Week 3 Part 3

The Affect of WADA on School Funding for Texas Schools

In the Coalition to Invest in Texas Schools, according to the Texas Association of School Boards, the definition of Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA): "In Texas, students with additional education needs are weighted for funding purposes to help recognize the additional costs of educating those students. Weighted programs include special education, vocational, bilingual, gifted and talented, and compensatory education. A weighted student count is used to distribute guaranteed yield funding." After examining and analyzing the school finance data from District 1 and District 2 for two Texas school districts we found the following information:

The data indicates for District 1:
$5044.00 Revenue per WADA @ Compressed Rate
5555.815 X $5044.00 = $28,023,530.86 Total Target Revenue for M & O
281 Teachers, Librarians, Nurses, & Counselors
The data indicates for District 2:
$7206.00 Revenue per WADA @ Compressed Rate
4794.076 X $7206.00 = 34,546,111.66 Total Target Revenue for M & O
307 Teachers, Librarians, Nurses, & Counselors

In a comparison between District 1 and District 2, they are of comparable size. District 1 has a student population of 3903, primary staff of 281, WADA of 5555.815, revenue per WADA @ compressed rate of $5044, and M&O revenue of $28,023,530.86. District 2 has a student population of 3890, primary staff of 307, WADA of 4794.076, revenue per WADA @ compressed rate of $7206, and M&O revenue of $34,546,111.66. District 1 has 13 more students, 26 less staff, and about $6.5 million less in revenue for M&O than District 2. District 1 has a much higher percentage of students in special populations than District 2. For example, District 1 has 93.3% Economically Disadvantaged, 48% Limited English Proficient, 41% Bilingual/ESL, and 24% Career and Technical Education. In contrast, District 2 has only 20.7% Economically Disadvantaged, 2% LEP, 2% Bilingual/ESL, and 14% CTE. These figures account for the higher WADA of $5555.815 in District 1 compared to $4794.076 for District 2.

After comparing the data, our group's position is that WADA, although it intends to provide an equitable education for all students, falls short of that goal. This weighted funding is designed to allow District 1 to be more closely matched to District 2 in their funding and in the personnel and educational services they can provide. This is not the case, however, in these two districts. Because District 2 has such higher property values and total target revenue for maintenance and operations, District 2 is able to provide more staff and has more money to spend per student than District 1. Though WADA is supposed to take care of the inequities, it can never balance out the difference between very poor districts and rich districts. District 2 gets only 30% of their funds from the state, which indicates a very healthy tax base. District 1 must rely on the state and federal government for 94% of their funds. The higher WADA value for district 1 indicates they have more students in special populations yet still receive less funding for their district. Having greater special populations should result in more funding and be a more positive impact for funding equity, but that does not seem to be the case.


REFERENCES
Coalition to Invest in Texas Schools (2010). School funding 101 - glossary. Retrieved January 30, 2011, from http://www.investintexasschools.org/schoolfunding/glossary.php.