Download - 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 1/29
Student‐Based Budget Overview & 2011‐12 Budget
Recommendations
January 18,
2010
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 2/29
Strategic Management of Financial Resources
Strategy 1 – Ensure Fiscal Stability
Strategy
2
– Maximize
Financial
Resources Strategy 3 – Align Resources with Goals
Strategy 4 – Increase Transparency
Empowerment and Responsibility
Linkage to Denver Plan
1/18/11 2
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 3/29
• DPS Financial Status
•
2010‐
11
Amended
Budget• State Financial Status
• Budget Recommendations for 2011‐12
–
Key Budget
Assumptions
– Financial Goals
– Student Based Budgeting (SBB)
– Budget recommendations for schools, programs and support services
• Next Steps & Actions
31/18/11
Contents
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 4/29
FY2010‐11 Budget Reduction of 6% in state funding; $36 million to DPS
Expecting an additional rescission of approximately 0.7% ($4M)
State‐wide
enrollment
and
at
‐risk
student
growth
exceeded
funding
projections
Federal funding includes use of non‐recurring ARRA funds and Ed Jobs funding in
addition to normal Title funding, which mitigated a significant reduction.
Denver Preschool Program (DPP) funding reduced by over 35% ($3 million)
Enrollment growth
of
2,100
students
helps
maximize
available
state
funding
to
DPS
Fund Balance Significantly increased beginning general fund balance due to lower pension interest
costs, successful cost management initiatives and lower‐than‐forecasted state
funding reductions in FY09‐10.
$2.5M allocated in September for additional “class‐size relief” teaching positions.
DPS Financial Status
1/18/11 4
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 5/29
Beginning Balance Adjustments – The Adopted Budget included estimates of the July 1, 2010 beginning balance, whereas the Amended budget includes the
actual July 1, 2010 beginning balance as reflected in the 2009‐2010
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.
School Finance Act formula funding – Changes to revenue and expenditures as
a result of the actual October 2010 pupil count and the updated state estimate
for the
per
pupil
funding
amount.
District Funded Pupil Count increasing to 74,422 from 72,115 (based on October 1, 2010
count). Funded pupil count is K‐12 students, with Kindergarten funded at .58
2010‐11 Amended Budget
1/18/11 5
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 6/29
2010‐11 General Fund Recurring Budget Per Student Sources and Uses of Funds
6
94% of
recurring
fund
budget
used
directly or in direct support of
schools
School support includes centrally‐
budgeted direct
school
services:
Student Literacy/School Programs
includes ELL Programs, 9th Grade
Academies, Credit Recovery, Gifted &
Talented, Library & Textbook
purchases,…
Student Services
includes
Special
Education, Psychologists, Social
Workers & Nurses
Other includes Security & Technology
Central support includes cross‐
district organizations
&
services
including:
Teaching & Learning
Assessment & Research
Community Engagement
IT, Budgeting,
Accounting,
Legal,
Human Resources & Payroll
Notes:
1) Based on
ECE
‐12
October
Count
submission
of
78,339
2) Source ‐ Fiscal Year 2010‐2011 Amended Budget
1/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 7/29
Projected state revenue shortfall in FY11‐12 of $1.1B
Governor Ritter presented FY12 budget showing near flat funding for K‐12:
Enrollment and at‐risk student growth projections below 2010‐11 actual growth
No assumed
reduction
in
local
share
(which
would
increase
state
equalization
requirements),
despite projection in reduction of statewide Assessed Valuation of nearly 7%.
Governor Hickenlooper expected to retain budget proposal with minor
modifications; some legislative changes likely.
Expiration of
Federal
stimulus
funds
for
Title
programs
(approximately
$20
million used in FY10‐11 budget)
Next Steps
Governor’s budget proposal
Legislative actions
March 20th revenue forecast
State & K‐12 Financial Status
1/18/11 7
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 8/29
Projecting an increase in enrollment of nearly 1,700 students
Projecting net, apples to apples state funding reduction
(accounting for projected enrollment increase) of $18M (3%).
Gross decrease less because of increase in projected enrollment.
Federal program funding currently expected to be flat:
Dependent upon funding for ESEA, and Denver census poverty rate (not
expected to be announced until April)
ARRA funding no longer available
Increase in pension contributions (0.9%), both employee and
district (AED
&
SAED),
per
statute.
FY11‐12 Budget Assumptions
1/18/11 8
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 9/299
Financial Goals for FY11‐12
Maximize resources available to the classroom, and provide increased
autonomy to schools to use resources to best meet their students’ needs
Align budget to Denver Plan goals
fund targeted
programs
critical
to
advancing
student
achievement
priorities
provide support for neediest students
Continue to focus on enrollment growth, providing attractive program options
to families
and
available
seat
capacity
where
needed
Align cost structure to funding realities Maintain compensation levels in‐line with revenue expectations
Increase quality, customer service and efficiency of support services: Implement cost efficiencies in support service delivery areas such as transportation, facilities
and IT
Manage pension financing and other operational costs
Utilize GOB funding to improve facility efficiency and deliver needed capital improvements
Pursue external funding sources for district priorities
1/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 10/2910
External Funding Success in
2009 & 2010
I3‐
$30.1 million
Federal funds ‐ $25.1 million
Collective private match ‐ $5.0 million
1003g TIG ‐ $14.9 million
Bill and
Melinda
Gates
Foundation
‐$10.0
million
Michael and Susan Dell Foundation ‐ $8.6 million
Teacher Quality Partnership (TQP) ‐ $8.2 million
Athletics and Activities Grant ‐ $3.3 million
Early Reading
First
‐$2.9
million
Title V – Charter School Startup ‐ $2.5 million
Janus ‐ $2.4 million
21st Century ‐ $2.0 million
Colorado Health
Foundation
‐$1.2
million
The Eli and Edythe Broad Foundation ‐ $1.0 million
1/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 11/29
To increase funding for schools and key priorities, while maintaining fiscal
stability, we recommend making $10 million of support services budget cuts
and utilizing $10 million in savings from the previous two years.
Projected FY10‐11 end‐of ‐year General Fund balance is $90 million; use of $10M
would reduce this to $80 million.
1/18/11 Denver Public Schools 11
FY11‐12 Budget
Recommendations – Summary
Budget Assumption Amount (in millions)
Budget Cuts to Support Services ($10.0)
Increase Per Student School Funding through SBB $10.5
Increase Funding
for
Highest
Priorities $8.0
Use of Savings ($10.0)
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 12/29
2011‐12 General Fund Recurring Budget Per Student Sources and Uses of Funds
12
95% of
recurring
fund
budget
used
directly or in direct support of
schools.
School direct funding projected to
increase by
2.3%
($131)
per
student from 10‐11, and now
accounts for 70% of recurring
General Fund revenues.
School support, including targeted
programs, is projected to increase
by 1.2% ($25) per student from 10‐
11, and remains flat at 25% of
recurring General Fund revenues.
Central support
is
projected
to
decrease by 9.4% ($47) per
student from 10‐11, and declines
to 5% of recurring General Fund
revenues. Notes:
1) Based on
ECE
‐12
population
estimation
of
80,051
2) Source ‐ Fiscal Year 2011‐2012 Recommended Budget Plan
3) Budgeted Revenue includes one time use of General Fund
reserves1/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 13/29
SBB Improvement – Increasing
School Budget Flexibility
13
63%
68%69% 70%
30%
26%25% 25%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
08‐09 Adopted 09‐10 Adopted 10‐11 Amended 11‐12 Proposed
School Direct & School Support as a Percent of Annual General Fund
Operating Budget
School % Of Total GF and ML School Support % Of Total GF and ML
1/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 14/29
Reduce support services by $10 million (approximately 5%), while
improving efficiencies and trying to maintain service levels.
Operations Support
Services
($5
million)
Primarily Transportation, Facilities & IT
Central Support Services ($0.3 million)
Primarily OSRI,
Legal
Academic Support Services:
Elementary Education & Student Services ($3.5 million)
CAO
support
services
($1.2
million,
including
Title
funds)
1/18/11 14
FY11‐12 Budget
Recommendations – Budget Cuts
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 15/29
Student Based Budgeting (SBB)
Overview
SBB is a budgeting approach where dollars follow students
directly to their schools where decisions can be made on how
to best serve those students.
First implemented at DPS for 2007‐08 budget year;
continuously being refined to increase buying power at
schools:
SBB empowers site‐based management and enhances the flexibility of
resource utilization by schools.
Provides transparency of the dollars allocated to schools.
Provides
weighted (differentiated)
funding
based
upon
the
costs
to
serve certain categories of students such as:
Special needs students
Low‐income students
Gifted and
talented
students
151/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 16/29
SBB FY11‐12 Recommended
Improvements
Increase base SBB funding for all students
Provide FRL weighted funding for all Reduced Price Lunch students
Increase funding amount for FRL students
Provide a more
transparent
per
student
subsidy
to
support
new
Alternative
programs which have a higher cost to serve their students
Increase dollars available for site‐level decisions:
Increase flexibility in meeting staffing requirements for Mild Moderate students and
Student Service days
A more streamlined and consistent student based formula:
Provide increased transparency and understanding of the SBB model
Allow funds to appropriately follow the student population
Increase ability to forecast and plan for budget changes at the school site
Improve non‐SBB direct funding process to allow for strategic allocation of additional
resources outside the SBB model
161/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 17/29
FY11‐12 Budget
Recommendations ‐ SBB
Increase SBB funding by $10.5 million (net of enrollment increases)
Increase SBB Base funding to all schools by 2%
1% to cover increased teacher salary costs and an additional 1% increase
From $3,854/student adjusted to $3,931/student
Provide Free/Reduced (FRL) weighted funding for all students
“Reduced” level students now receive weighted funding at same levels as “Free”
Kindergarten FRL students to receive weighted funding at 100% vs. 50%
Increase FRL funding per student by $25 (to $461‐$496/student)
Increase Gifted & Talented student funding by $25/student (to $120/student)
Provide additional funding for new Multiple Pathway Centers (MPCs)
Establish targeted
per
student
incentive
for
SPF
growth
and
high
achievement
171/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 18/29
FY11‐12 Budget
Recommendations ‐ SBB
Increase SBB funding available for site‐level decisions
Reallocate $29 million in funding to less‐restrictive allocations
Increase
dollars
available
for
site‐
level
decisions
– focus
on
accountability
rather than control
Increase flexibility in meeting staffing requirements for Mild Moderate students and Student
Service days (Psych, Social Worker, Nurse)
Dollars can support varying levels of need rather than focusing on only those identified with
an IEP
Schools will be able to implement other staffing options such as contracted services
Student Services continues to have oversight and will work collaboratively to ensure
appropriate services are being provided
Continues to
move
our
funding
model
to
a more
student
‐based
formula
as
opposed to the RAM methodology
Eliminates stair‐step effect present in Mild Moderate and PSN allocations whereby
adding/losing a single student causes the gain (loss) of a staffing allocation
181/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 19/29
FY11‐12 Budget Recommendations
– Summary Breakdown of SBB Changes
Increase SBB Base per pupil by 2% after impact of all other changes ($4.7
million)
Increase SBB weights for FRL students by:
Increasing kinder
weight
to
1.0
from
.5
($1.1
million)
Funding students eligible for reduced lunch at the same level previously allocated to free
lunch students only ($3.7 million)
Add an additional $25 per GT student ($111,000)
Implement a performance
allocation
to
incentivize
growth
and
SPF
performance ($1 million)
191/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 20/29
SBB Formula Changes
SBB Base – Several staffing‐based allocations have been modified in order to
fund the student rather than a purchase to be made. Several components of
those staffing allocations funded all students. Where applicable, those
dollars will
be
added
to
the
Base.
In
addition,
a 2%
increase
to
the
base
is
being recommended.
Current (2010 ‐11): Base ranges depending on grade level and hurdle effect.
New (2011
‐12):
SBB Base will be a standardized amount across all school types
Supplemental Base funding will be allocated to schools with center programs
1/17/2011 20
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 21/29
SBB Formula Changes
Free Lunch Funds – The Free Lunch allocation was previously made available only
to students eligible for FREE lunch. The change allows REDUCED lunch students
to also receive this funding. Additionally, since 95% of Kindergarten students
attend
full‐
day
programs,
provide
FRL
Kindergarten
funding
at
1.0
FTE
(vs.
previously at .5 FTE). The recommended increase provides additional dollars in
direct support of our neediest population.
Current
(2010 ‐
11):
Funding for Free Lunch Students only in (grades 1‐12)
Secondary schools receive a slightly higher per pupil than elementary schools
Per Student amount varies due to hurdle effect
New
(2011‐
12): Reallocate
to
fund
Free
AND
REDUCED Funding for Free AND REDUCED Lunch students
Fund Kindergarten students at 100%
Secondary per pupil still higher then elementary
Increase funding per student by $25
1/18/11 21
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 22/29
SBB Formula Changes
Student Service
Days
Allocation
(Psychologist,
Social
Worker
and
Nurse)
– SBB
is
meant to fund students not specific purchases. The recalculation allows the dollars
to follow the student and increases site‐level control over staffing decisions.
Current (2010
‐11):
Allocation
made
up
of
3 components
– Required
minimum
staffing levels
$ for every student
$ for Free Lunch Students
$ for
Center
Programs
New (2011‐12): Eliminate the specific student service days staffing allocation –
Recommended staffing ratio:
Split funding into its component parts and allocate based on student type
Add
dollars
for
every
student
to
base Add dollars for Free Lunch students to Free AND REDUCED Lunch Supplemental Funds Allocation
Add center program dollars to supplemental base funding to support schools with these
classrooms
Schools able to implement other staffing options such as contracted services
Student Services
will
have
oversight
to
ensure
appropriate
staffing
levels
Targeted funding pool to meet high Student Services needs of individual schools1/18/11 22
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 23/29
SBB Formula Changes
Mild Moderate ‐ The dollars now directly flow to the intended student
population with discretion over the level of staffing.
Current
(2010 ‐
11):
Allocation
made
up
of
2
components $ for Free/Reduced Lunch Students
$ for Non‐Free/Non‐Reduced Lunch Students
Subsidies provided to schools with inadequate funding to meet FTE minimum ratio
New (2011‐12): Eliminate the specific Mild Moderate staffing allocation
Split funding into its component parts and allocate based on student type
Combine Free/Reduced Lunch dollars with Free Lunch Supplemental funding to fund
Reduced Lunch students at the same level as well as K at 100% vs. 50%
$ for Non‐Free/Non‐Reduced Lunch Students ($223/student) – added to base funding
for ALL K‐12
(K=.50)
Allocation would be flexible, but subject to Student Services approval of appropriate service
levels for Mild Moderate students
Subsidies would not be provided to schools within SBB
Establish a Student Services High Needs Fund (similar to class size relief) to address specific
issues in
funding
for
schools
with
higher
than
average
Mild
Moderate
populations
1/18/11 23
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 24/29
SBB Formula Changes
Gifted and Talented ‐ The change to Gifted and Talented allows for more
autonomy and over dollars directly supporting the needs of our gifted
learners.
Current: .25 FTE Equivalent + $95 per GT student (through grade 8)
Per Student amount varies due to hurdle effect
New: .25 FTE Equivalent + $120 per GT student
Eliminate hurdle
to
allocate
additional
dollars
to
all GT
students
(through
grade
8)
Increase to SBB of approximately $111,000
1/17/2011 Denver Public Schools Internal Use Only 24
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 25/29
SBB Formula Changes
Targeted Interventions
– As
in
previous
years,
$100,000
is
allocated
to
Accredited
on Probation schools on the SPF for targeted programs to drive student
achievement. New for FY11‐12, a performance allocation will be awarded to
schools in the Distinguished status and to schools gaining in SPF rankings.
Current (2010 ‐11): $100,000 allocated to the SPF “red” schools
Not currently allocated to schools in SPF categories other than “red”
New (2011‐12):
Maintain $100,000
Targeted
Interventions
allocation
for
“RED”
schools
only
Implement a Performance incentive allocation for SPF growth
Per Student Allocations:
$100 per student for growth into the “Accredited on Priority Watch” category
$105 per
student
for
growth
into
the
“Accredited
on
Watch”
category
$110 per student for growth into the “Meets Expectations” category
$115 per student for growth into the “Distinguished” category
$65 per student to schools maintaining “BLUE” status – allocated annually if the school
maintains distinguished status
Increase to
SBB
of
approximately
$1
million
1/18/11 25
FY11 12 B d R d i
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 26/29
FY11‐12 Budget Recommendations
– Targeted Programs
26
Increase Targeted
Program
funding
by
$8
million
for
initiatives
critical to advancing Denver Plan priorities
Educator Effectiveness – provide funding for Peer Observers ($3.8 million)
English Language
Acquisition
– provide
funding
to
continue
ARRA
‐funded
ELA
summer
academy (move professional development expense for ELA educators to GF) ($0.6
million)
Early Childhood Education – backfill funding losses from local sources to maintain
current level
of
preschool
classes
($0.8
million)
Post‐Secondary Readiness
Maintain funding (ARRA) for Credit Recovery/APEX and Student Engagement Centers ($1.0
million)
Provide matching
funding
for
Athletics
&
Activities
expansion
(2010
grant)
($0.5
million)
Parent and Community Engagement
Provide funding to replace lost grant funding for Parent Engagement ($1 million)
Increase funding for Multi‐Cultural Outreach ($0.2 million)
1/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 27/29
October November December January February March April May
FY11‐12 Budget Timeline
Planning PreparationSchool & Department
Level Budget
Development
Finalization
December –District
Internal ReviewJanuary ‐ Final
Budget
Decisions
Feb 4 & 11 ‐ Budget
Forms distributed
May – Proposed
Budget
June ‐ Adopted
Budget
• January
– Present SBB overview and recommendations on school and support services budgets (1/18)
–
Board of
Education
adopts
amendments
to
FY10
‐11
budget
(1/20)
– Confirm budget targets and distribute to schools and departments (2/4)
• February: Governor to present proposed state budget to legislature
• March: State Revenue Forecast (3/20)
• May:
Present preliminary
2011
‐12
budget
summary
• June – Board of Education adopts 2011‐12 budget
Feb 7 – 18
One‐on‐one with
Principals
Feb 14
– Mar
11
One‐on‐one with
Dept Mgrs
October – December
Prioritization Process to
including Budget Task
Force
April 4 – 22
Budget Reviews
1/18/11
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 28/29
Appendix
1/17/2011 Denver Public Schools Internal Use Only 28
S f G l F d SBB
8/8/2019 4.01 - 2011-12 Budget Recommendation
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/401-2011-12-budget-recommendation 29/29
Summary of General Fund SBB
Changes
29
ALLOCATION FY10‐11 PROPOSED FY11‐12 NOTES
Base Per Pupil (Includes Previous Instructional
Allocation $193pp)$3,528 $3,931
Includes recommended 2% increase and all other
formula changes
Supplemental Base for Center Programs NONE
$ Per Center Program per K‐12 (K=.5)
ES ‐ $12
K8 ‐ $12
MS ‐ $13
6‐12
‐$13
HS/Alt ‐ $11
Previously included as part of PSN staffing
allocation (below)
PSN (Student Service Days) Staffing Allocation
$106‐$119 (K‐12, K=.5)
$52‐$57 (Free Lunch grades 1‐12)
$11‐13 per center/per K‐12 (K=.5)
Reallocated to Base and FRL weight
No specific PSN allocation ‐
$106‐$119 (K‐12, K=.5) included in Base (above),
$52‐$57 (Free Lunch grades 1‐12) added to Free
and Reduced Lunch Supplemental Funds
Allocation (below)
$11‐13 per center/per K‐12 (K=.5) included in
Supplemental Base for Center Programs (above)
Mild Moderate Staffing Allocation
$334 for FRL Students
$223 for non‐FRL students
Minimum FTEs required
Reallocated to Base and FRL weight
No specific MM staffing allocation –
FRL is a standalone allocation (below)
Non‐FRL students funded as part of SBB Base (All
K‐12, K=.5)
Free Lunch / Free and Reduced Lunch Supp
Funds
$268 for Elementary FREE lunch only (K‐12, K=.5)
$303 for Secondary FREE lunch only (K‐12, K=.5)
$449 for Elementary Free ANDREDUCED lunch (K‐12 @ 1.00)
$484 for Secondary Free ANDREDUCED lunch (K‐12 @ 1.00)Includes recommended increase of $25 per pupil
Gifted & Talented Per Pupil $95 $120
Targeted Interventions $100,000 for lowest performing $100,000 for lowest performing
Performance NONE
$65 per student ‐ SPF Blue
$95 per student for growth to Orange
$100 per student for growth to Yellow
$105 per student for growth to Green
$115 per student for growth to Blue
Extra Allocations (IB, Montessori, Arts) $2.3 million (Total) ‐ Not a per pupil allocation
This funding will be added to the district class size relief pool, school
needs will be addressed through that process ; no reduction in
overall funding
Small School Factor $854,000 (Total) ‐ Not a per pupil allocation
This funding will
be
added
to
the
district
class
size
relief
pool,
school
needs will be addressed through that process ; no reduction in
overall funding
1/18/11