State officials outline $13,200 foundation formula, five‑district governance and $184 million estimated savings

Secretary Zoe Saunders, the Vermont Agency of Education (AOE) and consulting firm APA presented detailed numbers on the governor—s education transformation plan at a joint Senate Finance and Education Committee hearing, saying the proposal centers on a $13,200 per‑student foundation base, new student‑need weights and a five‑district governance structure.

The plan, Saunders told lawmakers, is intended to "promote education quality, educational equity, and sustainability." APA consultant Justin Silverstein said the model "is estimated to reduce overall spending by about a $184,000,000" while still funding a more generous base and categorical supports, subject to the plan—s assumptions and the proposed governance changes.

Committee members were shown the mechanics behind the calculation: a $13,200 base amount multiplied by long‑term average daily membership (ADM) and adjusted by weights for student need and district/school characteristics. Key proposed weights in the presentation included: economically disadvantaged students, +0.75; English learners, +1.50; career and technical education (CTE) students, +1.30; and early childhood (Triple E) students kept at a negative adjustment of −0.54 in the modeling. APA said the CTE weight plus an in‑lieu payment structure would direct most CTE funding to a statewide CTE BOCES (regional CTE organization) and that the median cost of center‑based CTE programming is roughly $25,000 per full‑time equivalent (FTE) student.

Presenters described additional categorical funding retained outside the base for special education and transportation. The AOE—s modeling shows an explicit $70 million estimate for special education spending currently generated by local budgets above federal and state aid, and roughly $25 million to cover the half of transportation costs the state does not currently reimburse (presenters modeled transportation at 100% for initial estimates by doubling current 50% reimbursement). APA said small‑school and district sparsity adjustments together would add roughly $124 million across the state to the base funding result.

In APA—s FY25 modeling, the aggregated long‑term weighted ADM was roughly 122,000; multiplying that by the $13,200 base and the proposed weights produced approximately $1.1 billion in base funding and additional allocations (APA presented a consolidated foundation formula total of about $1.668 billion after weights, school‑scale and sparsity adjustments). Presenters compared that total to FY25 appropriations and reported the plan—s net projected reduction in statewide spending of about $180–184 million under the assumptions shown, noting the estimate assumes no immediate change in the number of school buildings (the scenario assumes the current school portfolio remains in year one).

Officials emphasized the formula is designed to be transparent, predictable and to smooth differences in property wealth per pupil across the state by consolidating many supervisory unions into five larger K–12 districts, which the presenters said would reduce duplicate central office overhead and enable scale efficiencies. The AOE and APA repeatedly framed the funding proposal as one component of a three‑part transformation: funding, governance and education quality supports. AOE said it expects a two‑year transition period and will provide field supports, policy sprints and technical assistance during the change.

Presenters also noted that several current categorical grants were folded into the foundation formula (for example, flexible pathways and English‑learner funding would flow through weights) while others remain separate (special education and transportation). APA and AOE staff said more granular analyses and additional governance detail would follow in a separate governance brief scheduled for release after the funding materials.

The hearing produced numerous technical questions from senators about the underlying research, the assumptions that produced the $13,200 base, and how the model treats preschool and Triple E students, CTE financing, nurse staffing levels, maintenance and operations estimates and the timetable for consolidation and transition of district governance.

The AOE said the $13,200 base and accompanying weights were derived from an "evidence‑based model" used in national studies and adapted with Vermont‑specific adjustments; APA referenced a September 2024 evidence‑based funding report as the primary starting point for the modeling and said staff used multiple Vermont studies to refine the assumptions.

AOE officials and consultants said the plan is not prescriptive at the classroom level: the foundation formula would fund resources to support recommended staffing and class‑size targets, but districts would retain budgetary choice on specific hires. AOE additionally said the governor—s budget includes proposed increases in AOE capacity to support the transition and develop the operational guidance districts will need.

Looking ahead, presenters said they will release additional material on governance, the roles of districts and BOCES, and the operational details of the transition. They also described ongoing policy sprint teams that will engage subject‑matter experts on pre‑K, CTE, special education and other policy areas.

No formal votes or legislative actions were taken at the hearing; lawmakers asked for additional detail and time to review the posted report and the Excel modeling behind the $13,200 figure.

The AOE and consultants committed to returning to the committees to answer follow‑up questions and to provide the governance brief and more detailed cost and staffing assumptions.