The short answer to the question of whether Chatham County gets enough funding is simple — no, according to schools officials.
But neither does any public school district in North Carolina.
That’s according to the recently-released “Sound Basic Education for All: An Action Plan for North Carolina,” a 300-page report on the State of North Carolina’s adherence to a 1997 ruling in Leandro v. State by the state Supreme Court, which said the state “has a constitutional responsibility to provide every student with an equal opportunity for a sound basic education” — and that the state was failing to meet that responsibility.
The Action Plan added this: “North Carolina’s current education system fails to meet the educational needs of many of its children and thereby fails to provide for the future success of these individuals, their communities, and the state.”
The report — also known as the Leandro report, based on the 1997 court case — was generated by the nonpartisan, California-based firm WestEd as part of an agreement by both the plaintiffs in the suit, a group of parents and school boards, and the State of North Carolina. The state Supreme Court has tracked this case and the state’s progress since 1997.
The document’s release on Dec. 10 generated lots of conversation in the education community across the state.
Chatham County Schools Superintendent Dr. Derrick Jordan said he hasn’t read the full document yet, but plans to. But on the subject of money, he said he doesn’t know if he’ll ever be satisfied with the amount of money the state provides his district, and the report is more or less spot on.
“I think that as things stand today, there are a number of needs that are yet unmet,” he said, “based on the way that the current funding is allotted from the state level to the local level.”
The Leandro report cites several areas where North Carolina’s public education system needs improvement: higher pay for teachers so they join and stay in the profession; better and more equitable education for minority students; revision to the student assessment and school accountability system; and higher quality early childhood programs.
While the document says money is not the only answer to these problems, it does suggest that how funding is allocated and what money is currently being spent is not enough, particularly when it comes to disadvantaged student populations.
Jordan agrees that funding is not the solution in and of itself, but it’s where the fixes start.
“I don’t think there’s a particular amount of money, that’s going to be a magic bullet,” he said. “I do think that money is the basis for the additional resources, and without money, there won’t be additional resources, and without additional resources, there won’t be greater degrees of success for students who struggle the most.”
Chatham spends the sixth most of any district in N.C. on per pupil funding at $3,350 and ranks 86th in state funding per student at $6,132. While state funding per pupil has actually increased by $560 in Chatham since 2015, how that funding can be used is another issue.
The Leandro report said district chief financial officers “most frequently cited obstacle is aligning funding with student needs at the local level.” In the 2010-2011 school year, “allotments with substantial flexibility” made up about three-fourths of state funding. Eight years later, that’s dropped to around 20 percent.
“When funds are restricted to a particular use and cannot be transferred, it restricts district leaders’ ability to make decisions about how to allocate resources to make the greatest impact on student outcomes given their local circumstances,” the report stated.
Jordan agreed, stating, “We have absolutely been frozen by the shifts away from flexibility that have historically been allowed.”
The report suggests that the state spend $8 billion over the next eight years as part of not just adherence to the Leandro ruling, but for the state’s future.
“A deep ongoing commitment and wise investments are vital to building and maintaining the required capacity at the school, district, regional and state levels,” the report states. “The future of the state hangs in the balance.”
While Jordan believes that more funding doesn’t directly lead to better educational outcomes, it can only help.
“It’s probably unreasonable to say, ‘Hey, if you give more money, this will happen,’’” Jordan said. “I can’t give specifics, but I can say with a high percentage of certainty that if more resources are provided, there’s potential to use those resources to provide to the needs of the student, then we will be better equipped to push a kid toward a higher success rate.”
What happens next is up to lawmakers. It’s questionable whether or not the court can mandate the state spend a certain amount of money.
Education funding, particularly teacher pay, has been a subject of debate in the halls of state government for years. The Leandro report provides a recommendation for funding, but also says changes have to be made across the board in practical policy and procedure, including areas Jordan emphasized like helping students with social-emotional needs and children coming into kindergarten and 1st and 2nd grades from various backgrounds and reading levels.
“If we don’t provide ways to provide resources for those things, we’re beating our heads against the wall,” Jordan said. “I would hope that regardless of political persuasion that everyone would agree that if you don’t have adequate needs to meet the resources of those you’re funding, you’re unlikely to meet the goal.”
That goal? Helping students “survive beyond school walls once they’re adults,” he said. “If we do what we’ve always done, we’ll get what we’ve always got.”
Reporter Zachary Horner can be reached at zhorner@chathamnr.com or on Twitter at zhorner@chathamnr.com.