Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Budget Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District 11 details site‑based budgeting rollout to give schools more authority and accountability
Summary
District 11 staff presented a multi‑year transition to site‑based (student‑based) budgeting, showing tools, examples and protections intended to preserve services during transition; a fall adjustment process and central checks were described.
District staff presented a detailed update Feb. 19 on the district’s multi‑year rollout of site‑based (student‑based) budgeting, saying the district has shifted more authority and accountability to individual schools while keeping a mix of centrally managed positions to protect districtwide programs.
Brandon (staff member) led the briefing and said the district treated the current year as a baseline to avoid abrupt negative impacts on schools during the transition. "The truest form of student based budgeting is really money follows kids," Brandon said. He added the district is not yet at a precise per‑student dollar‑for‑student allocation but will move closer over time with a fall adjustment process.
Nut graf: The change moves staffing and discretionary dollars to building leaders while retaining centrally managed FTE for special education, CLDE/ELL, GT, counselors and other essential districtwide services. Officials said the approach aims to give principals flexibility while preventing sudden cuts to mandated programs.
Details from the presentation and school examples included: - Every school in the district currently has more FTE than the prior board‑formula baseline in the briefing’s example; one school showed 4.7 FTE above the board formula for the year in question. - North Middle School was shown as having about $4,600,000 in discretionary funding for staffing and programming in the example presented to that school. - Holmes Middle School had roughly $1,600,000 identified as "special programs position locked" in the AlloView tool; the school’s total staffing and program budget was shown at approximately $5,300,000 in the demonstration. - The AlloView (Allaview/PowerSchool) tool was demonstrated: adding a 1.0 FTE teacher in the tool displayed a total cost with benefits (an example figure shown was about $97,000 per FTE with benefits). Brandon said average salary plus benefits raised the effective cost of personnel in principals’ budgeting decisions.
Staff described training and safeguards: principals have attended monthly level meetings and one‑on‑one budget builds with central‑office staff present (HR, CLDE, GT, special education and other central teams). The district will use a fall adjustment after the October count to provide money to schools that come in over projection; the presenter noted the district intends to set aside one‑time funds to soften transitions for schools that might otherwise owe the district money because of underprojection.
Speakers on the record said the vendor list and procurement discounts remain available in the budgeting tool, and schools must tie program expenditures to district priorities and strategies within the system so the district can later pull data on spending and outcomes.
Brandon said about implementation: "Student based budgeting isn't the reason you have to change anything. It can be the reason you change everything, but you won't have to change anything because of it." He also explained the accounting for benefits: "When you think about that, average cost of a teacher is $70,000 but really it's over a hundred thousand dollars because of the benefits." A board member clarified that PERA contributions (employee and employer shares) make up a large portion of benefit costs.
Ending: Staff said most principals have reacted positively, that the district will continue refining parameters and rule sets, and that the budget office will finalize allocations and adjustments as schools complete builds for next year.
