Spending Analysis of Plano

	Sign In Sign-Up

Big Spending at PISD

Since the school district is considering next year’s budget and a possible tax increase is on the table, it will be enlightening to launch a series of articles analyzing PISD’s expenditures. The following table is a comparison of the operating and instructional cost per pupil among large school districts with more than 25,000 students. The data is taken from Snapshots which is an annual report published by the Texas Education Agency (TEA). The expenditure information are provided by each school district to the state agency which also publishes the report on its internet website.

It has been alleged by our district that the published operating cost per pupil of $6,198 for year 1998 is wrong since it included recapture (the amount of money paid to the state under Robin Hood). According to TEA, Plano was one of eight districts that made erroneous submission in 1997 and they contacted the district to make the necessary correction. In the following year, PISD became one of three districts which erred in their reporting of data in this category. After persistent attempts to get the correct figure, PISD offered the figure of $5,488 as the operating cost per pupil for 1998 and also informed me that the figure for 1999 would also have the same error since the submission was already made.

Based on this figure provided by PISD, out of 33 districts Plano has the highest instructional cost and the second highest operating cost (only $14 per pupil less than Brownsville and San Antonio). The average operating cost for these 33 districts is $4,871 per pupil which is $617 per pupil less than Plano’s. With 43,000 kids in our district, we are outspending the average by $617 x 43,000 = $26.5 M.

The average instructional cost for these districts is $2,858 per pupil which is $512 per pupil less than Plano’s. We outspend the average by $512 x 43,000 = $22 M.

In anticipation of expected excuses, I have shaded those fast growth districts which experienced more than 20% growth in the last five years. Fast growth does not lead to higher cost per pupil. On the contrary, one would expect some benefit from economies of scale. I applaud recent efforts by the board to demand serious cost cutting from the administration.

Comparison of Large Districts

Ranked by Operating Cost per Pupil

No.

District

5 yr. % Growth

Operating Cost per Pupil

Instructional Cost per Pupil

Plano

30.9

(erroneous) $6,198

$3,370

1

Brownsville

3.5

$5,502

$3,244

2

San Antonio

2.1

$5,502

$3,206

3

Plano

30.9

(PISD’s figure) $5,488

$3,370

4

North East

10.1

$5,295

$3,168

5

Houston

6.6

$5,245

$3,005

6

Spring Branch

12.7

$5,236

$3,023

7

Aldine

13.8

$5,170

$3,062

8

Northside

11.3

$5,133

$3,134

9

Richardson

2.7

$5,127

$3,010

10

Dallas

12.8

$5,079

$2,929

11

Killeen

16.8

$5,024

$2,803

12

Conroe

21.2

$4,979

$2,876

13

Fort Worth

8.2

$4,947

$2,675

14

Klein

10.5

$4,930

$2,950

15

Irving

9.3

$4,881

$3,004

16

Ysleta

- 3.4

$4,865

$2,869

17

Corpus Christi

- 2.9

$4,821

$2,831

18

Lewisville

41

$4,766

$2,930

19

Cypress-Fairbanks

20

$4,757

$2,820

20

Austin

9.7

$4,749

$2,761

21

El Paso

- 0.5

$4,728

$2,678

22

Alief

22.6

$4,726

$2,908

23

Lubbock

- 2.5

$4,724

$2,642

24

Pasadena

4.1

$4,698

$2,757

25

Round Rock

24.7

$4,697

$2,880

26

Katy

30.3

$4,652

$2,798

27

Fort Bend

20.6

$4,623

$2,318

28

Ector County

1.6

$4,585

$2,524

29

Amarillo

2.5

$4,573

$2,810

30

Clear Creek

19

$4,386

$2,687

31

Mesquite

12.6

$4,357

$2,365

32

Arlington

13.7

$4,317

$2,661

33

Garland

15.3

$4,184

$2,626

Average Cost for 33 districts

Spending like a small district

Among the 33 districts with more than 25,000 students, Plano has the second highest operating cost per pupil. Fast growth does not necessarily explain this high cost for there are many districts facing fast growth but have a far lower per capita cost than PISD. The fact that we are a Robin Hood district also does not explain the high cost for those property wealthy districts with higher operating cost have significantly lower student population. Our operating cost per pupil actually reflect the cost of educating a student in a district size of between 500 and 1,600.

This is the second part of a study on PISD’s operating expenditure. The number within each column shows the number of districts within that size category. About two thirds of Texas districts are very small districts.

PISD spends about $600 more per pupil than districts with more than 1,600 students! With a student population of 43,000, the total adds up to a sizable $25.8 million. We should spend less time blaming Robin Hood and start looking for the real causes of our woes.

Comparison with Rich Districts

In the previous study, we have seen that PISD’s operating cost per pupil is close to the average for a small Texas district with between 500 and 1,600 students. For a district with close to 45,000 students, we do not seem to be reaping any benefits from economies of scale.

It is true that many districts with the same or greater property wealth as Plano shows a higher operating cost per student. However, these districts have significantly smaller student population. Plano still substantially outspends large "Robin Hood" districts with more than 10,000 students, e.g., Richardson, Carrollton-Farmers Branch, Coppell, Grapevine-Colleyville and Brazosport. Ironically, many of these districts achieve higher ratings from the Texas Education Agency. To be put it bluntly, they are spending less but achieving more.

Lest it be said that we have a more challenging student profile, I am furnishing this table to preemptively invalidate that premise. The table identifies "Robin Hood" districts with more than 5,000 students which have a higher rating than Plano (either Exemplary or Recognized). Brazosport, with the most challenging student profile, spends about $900 less per pupil than Plano and is rated Exemplary. Incidentally, some of you may notice that Plano has the smallest percentage of kids enrolled in gifted and talented programs.

These six districts have an average operating cost of $5,218 which is $270 less than ours. One can only appreciate how staggering this amount is after we multiply it by 43,000 students. In effect, we outspent the average of these five property wealthy districts by a grand total of about $12 million in 1998. How can so much be spent on so many to accomplish so little?

The school board is considering raising taxes. No matter how we look at the numbers, the problem does not seem to be lack of funds. Growth in our tax base, recent relief from Robin Hood, and the availability of more state aid should more than sufficiently cover our growth needs. Further infusion of funds by increasing taxes would only produce a grotesquely unflattering image of our community at the state capitol where we constantly lobby for Robin Hood relief.

Before we spend even more money, we should identify the causes for our relatively poorer performance, particularly in the lower grades. How our kids manage to turn in "sterling" SAT performances in latter years is the subject of numerous conjectures. Parents and the business community in Plano should urge this district to re-assess their present spending priorities before raising our already high tax rates.

Comparison of Big "Robin Hood" Districts (>5,000 students)

with Better Rating than PISD

Ranked by operating cost per pupil from left to right

Data from Snapshots ’98 published by the Texas Education Agency

	Eanes	Highland Park	Plano	Coppell	Grapevine-Colleyville	Brazosport
Operating Cost per Pupil	$5,717	$5,556	$5,488	$5,043	$4,929	$4,573
%age Growth 1993-1998	20.9	27.5	30.9	77.9	26.2	4.8
Student Population (1998)	7,184	5,695	43,323	7,722	12,867	13,131
Academic Rating	Exemplary	Exemplary	Academically Acceptable	Exemplary	Recognized	Exemplary
Student Profile (%)
African-American	1	0	6	3	2	9
Hispanic	4	1	8	7	6	33
White	90	97	76	79	89	57
Other	5	2	11	11	3	2
Econ. Disadvantaged	2.4	0	8.8	3.8	6.4	36.4
Special Education	11	9	10	8	9	14
Bilingual/ESL	1	0	5	3	1	7
Career/Technology	5	2	16	11	16	24
Gifted/Talented	11	12	7	14	24	10
Overspending Analysis	by writer
Diff. from Ave. Cost ($5,218)	$499	$338	$270	($175)	($289)	($645)
Diff. x Student Population	$3.6M	$1.9M	$11.7M	($1.4M)	($3.7M)	($8.5M)

Proportional Expenditure Comparison

ranked by operating cost per pupil from left to right

based on 1998 data

	Eanes	Highland Park	Plano	Spring Branch	Richardson	Coppell	Grapevine-Colleyville	Katy	Brazosport	Clear Creek
Operating Cost per Pupil	$5,717	$5,556	$5,488	$5,236	$5,127	$5,043	$4,929	$4,652	$4,573	$4,386
Revenue per Pupil	$7,031	$5,910	$6,884	$5,843	$11,198	$6,049	$5,750	$5,553	$5,498	$5,215
Recapture	$10.5 M	$30 M	$30 M	0	$10 M	$4 M	$10 M	$137K	0	0
Recapture per pupil	$1,461	$5,268	$692	0	$293	$518	$777	$5	0	0
%age Growth 1993-1998	20.9	27.5	30.9	12.7	2.7	77.9	26.2	30.3	4.8	19.0
Student Population	7,184	5,695	43,323	30,880	34,106	7,722	12,867	28,230	13,131	28,200
Academic Rating	Exemplary	Exemplary	Acceptable	Acceptable	Acceptable	Exemplary	Recognized	Recognized	Exemplary	Recognized
Expenditure by Proportion (%)
Payroll Costs	66.1	77.8	67.3	76.2	73.8	68.9	71.0	72.4	70.9	73.6
Prof. & Contracted Services	7.0	7.8	9.2	6.4	9.8	8.4	8.0	4.9	6.5	7.4
Supplies & Materials	5.7	3.5	6.3	5.5	4.3	5.9	5.3	4.8	6.7	4.5
Other Operating Costs	1.4	1.2	1.6	1.3	0.8	1.8	1.8	1.1	1.6	1.2
Debt Service	19.1	9.0	12.6	8.8	10.2	9.7	13.7	14.3	6.1	12.2
Capital Outlay	0.7	0.6	3.1	1.8	1.1	5.4	0.2	2.4	8.2	1.1
Staff
Total Staff FTE	905	642	4,679	4,021	3,941	881	1,532	3,144	1,507	3,030
Total Teachers FTE	524	418	2,818	2,018	2,200	509	854	1,719	767	1,676
Avg Central Admin Salary	80,624	115,661	78,765	82,080	62,494	65,333	69,277	77,941	78,122	63,934
Avg Campus Admin Salary	60,306	76,066	63,853	58,418	56,459	52,739	53,144	56,037	56,088	53,783
Avg Profess, Sup. Staff Salary	41,084	46,138	43,710	42,073	42,099	38,756	40,414	43,905	39,474	40,136
Avg Teacher Salary	35,889	36,990	36,540	36,020	35,351	33,134	33,519	35,488	36,173	33,940
No. of Students per Staff	7.9	8.9	9.3	7.7	8.7	8.8	8.4	9.0	8.7	9.3
No. of Students per Teacher	13.7	13.6	15.4	15.3	15.5	15.2	15.1	16.4	17.1	16.8
Student Profile
African-American	1	0	6	6	20	3	2	5	9	7
Hispanic	4	1	8	46	15	7	6	13	33	11
White	90	97	76	40	55	79	89	78	57	74
Other	5	2	11	8	9	11	3	4	2	9
Econ. Disadvantaged	2.4	0	8.8	49.8	29.8	3.8	6.4	10.8	36.4	10.8
Special Education	11	9	10	11	11	8	9	9	14	8
Bilingual/ESL	1	0	5	29	13	3	1	5	7	4
Career/Technology	5	2	16	13	17	11	16	13	24	11
Gifted/Talented	11	12	7	5	5	14	24	7	10	8
College Admission Tests	Class of	1997
Percent Tested *	91.3	107.7*	83.1	72.4	88.9	93.7	84.9	82.2	70.6	81.7
Percent At/Above Criterion	63.3	64.7	52.7	48.1	46.0	46.4	41.3	42.1	37.9	44.2
SAT I: Mean Total Score	1,145	1,153	1,113	1,091	1,072	1,084	1,068	1,065	1,047	1,080
ACT: Mean Composite Score	24.2	23.9	23.5	22.3	22.5	22.4	22.3	22.3	21.7	21.4
Other analysis by writer
% tops in elem. Reading	66.7	50	44.4	58.3	40.5	71.4	54.5	40.5	72.7	56.3
% tops in elem. Math	16.7	50	11.1	33.3	29.7	71.4	0	25	63.6	27.8
% tops in elem. reading & math	16.7	50	7.4	29.2	27	42.9	0	25	81.8	27.8
Diff. from Avg. Cost ($5,071)	$646	$485	$417	$165	$56	($28)	($142)	($419)	($498)	($685)
Diff. x Student Population	$4.6 M	$2.8 M	$18.1 M	$5.1 M	$1.9 M	($0.2 M)	($1.8 M)	($11.8 M)	($6.5 M)	($19.3 M)

Cost Analysis

3^rd highest operating cost per pupil

2^nd lowest percentage for payroll but second highest for professional & contracted services as Supplies & Materials.

3^rd in Debt Service and Capital Outlay.

Salary Comparison

4^th in average central admin. salary

2^nd in average campus admin. salary

3^rd in average professional support staff salary

4^th in average central admin. salary

2^nd in average teacher salary

College Results

5^th lowest percentage taking SAT

3^rd highest at or above criterion

3^rd highest SAT mean total score

2^nd highest ACT mean composite score

Elementary Proficiency

3^rd lowest in reading

2^nd lowest in math

2^nd lowest in both reading and math