Pupil Transportation Funding Derek Graham Section Chief Transportation

Pupil Transportation Funding Derek Graham, Section Chief Transportation Services North Carolina Dept. of Public Instruction

Allotments for School Transportation • NC Department of Public Instruction, Division of School Support, Transportation Services • Charged with equitably distributing funds to 117 LEAs for operation of a safe, efficient school bus transportation system • Separate appropriation for replacing school buses

Pupil Transportation Funding: A Little History • Property and Cost Clerks – Allotted for 12 months based on a formula considering the number of buses • Mechanics, Directors, Supervisors and Foremen – Allotted for 12 months based on a formula considering the number of buses • Contracts: Reimbursed for actual expenses • Fuel, tires, parts, etc. reimbursed for actual expenses

1989 Legislative Action • SB 44, Sec. 55 • “The Department of Public Instruction shall implement the Pupil Transportation Operational Study authorized by Section 94 of Chapter 1086 of the 1987 Session Laws, The State Board of Education shall allocate up to $400, 000 of the funds appropriated for the 1989 -90 fiscal year for aid to local school administrative units for pupil transportation to implement the findings of this study. The Department shall also report its final recommendations for achieving improved efficiency and economy in the pupil transportation system to the 1990 Session of the General Assembly. These recommendations shlal included incentives for encouraging cost-effective operations in local school administrative units, as provided in GS 115 C-240(e) and GS 115 C-246(a).

Ernst & Young Study Results Jan. 1991 • Allot funds in a way that will provide incentives for the LEAs to provide pupil transportation service as efficiently as possible. • Structure the funding process to maximize the LEAs’ discretion in deciding how pupil transportation objectives are to be met and to hold them accountable for the results of those decisions relative to meeting the dual objectives of service quality and economy. • Provide information that helps each LEA to identify the source of any inefficiencies.

Local Control • Block Grant Allotments: Eliminated Line Item Allotments – Fuel – Salaries – Tires/Repair Parts • Flexibility to Use Funds where needed Accountability • Block Grant based on a Budget Rating – Expenditures – Students Transported – Buses Operated • Budget Rating is an indication of Efficiency

Transportation Funding: Step by Step 1. Determine Funding Base 2. Determine Budget Rating 3. Multiply (1) x (2) and Adjust

Step 1: Determine Funding Base (Previous Years’ Eligible Expenditures) • All State Expenditures except for equipment line items • All Local Expenditures corresponding to a state object code, except equipment • Exceptions: – Salaries in excess of the state maximum – Salary bonuses

• All State Expenditures except for equipment line items • All Local Expenditures corresponding to a state object code, except equipment • Legislative appropriation assumes allotment growth consistent with enrollment growth plus legislated increased (salary increases, etc) • A few counties are capped each year due to expenses that increased beyond these projections

Capped Expenses • Does not count “against” the LEA in the calculation of budget ratings. • Does not get included in the funding base carried forward to the next year.

Step 2: Determine Budget Rating • Inputs: Expenditures, Students Transported, Buses Operated • Adjustments for Site Characteristics – Avg. Distance from School; Street Network – Pupil Density; Student Clustering – Median Family Income; Seats per Bus

Step 3: Apply Rating to Base Funding and Adjust • Multiply Budget Rating By Base Funding (Step 1). • Add funding for (positive) growth in students transported • Adjust for Legislated Increases

Determining the Ratings • Calculate the cost per student transported for each county • Calculate the # buses operated per 100 students transported for each county • Use Linear Regression to make sure that there is nothing beyond the county’s control that unfairly penalizes them: Site Characteristics

Factor Efficiencies - Step 1 350 Expenditures per Adjusted Student 300 A M Y 250 Cost Eff = XL / XA 200 Bus Eff = YM / YA L 150 100 Combined Eff = AVG(Bus Eff, Cost Eff) 50 O X 0 0 0. 5 1 1. 5 Buses per 100 Adjusted Students 2 2. 5 3

Factor Efficiencies - Step 2 350 Expenditures per Adjusted Student 300 250 • A 200 Overall Efficiency. A = 150 B Combined Efficiency. A Average Combined Efficiencies. F 100 50 O C D (F=Frontier Points) 0 0 0. 5 1 1. 5 Buses per 100 Adjusted Students 2 2. 5 3

Leveling the Playing Field: Consider Site Characteristics Beyond the Control of the LEA • Pupil Density (Students Transported per Mile of Road • Distance of Students to School • Circuity • % EC Students

Unadjusted Bus Efficiency Buses - 3 rd Quartile Distance to School 14 12 3 rd Quart. Dist. 10 8 3 Quart Dist Linear (3 Quart Dist) 6 R 2 = 0. 3781 4 2 0 0 0. 2 0. 4 0. 6 Unadjuested Bus Efficiency 0. 8 1

Bus Efficiency Adjusted for Distance to School 3 rd Quartile Bus Efficiency Adjusted for Distance 3 rd Quartile Distnace to School 3 rd Quartile 14 12 10 8 R 2 = 3 E-05 3 Quart Dist Linear (3 Quart Dist) 6 4 2 0 0 20 40 60 Bus Efficiency 80 100

Site Characteristics

Pupil Transportation Funding Derek Graham, Section Chief Transportation Services North Carolina Dept. of Public Instruction