2009%20aug%20nnotes

EQUITY CENTER

News & Notes

August 2009Vol. 28, No. 4

Advocating School Finance Equity and Adequacy in Texas

Wealth Neutrality in Texas Public Schools Facilities Funding

It is no secret that Texas public schools face difficult economic times. With large shortfalls in funding for public schools facing policy-makers and educators, school finance equity and adequacy issues in coming years are likely to be focused on the basic education funding system. However, any approach to creating a wholly equitable system of school funding must include an analysis of facilities funding. In

Texas, this involves the question “Do some school districts have a greater ability to provide quality facilities than others?” - an issue known in school finance as “wealth neutrality.”

Wealth NeutralityWealth neutrality in education may be defined as “relationship measures where, in most cases, perfect equity is defined as the absence of a relationship” (Berne & Steifel, 1984). In other words, wealth neutrality equity exists for students when there is no relationship between the wealth of the school district and the educational opportunity of the students. A recent study undertaken to determine whether or not the Texas public school facilities funding system is statistically inequitable as measured by school district spending discovered specific findings regarding wealth neutrality in facilities construction (Luke, 2007).

Test to Determine Statistical Significance and Non-Significance In order to determine if significant correlations between Texas school districts’ property wealth and their ability to fund facilities construction exist, the Pearson Product-Moment test was administered using per pupil capital outlay data on all 1,039 Texas public school districts in existence during the three-year period of the study (2000-01; 2001-02; 2002-03).

Results of the Test on Weighted DataIn order to determine if equity existed in the weighted system, the initial test was administered to the data to determine whether or not a correlation existed between the per pupil capital outlay expenditures for the study period and school district per pupil wealth per weighted average daily attendance (WADA). The results for the 2000-2001 school year when WADA was correlated to per pupil capital outlay spending for that year was .055 indicating no statistically significant correlation. Results for the 2001-2002 school year were similarly non-significant with a correlation of .051. Results for the 2002-2003 school year were also non-significant with a correlation of .014 (Table 1). The results of the test satisfied the requirement for wealth neutrality when data was tested within the weighted system indicating that, whenever school district capital outlay dollars are equalized wealth neutrality can exist.

Dr. Charles Luke

Dr. Charles Luke has over 26 years combined experience in public education and non-profit organizations. Charles is an independent consultant for Texas Professional Development systems in the fields of education and school law and holds a doctorate from the University of North Texas in Educational Administration.

Charles served as a teacher, principal, and superintendent in Texas public schools. He is the Vice President for Strategic Program Development for the Volunteers of America.

(continued on page 2)

52282 News and Notes.indd 1 8/19/09 11:27 AM

August 2009 Equity Center News & Notes

(continued from FRONT)Wealth Neutrality in Facilities FundingTable 1. Pearson Product-Moment Correlations Between District Property Wealth Per Weighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) and Capital Outlay

Results of the Test on Un-weighted DataNext, un-weighted data was tested to determine a correlation between school district wealth per pupil and capital outlay spending per pupil in the all funds category. Data tested for the 2000-2001 school year yielded a correlation coefficient of .740 indicating statistical significance between per pupil capital outlay spending and per pupil district wealth in that year. Similarly, data tested for the 2001-2002 school year indicated a statistically significant correlation, yielding a correlation coefficient of .705. In the 2002-2003 school year, the data yielded a coefficient of .608, again indicating statistical significance between school district per pupil wealth and per pupil capital outlay spending for that year (Table 2). The results of the test did not satisfy the requirements for wealth neutrality when data was tested within the un-weighted system. Table 2. Pearson Product-Moment Correlations Between District Property, Wealth, and Capital Outlay – All Funds

Test Results for State Facilities Funding Assistance Mechanisms Finally, as the Instructional Facilities Allotment (IFA) and the New Instructional Facilities Allotment (NIFA) are the only state mechanisms for equalizing the facilities funding system, these awards were applied to the data and compared to per pupil capital outlay spending and per pupil school district wealth per weighted average daily attendance (WADA) to determine if a statistically significant correlation existed between these variables.

(continued on BACK)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 2 3 4 5 6

Table 1.Pearson Product-Moment Correlations Between District Property Wealth PerWeighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) and Capital Outlay

1.00 .88** .769** .055 .060 .040 .543** .660** .602** .520**

.881** 1.00 .86** .046 .051 .032 .554** .639** .595** .508**

.769** .859** 1.00 .03 .031 .014 .530** .594** .524** .425**

.055 .046 .027 1.00 .96** .875** -.059 .007 .015 -.011

.060 .051 .031 .963** 1.00 .95** -.066 .012 .019 -.011

.040 .032 .014 .875** .954** 1.00 -.07 .001 .007 -.020

.543** .554** .530** -.059 -.066 -.075 1.00 .47** .461** .277**

.660** .639** .594** .007 .012 .001 .467** 1.00 .77** .551**

.602** .595** .524** .015 .019 .007 .461** .766** 1.00 .62**

.520** .508** .425** -.011 -.011 -.020 .277** .551** .618** 1.00

Capital Outlay (All-Funds) 00-01 - 1

Capital Outlay (All-Funds) 01-02 -2


Wealth Per WADA (00-01) -4



Instructional Facilities Allotment - 7

General Funds (00-01) - 8


General Funds (02-03) -10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).**.

Results of the Test on Un-weighted DataNext, un-weighted data was tested to determine a correlation between school

district wealth per pupil and capital outlay spending per pupil in the all funds category.

Data tested for the 2000-2001 school year yielded a correlation coefficient of .740

indicating statistical significance between per pupil capital outlay spending and per pupil

district wealth in that year. Similarly, data tested for the 2001-2002 school year indicated

a statistically significant correlation, yielding a correlation coefficient of .705. In the

2002-2003 school year, the data yielded a coefficient of .608, again indicating statistical

significance between school district per pupil wealth and per pupil capital outlay

spending for that year (Table 2). The results of the test did not satisfy the requirements

for wealth neutrality when data was tested within the un-weighted system.

Table 2. Pearson Product-Moment Correlations Between District Property, Wealth, andCapital Outlay – All Funds

1.00 1.00** .998** .740** .697** .597**

.999** 1.00 1.00** .748** .705** .603**

.998** .999** 1.00 .75** .709** .608**

.740** .748** .751** 1.00 .88** .769**

.697** .705** .709** .881** 1.00 .86**

.597** .603** .608** .769** .859** 1.00

District Wealth (00-01) - 1






1 2 3 4 5 6


Table 1.Pearson Product-Moment Correlations Between District Property Wealth PerWeighted Average Daily Attendance (WADA) and Capital Outlay

1.00 .88** .769** .055 .060 .040 .543** .660** .602** .520**

.881** 1.00 .86** .046 .051 .032 .554** .639** .595** .508**

.769** .859** 1.00 .03 .031 .014 .530** .594** .524** .425**

.055 .046 .027 1.00 .96** .875** -.059 .007 .015 -.011

.060 .051 .031 .963** 1.00 .95** -.066 .012 .019 -.011

.040 .032 .014 .875** .954** 1.00 -.07 .001 .007 -.020

.543** .554** .530** -.059 -.066 -.075 1.00 .47** .461** .277**

.660** .639** .594** .007 .012 .001 .467** 1.00 .77** .551**

.602** .595** .524** .015 .019 .007 .461** .766** 1.00 .62**

.520** .508** .425** -.011 -.011 -.020 .277** .551** .618** 1.00







Instructional Facilities Allotment - 7



General Funds (02-03) -10

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


Results of the Test on Un-weighted DataNext, un-weighted data was tested to determine a correlation between school

district wealth per pupil and capital outlay spending per pupil in the all funds category.

Data tested for the 2000-2001 school year yielded a correlation coefficient of .740

indicating statistical significance between per pupil capital outlay spending and per pupil

district wealth in that year. Similarly, data tested for the 2001-2002 school year indicated

a statistically significant correlation, yielding a correlation coefficient of .705. In the

2002-2003 school year, the data yielded a coefficient of .608, again indicating statistical

significance between school district per pupil wealth and per pupil capital outlay

spending for that year (Table 2). The results of the test did not satisfy the requirements

for wealth neutrality when data was tested within the un-weighted system.

Table 2. Pearson Product-Moment Correlations Between District Property, Wealth, andCapital Outlay – All Funds

1.00 1.00** .998** .740** .697** .597**

.999** 1.00 1.00** .748** .705** .603**

.998** .999** 1.00 .75** .709** .608**

.740** .748** .751** 1.00 .88** .769**

.697** .705** .709** .881** 1.00 .86**

.597** .603** .608** .769** .859** 1.00







1 2 3 4 5 6




The Equity Center presented Dr. Albert Cortez, Director of Policy for the Intercultural Development Research Association (IDRA) with the Champion of Equity Award at the Equity Center’s annual membership breakfast meeting in June. The award is given for lifetime contribution, commitment and achievement in advancing the pursuit of equitable educational opportunities for all children.

Dr. Cortez received a standing ovation honoring his 30 plus years of outstanding loyalty and devotion to the achievement of equity. Over that time, he worked closely with the Equity Center and other supporters of equity to educate school administrators, board members, teachers, parents, community members, legislators and courts on the inequities that exist in our system of school finance. Dr. Cortez has served as a technical expert and advisor to attorneys in numerous school related court cases including U.S. vs. Texas and Edgewood vs. Kirby. He has developed statewide public awareness campaigns and coordinated IDRA school finance advocacy activities. Additionally, he has developed and directed many major state and national research projects addressing such issues as immigrant education, in-grade retention, adult literacy,

dropouts and causal factors, and student and school accountability.

Upon acceptance of his award, Dr. Cortez shared these words with the audience. “While we’ve gone a long way and have been proud partners with the Equity Center in helping move the agenda forward, we also know that equity has not been achieved. As an individual and an organization, we will not rest and we will not be satisfied until the state of Texas meets, what we think is its obligation, which is, to make sure that each and every child, in each and every neighborhood, in each and every school, regardless of the neighborhood they grew up in, has an equal educational opportunity as reflected in the amount of resources that are provided to each child. We think of it not as an ideal or something that is nice to do, but as the right thing to do. And we appreciate the fact we share that space with all of you who work in this area and do what you do on a daily basis that impact millions of children every day because you’re dedicated and know what’s important, and know it’s the right thing to do.”

Dr. José A. Cárdenas, former superintendent of Edgewood ISD and founder of IDRA once gave the following explanation of the mindset that drove him to establish IDRA.

In one powerful moment, it all came together for me. Scientists had experimented with amoebas in a laboratory, and by using their reactions to color and light, they had trained these amoebas to recognize letters of the alphabet. And I thought, “What if the amoebas had been sent to public schools instead? Then I would be hearing what I always heard about non-readers in our schools: ‘They don’t speak our language! They’re amoeba! How can you expect them to learn? They come from the wrong side of the pond.’

Dr. Albert Cortez Presented with Champion of Equity Award

Dr. Wayne Pierce, Dr. Albert Cortez, Dr. Ray Freeman



What was different and special for those particular amoebas wasn’t their readiness to learn compared with other amoebas, but the context: the laboratory and all the equipment, the skills of the technicians, the elegant process the scientists had designed specifically for amoebas. And I was sure that all children could learn if their schools had effective curricula and material and were properly equipped and their teachers were well-trained and exercised every effort to teach them.

Dr. Ray Freeman, Deputy Executive Director of the Equity Center presented the award stating, “On every front and in everyway, Dr. Cortez has put these goals and dreams to the forefront of his life’s work. They are part of his very core, his being. That is why the Equity Center is honored to name Dr. Albert Cortez our Champion of Equity.”

Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P.Bond Attorneys - www.fulbright.com

W. Jeffrey Kuhn – [email protected] (210) 270-7131

GOLD SPONSORS

SILVER SPONSORS W.B. Kibler Construction CompanyGeneral Contractor

Joe Spoon – www.wbkconstruction.com(214) 358-4601

Ray, Wood & BonillaState & Local Taxation Attorneys

www.rwblaw.net Ray Bonilla (512) 328-8877

A. Bargas and Associates, LLCFurniture Distributorwww.abargasco.com

Chico Bargas (800) 344-2821

First Southwest CompanyFinancial Advisorswww.firstsw.com

Jeff Robert (214) 953-8705

JR3 Education Assoc, WebSmart, iCapRetire/ReHire, Finance/SIS Software, Digital Documents

www.jr3online.com (254) 759-1902 Jim Payne – Bob Clemons – David Hankins

The Aikin GroupFacilities Financing and Consulting

Bob Aikin – [email protected](903) 886-1978

Southwest SecuritiesFinancial Advisors

www.swst.comBruce Wood (972) 978-8661

Schwartz & Eichelbaum Wardell Mehl and Hansen, PC

Preventive School Lawwww.edlaw.com (800) 488-9045

WRA Architects, Inc.www.wraarchitects.com

Tony Apel– [email protected](214) 750-0077

Harris County Dept of Educationwww.hcde-texas.org

Jesus Amezcua – [email protected](713) 696-1371

~ BE SURE NOT TO MISS THIS PRESENTATION ~ TASA/TASB CONFERENCE IN HOUSTON – OCTOBER 2009

“If the State Saves Us One More Time, We’re Not Going to Make It”

Dr. Wayne PierceFriday, October 2, 2009 – Room 320AD – 10:30 am-11:45 am



“I don’t care what they say about me, I keep fighting because I want my grandchildren to have what I and my children never had.” No better words exist to describe the man whose very name is synonymous with the now 40+ year battle to acquire equitable funding for educational opportunities for all the children of Texas.

In a July 27th ceremony at the Edgewood ISD Fine Arts Building, the Equity Center and Edgewood ISD presented its Champion of Equity award to Mr. Demetrio P. Rodriquez of Rodriquez v. San Antonio ISD fame.

Mr. Rodriquez, a 10th grade dropout, armed services veteran, sheet metal worker and father of five children who attended school in Edgewood ISD has admitted over the years that he realized the importance of education too late for himself. But that realization became part of what drove him to push for equitable funding for the educational opportunities afforded his children, grandchildren and all children. That was why he filed the first Texas school finance lawsuit over 40 years ago.

In 1968, when four hundred students at Edgewood High School walked out of classes and marched to the school administration building to present their complaints about tattered and torn textbooks, broken and obsolete typewriters, and the use of tin cans in science labs instead of the normal science beakers students in wealthier districts used, the fight for equitable funding was on! Now, he is still a proponent of the pursuit of equity, and realizes it is a dream that is still only partially realized and must continue to be pursued.

In an April 10, 1994 New York Times article, Mr. Rodriquez said “The state doesn’t give property-poor school systems enough money, leaving them at a disadvantage. We want no more or no less than our fair share, but people have been so greedy and uncaring.” Fifteen years later his quote still rings true.

The Equity Center is pleased to name Mr. Demetrio Rodriquez our Champion of Equity. There is no one in Texas more deserving of such an honor!

Equity Center Recognizes Demetrio P. Rodriquez as a Champion of Equity

July 27, 2009

Pictured left to right: Mr. Rodriguez’s Grandchild Juan Carlos Rodriguez, Daughter Patricia Rodriguez, Senator Leticia Van de Putte, Grandchild Jaclyn Kate Rodriguez, Mr. Demetrio Rodriguez, Dr. Wayne Pierce,

Edgewood ISD Board President Estefana C. Martinez, and Dr. Albert Cortez.



In all three years of the study period, tests indicated a statistically negative correlation between per pupil district wealth per WADA and IFA monies awarded. These results satisfied the requirements for wealth neutrality when IFA monies were compared to school district wealth, indicating that equalization assistance helps improve wealth neutrality. However, the overall study indicated that total IFA and NIFA awards are minimal and do not improve facilities funding equity significantly.

ConclusionIt is clear that equalized dollars appear to help move facilities closer to wealth neutrality. When weighted amounts or funding awarded to provide assistance for poorer school districts were measured, wealth neutrality was satisfied. When un-equalized dollars were measured wealth neutrality was not satisfied. However, as the study revealed, current levels of IFA and EDA funding are minimal at best and do not provide the levels of funding necessary to significantly improve facilities funding equity. It can be assumed then that those students in Texas school districts with a greater local capacity to fund facilities through bonded indebtedness have greater educational opportunity than their poorer counterparts. Wealth neutrality and equitable educational opportunity with regard to facilities funding may only be achieved when facilities funding mechanisms are equalized to a significantly high level of funding.

(continued from page 2)Wealth Neutrality in Facilities Funding

The overall study indicated that total IFA and NIFA awards are minimal and do not improve

facilities funding equity significantly.

ReferencesBerne, R. & Stiefel, L. (1984). The measurement of equity in school finance: Conceptual, methodological, and empirical dimensions. Johns Hopkins University Press: Baltimore, M.D.

Hinkle, D., Wiersma, W., and Jurs, S. (1998) Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences. 4th Ed., Boston, Mass.: Houghton Mifflin.

Luke, C. (2007) Equity in Texas public education facilities funding. Dissertation for Ed.D. in Education Administration. University of North Texas, Denton, Texas. Published digitally online at http://digital.library.unt.edu/permalink/meta-dc-3647

Page 6January 2009 Equity Center News & Notes

2009 GOLD Sponsor - www.jr3online.com

2009 GOLD Sponsor - www.edlaw.com
