Providence attorney Sam Zurier, who led the analysis of funding formulas at the last RI is Ready meeting, released a detailed response to yesterday's RI Dept. of Education funding formula FAQ, taking issue with some of their central assertions. In his e-mail — cc'd to the same list copied on yesterday's RIDE mailing — he makes very clear that he is supports a formula and RIDE's efforts to move the process along, which makes his critique of their basic assumptions all the more pointed.

Take for example, his deconstruction of RIDE's assertion that the overall level of state funding is adequate, in which they state that "RI ranks in the top ten for education funding in the nation." Zurier's reply is worth quoting at length:

There are several other ways to measure Rhode Island’s overall level of state aid to public education that indicate the need for substantial additional funds. Before discussing those, however, let’s begin with the methodological problem with nominal state dollars per pupil. If we want to use this comparison, we must adjust for the cost of living in each state. I found a state-by-state cost of living comparison from the Missouri Economic Research and Information Center at this link: http://www.missourieconomy.org/indicators/cost_of_living/index.stm

It shows that the cost of living in Rhode Island in the 4th quarter of 2009 was 19.2% above the national average. I then adjusted each state’s per pupil expenditures by their respective cost of living. The data set I used was from the U.S. Census, Survey of Local Government Finances - School Systems for 2006-07 (most recent year available) Table 11. It lists Rhode Island at $5,531 per pupil of state aid, above the national average of $5,466 per pupil. I then adjusted each state’s total by the cost of living factors in the Missouri study. Adjusting for its high cost of living, Rhode Island’s state per pupil contribution becomes $4,640, more than $800 below the national average, and 33 in the country (where the highest is Vermont.) Thus, Rhode Island is in the bottom third nationally in this category when you factor in the cost of living.

You can perform the same exercise when it comes to the State’s overall spending per pupil (combining federal, state and local funds), which RIDE listed in its application for Race to the Top funds as being the 6th highest in the country. Using the U.S. Census data for all states (U.S. Census, Survey of Local Government Finances - School Systems for 2006-07, Table 11) I found that RI’s $13,964 should be scaled down to $11,714, which is 38th highest in the country (or, if you prefer, 13th lowest in the country), not 6th highest.

There are other measurements of the inadequacy of the total amount of Rhode Island state aid. If you measure the State’s contribution to the total education budget in Rhode Island in the most recent year for national data, we contributed 36.2%, with the Federal government contributing 3.2% and local communities 60.6%. In contrast, the national norm is 50%, Massachusetts is 47.7% and Vermont is 86.8%. Rhode Island’s state share is the 44th highest or, if you prefer, the 7th lowest in the United States of America according to this data set (National Education Association, Rankings and Estimates, 2006-07).

In fact, the Rhode Island state share has declined in the past three years because we level funded State aid in 2007 and 2008, and reduced state aid in favor of Federal stimulus funds in 2009.

Finally, the current level of State aid is inadequate according to the 2007 report of a study group that was commissioned by the General Assembly and whose members included Peter McWalters, the Commissioner at the time and Patrick Guida, Vice Chair of the Board of Regents. The Technical Advisory Group prepared a report stating that adequate State funding required that the State contribute 44% of the expense, not 36.2%. A link to the report is here: http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/Documents/FATAG_FR.pdf. It is difficult to accept the concept that this blue-ribbon panel (which included the Commissioner of Education and the Vice Chair of the Board of Regents) could have missed the mark by the wide margin claimed in RIDE’s current thinking.

He goes on with similarly sharp, well-supported critiques of the core instruction amount, the student success factor, the quadratic mean, and the special pool of funding for Central Falls, which, he says, "represents the 'canary in the coal mine' that signals the inadequacy of the RIDE formula." His response is worth reading in its entirety, and he gave me permission to repost it here.

Download Zurier's analysis

Resources:
RIDE funding formula page
RI is Ready on Facebook

Full disclosure: I am a member of RI is Ready, and I support a fair, equitable funding formula.