Gross Funding Inequality for Carrboro High School

Does CHS have the same faculty payroll as the other two, especially in terms of salary bands?  That might explain a lot if their teachers are not at the same levels of seniority.  If so, you are not comparing apples to apples.GO HEELS!

Your break-down doesn't break out salaries... which would be the place to start, in order to find out if Fred's onto something or if Carrboro is somehow being shortchanged in "quality" teachers.  Also, Carrboro is the newest of all these schools, raising possibilities that it's still finding its way in negotiating the financial ins and outs.  That could explain why the 4 items you highlight (field trips, staff development, instructional supplies, and text books) aren't on a par.  (Yet?).   In that vein, I also would want to see a breakout of things like heating/cooling costs, etc.  It might only be a small difference, but is it possible their plant overhead isn't as high as the older schools'?  I hate to see a jump to "ugly" assumptions based on bottom-lines before looking at all of what goes into them, as well as the context.  If your suspicions are borne out, you're on firmer ground raising heck about it if you really do know that the faculty is less talented or can show how the distributions are rigged, exactly, to penalize Carrboro students.    Finally, although I never agree with, let alone support, this position, you're going to find some who argue that spending for education doesn't equal excellence.

The differences in salary/benefit allocations are enormous:  CHS - $4,896; Chapel Hill - $7,333; East - $6,776.  Some of this can be attributed to the more experienced -- and therefore higher paid -- staff at the older schools.  But the difference is still enormous.  Regardless, there's no rationale for the disparity in other areas.  Allocations for staff development, for example, should be higher for a new school with inexperienced faculty.  And field trip money should definitely be in the same ballpark.

Free/Reduced Lunch:  CHS - 24.4%; Chapel Hill - 18%; East - 13%**In raw numbers, this means that CHS, with 842 students, has more 13 economically-disadvantaged than East, which has 1475 students (75% larger than CHS).ESL Student Enrollment:  CHS - 12%; Chapel Hill - 6%; East - 8%**This means that CHS has 20 more ESL students than Chapel Hill, which has 1355 students (61% larger).These populations require MORE resources, rather than LESS, which is what they have been given under the current budget arrangements.

Appreciate the added information.  Now, to whom should questions/objections be addressed with an expectation of actually fixing things?  Presumably, the schools themselves prepare budgetary requests and submit them to district and board, correct?  Sorry not to know the chain of events here (it's been more than a decade since I had a student in the system), but if allocations are badly imbalanced, how/where in the process did this happen, and how do you get it fixed once you've called attention to it? 

First, I don't have a dog in this fight other than being a taxpayer. The textbook and supply difference do concern me. Why are these two so out of balance? Something that may impact those numbers is the courses offered at each school, just a thought.On a different note I saw where one of the possible budget saving ideas for the Chapel Hill/Carrboro System was to have core teachers teach 5 classes a day instead of the 4 classes now. My question is how many class periods are there now?

Some of the figures in the budget packette were incorrect and thus the conlusions drawn from those figures above are also incorrect.  The district has now corrected the data and provides it on the district website here.  The only substantive difference in funding between the high schools is in the salary lines for the reason explained below.    

The Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools recently received claims that
funding given to the district's three high schools has not been
distributed in an equitable manner.  These claims were based on
erroneous information that appeared as supporting documents in the back
of the Superintendent's Recommended Budget for 2009-2010.  We apologize
for any confusion or misunderstanding this may have caused.  We are
posting this spreadsheet that accurately reflects the funding provided
to the three schools.  Please note that differences in the salary and
budget lines reflect variations in years of experience (and higher
compensation for those with more years of experience) held by staff
members at the different schools.

Even if the revised numbers are accurate, the school board and administration are in denial about the inequities at Carrboro High School.  There are still questions about:* breadth of course offerings* too many combined classes (ex: French 2/3 taught together)* overloading teachers with too many courses* teachers working outside their specialties* demographics of the schoolIn the end, the school still receives fewer resources (although perhaps not to the magnitude that it previously appeared) -- in spite of the fact that small schools require greater resources per student AND in spite of the alarming demographics of the school.Currently, 12% of CHS students are English as a Second Language, compared with 8% at East and 6% at Chapel Hill.  These students enrich our community, but they are higher risk of dropping out and require more resources at the school.  Yet, we still have less funding. Further, 24.4% of CHS students receive free/reduced lunch.  Some quick math
says that for every 6 or 7 students who transfer to other schools, that number of students will increase by about 1 percent.  So it wouldn't be surprising if the free/reduced lunch rises to 30% next year.  And clamping down on the transfer policy still wouldn't fix the problem, which is that students who are not getting comparable opportunities at Carrboro High School want to go elsewhere. For you budget hawks out there:  I'm not saying spend more money (although that might be inevitable), I'm saying share the plentiful resources of the district with this school.

Mike,We are not seeking perfection.  We are asking for comparable education opportunities -- both academic and otherwise -- for our students . When the new high school was proposed, many people voiced their concerns that a smaller school would not have the same course selection and opportunities as its larger siblings.  To imply that these concerns are new -- or that we should have fought redistricting -- is simply not true, or relevant.  We are asking that the school board and administration find ways to mitigate the differences between the schools, rather than deny they exist.  The "small schools" movement touts the advantages of smaller school in terms of leadership
opportunities for students, higher graduation rates, better relationships with the staff and faculty, and a sense of "belonging." 
But the academic research and literature are very clear that smaller
schools require more resources to offer a comparable education.  Right now, the administration is applying the per-student formulas that work well for our large high schools to a school that is about 45 percent smaller, rather than looking for creative ways to offer comparable opportunities (and not all of them cost more money). Carrboro High School is a good high school.  But unless it offers better teacher support, broader course selections and appropriate art, music and theater classrooms, it will lose its best and most creative students and limit the opportunities for those who stay.  As important, the community will have lost an
opportunity  to build a great school from scratch.  And that will be tragic.

Redistricting is relevant.  Our district uses redistricting as the primary method to balance schools by SES rather than the Mecklenburg County method of redistributing resources.  Resources do follow children for ELL and EC services.  At the elementary level, there are also federal funds for the low wealth schools but the high schools are all relatively close.