GPPSS Financial Benchmarking Report and Analysis - 2012

2012
Grosse Pointe Public School System

Financial Benchmark Report Analysis
Brendan Walsh, Treasurer, Grosse Pointe

Public School System Board of Education
6/4/2012
Contents
Disclaimer ......................................................................................................................................................................3
Financial Benchmark Analysis Overview .....................................................................................................................4
General Construct of Benchmark Report .................................................................................................................5
Pupil Count .................................................................................................................................................................6
Pupil to Teacher Ratio .................................................................................................................................................6
Average Teacher Salary ................................................................................................................................................7
Total Instructional Salaries ...........................................................................................................................................7
General Fund Revenue ................................................................................................................................................7
Local .......................................................................................................................................................................8
State ........................................................................................................................................................................8
Total General Fund Operating Expenditure ................................................................................................................8
Instructional Expenditures ...........................................................................................................................................9
Basic Instruction Expense .......................................................................................................................................9
Added Needs Instruction Expense ..........................................................................................................................9
Support Services Expenses ....................................................................................................................................... 10
Instructional Support Expense.............................................................................................................................. 10
Business and Administration Expense .................................................................................................................. 10
Operations and Maintenance Expense .................................................................................................................. 10
Transportation Expense ....................................................................................................................................... 10
Summary .................................................................................................................................................................. 10
Glossary of Terms .................................................................................................................................................... 11
General Fund ................................................................................................................................................... 11
Revenue ................................................................................................................................................................ 11
Local ................................................................................................................................................................ 11
State ................................................................................................................................................................. 11
Expenditures ........................................................................................................................................................ 12
Instruction ........................................................................................................................................................ 12
Basic Programs ................................................................................................................................................. 12
Added Needs .................................................................................................................................................... 12
Total Instructional Expenditure ........................................................................................................................ 12
Support Services ............................................................................................................................................... 12
Instructional Support ........................................................................................................................................ 12
Business and Administration ............................................................................................................................. 12
Operations and Maintenance ............................................................................................................................ 12

Total Support Services ...................................................................................................................................... 12
Other Terms ......................................................................................................................................................... 12
Average Salary Per Teacher ............................................................................................................................... 12
Fall Pupil Count ................................................................................................................................................ 12
Taxable Value Per State Aid Member ................................................................................................................ 13
Pupil Teacher Ratio .......................................................................................................................................... 13
Per Pupil ........................................................................................................................................................... 13

Disclaimer
This analysis was conducted, written and executed solely by myself DWQRRQHVGLUHFWLRQEXWP\RZQUHODWHGWRP\GXWLHVas the
Treasurer of the Grosse Pointe Public School System Board of Education. It therefore reflects my opinion alone and not that of
the district, any of its employees, the Board of Education, or any of its individual members.
Financial Benchmark Analysis Overview

The Grosse Pointe Public School System (GPPSS) began issuing early versions of GPPSS Financial
Benchmarking Report, accessible here, were issued in 2006 at a time when it was clear the financial
conditions of Michigan public schools was going to be a major challenge. It began an effort to benchmark
the revenue and expense patterns of the GPPSS against other districts in the state of Michigan to whom a
comparison might be instructive to our own financial strategy.
The report now spans an eight year period from Fiscal Year 2003-4 through 2010-11. The benchmark
districts are a group of fourteen Michigan public schools that have either geographic or other demographic
similarities to the Grosse Pointe Public School System. The geographic distribution of the fourteen districts
is as follows:
Four are in Wayne County (Grosse Pointe, Plymouth-Canton, Northville, and Grosse Ile)
Six are in Oakland County (Birmingham, Bloomfield Hills, Farmington Hills, Rochester, Troy, and
West Bloomfield)
7ZRDUHLQZHVWHUQ0LFKLJDQV.HQW&RXQW\(DVW*UDQG5DSLGVDQG)RUHVW+LOOV
One each in Macomb County (Chippewa Valley) and Washtenaw County (Ann Arbor)
7KHUHSRUWVVRXUFHGDWDLVWKH0LFKLJDQ'HSDUWPHQWRI(GXFDWLRQV%XOOHWLQ 0LFKLJDQ3XEOLF6FKRRO
Districts Ranked E\6HOHFW)LQDQFLDO'DWD7KHHDUOLHVWYHUVLRQVRI%XOOHWLQwere published in 1995,
IROORZLQJWKHSDVVDJHRI0LFKLJDQVODQGPDUNVFKRROIXQGLQJUHIRUP3URSRVDO$7KHVLJQLILFDQFHRIWKLV
event relative to this report is that the State, as opposed to the local districts, became the primary
determinant of K-12 education revenue and investment policy.
Also significant to Proposal A and this report, funding for Michigan public schools converted to a per pupil
model with not all school districts receiving equal per pupil funding. The Bulletin 1014, and this report,
therefore represents revenue and expense patterns in key district operational categories over the course of
time on a per pupil basis.
The inequality of revenue per pupil makes benchmark comparison an interesting exercise. Not surprisingly,
districts generally spend what they are given and more recently more than what they are given. In 2010-11
the average of the benchmark districts in this report consumes 96% of the General Fund revenue per pupil
on operating expenses. The statewide average is even higher at 104%.
The average revenue per pupil of this benchmark group was $10,862 in 2010-11 while the state average was
$9,202, indication that this benchmark group contains some of the highest revenue districts in the state. But
even among this benchmark group the lowest revenue district, Chippewa Valley Schools, received $6,400
OHVVSHUSXSLOWKDQWKHEHQFKPDUNJURXSVKLJKHVWVSHQGLQJGLVWULFW%ORRPILeld Hills, who receives 76%
more revenue per pupil.
This disparity in per pupil revenue introduces some interesting questions that affected the construct of this
report. RIPRVWVFKRROGLVWULFWVH[SHQVHVDUHKXPDQUHVRXUFHUHODWHGWhat then determines market
value of these resources? The macro conditions of the public education market or the financial capacity of
the local district?
For this reason, this benchmark report represents expense categories in both a cost per pupil as well as a
percentagHRIWKHGLVWULFWVUHYHQXHSHUSXSLO7KLVDOORZVXVWRDEVWUDFWWKHGLIIHUHQFHVLQUHYHQXHSHUSXSLO
and evaluate investment strategy on a proportional basis. The analysis below will provide greater detail.
In such a data analysis, there are no absolute answers. For example, being a high or low spender
(proportionally or in dollars) is not in itself an indication of effective or poor financial management.
However, benchmark comparisons as well as trend over time are informative to root causes of financial
distress.
As the report indicates, there is significant variance in some of the expense categories. In times such as now
when expense control is paramount to financial survival, cross referencing districts that are delivering quality
services at a lower cost can be a valuable exercise.
This analysis accompanies the benchmark report itself and offers commentary in each category. Please refer
to the glossary for a description of each category, excerpts from the Bulletin 1014 report itself.
General Construct of Benchmark Report

The benchmark report contains demographic data including student enrollment (as measured by Fall Pupil Count),
pupil to teacher ratio, Homestead Sate Equalized Value per pupil, average teacher salary, and instructional salary
expense per pupil. Then, generally, a variety of financial data, all represented on a per pupil basis, for revenue and
expenses.
The expenses are categorized into two major sub-categories, Instructional and Support Services, that both have their
own sub-categories. Here is the general construct of the Expense categories:
Instructional Expenses
Basic Instruction
Added Needs Instruction
Support Services
Instructional Support
Business and Administration
Operations and Maintenance
Transportation
The report contains a breakout of each and then an aggregation of Total Instructional Expense and Total Support
Services. Those totals comprehend the categories delineated in the table above. This hierarchy will provide an
informative overall context for the report. A summary here may be helpful:
2010-11 Expenditures in Major Expense Categories

(as a percentage of revenue per pupil)
GPPSS
Benchmark Group
Average
Statewide
Average
Total Instruction
Basic Instruction
Added Needs Instruction
67%
60%
62%
Total Support Services

Instructional Support
Business and Administration
Operations and Maintenance
Transportation
33%
Grand Total
100%
54%
13%
50%
10%
36%
12%
11%
10%
1%
47%
14%
39%
12%
12%
9%
4%
96%
11%
14%
10%
5%
101%
The remainder of this analysis will treat these sub-categories in greater detail.
Pupil Count
This category is of great significance since revenue for Michigan K-12 schools, student enrollment, along
with revenue per pupil, is the single biggest determinant of revenue. The State of Michigan pupil count has
dropped a staggering 9% from 2003-4 to 2010-,QWKLVVDPHWLPHWKLVUHSRUWVEHQFKPDUNJURXSKDV
seen its average enrollment increase 3.3%, but in the same period GPPSS enrollment is down 5.9%. In this
UHVSHFW*3366HQUROOPHQWPRUHFORVHO\UHVHPEOHVWKHVWDWHVRYHUDOOSattern than the benchmark group
not as favorable as the benchmark group, but more favorable than statewide trend.
$YDULHW\RIIDFWRUVLQIOXHQFHVWXGHQWHQUROOPHQWZLWKSDUWLFLSDWLRQLQWKHVWDWHV School of Choice program
EHLQJWKHPRVWVLJQLILFDQW7KHGLVWULFWVZLWKWKHODUJHVWVWXGHQWSRSXODWLRQJURZWKRYHUWKLVUHSRUWVWLPH
period, Chippewa Valley and Forest Hills, both participate in School of Choice. Others who do not, such as
GPPSS (-5.9%) and Bloomfield Hills (-8.3%), are seeing larger enrollment declines.
2IFRXUVHLWVQRWDVVLPSOHDV6FKRRORI&KRLFHSDUWLFLSDWLRQHLWKHU%LUPLQJKDP6FKRROVLVQRWD6FKRRORI
Choice district (other than allowing non-resident staff members to send their children to their schools) and
their enrollment is up 4.4% over the period of this report. This is indication that strategies beyond School of
Choice can influence enrollment.
,QWKH*3366FDVH\HDURYHU\HDUHQUROOPHQWKDVGHFOLQHGLQILYHRIWKHeight years in this report; with the
best indication in 2010-11 that enrollment may be stabilizing and more clearly resembling the average of the
benchmark districts.
Enrollment is a major factor in nearly all of the other benchmark categories. Recall that all the data points in
the report are represented on a per pupil basis. This is very relevant to the analysis since scaling expenses to
per pupil revenue is critical to financial solvency.
Pupil to Teacher Ratio

This data point is not analogous to class size, but is rather a measure of the volume of students supported
per teacher. If a district chooses to raise class size, its ratio would of course increase. Other changes, such as
districts offering fewer course periods in middle or high school, also yields a higher ratio, but not necessarily
a higher class size.
This latter example is the main reason the GPPSS ratio increased from 2006 to 2008, as the middle school
schedule was reduced from offering seven periods to six. The same is probably true of Birmingham Schools
and Farmington Schools move to trimester schedules over the last three years.
,QWKH*3366FDVHWKDWLQFUHDVHRIDIHZ\HDUVDJRKDVEHHQUHGXFHGEXWQRWWROHYHOV:KDWVPRUH
significant is that GPPSS has reduced our ratio of pupils to teacher, or held steady, in the last few years
while the benchmark districts have significantly increased their ratios, with an average of a 5.4% increase for
WKHEHQFKPDUNDYHUDJHZKLOH*3366VZDVIODW
The pattern is undeniable among the benchmark districts and across the state, where the ratio has increased
from 2003-VUDWLRRIWRODVW\HDU'istricts are shedding teachers at a rate greater than they are losing
student enrollment. The question is at what point does this strategy not do enough to offset rising per pupil
costs? Or diminish service offerings?
*3366UDWLRLVORZHUWKDQWKHEHQFKPDUNJURXSDQGORZHUWKDQWKHVWDWHZLde average. This

means we have fewer students aligned with teachers. This comes at a significant cost, as will be seen by the
instructional expenditure ratios.
Average Teacher Salary

These figures comprehend only direct salary and not fringe benefits and provide a good segue from Pupil to
Teacher ratio. It is extremely difficult to maintain favorable Pupil to Teacher ratios and higher than average
teacher salaries, which is precisely the GPPSS position. We averaged the fifth highest salaries in the state last
year and among the lowest Pupil to Teacher ratios in the state, particularly among like-sized districts.
Statewide average teacher salaries have increased 18% in the time of this report and the benchmark average
has increased 16.7%. This does not necessarily mean actual wages have increased by this rate. The loss of
students, and teachers that come with that loss, is a major factor in the average since layoffs cause districts
to reduce the lowest wage teachers disproportionally, which will drive the average up. Michigan public
school districts employs 15% (10,198) fewer teachers now than in 2003-4.
Retirement incentives (either at the state or local level) can counter this effect, which is why a reduction in
average teacher salary cannot be interpreted as a true wage reduction. Either way, it serves a as a reasonable
barometer of teacher wages.
Total Instructional Salaries

This category essentially comprehends both Pupil to Teacher ratio and average teacher salary to calculate
Total Instructional salaries per pupil. Not surprisingly given the previous metrics, the GPPSS ranks first
among the benchmark districts despite ranking fifth in revenue per pupil. Even the abstraction of the
difference in revenue per pupil yields the GPPSS as the top ranking benchmark district, with 67% of
revenue per pupil directed to Instructional Salaries.
If the GPPSS were to invest in Instructional Salaries at a proportion equal to average of the benchmark
district, the resulting reduction on a per pupil basis would be $460. This increased relative expenditure is a
function of lower student to teacher ratios and higher average teacher salaries. One or both of those metrics
would have to move in order to bring about this cost reduction.
General Fund Revenue

This report is limited to General Fund revenues and expenses limited to instructional and operating
expenses and those supporting services that enable or support instruction. Building and site related revenue
sources, such as voted bonds and sinking funds, are not comprehended in these figures.
The State of Michigan funds public schools on a per pupil basis, establishing a Foundation Allowance
annually that sets the revenues a school district will receive per pupil. Local districts have no direct say in
operating revenue per pupil.
2IVLJQLILFDQFHLQWKLV\HDUVUHSRUWLVWKHDSSHDUDQFHRIDVLJQLILFDQWSHUSXSLOUHYHQXHLQFUHDVHIURP10. In actuality there was no increase, but the likely explanation is the flow of federal revenue, in the form of
ARRA and other stop-gap funding used to stabilize public school budgets nationally. As this money was
consumed the state revenues backfilled it.
This report shows a 4% reduction in revenue per pupil from just three years ago. This is rate is four times
greater than the benchmark groups loss in the same time. Even more startling in comparison is the
statewide average shows an increase of 4%. This reflects ongoing pressure to decrease the per pupil funding
disparity across the state, a trend that is gaining steam even now as the 2012-13 school aid bill.
In 1995, the first year under Proposal A, the GPPSS ranked 27th among all state school systems in revenue
per pupil. In 2010-11 we had dropped to 76th. This is an informative trend to identify for higher revenue
districts like the GPPSS. Inability to maintain proportional scale in expenditures is unworkable financially.
Local
7KH*3366LVRQHRIDOLPLWHGQXPEHURI+ROG+DUPOHVVGLVWULFWVLQWKHVWDWHWKDWDUHDOORZHGXQGHU3URSRVDO$
to levy a state prescribed tax to yield a fixed amount of revenue per pupil. In our case, just under 30% of our total
operating revenue per pupil is derived from locally levied property taxes. This revenue is significant to our operations,
EXWWKHGDWDVKRZVWKDWPDQ\OLNH GLVWULFWVLQWKHEHQFKPDUNJURXSGHULYHHYHQJUHDWHUSURSRUWLRQVRIUHYHQXH
locally. Five of the fourteen benchmark districts levy greater local taxes per pupil than the GPPSS.
One possible explanation for this is that the GPPSS community has, relatively, a very low commercial property
baseline. Proposal A, particularly for Hold Harmless districts, increases the local tax burden as non-homestead
property values increase. Ann Arbor is a good example, as their local revenue has increased while their state revenue
has declined.
State
State revenues represent about two-thirds of the GPPSS operating revenue. We enjoy significant
incremental revenue from the state in comparison to both the benchmark group and the statewide average.
But as above, we have experienced an even greater decline in ranking among Michigan districts, dropping
from 12th in the state in 1995 to 84th in 2010-11.
Total General Fund Operating Expenditure

This totals all the sub-categories referenced in the introduction. A word of caution is needed, however. The total
General Fund operating expenditure (to which the state refers to as COE) does not represent all General Fund
expenditures. On a statewide basis, GLVWULFWVDYHUDJHSHUSXSLORI2WKHU([SHQVHVVRXUFHGIURPWKH*HQHUDO
)XQGQRWDFFRXQWHGIRULQWKHPDMRUH[SHQVHFDWHJRULHVLQWKLVUHSRUW,QWKH*3366FDVHWKHVXPLVHYHQJUHDWHUDW
$393 per pupil. Contributing to this difference could be such expenses as food services, athletics, and debt service.
This is important to note because, as the data shows, for many years and for certain schools, the report reflects that
they spend less than 100% of their General Fund revenue per pupil. This may indeed be the case, but not likely to the
degree the proportional expense may lead a reader to conclude. By the same token, a district reflecting a COE
proportional expenditure over 100% may not necessarily be operating at a deficit since they may have other revenue
sources not reflected in this report. That is why it is best to use this report more as a barometer with a focus on trend
and relative values and comparisons.
Seen this way, the trend of increased proportional expenditure of General Fund revenues is very clear, with particular
distress from 2007 through 2010 among both the benchmark districts and on the statewide level. Districts are clearly
operating with far less margin for financial error and many that have the means are tapping General Fund equity
reserves to balance budgets.
The analysis of the sub-categories will more clearly pinpoint the source of this rising proportional expense.
Instructional Expenditures
This category comprehends Basic, generally meaning general education student instruction, and Added Needs,
generally referring to special needs student instruction.
Basic Instruction Expense

The predominance of this cost is in teachers. The earlier analysis of average teacher salary and pupil to teacher ratio
then are tightly correlated with this expense. With very high relative salary cost and very low pupil to teacher ratio, it is
no surprise that the GPPSS is second only to Bloomfield Hills in Basic Instruction expense per pupil among the
benchmark groups.
This is where proportion is so relevant. Bloomfield Hills receives 27% more revenue per pupil than the GPPSS. On a
proportional investment basis, the GPPSS expends 54% of 2010-11 revenues while Bloomfield Hills expends 45%.
Revenue per pupil alone does not account for all differenceV7KH*3366UHYHQXHLVVLJQLILFDQWO\KLJKHUWKDQERWK
Rochester and Northville schools, but Rochester expends about the same proportion as Bloomfield Hills and
Northville expends proportionally about what the GPPSS does.
Referencing teacher salaries and pupil to teacher ratios is informative here. Bloomfield Hills is the only benchmark
district with a lower pupil to teacher ratio than the GPPSS, but their average teacher salary is 13% lower than the
*3366Rochester pays their teachers about equal to Bloomfield Hills, but while Bloomfield has a pupil to teacher
UDWLRRI5RFKHVWHUVLV 33% higher than Bloomfield Hills.
Districts with average teacher salaries nearing the GPPSS all have pupil to teacher ratios much higher than ours.
Chippewa Valley WHDFKHUVDODULHVDUHORZHUEXWWKHLUSXSLOWRWHDFKHUUDWLRLVWR*3366%RWKPRGHOV\LHOGD
nearly identical Basic Instruction proportional expense, 53% for Chippewa Valley and 54% for GPPSS.
,QWKHILQDODQDO\VLVWKH*3366SURSRUWLRQDOLQYHVtment in Basic Instruction is generally rising. While other districts
have either curbed teacher salary costs and/or increased pupil to teacher ratios, the GPPSS has done so to a lesser
extent.
Added Needs Instruction Expense

This category has many characteristics and contributing factors consistent with Basic Instruction. As a result, the
GPPSS ranks first among all benchmark districts in both dollars invested per pupil and proportional investment. In
trend, the rise in this cost is far greater, however than Basic Instruction.
In the eight years of this report, Basic Instruction per pupil costs in the GPPSS have risen 11% while Added Needs
Instruction has risen 39%. 7KHEHQFKPDUNJURXSVDYHUDJHKDVULVHQLQWKDWWLPHDQGWKHVWDWHDYHUDJHLVXSD
relatLYHO\PXFKORZHU,VRODWLQJMXVWRQHGLVWULFWLQFRPSDULVRQ1RUWKYLOOHLVLQIRUPDWLYH7KH*3366DYHUDJH
WHDFKHUVDODU\LVKLJKHUWKDQ1RUWKYLOOHV\HWWKHLU$GGHG1HHGV,QVWUXFWLRQH[SHQVHLVORZHUWKDQWKH
GPPSS.
As opposed to Basic Instruction, ratios of pupils to teachers in special education is much more prescriptive, a factor
that should make relative comparisons easier. This is a category that clearly requires more specific analysis and
perhaps even visits to some benchmark districts to evaluate if their service delivery model varies significantly, and with
similar effect, as that in the GPPSS.
Support Services Expenses

Instructional Support Expense
While not categorized directly as student instruction, this expense category is the most closely associated with it
relative to the other Support Services categories. This category includes, but is not limited to, speech therapists,
guidance counselors, school nurses, and curriculum specialists. A majority of these titles are compensated
the same as teachers, so much of the analysis is affected by this factor.
2QWKLVEDVLVDORQHJLYHQWKDWWKH*3366SURSRUWLRQDOLQYHVWPHQWLQWKLVFDWHJRU\LVDERXWHTXDOWRWKHEHQFKPDUN
DYHUDJHLWVUHDVRQDEOHWRFRQFOXGHVWDIILQJLVOLJKWHUKHUHWKDQLn the benchmark districts. As with other benchmark
categories, the variance here is significant, with other districts investing, in some cases, half that of the GPPSS (in
*URVVH,OHVFDVHRU0% more (LQ$QQ$UERUVFDVH More in depth analysis and benchmarking of service offerings
would be helpful here.
Business and Administration Expense

This is the first category that reflects a significantly lower proportional investment by the GPPSS as compared to both
the benchmark districts and the state average. Given the proportionally higher investment in Instructional Expense, it
only stands to reason this would be the case.
Comprehending all building and central office administrative and business related costs, the GPPSS proportional
expense here is higher than a few years ago, but growing at a rate lower than the benchmark and state average. As a
reminder, this is represented on a per pupil basis. Given that these costs are less likely to scale with enrollment, and
given the GPPSS declining enrollment, this is a good example of cost containment.
Operations and Maintenance Expense

If Business and Administration is an example of cost containment, this category reflects operating cost reduction $333 per pupil lower than in 2003-4. Again, factoring declining enrollment, this is significantly difficult to accomplish
and worthy of some caution to ensure the proper investments are being made.
Like all the others, many factors influence this expense. One example is the rising adoption of sinking and site
building funds. One of the stated purposes of the local adoption of the Sinking Fund, which has yielded as much as $3
million annually, was to reduce burden on the General Fund for such expenses. This is likely a significant factor in this
benchmark category, as many other districts have taken a similar path.
Transportation Expense
With no general education student bus expenses, the GPPSS has long enjoyed a massive cost savings from our
neighborhood school organizational structure. This translates into a $324 per pupil cost benefit relative to the
benchmark districts and $352 per pupil lower than the state average. This structural cost advantage accounts for
overall proportional difference in Support Services expense when comparing the GPPSS to the benchmark districts,
but is only about half of the difference relative to the statewide comparison.
Summary
Again, as a note of caution, the figures in the benchmark report alone are not necessarily indicative of a good or poor
condition, but are best used to draw attention to particular areas to optimize services and maintain financial stability.
As a result, benchmarking draws attention to areas that are most out of skew with similar organizations. With this in
mind, the areas where the GPPSS is most out of skew are summarized here:
10
1. Enrollment: Relative to the benchmark group, the GPPSS has lost student enrollment at a rate almost
double. As noted in the analysis, School of Choice programs are a factor, but other districts have stabilized or
increased enrollment without resorting to open enrollment.
2. Pupil to Teacher Ratio: Many will conclude lower ratios are better, but we are out of skew relative to the
overall trend for of higher ratios. This is not a call for increasing the ratio, but merely a factor that requires
attention relative to salary expenses.
3. Average Teacher Salary: The GPPSS variance to the benchmark average is not as high as it has been in the
last several years, but still significantly higher and 5th highest in the state. Maintaining high salaries and low
pupil to teacher ratios is a problematic trend to reconcile.
4. Instructional Salaries per Pupil: A byproduct of Pupil to Teacher Ratio and Average Teacher Salary, the
GPPSS premium over the benchmark districts is at its highest point in the 8 years covered in this report.
5. Revenue per Pupil: The contraction of the per pupil funding gap between the highest and lowest revenue
districts is a clear trend that should not be expected to abate.
6. Basic Instruction7KHLQYHVWPHQWLQWKLVFRUHVHUYLFHDUHDUHIOHFWVWKHGLVWULFWVYDOXHVEXWILQDQFLDOUHDOLWLHV
require attention. With the 34th highest investment per pupil in the state here, we are spending proportionally
much higher than our revenue position, which is 84th in the state.
7. Added Needs Instruction: This is the area where the district is most adversely out of skew with other
benchmarks. It is a rapidly growing expense and higher in both absolute and relative terms even accounting
for revenue advantages. This deserves prioritized attention.
8. Instructional Support:LWKVLPLODUFRVWFKDUDFWHULVWLFVDV,QVWUXFWLRQWKHGLVWULFWVUHODWLYHO\DYHUDJH
position here may reflect significant service structure differences from like districts. This deserves analysis.
Glossary of Terms
This section contains terms used in the Bulletin 1014, together with such additional terms as may be helpful
in promoting a common understanding of school financial accounting and reporting procedures. (Major,
Function, and Object Codes are further defined in the Michigan Public School Accounting Manual found on the
Michigan Department of Education website at:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/appendix_33974_7.pdf)
General FundThe fund used to record all operating revenue and expenditures of the district pertaining to
education except school food service, athletics, certain special education center programs, certain large noninstructional programs, purchase of sites, construction of buildings, and the retirement of bonded debt.
Revenue
Local (Major Class Codes 1xx, 2xx, 51x, 52x)Revenue produced within the school district boundaries
for operating the schools and available to the district in the amount produced. The major source of local
revenue in most districts is the general property tax levy. (Note: To avoid counting the same revenue
multiple times; Statewide and Groupings reports DO NOT INCLUDE local revenue paid to another
Michigan public school (Major Class Code 51x.)
State (Major Class Codes 3xx) Revenues received or to be received from the State of Michigan which
are appropriated by the state out of state levied funds. The major source of state revenue in most districts is
the State School Aid foundation allowance. (Note: To avoid counting the same revenue multiple times;
Statewide and Groupings reports DO NOT INCLUDE state revenue paid to another Michigan public
school (Major Class Code 317 and 318.)
11
Expenditures
Instruction(Function Codes 1xx)- The cost of activities dealing directly with the teaching of students in
the classroom or in a classroom situation.

Basic Programs (Function Codes 11x) The classroom costs related to basic instructional programs. This
includes pre-school, elementary, middle and high school. These expenditures do not include capital outlay.
The denominator for this category includes k-12 and special education pupils.
Added Needs (Function Codes 12x) The classroom costs of added needs instructional programs offered
by the school. This includes special education, compensatory education, and vocational education. These
expenditures do not include capital outlay. The denominator for this category includes k-12 and special
education pupils.
Total Instructional Expenditure (Function Codes 1xx) The total basic, added needs, and adult education
classroom instructional costs. These expenditures do not include capital outlay.

Support Services(Function Codes 2xx) - The cost of activities which provide administrative, technical,
and logistical support to facilitate and enhance instruction.
Instructional Support (Function Codes 21x and 22x)The costs of pupil support services and
instructional staff support services. These include, but are not limited to, speech therapists, guidance
counselors, school nurses, and curriculum specialists. These expenditures do not include capital outlay.
Business and Administration (Function Codes 23x,24x,25x,28x,29x,and 45x)The total cost of general
administration, school administration, business services, central services, and other support services. Noncapital facilities acquisition costs are included in this total. For fiscal year 1999-2000 and following, the
source data breaks out the facility acquisition costs from other business services. These expenditures do not
include capital outlay.
Operations and Maintenance (Function Codes 26x)The cost of those activities concerned with keeping
the physical plant open, comfortable, and safe for use.

These expenditures do not include capital outlay.
Total Support Services (Function Codes 2xx, 45x)The total cost of support services. In addition to
instructional support, business and administration, and operations and maintenance, the total includes
transportation services. These expenditures do not include capital outlay.
Other Terms
Average Salary Per TeacherA heading under which are gathered the full-time and prorated portions of
regular teachers' salaries for teaching services provided to pupils. The computation is made by dividing the
total salaries of certified teaching staff charged to Function Code 111, 112, 113 Basic Programs, by the
corresponding teacher FTE reported in the Registry of Educational Personnel (REP) for the same fiscal
year.
Fall Pupil CountThe number of pupils legally enrolled and reported to the Center for Educational
Performance and Information on the fall submission of the Single Record Student Database (SRSD). The
count includes prorated portions of the instructional time spent by private school pupils in the public school
district and all four adult education participant counts for the fiscal year.
12
Taxable Value Per State Aid Member (Homestead and Non-Homestead)The figure represents a
calculation made by dividing the ad valorem taxable value of real and personal property in the district (as
reported on the DS4410) by the Fall Pupil Count.
Pupil Teacher RatioCalculated by dividing the Fall Pupil Count excluding adult education participants by
the total K-12 teachers.
Per PupilThe total revenue or expenditure amount was divided by the Fall Pupil Count of the school
district to arrive at the per pupil amount.
13

Financial Benchmarking Report
(updated with 2010-11 Fiscal Year Data)
STUDENT ENROLLMENT AND TEACHER RATIO
Pupil Count
2003-4
ANN ARBOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS

BIRMINGHAM CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
BLOOMFIELD HILLS SCHOOL DISTRICT
CHIPPEWA VALLEY SCHOOLS
EAST GRAND RAPIDS PUBLIC SCHOOLS
FARMINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT
FOREST HILLS PUBLIC SCHOOLS
GROSSE ILE TOWNSHIP SCHOOLS
GROSSE POINTE PUBLIC SCHOOLS
NORTHVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS
PLYMOUTH CANTON COMMUNITY SCHOOLS
ROCHESTER COMMUNITY SCHOOL DISTRICT
TROY PUBLIC SCHOOL DISTRICT
WEST BLOOMFIELD SCHOOL DISTRICT
BENCHMARK GROUP AVERAGE
MICHIGAN STATEWIDE AVERAGE
GPPSS Variance To Benchmark Avg. (Units)
GPPSS Variance to Benchmark Avg. (%)
GPPSS Variance to Statewide Avg. (%)
Year over Year Change - Benchmark Average
Year over Year Change - GPPSS
Year over Year Change - Statewide Average
Updated: June , 2012

All Data from Michigan Dept. of Education
16,720
7,911
5,954
13,988
2,877
12,524
8,989
2,022
8,915
6,356
17,695
14,423
12,121
6,949
9,818
2,331
-903
-9.2%
73.9%
Pupil : Teacher Ratio
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
16,948
8,028
6,027
14,428
2,896
12,497
9,466
1,975
8,965
6,680
18,113
14,568
12,158
6,997
9,982
2,267
-1,016
-10.2%
74.7%
1.7%
0.6%
-2.7%
16,954
8,069
5,950
14,845
2,993
12,525
9,817
2,017
8,888
6,963
18,510
14,671
12,102
7,019
10,094
2,229
-1,207
-12.0%
74.9%
1.1%
-0.9%
-1.7%
16,748
8,132
5,867
15,193
3,016
12,338
10,014
2,010
8,899
7,083
18,822
14,874
12,223
6,919
10,153
2,191
-1,254
-12.3%
75.4%
0.6%
0.1%
-1.7%
16,537
8,047
5,717
15,539
3,004
12,335
10,014
1,941
8,853
7,185
19,047
15,017
12,290
6,704
10,159
2,149
-1,306
-12.9%
75.7%
0.1%
-0.5%
-1.9%
16,492
8,080
5,570
15,736
2,972
12,213
10,086
1,875
8,561
7,237
19,135
14,990
12,272
6,913
10,152
2,101
-1,591
-15.7%
75.5%
-0.1%
-3.3%
-2.2%
2009-10
16,529
8,179
5,498
15,984
3,005
12,126
10,187
1,838
8,416
7,284
19,102
14,976
12,152
6,983
10,161
2,051
-1,745
-17.2%
75.6%
0.1%
-1.7%
-2.4%
Page 1 of 13
2010-11
2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
16,668
19
20
19
19
8,256
24
18
19
19
5,459
17
17
17
17
16,292
25
25
25
26
3,010
21
21
21
21
11,762
20
20
20
20
10,099
20
19
21
20
1,846
20
20
21
20
8,391
18
19
19
20
7,301
20
20
20
20
18,973
22
23
24
24
14,948
18
24
24
23
12,124
19
20
21
20
6,848
20
20
20
21
10,141
20.2
20.4
20.8
20.7
2,002
22.0
22.0
23.0
23.0
-1,750
-2.2
-1.4
-1.8
-0.7
-17.3% -11.0% -7.0% -8.6% -3.4%
76.1% -22.2% -15.8% -21.1% -15.0%
-0.2%
1.1%
1.7% -0.3%
-0.3%
5.6%
0.0%
5.3%
-2.4%
0.0%
4.5%
0.0%
2007-8
2008-9
20
20
19
20
16
17
26
26
21
24
21
21
20
20
20
20
21
20
21
21
24
25
23
23
20
21
20
20
20.9
21.3
23.0
22.0
0.1
-1.3
0.7% -6.0%
-9.5% -10.0%
0.7%
2.1%
5.0% -4.8%
0.0% -4.3%
2009-10
19
24
17
26
21
21
20
21
20
21
24
23
20
21
21.3
23.0
-1.3
-6.0%
-15.0%
0.0%
0.0%
4.5%
2010-11
21
25
18
26
22
23
21
23
20
24
24
24
21
22
22.4
23.0
-2.4
-10.8%
-15.0%
5.4%
0.0%
0.0%
Financial Benchmarking Report_2011.xlsx

AVERAGE TEACHER SALARIES AND INSTRUCTIONAL SALARIES PER PUPIL
Total Instructional
Average Teacher Salary
Salaries Per Pupil
2003-4


$63,212
$88,747
$63,768
$64,840
$56,266
$64,482
$57,093
$63,343
$66,799
$61,140
$58,336
$51,066
$70,249
$58,690
$63,431
$52,161
$3,368
5.0%
21.9%
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
2010-11
$66,303
$66,282
$66,268
$68,481
$59,255
$65,716
$57,621
$64,414
$69,348
$63,153
$62,441
$64,317
$75,092
$63,280
$65,141
$53,959
$4,207
6.1%
22.2%
2.7%
3.8%
3.4%
$67,346
$68,736
$72,371
$68,966
$60,416
$67,298
$58,993
$64,657
$77,843
$64,276
$63,281
$67,334
$71,651
$66,608
$67,127
$54,739
$10,716
13.8%
29.7%
3.0%
12.2%
1.4%
$66,624
$69,902
$73,352
$71,185
$60,594
$70,917
$60,732
$63,468
$79,284
$63,634
$64,749
$67,296
$72,219
$68,590
$68,039
$55,526
$11,245
14.2%
30.0%
1.4%
1.9%
1.4%
$70,758
$73,025
$74,340
$73,645
$63,387
$71,254
$61,595
$65,999
$85,985
$66,289
$65,443
$67,013
$73,652
$68,299
$70,049
$60,430
$15,936
18.5%
29.7%
3.0%
8.5%
8.8%
$72,761
$75,890
$72,966
$75,907
$65,614
$74,526
$64,460
$66,240
$85,828
$69,214
$66,644
$67,827
$76,256
$70,192
$71,738
$62,237
$14,091
16.4%
27.5%
2.4%
-0.2%
3.0%
$ 72,058
$ 96,215
$ 70,352
$ 76,665
$ 66,948
$ 76,086
$ 67,391
$ 76,258
$ 85,851
$ 72,500
$ 68,526
$ 69,184
$ 74,162
$ 73,186
$74,670
$63,024
$11,181
13.0%
26.6%
4.1%
0.0%
1.3%
$ 71,425
$ 94,703
$ 69,764
$ 73,519
$ 69,859
$ 78,677
$ 66,950
$ 72,493
$ 80,566
$ 75,070
$ 66,783
$ 69,584
$ 76,726
$ 64,824
$73,639
$61,560
$6,927
8.6%
23.6%
-1.4%
-6.2%
-2.3%
Page 2 of 13
2003-4
$5,693
$6,688
$6,127
$4,363
$4,493
$5,964
$5,232
$4,956
$6,536
$4,986
$4,440
$4,665
$6,107
$5,390
$5,403
$4,928
$1,133
21.0%
24.6%
2004-5
$5,934
$6,814
$6,445
$4,551
$4,763
$6,362
$5,457
$5,130
$6,430
$5,142
$4,582
$4,824
$6,767
$5,863
$5,647
$4,688
$783
13.9%
27.1%
4.5%
-1.6%
-4.9%
2005-6
$6,196
$6,968
$7,119
$4,679
$4,833
$6,680
$5,348
$5,215
$6,924
$5,335
$4,818
$5,012
$6,308
$6,063
$5,821
$4,784
$1,103
18.9%
30.9%
3.1%
7.7%
2.0%
2006-7
$6,428
$7,327
$7,554
$4,823
$4,968
$6,828
$5,424
$5,366
$7,114
$5,464
$5,047
$5,214
$6,405
$6,243
$6,015
$4,903
$1,099
18.3%
31.1%
3.3%
2.7%
2.5%
2007-8
$6,323
$7,130
$7,698
$4,655
$5,104
$6,457
$5,548
$5,431
$7,133
$5,297
$5,009
$5,341
$6,385
$6,280
$5,985
$4,962
$1,148
19.2%
30.4%
-0.5%
0.3%
1.2%
2008-9
$6,652
$7,087
$7,434
$4,926
$5,206
$6,869
$5,683
$5,884
$7,479
$5,625
$4,890
$5,547
$6,885
$6,333
$6,179
$5,119
$1,300
21.0%
31.6%
3.2%
4.9%
3.2%
2009-10
2010-11
$ 6,885
$ 7,202
$ 7,123
$ 5,142
$ 5,327
$ 6,969
$ 5,892
$ 6,153
$ 7,444
$ 5,833
$ 5,039
$ 5,649
$ 6,559
$ 6,316
$6,252
$5,180
$1,192
19.1%
30.4%
1.2%
-0.5%
1.2%
$ 6,256
$ 7,064
$ 6,993
$ 5,086
$ 5,433
$ 6,765
$ 5,941
$ 5,641
$ 7,448
$ 5,754
$ 5,102
$ 5,628
$ 6,641
$ 5,892
$6,117
$5,105
$1,331
21.8%
31.5%
-2.2%
0.1%
-1.4%

LOCAL AND STATE REVENUE DATA
General Fund Local
General Fund State
Revenue Per Pupil
Revenue Per Pupil
2003-4


$4,192
$6,529
$6,675
$1,050
$969
$4,451
$2,128
$1,447
$3,087
$1,371
$1,907
$2,294
$4,823
$2,160
$3,077
$1,720
$10
0.3%
44.3%
2004-5
$4,623
$6,598
$7,424
$1,089
$1,363
$4,575
$2,744
$1,489
$3,077
$1,383
$1,986
$2,466
$4,955
$2,285
$3,290
$1,857
-$213
-6.5%
39.6%
6.9%
-0.3%
8.0%
2005-6
$5,080
$6,914
$8,108
$1,239
$1,351
$4,654
$2,833
$1,458
$3,429
$1,404
$2,117
$2,418
$5,020
$2,268
$3,450
$1,974
-$21
-0.6%
42.4%
4.9%
11.4%
6.3%
2006-7
$5,549
$7,113
$8,733
$1,330
$1,419
$4,910
$3,016
$1,508
$3,716
$1,504
$2,216
$2,725
$5,117
$2,480
$3,667
$1,753
$49
1.3%
52.8%
6.3%
8.4%
-11.2%
2007-8
$6,506
$7,314
$9,090
$1,375
$1,469
$4,993
$3,147
$1,670
$3,716
$1,567
$2,306
$2,655
$5,028
$2,809
$3,832
$1,853
-$116
-3.0%
50.1%
4.5%
0.0%
5.7%
2008-9
2009-10
2010-11
$4,573
$6,588
$7,218
$1,124
$888
$4,718
$2,187
$1,471
$2,956
$1,294
$1,873
$1,788
$3,860
$1,966
$3,036
$1,713
-$80
-2.6%
42.1%
-20.8%
-20.5%
-7.6%
$ 4,833
$ 6,670
$ 7,279
$ 1,132
$ 895
$ 4,660
$ 1,995
$ 1,396
$ 2,912
$ 1,289
$ 1,935
$ 1,882
$ 3,833
$ 2,014
$3,052
$1,742
-$140
-4.6%
40.2%
0.5%
-1.5%
1.7%
$ 5,741
$ 6,737
$ 7,780
$ 1,321
$ 1,505
$ 4,660
$ 2,775
$ 1,951
$ 3,362
$ 1,487
$ 1,936
$ 2,531
$ 4,238
$ 2,519
$3,467
$1,720
-$105
-3.0%
48.8%
13.6%
15.5%
-1.3%
Page 3 of 13
2003-4
$5,484
$6,142
$6,488
$6,009
$7,040
$5,738
$6,205
$7,514
$7,524
$6,609
$5,653
$6,939
$5,172
$7,107
$6,402
$6,160
$1,122
17.5%
18.1%
2004-5
$4,973
$6,142
$6,355
$6,017
$7,079
$5,996
$6,142
$7,592
$7,685
$6,684
$5,661
$6,956
$5,230
$7,208
$6,409
$6,145
$1,276
19.9%
20.0%
0.1%
2.1%
-0.2%
2005-6
$5,330
$6,173
$6,612
$6,144
$7,190
$6,129
$6,293
$7,628
$7,723
$6,858
$5,857
$7,151
$5,362
$7,442
$6,564
$6,280
$1,159
17.7%
18.7%
2.4%
0.5%
2.2%
2006-7
$5,373
$6,134
$6,584
$6,339
$7,440
$6,170
$6,395
$7,921
$8,078
$7,043
$5,999
$7,084
$5,598
$7,593
$6,697
$6,458
$1,382
20.6%
20.1%
2.0%
4.6%
2.8%
2007-8
$5,190
$6,184
$6,493
$6,425
$7,537
$6,188
$6,410
$7,989
$8,126
$7,001
$6,106
$7,317
$5,599
$7,582
$6,725
$6,468
$1,401
20.8%
20.4%
0.4%
0.6%
0.2%
2008-9
$5,252
$5,776
$6,130
$6,181
$7,259
$6,061
$6,455
$7,719
$7,984
$6,847
$6,085
$7,067
$5,658
$7,079
$6,540
$6,334
$1,445
22.1%
20.7%
-2.8%
-1.7%
-2.1%
2009-10
2010-11
$ 5,029
$ 5,633
$ 5,815
$ 6,131
$ 7,201
$ 5,859
$ 6,602
$ 7,195
$ 7,464
$ 6,575
$ 5,909
$ 6,991
$ 5,521
$ 6,850
$6,341
$6,191
$1,123
17.7%
17.1%
-3.0%
-6.5%
-2.3%
$ 5,467
$ 6,142
$ 6,236
$ 6,280
$ 7,343
$ 6,373
$ 6,644
$ 7,397
$ 7,728
$ 6,816
$ 6,219
$ 7,331
$ 6,103
$ 7,178
$6,661
$6,429
$1,067
16.0%
16.8%
5.0%
3.5%
3.8%

Total Federal, State and Local Revenue
General Fund Total
Revenue Per Pupil

2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
$10,025
$12,981
$13,603
$7,246
$8,270
$11,184
$8,596
$9,130
$11,028
$8,368
$7,811
$9,449
$11,180
$9,795
$9,905
$8,530
$1,123
11.3%
22.7%
$9,984
$13,064
$14,409
$7,328
$8,721
$11,533
$9,134
$9,310
$11,018
$8,469
$7,913
$9,796
$10,562
$10,233
$10,105
$8,793
$913
9.0%
20.2%
2.0%
-0.1%
3.1%
$10,830
$13,416
$15,087
$7,592
$8,804
$11,696
$9,368
$9,356
$11,418
$8,696
$8,258
$9,925
$10,796
$10,037
$10,377
$8,917
$1,041
10.0%
21.9%
2.7%
3.6%
1.4%
$11,376
$13,586
$15,572
$7,862
$9,137
$12,093
$9,681
$9,696
$12,042
$8,960
$8,560
$10,062
$11,158
$10,380
$10,726
$8,783
$1,316
12.3%
27.1%
3.4%
5.5%
-1.5%
$12,140
$13,841
$15,957
$8,064
$9,275
$12,514
$9,807
$9,921
$12,104
$8,958
$8,824
$10,309
$11,089
$10,738
$10,967
$8,831
$1,137
10.4%
27.0%
2.2%
0.5%
0.5%
$10,525
$12,929
$13,838
$7,943
$8,657
$12,320
$9,087
$9,833
$11,399
$8,802
$8,447
$9,432
$10,298
$9,595
$10,222
$8,981
$1,177
11.5%
21.2%
-6.8%
-5.8%
1.7%
Page 4 of 13
2009-10
2010-11
$ 10,449
$ 12,767
$ 13,468
$ 7,949
$ 8,496
$ 11,874
$ 8,965
$ 9,247
$ 11,025
$ 8,498
$ 8,257
$ 9,326
$ 10,171
$ 9,329
$9,987
$8,919
$1,038
10.4%
19.1%
-2.3%
-3.3%
-0.7%
$ 11,906
$ 13,583
$ 14,770
$ 8,370
$ 9,304
$ 12,592
$ 9,951
$ 9,889
$ 11,647
$ 8,925
$ 8,834
$ 10,575
$ 11,380
$ 10,347
$10,862
$9,202
$785
7.2%
21.0%
8.8%
5.6%
3.2%

Total Operating Expenditure per Pupil
Proportion of Total General Fund Revenue per
Complete Operating Expenditure (COE) per Pupil
Pupil

2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
2010-11
$10,005
$12,050
$11,670
$6,982
$7,549
$10,524
$8,576
$8,461
$10,367
$8,268
$7,506
$8,180
$10,046
$9,249
$9,245
$8,142
$1,122
12.1%
21.5%
$10,290
$12,091
$12,269
$7,145
$7,859
$11,145
$8,620
$8,895
$10,363
$8,397
$7,713
$8,576
$10,851
$9,859
$9,577
$8,327
$786
8.2%
19.6%
3.6%
0.0%
2.3%
$10,830
$12,339
$13,139
$7,364
$7,997
$11,549
$8,370
$9,259
$10,959
$8,717
$7,931
$9,014
$10,469
$10,180
$9,866
$8,558
$1,094
11.1%
21.9%
3.0%
5.8%
2.8%
$10,994
$12,543
$14,115
$7,615
$8,603
$11,774
$9,103
$9,266
$11,018
$8,772
$8,458
$9,257
$10,823
$10,321
$10,190
$8,756
$828
8.1%
20.5%
3.3%
0.5%
2.3%
$11,304
$12,643
$14,707
$7,525
$8,752
$11,451
$9,243
$9,566
$11,304
$8,778
$8,641
$9,631
$10,889
$10,549
$10,356
$8,922
$948
9.2%
21.1%
1.6%
2.6%
1.9%
$11,878
$12,417
$13,801
$8,065
$8,926
$11,976
$9,329
$9,938
$11,815
$8,947
$8,434
$9,790
$11,375
$10,480
$10,512
$9,138
$1,303
12.4%
22.7%
1.5%
4.5%
2.4%
$12,342
$12,386
$13,089
$8,169
$8,793
$12,205
$9,041
$9,870
$11,754
$9,053
$8,441
$9,637
$10,760
$10,348
$10,421
$9,241
$1,333
12.8%
21.4%
-0.9%
-0.5%
1.1%
$11,605
$12,355
$13,883
$8,026
$9,118
$11,832
$9,795
$9,583
$11,619
$8,992
$8,597
$9,717
$11,187
$9,985
$10,450
$9,258
$1,169
11.2%
20.3%
0.3%
-1.1%
0.2%
Page 5 of 13
2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
99.8% 103.1% 100.0%

92.8% 92.6% 92.0%
85.8% 85.1% 87.1%
96.4% 97.5% 97.0%
91.3% 90.1% 90.8%
94.1% 96.6% 98.7%
99.8% 94.4% 89.3%
92.7% 95.5% 99.0%
94.0% 94.1% 96.0%
98.8% 99.1% 100.2%
96.1% 97.5% 96.0%
86.6% 87.5% 90.8%
89.9% 102.7% 97.0%
94.4% 96.3% 101.4%
93.7% 95.2% 95.4%
95.5% 94.7% 96.0%
0.3%
-1.1%
0.6%
0.3%
-1.2%
0.6%
-1.5%
-0.7%
0.0%
1.5%
0.2%
0.1%
2.0%
-0.8%
1.3%
2006-7
2007-8
96.6% 93.1%
92.3% 91.3%
90.6% 92.2%
96.9% 93.3%
94.2% 94.4%
97.4% 91.5%
94.0% 94.2%
95.6% 96.4%
91.5% 93.4%
97.9% 98.0%
98.8% 97.9%
92.0% 93.4%
97.0% 98.2%
99.4% 98.2%
95.3% 94.7%
99.7% 101.0%
-3.8% -1.3%
-4.0% -1.4%
-9.0% -8.2%
-0.1% -0.6%
-4.7%
2.1%
3.9%
1.3%
2008-9
112.9%
96.0%
99.7%
101.5%
103.1%
97.2%
102.7%
101.1%
103.6%
101.6%
99.8%
103.8%
110.5%
109.2%
103.1%
101.7%
0.6%
0.6%
1.8%
8.8%
11.0%
0.7%
2009-10
118.1%
97.0%
97.2%
102.8%
103.5%
102.8%
100.8%
106.7%
106.6%
106.5%
102.2%
103.3%
105.8%
110.9%
104.6%
103.6%
2.0%
1.9%
2.8%
1.5%
2.9%
1.8%
2010-11
97.5%
91.0%
94.0%
95.9%
98.0%
94.0%
98.4%
96.9%
99.8%
100.8%
97.3%
91.9%
98.3%
96.5%
96.4%
100.6%
3.3%
3.4%
-0.9%
-7.8%
-6.4%
-2.9%

Basic Instruction Expenditure per Pupil
Total Amount Invested per Pupil
Pupil

2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
2010-11
$ 4,915
$ 5,572
$ 5,788
$ 3,763
$ 4,028
$ 5,062
$ 4,542
$ 4,583
$ 5,658
$ 4,360
$ 3,912
$ 4,138
$ 5,404
$ 4,765
$4,749
$3,825
$909
19.1%
32.4%
$ 5,084
$ 5,775
$ 6,152
$ 3,913
$ 4,312
$ 5,331
$ 4,757
$ 4,646
$ 5,707
$ 4,498
$ 3,972
$ 4,201
$ 5,988
$ 5,123
$4,961
$3,940
$746
15.0%
31.0%
4.5%
0.9%
3.0%
$ 5,184
$ 5,913
$ 6,817
$ 4,012
$ 4,404
$ 5,590
$ 4,653
$ 4,770
$ 6,108
$ 4,688
$ 4,114
$ 4,333
$ 5,412
$ 5,309
$5,093
$4,021
$1,015
19.9%
34.2%
2.7%
7.0%
2.1%
$ 5,258
$ 6,263
$ 7,264
$ 4,175
$ 4,621
$ 5,657
$ 4,810
$ 4,792
$ 5,990
$ 4,784
$ 4,252
$ 4,561
$ 5,513
$ 5,369
$5,236
$4,148
$754
14.4%
30.8%
2.8%
-1.9%
3.2%
$ 5,227
$ 6,146
$ 7,487
$ 4,097
$ 4,712
$ 5,484
$ 4,895
$ 5,005
$ 6,088
$ 4,711
$ 4,244
$ 4,661
$ 5,571
$ 5,445
$5,270
$4,226
$819
15.5%
30.6%
0.6%
1.6%
1.9%
$ 5,521
$ 6,229
$ 7,577
$ 4,330
$ 4,798
$ 5,877
$ 5,005
$ 5,343
$ 6,365
$ 5,008
$ 4,042
$ 4,788
$ 6,026
$ 5,476
$5,456
$4,376
$909
16.7%
31.2%
3.5%
4.5%
3.5%
$ 5,673
$ 6,274
$ 6,577
$ 4,482
$ 5,038
$ 5,931
$ 5,202
$ 5,551
$ 6,283
$ 5,093
$ 4,337
$ 4,779
$ 5,648
$ 5,450
$5,451
$4,403
$832
15.3%
29.9%
-0.1%
-1.3%
0.6%
$ 5,215
$ 6,140
$ 6,718
$ 4,422
$ 5,062
$ 5,816
$ 5,299
$ 5,055
$ 6,301
$ 4,997
$ 4,351
$ 4,732
$ 5,838
$ 5,077
$5,359
$4,359
$942
17.6%
30.8%
-1.7%
0.3%
-1.0%
Page 6 of 13
2003-4
49.0%
42.9%
42.5%
51.9%
48.7%
45.3%
52.8%
50.2%
51.3%
52.1%
50.1%
43.8%
48.3%
48.6%
48.4%
44.8%
2.9%
6.0%
12.6%
2004-5
50.9%
44.2%
42.7%
53.4%
49.4%
46.2%
52.1%
49.9%
51.8%
53.1%
50.2%
42.9%
56.7%
50.1%
49.5%
44.8%
2.3%
4.5%
13.5%
2.3%
1.0%
-0.1%
2005-6
47.9%
44.1%
45.2%
52.8%
50.0%
47.8%
49.7%
51.0%
53.5%
53.9%
49.8%
43.7%
50.1%
52.9%
49.5%
45.1%
4.0%
8.2%
15.7%
-0.2%
3.3%
0.6%
2006-7
46.2%
46.1%
46.6%
53.1%
50.6%
46.8%
49.7%
49.4%
49.7%
53.4%
49.7%
45.3%
49.4%
51.7%
49.1%
47.2%
0.6%
1.2%
5.1%
-0.7%
-7.0%
4.7%
2007-8
2008-9
43.1%
44.4%
46.9%
50.8%
50.8%
43.8%
49.9%
50.4%
50.3%
52.6%
48.1%
45.2%
50.2%
50.7%
48.4%
47.9%
1.9%
4.0%
4.9%
-1.5%
1.1%
1.3%
52.5%
48.2%
54.8%
54.5%
55.4%
47.7%
55.1%
54.3%
55.8%
56.9%
47.9%
50.8%
58.5%
57.1%
53.5%
48.7%
2.3%
4.3%
12.7%
10.6%
11.0%
1.8%
2009-10
54.3%
49.1%
48.8%
56.4%
59.3%
49.9%
58.0%
60.0%
57.0%
59.9%
52.5%
51.2%
55.5%
58.4%
55.0%
49.4%
1.9%
3.5%
13.4%
2.8%
2.1%
1.3%
2010-11
43.8%
45.2%
45.5%
52.8%
54.4%
46.2%
53.3%
51.1%
54.1%
56.0%
49.3%
44.7%
51.3%
49.1%
49.8%
47.4%
4.3%
8.7%
12.4%
-9.6%
-5.1%
-4.0%

Added Needs Expenditure Per Pupil
Pupil

2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
2010-11
$ 933
$ 1,300
$ 721
$ 766
$ 607
$ 1,144
$ 860
$ 606
$ 1,033
$ 745
$ 659
$ 714
$ 802
$ 889
$841
$1,108
$192
22.8%
-7.3%
$ 998
$ 1,266
$ 755
$ 763
$ 646
$ 1,271
$ 870
$ 657
$ 925
$ 727
$ 694
$ 815
$ 890
$ 955
$874
$1,115
$51
5.9%
-20.5%
3.8%
-10.5%
0.6%
$ 1,167
$ 1,296
$ 786
$ 788
$ 585
$ 1,369
$ 834
$ 793
$ 991
$ 730
$ 780
$ 858
$ 1,013
$ 1,013
$929
$1,142
$62
6.7%
-15.2%
6.3%
7.1%
2.4%
$ 1,324
$ 1,293
$ 954
$ 803
$ 630
$ 1,400
$ 879
$ 856
$ 1,300
$ 760
$ 873
$ 964
$ 1,235
$ 1,116
$1,028
$1,174
$272
26.5%
9.7%
10.6%
31.2%
2.8%
$ 1,441
$ 1,307
$ 1,137
$ 730
$ 657
$ 1,347
$ 937
$ 900
$ 1,425
$ 782
$ 922
$ 1,063
$ 1,268
$ 1,137
$1,075
$1,191
$350
32.5%
16.4%
4.6%
9.6%
1.4%
$ 1,484
$ 1,308
$ 1,201
$ 806
$ 633
$ 1,401
$ 960
$ 947
$ 1,484
$ 821
$ 976
$ 1,179
$ 1,405
$ 1,169
$1,127
$1,248
$357
31.7%
15.9%
4.8%
4.1%
4.8%
$ 1,544
$ 1,261
$ 884
$ 862
$ 576
$ 1,461
$ 903
$ 940
$ 1,505
$ 937
$ 841
$ 1,158
$ 1,112
$ 1,163
$1,082
$1,332
$423
39.1%
11.5%
-4.0%
1.4%
6.7%
$ 1,355
9.3% 10.0% 10.8% 11.6% 11.9%
$ 1,321 10.0%
9.7%
9.7%
9.5%
9.4%
$ 1,250
5.3%
5.2%
5.2%
6.1%
7.1%
$ 839 10.6% 10.4% 10.4% 10.2%
9.1%
$ 599
7.3%
7.4%
6.6%
6.9%
7.1%
$ 1,319 10.2% 11.0% 11.7% 11.6% 10.8%
$ 947 10.0%
9.5%
8.9%
9.1%
9.6%
$ 1,004
6.6%
7.1%
8.5%
8.8%
9.1%
$ 1,453
9.4%
8.4%
8.7% 10.8% 11.8%
$ 941
8.9%
8.6%
8.4%
8.5%
8.7%
$ 884
8.4%
8.8%
9.4% 10.2% 10.4%
$ 1,264
7.6%
8.3%
8.6%
9.6% 10.3%
$ 1,317
7.2%
8.4%
9.4% 11.1% 11.4%
$ 1,237
9.1%
9.3% 10.1% 10.8% 10.6%
$1,124
8.6%
8.7%
9.0%
9.6%
9.8%
$1,329 13.0% 12.7% 12.8% 13.4% 13.5%
$329
0.8% -0.3% -0.3%
1.2%
2.0%
29.3%
9.4% -3.8% -3.9% 12.2% 20.1%
8.5% -38.7% -51.0% -47.6% -23.8% -14.6%
3.8%
1.9%
3.5%
6.6%
1.9%
-3.5%
-10.4%
3.4% 24.4%
9.1%
-0.2%
-2.4%
1.0%
4.4%
0.9%
Page 7 of 13
2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
14.1%
10.1%
8.7%
10.1%
7.3%
11.4%
10.6%
9.6%
13.0%
9.3%
11.6%
12.5%
13.6%
12.2%
11.0%
13.9%
2.0%
18.2%
-6.7%
12.3%
10.6%
3.0%
2009-10
14.8%
9.9%
6.6%
10.8%
6.8%
12.3%
10.1%
10.2%
13.7%
11.0%
10.2%
12.4%
10.9%
12.5%
10.9%
14.9%
2.8%
25.7%
-9.4%
-1.4%
4.9%
7.5%
2010-11
11.4%
9.7%
8.5%
10.0%
6.4%
10.5%
9.5%
10.2%
12.5%
10.5%
10.0%
12.0%
11.6%
12.0%
10.3%
14.4%
2.1%
20.7%
-15.8%
-4.9%
-8.6%
-3.3%

Total Instructional Expenditure per Pupil
Pupil
2003-4


$5,842
$6,858
$6,509
$4,512
$4,634
$6,151
$5,403
$5,190
$6,691
$5,106
$4,584
$4,842
$6,322
$5,673
$5,594
$4,928
$1,097
19.6%
26.3%
2004-5
$6,074
$7,028
$6,907
$4,664
$4,957
$6,570
$5,627
$5,303
$6,632
$5,225
$4,682
$5,000
$6,953
$6,105
$5,838
$5,053
$794
13.6%
23.8%
4.4%
-0.9%
2.5%
2005-6
$6,340
$7,191
$7,603
$4,799
$4,988
$6,919
$5,486
$5,563
$7,098
$5,418
$4,927
$5,176
$6,542
$6,325
$6,027
$5,168
$1,071
17.8%
27.2%
3.2%
7.0%
2.3%
2006-7
$6,573
$7,327
$8,218
$4,969
$5,252
$7,023
$5,690
$5,648
$7,290
$5,544
$5,162
$5,509
$6,890
$6,484
$6,256
$5,318
$1,034
16.5%
27.1%
3.8%
2.7%
2.9%
2007-8
$6,658
$7,424
$8,624
$4,818
$5,369
$6,788
$5,832
$5,905
$7,513
$5,492
$5,196
$5,706
$6,976
$6,573
$6,348
$5,423
$1,165
18.3%
27.8%
1.5%
3.1%
2.0%
2008-9
$6,993
$7,505
$7,808
$5,126
$5,396
$7,208
$5,918
$6,177
$7,849
$5,800
$5,056
$5,846
$7,373
$6,596
$6,475
$5,614
$1,374
21.2%
28.5%
2.0%
4.5%
3.5%
2009-10
2010-11
$ 7,204
$ 7,494
$ 7,462
$ 5,329
$ 5,614
$ 7,351
$ 6,105
$ 6,491
$ 7,788
$ 6,030
$ 5,215
$ 5,920
$ 7,074
$ 6,573
$6,546
$5,723
$1,242
19.0%
26.5%
1.1%
-0.8%
1.9%
$ 6,554
$ 7,427
$ 7,968
$ 5,244
$ 5,661
$ 7,105
$ 6,246
$ 6,060
$ 7,754
$ 5,938
$ 5,293
$ 5,979
$ 7,541
$ 6,283
$6,504
$5,678
$1,250
19.2%
26.8%
-0.7%
-0.4%
-0.8%
Page 8 of 13
2003-4
58.3%
52.8%
47.8%
62.3%
56.0%
55.0%
62.9%
56.8%
60.7%
61.0%
58.7%
51.2%
56.5%
57.9%
57.0%
57.8%
3.7%
6.4%
4.8%
2004-5
60.8%
53.8%
47.9%
63.6%
56.8%
57.0%
61.6%
57.0%
60.2%
61.7%
59.2%
51.0%
65.8%
59.7%
58.3%
57.5%
1.9%
3.2%
4.5%
2.3%
-0.8%
-0.5%
2005-6
58.5%
53.6%
50.4%
63.2%
56.7%
59.2%
58.6%
59.5%
62.2%
62.3%
59.7%
52.2%
60.6%
63.0%
58.5%
58.0%
3.6%
6.2%
6.8%
0.4%
3.3%
0.9%
2006-7
57.8%
53.9%
52.8%
63.2%
57.5%
58.1%
58.8%
58.3%
60.5%
61.9%
60.3%
54.8%
61.7%
62.5%
58.7%
60.5%
1.8%
3.1%
0.0%
0.3%
-2.6%
4.5%
2007-8
54.8%
53.6%
54.0%
59.7%
57.9%
54.2%
59.5%
59.5%
62.1%
61.3%
58.9%
55.3%
62.9%
61.2%
58.2%
61.4%
3.8%
6.6%
1.1%
-0.8%
2.5%
1.4%
2008-9
66.4%
58.0%
56.4%
64.5%
62.3%
58.5%
65.1%
62.8%
68.9%
65.9%
59.9%
62.0%
71.6%
68.7%
63.7%
62.5%
5.2%
8.2%
9.2%
9.3%
10.9%
1.8%
2009-10
68.9%
58.7%
55.4%
67.0%
66.1%
61.9%
68.1%
70.2%
70.6%
71.0%
63.2%
63.5%
69.6%
70.5%
66.0%
64.2%
4.6%
7.0%
9.2%
3.8%
2.6%
2.7%
2010-11
55.0%
54.7%
53.9%
62.7%
60.8%
56.4%
62.8%
61.3%
66.6%
66.5%
59.9%
56.5%
66.3%
60.7%
60.3%
61.7%
6.3%
10.4%
7.3%
-8.7%
-5.8%
-3.8%

Instructional Support Expenditure Per Pupil
Pupil

2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
2010-11
$ 1,561
$ 1,767
$ 1,420
$ 779
$ 897
$ 1,480
$ 845
$ 654
$ 1,014
$ 798
$ 846
$ 1,111
$ 1,337
$ 920
$1,102
$837
-$88
-8.0%
17.5%
$ 1,661
$ 1,705
$ 1,557
$ 779
$ 801
$ 1,582
$ 668
$ 680
$ 1,078
$ 803
$ 876
$ 1,183
$ 1,444
$ 976
$1,128
$846
-$50
-4.4%
21.5%
2.4%
6.3%
1.1%
$ 1,764
$ 1,630
$ 1,679
$ 821
$ 850
$ 1,682
$ 594
$ 704
$ 1,184
$ 857
$ 898
$ 1,260
$ 1,385
$ 1,019
$1,166
$888
$18
1.5%
25.0%
3.4%
9.8%
5.0%
$ 1,762
$ 1,636
$ 1,785
$ 867
$ 1,091
$ 1,700
$ 937
$ 764
$ 1,116
$ 815
$ 960
$ 1,296
$ 1,462
$ 985
$1,227
$901
-$111
-9.0%
19.3%
5.2%
-5.7%
1.5%
$ 1,876
$ 1,637
$ 1,867
$ 911
$ 1,106
$ 1,640
$ 969
$ 782
$ 1,229
$ 788
$ 1,011
$ 1,322
$ 1,476
$ 1,017
$1,259
$903
-$30
-2.4%
26.5%
2.6%
10.1%
0.2%
$ 2,065
$ 1,654
$ 1,890
$ 988
$ 1,188
$ 1,833
$ 1,023
$ 782
$ 1,441
$ 781
$ 995
$ 1,356
$ 1,547
$ 1,035
$1,327
$933
$114
8.6%
35.3%
5.4%
17.2%
3.3%
$ 2,180
$ 1,767
$ 1,834
$ 982
$ 935
$ 1,946
$ 697
$ 555
$ 1,397
$ 840
$ 981
$ 1,388
$ 1,417
$ 1,118
$1,288
$971
$109
8.4%
30.5%
-2.9%
-3.1%
4.1%
$ 1,919 15.6% 16.6%

$ 1,766 13.6% 13.1%
$ 1,812 10.4% 10.8%
$ 984 10.8% 10.6%
$ 1,014 10.8%
9.2%
$ 1,811 13.2% 13.7%
$ 995
9.8%
7.3%
$ 684
7.2%
7.3%
$ 1,371
9.2%
9.8%
$ 817
9.5%
9.5%
$ 996 10.8% 11.1%
$ 1,369 11.8% 12.1%
$ 1,340 12.0% 13.7%
$ 1,022
9.4%
9.5%
$1,279 11.0% 11.0%
$970
9.8%
9.6%
$92 -1.8% -1.2%
7.2% -16.5% -11.2%
29.2% -6.7%
1.7%
-0.8%
0.1%
-1.9%
6.4%
-0.1%
-1.9%
Page 9 of 13
2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
16.3% 15.5% 15.5%

12.1% 12.0% 11.8%
11.1% 11.5% 11.7%
10.8% 11.0% 11.3%
9.7% 11.9% 11.9%
14.4% 14.1% 13.1%
6.3%
9.7%
9.9%
7.5%
7.9%
7.9%
10.4%
9.3% 10.2%
9.9%
9.1%
8.8%
10.9% 11.2% 11.5%
12.7% 12.9% 12.8%
12.8% 13.1% 13.3%
10.2%
9.5%
9.5%
11.1% 11.3% 11.4%
10.0% 10.3% 10.2%
-0.7% -2.1% -1.2%
-6.4% -18.2% -10.6%
4.0% -10.7% -0.7%
0.5%
2.3%
0.3%
6.0% -10.6%
9.6%
3.5%
3.0% -0.3%
19.6%
12.8%
13.7%
12.4%
13.7%
14.9%
11.3%
8.0%
12.6%
8.9%
11.8%
14.4%
15.0%
10.8%
12.8%
10.4%
-0.2%
-1.6%
17.8%
13.0%
24.5%
1.6%
2009-10
20.9%
13.8%
13.6%
12.4%
11.0%
16.4%
7.8%
6.0%
12.7%
9.9%
11.9%
14.9%
13.9%
12.0%
12.6%
10.9%
0.0%
0.2%
14.1%
-1.5%
0.2%
4.8%
2010-11
16.1%
13.0%
12.3%
11.8%
10.9%
14.4%
10.0%
6.9%
11.8%
9.2%
11.3%
12.9%
11.8%
9.9%
11.6%
10.5%
0.2%
1.6%
10.4%
-8.4%
-7.1%
-3.2%

Business & Administration Expenditure Per Pupil
Pupil
2003-4


$1,257
$1,405
$1,805
$774
$1,008
$1,041
$949
$1,196
$1,160
$962
$809
$834
$1,038
$1,065
$1,093
$1,100
$67
6.1%
5.2%
2004-5
$1,154
$1,317
$1,628
$792
$1,077
$1,087
$952
$1,245
$1,056
$945
$807
$981
$1,050
$1,109
$1,086
$1,109
-$30
-2.7%
-5.0%
-0.7%
-9.0%
0.8%
2005-6
$1,226
$1,374
$1,700
$839
$1,079
$1,098
$959
$1,128
$1,144
$972
$733
$1,042
$1,052
$1,139
$1,106
$1,116
$38
3.4%
2.4%
1.9%
8.3%
0.6%
2006-7
$1,202
$1,391
$1,826
$844
$1,164
$1,237
$966
$1,220
$1,158
$996
$898
$926
$1,101
$1,152
$1,149
$1,140
$9
0.8%
1.6%
3.8%
1.2%
2.2%
2007-8
$1,188
$1,364
$1,871
$832
$1,140
$1,293
$955
$1,203
$1,200
$998
$905
$940
$1,033
$1,188
$1,151
$1,158
$49
4.3%
3.5%
0.2%
3.6%
1.6%
2008-9
$1,240
$1,386
$1,858
$938
$1,172
$1,180
$934
$1,233
$1,217
$907
$918
$962
$1,048
$1,135
$1,152
$1,169
$65
5.6%
3.9%
0.1%
1.4%
0.9%
2009-10
2010-11
$ 1,267
$ 1,363
$ 1,778
$ 893
$ 1,168
$ 1,233
$ 972
$ 1,262
$ 1,319
$ 885
$ 850
$ 962
$ 1,062
$ 1,107
$1,152
$1,181
$168
14.5%
10.5%
0.0%
8.4%
1.0%
$ 1,557 12.5% 11.6% 11.3% 10.6%

9.8% 11.8%
$ 1,623 10.8% 10.1% 10.2% 10.2%
9.9% 10.7%
$ 2,166 13.3% 11.3% 11.3% 11.7% 11.7% 13.4%
$ 934 10.7% 10.8% 11.1% 10.7% 10.3% 11.8%
$ 1,393 12.2% 12.3% 12.3% 12.7% 12.3% 13.5%
$ 1,334
9.3%
9.4%
9.4% 10.2% 10.3%
9.6%
$ 1,164 11.0% 10.4% 10.2% 10.0%
9.7% 10.3%
$ 1,416 13.1% 13.4% 12.1% 12.6% 12.1% 12.5%
$ 1,294 10.5%
9.6% 10.0%
9.6%
9.9% 10.7%
$ 987 11.5% 11.2% 11.2% 11.1% 11.1% 10.3%
$ 960 10.4% 10.2%
8.9% 10.5% 10.3% 10.9%
$ 959
8.8% 10.0% 10.5%
9.2%
9.1% 10.2%
$ 1,216
9.3%
9.9%
9.7%
9.9%
9.3% 10.2%
$ 1,255 10.9% 10.8% 11.3% 11.1% 11.1% 11.8%
$1,304 11.0% 10.8% 10.7% 10.7% 10.5% 11.3%
$1,291 12.9% 12.6% 12.5% 13.0% 13.1% 13.0%
-$10 -0.5% -1.2% -0.7% -1.1% -0.6% -0.6%
-0.8% -4.6% -11.2% -6.2% -10.4% -5.6% -5.2%
0.2% -22.6% -31.6% -24.9% -35.0% -32.3% -21.9%
13.3%
-2.1% -1.0%
0.5% -2.1%
7.3%
-1.9%
-8.9%
4.5% -4.0%
3.1%
7.7%
9.3%
-2.2% -0.8%
3.7%
1.0% -0.7%
Page 10 of 13
2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
12.1%
10.7%
13.2%
11.2%
13.7%
10.4%
10.8%
13.6%
12.0%
10.4%
10.3%
10.3%
10.4%
11.9%
11.5%
13.2%
0.5%
3.9%
-10.7%
2.2%
12.1%
1.7%
2010-11
13.1%
11.9%
14.7%
11.2%
15.0%
10.6%
11.7%
14.3%
11.1%
11.1%
10.9%
9.1%
10.7%
12.1%
12.0%
14.0%
-0.8%
-7.1%
-26.3%
3.8%
-7.1%
6.0%

Operations & Maintenance Expenditure Per Pupil
Pupil
2003-4


$948
$1,559
$1,432
$692
$963
$1,393
$947
$991
$1,458
$1,121
$898
$947
$1,024
$893
$1,090
$935
$368
33.7%
35.9%
2004-5
$991
$1,613
$1,632
$672
$973
$1,407
$965
$1,208
$1,536
$1,146
$933
$959
$1,051
$920
$1,143
$959
$393
34.3%
37.6%
4.8%
5.3%
2.6%
2005-6
$1,079
$1,718
$1,567
$633
$1,030
$1,316
$964
$1,392
$1,461
$1,156
$934
$1,080
$1,091
$946
$1,169
$1,006
$292
25.0%
31.1%
2.3%
-4.9%
4.9%
2006-7
$1,026
$1,738
$1,675
$669
$1,004
$1,260
$992
$1,139
$1,378
$1,096
$965
$1,069
$1,012
$952
$1,141
$1,023
$237
20.8%
25.8%
-2.4%
-5.7%
1.7%
2007-8
$1,128
$1,788
$1,690
$695
$1,047
$1,172
$938
$1,163
$1,285
$1,130
$1,018
$1,159
$1,035
$1,012
$1,161
$1,042
$124
10.6%
18.9%
1.8%
-6.7%
1.9%
2008-9
$1,156
$1,461
$1,630
$745
$1,094
$1,223
$925
$1,250
$1,221
$1,113
$977
$1,110
$1,051
$987
$1,139
$1,039
$82
7.2%
14.9%
-1.9%
-5.0%
-0.3%
2009-10
2010-11
$ 1,225
$ 1,342
$ 1,493
$ 697
$ 1,037
$ 1,138
$ 879
$ 1,119
$ 1,175
$ 975
$ 925
$ 917
$ 875
$ 906
$1,050
$989
$125
11.9%
15.8%
-7.8%
-3.8%
-4.8%
$ 1,130
$ 1,108
$ 1,363
$ 604
$ 958
$ 1,017
$ 834
$ 995
$ 1,125
$ 941
$ 886
$ 926
$ 753
$ 852
$964
$947
$161
16.7%
15.8%
-8.2%
-4.3%
-4.2%
Page 11 of 13
2003-4
9.5%
12.0%
10.5%
9.6%
11.6%
12.5%
11.0%
10.9%
13.2%
13.4%
11.5%
10.0%
9.2%
9.1%
11.0%
11.0%
2.2%
20.2%
17.1%
2004-5
9.9%
12.3%
11.3%
9.2%
11.2%
12.2%
10.6%
13.0%
13.9%
13.5%
11.8%
9.8%
10.0%
9.0%
11.3%
10.9%
2.7%
23.8%
21.8%
2.4%
5.4%
-0.5%
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
10.0%
9.0%
9.3%
12.8% 12.8% 12.9%
10.4% 10.8% 10.6%
8.3%
8.5%
8.6%
11.7% 11.0% 11.3%
11.3% 10.4%
9.4%
10.3% 10.2%
9.6%
14.9% 11.7% 11.7%
12.8% 11.4% 10.6%
13.3% 12.2% 12.6%
11.3% 11.3% 11.5%
10.9% 10.6% 11.2%
10.1%
9.1%
9.3%
9.4%
9.2%
9.4%
11.2% 10.6% 10.6%
11.3% 11.6% 11.8%
1.6%
0.9%
0.0%
13.8%
8.0%
0.3%
11.8% -1.8% -11.1%
-0.2% -5.8% -0.1%
-8.2% -10.6% -7.2%
3.4%
3.2%
1.3%
2008-9
11.0%
11.3%
11.8%
9.4%
12.6%
9.9%
10.2%
12.7%
10.7%
12.6%
11.6%
11.8%
10.2%
10.3%
11.1%
11.6%
-0.4%
-3.9%
-8.0%
5.4%
0.9%
-2.0%
2009-10
11.7%
10.5%
11.1%
8.8%
12.2%
9.6%
9.8%
12.1%
10.7%
11.5%
11.2%
9.8%
8.6%
9.7%
10.5%
11.1%
0.1%
1.3%
-4.0%
-5.6%
-0.5%
-4.2%
2010-11
9.5%
8.2%
9.2%
7.2%
10.3%
8.1%
8.4%
10.1%
9.7%
10.5%
10.0%
8.8%
6.6%
8.2%
8.9%
10.3%
0.7%
8.4%
-6.5%
-15.3%
-9.4%
-7.2%

Transportation Expenditure Per Pupil
Pupil

2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
2010-11
$ 397
$ 461
$ 504
$ 225
$ 47
$ 459
$ 432
$ 430
$ 44
$ 281
$ 369
$ 446
$ 325
$ 698
$ 366
$ 362
$ (322)
-88.0%
-87.8%
$ 410
$ 428
$ 545
$ 238
$ 51
$ 499
$ 408
$ 459
$ 61
$ 278
$ 415
$ 453
$ 353
$ 749
$ 382
$ 369
$ (321)
-84.0%
-83.5%
4.5%
38.6%
1.9%
$ 421
$ 426
$ 590
$ 272
$ 50
$ 534
$ 367
$ 472
$ 72
$ 314
$ 439
$ 456
$ 399
$ 751
$ 397
$ 376
$ (325)
-81.9%
-80.9%
4.0%
18.0%
1.9%
$ 431
$ 451
$ 611
$ 266
$ 92
$ 554
$ 518
$ 495
$ 76
$ 321
$ 473
$ 457
$ 358
$ 748
$ 418
$ 400
$ (342)
-81.8%
-81.0%
5.2%
5.6%
6.4%
$ 454
$ 430
$ 655
$ 269
$ 90
$ 558
$ 549
$ 513
$ 77
$ 370
$ 511
$ 504
$ 369
$ 759
$ 436
$ 425
$ (359)
-82.4%
-81.9%
4.4%
1.3%
6.3%
$ 424
$ 411
$ 615
$ 268
$ 76
$ 532
$ 529
$ 496
$ 87
$ 346
$ 488
$ 516
$ 356
$ 727
$ 419
$ 430
$ (332)
-79.3%
-79.8%
-3.9%
13.0%
1.2%
$ 466
$ 420
$ 522
$ 268
$ 39
$ 537
$ 388
$ 443
$
75
$ 323
$ 470
$ 450
$ 332
$ 644
$ 384
$ 413
$ (309)
-80.5%
-81.8%
-8.4%
-13.8%
-4.0%
$ 445
4.0%
4.1%
3.9%
3.8%
3.7%
4.0%
$ 431
3.6%
3.3%
3.2%
3.3%
3.1%
3.2%
$ 574
3.7%
3.8%
3.9%
3.9%
4.1%
4.4%
$ 260
3.1%
3.2%
3.6%
3.4%
3.3%
3.4%
$ 92
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
1.0%
1.0%
0.9%
$ 565
4.1%
4.3%
4.6%
4.6%
4.5%
4.3%
$ 556
5.0%
4.5%
3.9%
5.4%
5.6%
5.8%
$ 428
4.7%
4.9%
5.0%
5.1%
5.2%
5.0%
$
75
0.4%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.6%
0.8%
$ 309
3.4%
3.3%
3.6%
3.6%
4.1%
3.9%
$ 462
4.7%
5.2%
5.3%
5.5%
5.8%
5.8%
$ 484
4.7%
4.6%
4.6%
4.5%
4.9%
5.5%
$ 337
2.9%
3.3%
3.7%
3.2%
3.3%
3.5%
$ 573
7.1%
7.3%
7.5%
7.2%
7.1%
7.6%
$ 399
3.7%
3.8%
3.9%
3.9%
4.0%
4.1%
$ 427
4.2%
4.2%
4.2%
4.6%
4.8%
4.8%
$ (324) -3.3% -3.2% -3.2% -3.3% -3.4% -3.4%
-81.2% -89.3% -85.4% -83.6% -84.0% -84.2% -81.6%
-82.4% -90.6% -86.8% -85.0% -86.1% -86.8% -84.1%
4.0%
2.2%
1.7%
2.2%
2.1%
3.1%
0.0%
38.8% 13.9%
0.1%
0.8% 20.0%
3.4%
-1.1%
0.5%
8.0%
5.7% -0.5%
Page 12 of 13
2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
4.5%
3.3%
3.9%
3.4%
0.5%
4.5%
4.3%
4.8%
0.7%
3.8%
5.7%
4.8%
3.3%
6.9%
3.9%
4.6%
-3.2%
-82.4%
-85.3%
-6.5%
-10.9%
-3.3%
2010-11
3.7%
3.2%
3.9%
3.1%
1.0%
4.5%
5.6%
4.3%
0.6%
3.5%
5.2%
4.6%
3.0%
5.5%
3.7%
4.6%
-3.0%
-82.6%
-86.1%
-4.7%
-5.3%
0.2%

Total Support Services Expenditure Per Pupil
Pupil

2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
2010-11
$ 4,163
$ 5,192
$ 5,161
$ 2,470
$ 2,915
$ 4,373
$ 3,173
$ 3,271
$ 3,676
$ 3,162
$ 2,922
$ 3,338
$ 3,724
$ 3,576
$3,651
$3,214
$25
0.7%
12.6%
$ 4,216
$ 5,063
$ 5,362
$ 2,481
$ 2,902
$ 4,575
$ 2,993
$ 3,592
$ 3,731
$ 3,172
$ 3,031
$ 3,576
$ 3,898
$ 3,754
$3,739
$3,274
-$8
-0.2%
12.2%
2.4%
1.5%
1.9%
$ 4,490
$ 5,148
$ 5,536
$ 2,565
$ 3,009
$ 4,630
$ 2,884
$ 3,696
$ 3,861
$ 3,299
$ 3,004
$ 3,838
$ 3,927
$ 3,855
$3,839
$3,390
$22
0.6%
12.2%
2.7%
3.5%
3.5%
$ 4,421
$ 5,216
$ 5,897
$ 2,646
$ 3,351
$ 4,751
$ 3,413
$ 3,618
$ 3,728
$ 3,228
$ 3,296
$ 3,748
$ 3,933
$ 3,837
$3,935
$3,434
-$207
-5.2%
7.9%
2.5%
-3.4%
1.3%
$ 4,646
$ 5,219
$ 6,083
$ 2,707
$ 3,383
$ 4,663
$ 3,411
$ 3,661
$ 3,791
$ 3,286
$ 3,445
$ 3,925
$ 3,913
$ 3,976
$4,008
$3,499
-$217
-5.4%
7.7%
1.9%
1.7%
1.9%
$ 4,885
$ 4,912
$ 5,993
$ 2,939
$ 3,530
$ 4,768
$ 3,411
$ 3,761
$ 3,966
$ 3,147
$ 3,378
$ 3,944
$ 4,002
$ 3,884
$4,037
$3,524
-$71
-1.8%
11.1%
0.7%
4.6%
0.7%
$ 5,138
$ 4,892
$ 5,627
$ 2,840
$ 3,179
$ 4,854
$ 2,936
$ 3,379
$ 3,966
$ 3,023
$ 3,226
$ 3,717
$ 3,686
$ 3,775
$3,874
$3,517
$92
2.4%
11.3%
-4.0%
0.0%
-0.2%
$ 5,051
42%
42%
41%
39%
38%
46%
$ 4,928
40%
39%
38%
38%
38%
38%
$ 5,915
38%
37%
37%
38%
38%
43%
$ 2,782
34%
34%
34%
34%
34%
37%
$ 3,457
35%
33%
34%
37%
36%
41%
$ 4,727
39%
40%
40%
39%
37%
39%
$ 3,549
37%
33%
31%
35%
35%
38%
$ 3,523
36%
39%
40%
37%
37%
38%
$ 3,865
33%
34%
34%
31%
31%
35%
$ 3,054
38%
37%
38%
36%
37%
36%
$ 3,304
37%
38%
36%
39%
39%
40%
$ 3,738
35%
37%
39%
37%
38%
42%
$ 3,646
33%
37%
36%
35%
35%
39%
$ 3,702
37%
37%
38%
37%
37%
40%
$3,946
37%
37%
37%
37%
36%
39%
$3,580
38%
37%
38%
39%
40%
39%
-$81
-3%
-3%
-3%
-6%
-5%
-5%
-2.0% -9.3% -8.1% -8.2% -15.4% -14.1% -11.7%
7.4% -13.0% -10.0% -12.4% -26.3% -26.5% -12.8%
1.8%
0.3%
0.0% -0.7% -0.3%
8.1%
-2.5%
1.6% -0.1% -8.4%
1.2% 11.1%
1.8%
-1.2%
2.1%
2.8%
1.3% -1.0%
Page 13 of 13
2003-4
2004-5
2005-6
2006-7
2007-8
2008-9
2009-10
49%
38%
42%
36%
37%
41%
33%
37%
36%
36%
39%
40%
36%
40%
39%
39%
-3%
-6.7%
-9.6%
-2.2%
3.4%
0.5%
2010-11
42%
36%
40%
33%
37%
38%
36%
36%
33%
34%
37%
35%
32%
36%
36%
39%
-3%
-8.2%
-17.2%
-6.3%
-7.8%
-1.3%

GPPSS Financial Benchmarking Report and Analysis - 2012

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

GPPSS Financial Benchmarking Report and Analysis - 2012

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

2012

Grosse Pointe Public School System

Brendan Walsh, Treasurer, Grosse Pointe

Operations and Maintenance ............................................................................................................................ 12

Financial Benchmark Analysis Overview

General Construct of Benchmark Report

2010-11 Expenditures in Major Expense Categories

Total Support Services

Pupil to Teacher Ratio

*3366UDWLRLVORZHUWKDQWKHEHQFKPDUNJURXSDQGORZHUWKDQWKHVWDWHZLde average. This

Average Teacher Salary

Total Instructional Salaries

General Fund Revenue

Total General Fund Operating Expenditure

Basic Instruction Expense

Added Needs Instruction Expense

Support Services Expenses

Business and Administration Expense

Operations and Maintenance Expense

the classroom or in a classroom situation.

classroom instructional costs. These expenditures do not include capital outlay.

and logistical support to facilitate and enhance instruction.

the physical plant open, comfortable, and safe for use.

the total K-12 teachers.

district to arrive at the per pupil amount.

Grosse Pointe Public School System

ANN ARBOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Updated: June , 2012

Pupil : Teacher Ratio

Financial Benchmarking Report_2011.xlsx

Grosse Pointe Public School System

ANN ARBOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Updated: June , 2012

Financial Benchmarking Report_2011.xlsx

Grosse Pointe Public School System

ANN ARBOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Updated: June , 2012

Financial Benchmarking Report_2011.xlsx

Grosse Pointe Public School System

Updated: June , 2012

Financial Benchmarking Report_2011.xlsx

Grosse Pointe Public School System

Updated: June , 2012

99.8% 103.1% 100.0%

Financial Benchmarking Report_2011.xlsx

Grosse Pointe Public School System

Updated: June , 2012

Financial Benchmarking Report_2011.xlsx

Grosse Pointe Public School System

Updated: June , 2012

Financial Benchmarking Report_2011.xlsx

Grosse Pointe Public School System

ANN ARBOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Updated: June , 2012

Financial Benchmarking Report_2011.xlsx

Grosse Pointe Public School System

Updated: June , 2012

$ 1,919 15.6% 16.6%

16.3% 15.5% 15.5%

Financial Benchmarking Report_2011.xlsx

Grosse Pointe Public School System

ANN ARBOR PUBLIC SCHOOLS

Updated: June , 2012

*3366UDWLRLVORZHUWKDQWKHEHQFKPDUNJURXSDQGORZHUWKDQWKHVWDWHZLde average. This