Could administrative funding be better spent?

The cost of school administration and its effect on the resources available for instruction have been the subject of countless speeches, op-ed articles and talk radio discussions since former U.S. Secretary of Education William Bennett first applied the "blob" description to administration almost 20 years ago. Today even staunch supporters of public education sometimes rely on the same misperceptions.

But do the facts support the contention that considerable money now spent on administration could be channeled more productively to instruction--in other words, to increase teacher salaries or reduce class sizes?

The reality of today's school expenditures, according to 2002-03 survey data collected by Educational Research Service, is that only six cents of every dollar is allocated to central-office administration and school board services, such as legal counsel and school census. Further, the federal government or state legislative mandates require many of the functions included in this budget category.

Money Source

ERS survey data show two-thirds of school budgets currently are allocated to direct instructional services. Specifically, 67.8 percent of the average school district budget goes to classroom instruction, special education, books and materials, auxiliary instructional services, curriculum development and staff development.

Another fifth of the budget goes to support school-related functions such as heating and cooling of schools, transportation, cleaning and routine maintenance, student counseling and health-related services.

Only 6.3 percent of the budget is allocated for all central-office and school board functions. Among these are school personnel issues, such as ensuring each school has well-prepared teachers and paying them. Business functions are performed, such as attending to building support services, including maintenance and safety issues.

Central-office personnel also make provisions for and supervise food, transportation and health-related services. And the offices of the superintendent and assistant/associate superintendents must plan for future school building and renovation needs.

Diverting Money

On the mistaken assumption that large proportions of school district budgets are going to administrative overhead, some school critics have proposed money be diverted from administration to increasing teacher salaries or reducing class sizes. In the typical school district's budget, however, little money presently goes to administration that could be reallocated.

The Consortium for Policy Research in Education's Finance Center pointed out in one report that "since many central-office functions--fiscal services, transportation coordination, personnel administration and so on--need to be performed at some level, even eliminating central offices entirely would not allow a district to use all central-office administrative dollars for other purposes."

With increased state and federal mandates such as No Child Left Behind, many of which are underfunded, there are new strains on administrative dollars. In fact, 70 percent of superintendents and 58 percent of principals say insufficient school funding is the most significant issue facing school districts, according to a report released earlier this year by Public Agenda, a nonpartisan, nonprofit public opinion research organization.

Analyzing school spending data for the percentage of the personnel budget allocated to salaries, retirement contributions and fringe benefits, ERS researchers found the lion's share, 65.2 percent, already committed to classroom teachers. An additional 25.4 percent goes to auxiliary and support personnel. Only 4 percent goes to central-office administrators, and 5.4 percent goes to site administrators.

Looking at class sizes, research data show the ratio of pupils to teachers has declined over the past decade, even without reducing administrative spending. Ten years of pupil/teacher ratio data collected by ERS researchers show a 12.4 percent decline in pupil/teacher ratios, from 18.5 pupils per teacher in 1992-93 to 16.2 in 2002-03. And, of course, a smaller ratio means more teachers are needed, increasing rather than decreasing the complexity of administration and administrative spending.

Clearly, most proposals to shift resources away from administration have been made without consideration of pertinent financial data or how an institution as large and important as public education could function effectively without an adequate, well-trained and effective leadership staff.

Resources

John Forsyth suggests these resources on the subject:

* "Budgeted Revenues and Expenditures in Public School Systems: Current Status and Trends, Update 2003," Educational Research Service, 800-791-9308, www.ers.org.

* "Staffing Patterns in Public School Systems: Current Status and Trends, Update 2003," ERS, 800-791-9308, www.ers.org.

* "Rolling Up Their Sleeves: Superintendents and Principals Talk About What's Needed to Fix Public Schools," Public Agenda, 212-686-6610, www.publicagenda.org.

John Forsyth is president and director of research of Educational Research Service, 2000 Clarendon Blvd., Arlington, VA 22201. E-mail: [e-mail]