Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Funding Matrix topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultants outline how Arkansas funding matrix diverged from evidence‑based recommendations
Summary
APA consultant Mark Fermanick reviewed the funding matrix's origins in the Lakeview litigation and compared consultant evidence‑based recommendations (2003 onward) to the matrix, noting major gaps on K–3 class sizes, pupil support staff linked to poverty, ELL and ALE per‑pupil funding and special‑education staffing.
Mark Fermanick of APA presented a historical and technical review of adequacy studies and how their recommendations compare to the state funding matrix. He traced the matrix to the Lakeview school‑finance litigation and the consultants' 2003 evidence‑based study, which ‘‘made a comprehensive set of recommendations totaling $847,000,000 in new funding,’’ he told the committee.
Fermanick detailed points of agreement and divergence. The matrix incorporated many consultant recommendations — market pay adders, additional professional development days and increased minimum salaries — but differed on early‑grade class sizes (consultants recommended lower K–3 ratios such as 15:1 in some studies while the matrix funded higher ratios), pupil‑support staffing that scales with poverty (matrix uses a fixed FTE approach and NSLP/eligibility bands), and per‑pupil rates for Alternative Learning Environments (ALE) and ELL services where the consultants generally recommended higher resource levels.
He described subsequent recalibrations and a desk audit that compared the evolving evidence‑based model to the current matrix; the desk audit did not itself set new funding levels but highlighted where the matrix and EB model differ and where states have chosen implementation approaches. Committee members asked whether the state could reallocate resources to lower K–3 class sizes; presenters said many states target early grades with additional weights or targeted funding but tradeoffs vary.
Fermanick closed by noting detailed comparison tables were provided in committee materials and invited members to request deeper dives on particular elements in September.
