LM Sept. 2018

13 / 27

13
Evidence-BasedFunding:
Instrument for Strategic Leadership
By Gary Tipsord, Superintendent, LeRoy CUSD #2
You may have heard IASA Executive Director Dr. Brent Clark
say, “The only significance of $6,119 as a foundation level is
that it is between $6,118 and $6,120.” The number carried no
educational significance.
Through the course of the Vision 20/20 process, we set
to change that model. A core objective evolved, one that
was specifically related to the delivery of instruction and
opportunity for our students.
The Evidence-Based Funding Model, passed last August,
pivots around an Adequacy Target—a unique target
that is driven by the specific students that a district has
a responsibility to serve and by the economic factors
associated with their geographic location in the state, rather
than an arbitrary number like $6,119. More specifically, this
funding solution is about each of us rather than all of us.
That distinction truly is critical to communicating a narrative
and making leadership decisions. Now that the EBM model is
our reality, it’s necessary for us as superintendents to use it
to establish a framework for the next 10 years.
So, what I want to do is challenge each of you to embrace
the comprehensive capacity of this model to tell your story,
to develop a plan for the future and to take on dissent. We
now possess an instrument for those types of strategic
conversations that are data and mathematically driven, rather
than ideologically driven. While opinions do and will continue
to exist, and remain relevant, EBF as an instrument of
leadership allows us to return to the relative data and frame
the dialogue around numbers that carry significance.
Here are some critical questions where the model becomes
more an instrument than just a spreadsheet.
1. Now that we know what our Adequacy Target is, is that
target sufficient to meet the demand of the public that we
are responsible to serve? What will our district look like in
10 years if the state invests according to the design?
2. How do our staffing and services compare to the
research-based design for the students we serve? Are
we overstaffed, and is there intentionality to that staffing?
Are we understaffed, and do we have deficits in learning
because of the staffing structure? Is either the excess
or deficit in staffing meaningful to the demand of our
community? Is there a relationship between this gap
analysis and our student achievement data?
3. What does shared responsibility look like for our
district? Once fully implemented, what is the anticipated
responsibility for the community? How can we rightly
design our tax rate? If we do, what is the impact to the
demand for programming core to our community values?
These are just three themes that come to the surface for
nearly every district in the state in some form or another. Our
ability to create narrative around educational initiatives and
resource management is limitless within the context of the
funding model. We have a powerful tool with which to both
make decisions and have conversations.
In some cases, we can find answers in the model; but in
every case, we can find information around which to have
critical conversations. Regardless of where your district lies
in relative access to resources, the model will allow you to
create a strategic narrative for the next decade.
With ESSA and the recent demand to establish and
communicate an appropriate spending plan related to new
funding and accountability, it is important to begin to leverage
this model as a means of transparent communication and
analysis of resource allocation. We have two steps related to
funding going forward:
1. Communicate how new funding is being utilized to enrich
the experience of our students.
2. Determine if resource allocation to specific buildings and
programs is having an impact on student outcomes.
Finally, if you have specific questions related to School-
Based Accounting, you are encouraged to watch the IASBO
video: And, if you have
specific questions related to the EBF Spending Plan, email:
.