Public School Funding Question

quote:

---

wouldn't that mean the school district has more money per student since they are receiving the same amount of funding but with less kids to educate

---

Yes. And it doesn't make a lick of difference.

quote:

---

If more and more kids are opting the private or Catholic school route yet still paying EBR school property taxes, wouldn't that mean the school district has more money per student since they are receiving the same amount of funding but with less kids to educate?

---

Is this actually true?

quote:

---

Is this actually true?

---

I don't think its supposed to be true, but I think that there is evidence that it is.

quote:

---

Is this actually true?

---

Nope. Schools receive public funding based on the number of students enrolled. They don't get a surplus from a lower enrollment, they get less funding.

quote:

---

It’s math

---

LOL - you believe the government understands math

quote:

---

It’s math. If all the kids currently in Catholic schools enrolled in public schools tomorrow, the funding from the parish would be diluted per child compared to what it is today.

---

It's math, but not how the policy works. In your scenario, the public funding would have to increase the overall pot via raised taxes.

Or y'know, breaking off to make another ISD...

quote:

---

I live in EBR parish. I have two kids in Catholic school, but I am still paying EBR property taxes for the public school system. For the record, I am not complaining about funding public schools. Every kid deserves the opportunity to receive a decent education. The part I'm hung up on is how that funding is dispersed. If more and more kids are opting the private or Catholic school route yet still paying EBR school property taxes, wouldn't that mean the school district has more money per student since they are receiving the same amount of funding but with less kids to educate? I'd imagine there is some state or federal funding tied to student count, but I'm really not sure how much of that factors into total school funding.

---

It's true and not true at the same time. Let me explain:

Schools receive a per pupil alotment through the Minimum Foundation Program (MFP). So as students exit the system there are less funds. To your point though with less students the district should be able to respond to the lesser number of students and reconstitute itself so that it reflects the smaller number of students. Unfortunately, while this sounds logical/rational you have to remember that the district is controlled by the board, albeit run by the Superintendent. I spoke recently to an former EBR central office employee who stated that for many of the past few years the district has lost 1200 students a year. That's equal to a 5A high school. THere's simply no way that a district can reconstitute itself that quickly to keep up with that and boards are notorious for not closing schools because the public hates it. So, yes it should be cheaper to educate less kids but boards are slow to reduce costs...

I don't know all the details but i work at a catholic school in Georgia and our school receives some money from the public school systems that our kids would attend. They call them title funds

quote:

---

People really just be saying shite they think is true without spending 10 seconds to look up how it actually works.

---

Of the fact that the population of Baton Rouge isn’t stagnant

quote:

---

wouldn't that mean the school district has more money per student since they are receiving the same amount of funding but with less kids to educate

---

A lot of the cost are fixed, if you have 5 less students in each class, you are still going to have the same number of bus routes, the same number of teachers, the electric bill isn't going to be lower. Textbooks usually come in a class set.

The lunch program is federally run, so really no savings there.