Preliminary Analysis of Governor Malloys Biennial Budget Proposal

February 18, 2015

18, 2015, Governor Malloy released his biennial budget proposal, including his proposed budget for education for fiscal year 2016 and 2017 (FY16 and FY17). The p
nor Malloys continued commitment to improving education by providing additional funding to expand high-quality options and maintaining funding for other critical im
overnors proposed budget falls short, however, of the bold change needed to improve outcomes and opportunities for the 40,000 children who currently attend chron
hools.1 It reduces funds to programs that serve our highest need schools and districts, such as the Commissioners Network; creates only limited new school options
e larger problem of fixing our broken system of school finance. Key points from the Governors Proposed Education Budget include:

for the Education Cost Sharing (ECS) Grant and Alliance District programs: The state is no longer following the ECS formula. In the Governors proposal, distr
nding levels based on amounts that they have received previously via the ECS line item and Alliance District program for the 30 lowest-performing districts.

ccess to High Quality Public School Options: Per-pupil funding for charter schools remains flat and lower than most traditional schools (at $11,000) because the
per-pupil funding increase for charter school students. FY16 funding for charter schools includes an additional $12 million for 1,250 new seats and $7.9 million in
seats, according to the Governors introductory budget documents. The Department of Education Budget Summary also includes a $2 million increase to expan
schools. These increased funds cover approved growth at existing state charter schools. This analysis may change once the state releases more information beca
er schools and local charter school start-up is included in the Education Equalization Grants (ECS) line item (which is not broken down in the currently available do

16 funding for magnet schools increases significantly, with a 12% increase equalling nearly $36 million and a slight decrease for FY17. Conversely, FY16 funding f
ecreases significantly by approximately $9 million (or 43%), and increases only slightly from FY16 to FY17. Proposed FY16 funding for the Open Choice program
rly 2%) from FY15 to FY16, and further increases by an additional $5 million from FY16 to FY17.

n the Lowest Performing Schools and Districts: Funding for Commissioners Network schools in FY16 decreases by about 27%. The Governors proposal red
rs Network funding from $17.5 million in FY15 to about $13 million for each year of the FY16-17 biennium. We await further detail on how this impacts the number
ipate in the program. Proposed funding must be accompanied by legislative changes to strengthen the Network.

y with High Quality Early Childhood Education: The Governor proposed a modest 6% decrease in early childhood program funding. Funding is decreased to $
of the biennium. Proposed funding for the K-3 Reading Assessment Pilot is reduced by about 14% to $2.6 million for each year of the biennium. However, Scho
ses by more than $3 million (or 4%) in FY16 and remains the same for FY17.

reat Teachers, Principals, and Leaders: The Governor proposed a slight increase of less than 1% (about $34,000) from FY15 to FY16 for Talent Development,
ement the states teacher and principal evaluation program. Similarly, the FY17 budget proposes only a slight increase from FY16 of about $7,500.

dards, Accountability, and Transparency: Proposed funding for Common Core implementation remains the same as FY15 at just under $6 million, with no dolla
either FY16 or FY17.

is We Can Solve: Connecticuts Failing Schools and Their Impact. Nov. 2014. http://www.conncan.org/media-room/2014-11-connecticut-education-in-crisis-40000-children-trapp

Preliminary
Education Budget Summary
and FY17 - February 18, 2015

Notes:
1. Based on FY15 revised budget and la
rescissions (See OFA Analysis of Resciss
2015).

2. As of FY13, the Charter Schools line it

included within the Education Equalizatio
(ECS) line. In this proposal, the line item
both state charter school funding and lo
start-up funding. For this reason, the tot
amount does not match the total amoun
for the line item.

3. Includes School Readiness Quality En

and School Readiness.

4. Includes Head Start Services, Head S

Enhancement, and Head Start - Early Ch
Link. The only line item with proposed fu
FY16 and FY17 is Head Start Services.

5. In prior years (FY14 and FY15), the Ne

Replicated Schools line item was specifi
charter school funding. The current prop
not specify as such.

Office of Fiscal Analysis. Conn. State Budget: FY15 Revisions. Oct. 15, 2014. http://www.cga.ct.gov/ofa/Documents/year/BB/2015BB-2014101

Connecticut%20Budget%20Revisions.pdf; Conn. Office of Fiscal Analysis. Analysis of January 22, 2015 Governor's FY15 Rescissions. Feb. 3, 2015.
t.gov/ofa/Documents/year/BB/2015BB-20141015_FY%2015%20Connecticut%20Budget%20Revisions.pdf; Conn. Office of Policy and Management. Conn. FY16 - FY17 B
et Summary. Feb. 18, 2015. http://www.ct.gov/opm/cwp/view.asp?a=2958&Q=560960&PM=1