District Deeds Sunday Reads – Sunday, January 23, 2022: Is the San Diego Unified School District Board of Education Corrupt? You have .00675 Seconds!!!

Tags

, ,

This week the San Diego Unified School District (SDUSD) propaganda effort is going full steam toward their predetermined Superintendent candidate.

Today Sunday Reads features an article from K-12 Dive that examines so called “funding declines” from the drop in Student attendance during the Covid 19 pandemic.

We have featured the complete K-12 Dive article but we strongly urge our readers to click on the title (in red) and read the full dispatch for themselves.


States look to ease funding declines spurred by low student attendance

By Karen Arundel – Reporter

Dive Brief:

  • Lawmakers and education officials in a few states are seeking changes to school funding formulas to avoid financial harm to districts from pandemic-related drops in student attendance rates.
  • States currently calculate funding allocations in a variety of complicated ways using attendance and enrollment counts or both, and changing student funding formulas often requires legislative approval.
  • Favoring current-school-year averages of student enrollments rather than one-day attendance counts could increase state flow-through funds to local districts and help with more accurate budget planning, school funding experts say.

Dive Insight:

Declining student attendance rates during the pandemic are raising concerns among education officials that district coffers will shrink significantly once federal emergency funding is spent and if attendance rates don’t rebound.

A bill in the California legislature from state Sen. Anthony Portantino, a Democrat, would change that state’s funding formula to one favoring total enrollment that factors in how many students are enrolled in a district. The current formula uses average daily attendance, which includes how many students are present on campuses during a specific time period.

If approved, the change would start with the 2023-24 school year. Proponents say the adjustment would benefit districts with higher absenteeism rates.

“If a school district enrolls 100 students, but their attendance rate is 95%, the school district must prepare as if 100 students will attend class, but only receives funding for 95,” Portantino told the Sacramento Bee. “This bill will remedy that inequity.”

Research from School Innovations & Achievement, a company that provides programs to districts to reduce school absenteeism, found 17 California school districts experienced a chronic absenteeism rate of 27.4% in October 2021, up from18% in October 2020 and 11.2% in October 2019. Black and Latino students experienced higher rates of chronic absenteeism compared to White and Asian students.

Illinois lawmakers, meanwhile, last year tweaked their state’s funding formula for fiscal years 2022 through 2024 to allow districts to use average student enrollments based on pre-COVID-19 levels, if desired. In Kentucky, a task force is recommending the state legislature consider moving from its average daily attendance funding formula to one based on average daily membership, a calculation of daily enrollment.

Approaches vary nationwide

Approaches to calculating funding based on enrollment or attendance vary state-to-state, according to research from the Education Commission of the States. ECS data shows six states use attendance averages to allocate funds to districts: California, Idaho, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri and Texas.

Earlier in the pandemic, several states eased requirements around enrollment or attendance counts for funding purposes in light of remote learning and illnesses causing absences, allowing districts to use historical student attendance counts or projected counts.

The Texas Education Agency enacted an average daily attendance hold harmless policy last school year but has not provided the same flexibility this school year.

This was not much of a concern in fall 2021 as in-person attendance held steady, but now several districts in the state are seeing attendance levels drop during this winter’s struggle with the omicron variant, said Curtis Culwell, executive director of the Texas School Alliance, whose membership includes 44 school districts that educate 42% of the state’s total enrollment.

If the trend continues, the alliance will talk to the state education agency about the potential impact on the funding formula, Culwell said.

Culwell predicts state lawmakers will have ongoing conversations about this because of the “deepening realization” that disruptions due to different variants “may continue to occur over the next few years.”

For now, districts in Texas have “tools in their toolboxes” for short-term disruptions, Culwell said. For instance, districts have been able to adjust their calendars, such as adding days off before or after the Martin Luther King Jr. holiday weekend, in response to positive cases and staffing shortages, he said.

“This is where everybody’s monitoring this situation,” Culwell said. “They want to keep schools open, and they don’t want another significant disruption to instruction.”

Have attendance-based models run their course?

Some education finance experts have said funding schools based on attendance was outdated even before the pandemic. The forced move to virtual learning only highlighted the problems with these calculations when “student attendance” in remote settings brought different interpretations.

The financial declines could be dramatic if a district experiences a steep enrollment drop. The Urban Institute estimates if a 1,000-student district with a $15 million budget lost 200 students between the 2019-20 and 2020-21 school years, its budget for the 2021-22 school year would decrease by $3 million, or from $15,000 per student in 2019-20 to $12,000 per student in 2021-22.

Still, others say tying funding to attendance keeps school systems accountable not only fiscally but also with student engagement and learning, because students would actually need to be in classrooms and on campuses to be counted for funding.

Enrollment and attendance counts are just one part of the state-to-district funding calculation, as other factors influence total allocations. States are continuously looking at adjustments — both big and small — to funding formulas. They also are taking into consideration how decisions impact the many different aspects of a district’s budget.

Republican South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster is planning to propose funding formula changes based on student-teacher ratios that would increase funding for special education programs, which also receive dedicated federal funding, according to the Associated Press.

In Vermont, lawmakers are considering a change to the state’s funding formula based on student enrollment that would provide higher per-student formula allocations for students from low-income households and other populations.


District Deeds Synopsis

We have featured a number of K-12 Dive articles in Sunday Reads over the last seven years but this posting is special.

“States Look to Ease Funding Declines Spurred by Low Student Attendance” really illustrates the complete suspension of disbelief that virtually every member of SDUSD senior leadership engages in during the annual district budgeting process.

The “Dive Insight” says it all:

Declining student attendance rates during the pandemic are raising concerns among education officials that district coffers will shrink significantly once federal emergency funding is spent and if attendance rates don’t rebound.

Think of every San Diego County business that has faced the very same challenge during the Covid Pandemic.

It is very simple:

Reduced customers create reduced revenues, some reduced expenses and reduced number of employees.

Not really “Rocket Science” right?

But somehow the SDUSD propganda machine continually finds ways to interpret this obvious and simple computation into a justification for MORE funding (revenue), MORE expenses for FEWER Students (customers)!  Here are a couple of the more well propagandized financial scams we are sure will be supported by Trustee Richard “Ticky Dick Barrera and his incompetent, corrupt trustee clan:

A bill in the California legislature from state Sen. Anthony Portantino, a Democrat, would change that state’s funding formula to one favoring total enrollment that factors in how many students are enrolled in a district. The current formula uses average daily attendance, which includes how many students are present on campuses during a specific time period.

This is a well used scam by the SDUSD who finds a way every year to cover up the loss of SDUSD enrollment to get more State and Federal money for invisible Students.

Back on April 25, 2021 we posted “Marten Lincoln High Enrollment: 1,428; REAL Student Enrollment – Under 500!!! Senators – Do YOU want a Liar in the Education Department?

In that post we said:


Here is page 8 of the same Public Records Request that may have been used by both Reopen San Diego and the VOSD in Responsive Documents FY20202021.074.

The enrollment for Lincoln High School on the report is 1,428 Students.

As recently as February, 2020 before the Covid Pandemic, our sources heard directly from Trustee Sharon Whitehurst Payne and the Lincoln Principal that enrollment at Lincoln had shrunk to under 900 Students.

and…

Right now the ACTUAL enrollment at Lincoln High School, as reported by sources on campus, is SHOCKING…

Under 500 Students are REALLY enrolled at Lincoln High School!!!


With more scrutiny of actual attendance due to the pandemic, corrupt California school districts like the super majority Democrat SDUSD Trustees are looking to their super majority Democrat legislature cronies to find ways to produce funding for Students who are not there.

Another classic SDUSD Board of Education scam is to manipulate Teacher/Student ratios.

The article mentions “Republican South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster” who “is planning to propose funding formula changes based on student-teacher ratios that would increase funding for special education programs, which also receive dedicated federal funding, according to the Associated Press.”

The corrupt SDUSD Board of Education has regularly pulled out this scam to pay off their SDEA (Teacher’s Union) cronies directly in the face of continous decreasing SDUSD enrollment to help them maintain paying union membership and their own polictical contibutions and endorsements.

According to an article in The Hechlinger Report titled “Despite popularity with parents and teachers, review of research finds small benefits to small classes” the myth of small class size was completely exposed:

Now, a new October 2018 review of class size research around the world finds at most small benefits to small classes when it comes to reading. In math, it found no benefits at all.

“Class size reduction is costly,” the researchers wrote. “The available evidence points to no or only very small effect sizes of small classes in comparison to larger classes. Moreover, we cannot rule out the possibility that small classes may be counterproductive for some students.”

Since approximately 96% of the SDUSD annual budget is applied to human resource expense, primarily Teachers, it makes sense that Union sychophants like Barrera would, to use an SDUSD propaganda term, be “ALL IN” for smaller class sizes and therefore more costly staff and more union dues rolling into his re-election campaign.

We also feel compelled to address the ridiculous “All In” propaganda campaign on the SDUSD website:

As we said last Sunday…San Diego Unified Students are “All In”…

ALL IN Asynchronous Student Warehouses being baby-sat by uncredentialed office clerks and other rank and file district personnel while the SDUSD receives FULL per Student attendance money for them from the State and Federal governments and continues to beg for more.

Like usual, the SDUSD is ALL IN for the money while a FULL education for ALL SDUSD Students comes in DEAD LAST!

Another ALL IN message on the SDUSD website is the announcement of the ridiculous rescheduled “community forum to meet and interact with the finalists for the superintendent position.”

District Deeds estimates 400,000 SDUSD Stakeholders including 118,000 Students, 12,000 District Employees, over 70,000 Parents/Guardians and over 200,000 taxpayers are being provided the following opportunity to “meet and interact” with the preidentified, predetermined 2 (not 3 as promised) Superintendent candidates:

Here is the math:

12 – 1:30 pm = 90 minutes

90 minutes x 60 seconds = 5,400 seconds

5,400 seconds divided by 400,000 SDUSD Stakeholders divided by 2 candidates  =

.00675 seconds PER STAKEHOLDER to “Meet and Interact with each Superintendent Candidate!!!

.00675 Seconds!!!

Unfortunately it takes EVEN LESS TIME for those 400,000 SDUSD Stakeholders to conclude that the current SDUSD Board of Education, lead by Trustee Tricky Dick Barrera, is hopelessly and irrevocably corrupt.

And even less time to determine why SDUSD enrollment and trust in SDUSD “leadership” continues to shrink nanosecond by nanosecond.

ikonicstopwatch timer stopwatch tag heuer cronometro GIF

Tick…tick…tick…


Now for our quote of the week regarding trust from a world renowned source:

“Whoever is careless with the truth in small matters cannot be trusted with important matters. – Albert Einstein

IF

  • Your family has been injured by the San Diego Unified School District, go to the District Deeds Complaint Forms page to find instructions to fight for your Civil Rights!
  • You want to be sure you don’t miss an issue of District Deeds, click the “follow” button below and you will get an email automatically when an article is published on District Deeds.