Kansas can expect to pay out an additional $317 million to benefit at-risk students for the 2009-2010 school year, unless additional cuts are made, according to Kansas State Department of Education deputy commissioner of education Dale Dennis.

While the funding must be allocated to assist at-risk students, the state determines the total amount each school should receive based on how many students at the school receive free lunches.

Federal guidelines stipulate that students of families with below 130 percent of the poverty rate qualify for free lunches.

Dennis said the state has been paying out a greater amount of additional funding in recent years due to the recession.

“The numbers have gone up particularly in the last two years since the recession,” Dennis told Kansas Liberty. “We just have so many people who are without jobs all over the state.”

For the 2009-2010 school year there is expected to be roughly 170,912 students who will qualify for free lunches, which is almost 19,000 more than the amount of students who qualified in the 2008-2009 school year.

Because districts use the base state aid number in the formula for determining the funds to benefit at-risk students when the state increases funds to schools, the amount of money allocated to each at-risk student also proportionately increases.

For example, Dennis said the state is currently expected to allocate an additional $1,855 for each student who qualifies for free lunch. For the 2005-2006 year, schools received a lower base state aid which translated to just $822 being allocated for each free-lunch student.

So if the state decides to cut additional funds from school budgets the amount of money they would be required to allocate for at-risk students would also be cut.

“Every time you have a cut, that at-risk funding will decrease,” Dennis said.

The state has increased the amount of funding based on free-lunch students by more than $200 million in the last five years.

• -Districts received $110.6 million based on free lunch count for 2005-2006
• -Districts received $164.6 million based on free lunch count for 2006-2007
• -Districts received $230.9 million based on free lunch count for 2006-2007
• -Districts received $305.2 million based on free lunch count for 2007-2008
• -Districts are currently expected to receive $317 million for 2009-2010 school year, but could receive less if more cuts are made

A November 2006 audit conducted by the Legislative Division of the Post Audit delved into the topic of whether or not the number of students identified as receiving free lunches, actually qualified for the benefit.

The audit found that out of a sample of 500 students who received free lunches, 85 actually did not qualify for the benefits.

“Projecting our results to all free-lunch students, we estimate the State paid almost $19 million in at-risk funds for nearly 23,000 ineligible students in 2005-06,” the audit said. “Many households are able to under-report their income and still receive free lunches because federal law requires school district officials to accept their applications at face value.”

Small business advocate Ken Daniel has performed his own research to determine whether or not the state has been paying the accurate amount of additional funds, which he has presented during legislative hearings. Daniel used his information to argue that legislators should eliminate any inappropriate school funding before they consider placing additional taxes on small business.

Daniel compared the amount of children who were identified by the U.S. Census as living 130 percent below the federal poverty rate to the actual number of students receiving free lunch benefits and found there was a great discrepancy between the two amounts.

“The numbers were just way overblown,” Daniel told Kansas Liberty.

Daniel’s findings corresponded with the audit which determined that for the 2003-2004 school year, school districts claimed that 130,000 qualified for free lunches while the Census identified that only 76,000 children lived below the specified poverty rate.

Daniel said he believed that districts were utilizing the free lunch count to leverage as much additional funds as they could, and said he had concerns this situation would only magnify as the state starts making deeper cuts to K-12.

“The amount of money we have given them for at-risk kids has gone up every single year,” Daniel said. “They are just milking it.”

It is important to note that while additional funding is determined by the number of students who qualify for free lunches, the funding is required to benefit those students determined to fall in the at-risk category.

The Kansas State Department of Education has a lengthy definition which encompasses all of the different variables that could be used to categorize a student as “high risk.”

A student could be put into this group if they are homeless, are learning English as a second language, if they are not currently performing at their grade level, or has repeatedly been expelled.

While the funds must go to benefit at-risk students, the actual total amount of at-risk students a district believes it has, does not impact how much additional funds it receives.

Despite the massive increase in regular as well as at-risk funding, school advocates are continuing to push for more money and have even threatened to sue the state if they don’t receive the funds they want.

It is unlikely the state will be able to come up with the additional funds unless they raise taxes or significantly cut from other expensive state agencies such as social services caseloads.

In light of the most recent budget deficit, Gov. Mark Parkinson said he would be making the necessary cuts to balance the budget, and even the Kansas National Education Association understands that this will likely mean greater cuts to K-12.

“The Governor’s action would make cuts for the current school year and perhaps offset the need for the legislature to make immediate cuts when they convene in January,” the KNEA Oct. 30 Under the Dome Report said. “And while it has been hoped that this action would not be necessary, no one is naïve enough to believe that it was not possible.”

Resources:

Previously on Kansas Liberty:

The Week in Review