a Cherry Hill Neighborhood school that made AYP for the first time ever last year, will lose more than $340,000. Roland Park Elementary/Middle School parents went to a budget hearing and asked school board members to explain the $600,000 cut to the high achieving school.
Roland Park parents went to a city school budget hearing and asked officials to explain the decrease.
Elizabeth Reichelt was part of a group, looking to understand the decrease, especially after she and other parents stood in the rain to protest state lawmakers in Annapolis to restore all city school funding.
“We understood that there were going to be these huge cuts, and thanks to the advocacy we were going to be avoiding those cuts,” Reichelt said. “So we were really caught off guard when there were still cuts at the school level.”
She said that she hopes that, “principals be given the support that they need to be creative and look at things in a whole new way,” she said. “Because it’s really hard to figure out where to cut when you’re losing resources.”
It is still unclear how many teaching positions will be lost next year, though we've heard that the number of surplus teachers is swelling.
School officials said that final budgets, with all full-time positions, are due in June. So far, teachers at Polytechnic Institute have spoken out against losing 9 teachers, and Baltimore School for the Arts students have protested losing 2 teachers and a staff member.
Apparently, similar scenarios are unfolding across the district.
“A number of principals are facing loss of staff,” said Jimmy Gittings, head of the principal’s union. “They have to make decisions to keep an assistant principal or lose two teaching positions, and that puts them between a rock and a hard plate.”
The school system also provided me with the list of schools that noted the largest budget increases and decreases:
Under the district's Fair Student Funding model, schools receive money based on enrollment numbers. School officials said that the decreases and increases were based on enrollment, and the amount of additional money that schools received for basic, advanced and special education students. It should also be noted that in most charter agreements, many are approved to expand by adding a new grade each year, so charter enrollment is designed to grow.
The top five gainers were all charter or transformation schools, and the schools that lost the most money were predominantly neighborhood and large, high schools--some of which have been struggling for some time.
Here is the list the school system provided (Note: for those who are wondering, yes, I have questions about why some schools weren't included as well--will check on that).
1. Furman L. Templeton Elementary gained $2 million, and 42 new students
2. Vanguard Collegiate Middle School gained $1.23 million and 157 new students
3. City Neighbors High School gained $1 million and 88 new students
4. Green Street Academy gained $1 million and 100 new students
5. NACA Freedom and Democracy Academy II gained $679,139 and 55 students
Schools that lost the most funding this year:
1. Frederick Douglass High School lost $1.2 million and 127 students
2. Forest Park High School lost $979, 201 and 104 students
3. Reginald F. Lewis which lost $610,745 and 127 students
4. Lyndhurst Elementary School lost $319,778 and 39 students
5. Southside Academy lost $487,107 and 36 students
In discussing the list, I asked school officials if neighborhood and big, city high schools will be able to sustain under the current funding model.
For example, Reginald F. Lewis experienced one of the biggest funding cuts this year. But, it's the school that city schools CEO Andres Alonso reassigned to Barney Wilson, former principal of the high achieving Polytechnic Institute, last year to help turn around.
“Sometimes you have a school that absolutely has to turn around, and work like hell to do it," said Michael Sarbanes, spokesman for the school system. "But sometimes the perception is such that it's not where [families] want to be, and they lose funds. The money follows the kids.”
Sarbanes said that Douglass and Reginald F. Lewis will receive grant funding this year to help with turnaround efforts.
However, NACA II charter leaders expressed concern about their sustainability at a school board meeting earlier this year, after the school's enrollment numbers and budget decreased two years in a row. They seem to be on the upswing.






Comments
Erica, can you post the full list of losses and gains? Most of us don't work at the ten schools listed, but would like to know more about our own particular situations. Some have mentioned on this blog the disparity in funding for Vo-Tech and Citywide schools as opposed to other schools. Is there evidence of that as well?
And is funding for charters absolutely safe-guarded by law, which is the reason losses have not extended to them? (referring to your other story)
Also, the amount of money lost or gained that you list here doesn't seem to completely match the number of students lost or gained. What else is a factor?
If NACA has lost students two years in a row, why is it expecting a gain of 55 students this year? Has it done something differently?
How much do salary increases affect the losses? During the contract negotiations, the school district refused to engage the very real concern that the new teachers contract might result in increased class sizes and cuts that directly affect our children's educations. Alonso went so far as to say the increases were a tiny percentage of the entire budget, and therefore would have negligable affects. In this story, he seems to have reversed this statement. Is it too early to say the 'pudding' is coming out of the oven right now?
Thanks for continued coverage of this. It's good to hear of the protests from Poly teachers, Roland Park families and Baltimore School of the Arts students. The rest of us should take note.
Posted by: Robin Bingham | May 28, 2011 11:24 AM
Can you check the numbers for Patterson High School? It appears to me that Patterson should be in the #1spot for losing money: $1.8 million, 192 students are listed under the city's Fair Student Funding school budget page.
Posted by: Nick | May 28, 2011 1:32 PM
I don't see why these funding cuts are a problem. The 15 new $125k directors and the $175k deputy CEO will surely have the expertise to help schools deal with their staff shortages. I hope the board gives all the well-paid administrators at North Ave a big bonus for coming up with this brilliant plan at the last minute. They obviously deserve it.
Posted by: Nemesis | May 28, 2011 9:01 PM
This is the only logical outcome. There are too many schools in Baltimore city and they are cannibalizing each other. The current pace of reform is unsustainable without massive infusions of cash and that is not going to happen. Race to the Top was a booby trap that Baltimore and other districts embraced. Where are the Mayor and the City Council on this? Alonso's ship has run aground and he is going to need someone to tow him back to deeper waters.
Posted by: OverTheTop | May 28, 2011 10:25 PM
If you published the top losers you would see clearly the neighborhood schools are at the top. You also cloud the issue when you fail to say the actual Per Pupil cut because the system likes to hide cuts by talking enrollment.
Posted by: Insider | May 29, 2011 11:30 AM
Patterson lost over a million, Northwestern lost over 700K. Who gave you this list?
Posted by: Really | May 29, 2011 11:31 AM
I was wondering about the logic of this list. In the bdody of the blog you quote someone staing that RPEMS lost $600K which is more than schools 4 and 5 on your list. And it would be nice to know the percentage increase/decrease. For a large school like Patterson is it a 10% decrease where as for a small school like CNHS is it a 20% increase?
Posted by: OverTheTop | May 29, 2011 8:05 PM
I'm also interested in the complete list. Our school was told it lost in the area of $600K and it doesn't appear on the list above.
Posted by: epiph | May 30, 2011 9:12 AM
Just another thought. If I remember the pitch correctly, enrollment allocations are based on the prior year.Under Fair Student Funding adjustments are made to reflect actual enrollment in late September/ early October. So if any of these schools saw an increase or decrease the adjustmant should have already been made. That begs the question, how are they predicting enrollement for next school year. Choice may be a factor in the middle and high schools but it is not in the elementary schools. IF the system is true to FSF then elementary school funding should be based in the adjusted funding of the prior year and at this point it would be hard to predict gains or losses. Is this really a cover-up for the landmark labor contract that BCPSS agreed to in a time when most are pushing fiscal restraint?
Posted by: OverTheTop | May 30, 2011 5:15 PM