Burlington presents equity-driven budgeting model to House Education committee

Nate Lavery, presenting to the House Education Committee on Jan. 21, outlined Burlington School District’s approach to allocating existing dollars more equitably by pairing a baseline staffing model with a weighted supplemental allocation called RISE. Lavery said the model is designed to distribute whatever funding the district has in a transparent, formula-driven way rather than to increase total spending.

Lavery told lawmakers the model began about five years ago under then-superintendent Tom Flanagan and was developed by district staff and principals with extensive community input. "We sought information from [students, families and community members]," he said, adding that survey responses showed "overwhelming support in our community for allocating resources to students who have the most need." The district combines baseline staffing and non-personnel per-student allocations with RISE funds, which are weighted to direct more money toward higher-need student populations.

The baseline staffing model, Lavery said, covers the bulk of district expenses — largely personnel costs — and establishes core positions that every school receives. Non-personnel allocations are provided as a per-student amount to cover classroom-level operating needs; larger costs such as utilities and facilities maintenance remain centrally managed by the district. RISE functions as a discretionary pool schools can use for targeted supports, including reading interventionists, social-emotional programming or family-engagement initiatives.

Lavery described how the district generated RISE dollars by identifying positions that were not part of core staffing, quantifying the cost of those positions, and redistributing the funds into RISE rather than seeking new revenue. "These positions are no longer automatic; they're distributed through the RISE mechanism," he said, noting schools may choose to use RISE funds to buy back specific positions.

Lavery cited a third-party analysis that the district said shows improved alignment between funding and student need and said the district’s current challenge is translating those funding shifts into measurable improvements in student achievement. He urged an annual review of RISE-funded experiments, saying it is acceptable to try interventions that fail so the district can learn and reallocate resources.

On district specifics, Lavery told the panel Burlington operates six elementary schools, two middle schools, a (new) high school and a technical center, and that enrollment is "a little over 3,000" students. He said the board adopted a proposed budget that, because of declining enrollment, indicates reductions of about 4.5 teaching full-time equivalents and roughly three operational district positions, along with an approximate $100,000 reduction in total RISE expenditures.

Responding to questions about budget cuts under a reduced state foundation or a recession, Lavery said the district can model changes (for example, modest increases in average class size) to estimate the impact on positions and dollars, allowing an approach that is applied uniformly across schools. He characterized the model as a tool to avoid year-to-year "seesaw" staffing changes and to provide a transparent rationale for any adjustments.

Lavery also described school advisory groups — typically six to 10 people who meet two to three times during the budget season and are selected to broaden participation beyond traditional PTO structures — that help principals decide how to spend RISE allocations.

The committee recessed after the presentation; Lavery urged continued work on measuring the effect of RISE spending on student outcomes.

The House Education Committee did not take any votes during this briefing. The district’s proposed reductions will be considered as part of its normal budget adoption process and any local consolidation decisions would follow further study and community engagement.