Title: Dollars and Data: A Look at K-12 Education Funding in Colorado | Common Sense Institute
Headings: Dollars and Data: A Look at K-12 Education Funding in Colorado
Dollars and Data: A Look at K-12 Education Funding in Colorado
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Here are some of the key findings from this study.
POLICY IMPLICATIONS
METHODOLOGY
STATE CONTEXT
SCHOOL FINANCE ACT
SCHOOL FINANCE FUNDING SUMMARY
STUDENT POPULATION TRENDS
TRENDS IN EDUCATION REVENUE
LOCAL FUNDING
TAX TERMS
TRENDS IN EDUCATION SPENDING
INSTRUCTION AND SUPPORT EXPENDITURES
EXPENDITURE EXAMPLES
TRENDS IN TEACHER SALARIES AND TURNOVER
TEACHER SALARIES
ADMINISTRATOR SALARIES
TEACHER TURNOVER
TEACHER SALARY AND TURNOVER SUMMARY
CONCLUSION
APPENDIX A: LIST OF SCHOOL DISTRICTS BY REGION
APPENDIX B: PER PUPIL REVENUES BY SCHOOL DISTRICT, 2017
APPENDIX C: MILL LEVY OVERRIDES BY SCHOOL DISTRICT, 2017
APPENDIX D: PER PUPIL EXPENDITURES BY SCHOOL DISTRICT, 2017

Content: Despite the rhetoric that teachers are fleeing the profession due to low pay, pressure from state tests, or other factors, the data in this study shows a different picture. Overall, in 2017, teacher turnover was 16.9 percent. When looking all public education positions in the state, turnover that same year was 20.5 percent. An even starker difference is seen when considering that turnover for all jobs—public and private—was 48 percent in Colorado in 2017. Further, only 2.3 percent of teachers responding to a statewide survey in 2017 stated they planned to leave the field of education that year.3 In sum, teacher turnover in Colorado is drastically lower than in most other professions. POLICY IMPLICATIONS
These findings indicate that careful thought should be given to any policies or ballot initiatives focused on K-12 education funding. Pouring more money into a funding system with serious structural flaws is unlikely to affect change in a way that significantly improves student outcomes. The current statutory funding formula for K-12 education collects revenues from taxpayers in an inequitable way and then fails to fully address the disparate local funding levels when allocating total program funding to school districts. Because the formula’s distribution of revenues is not adequately accounting for differences in property wealth, some wealthier districts have far higher per pupil revenue levels than poorer districts. Simply adding more dollars into this system will only perpetuate and even increase these inequities.