Archives for category: Charts & graphs

from Bloomberg, a useful list:

  1. Giving out raises faster than revenues are growing.
  2. Giving out raises and increasing benefits when revenues are falling.
  3. Giving out raises and benefits retroactively.
  4. Allowing employees to cash out unlimited amounts of sick leave when they retire.
  5. Providing lifetime health care for retirees.

In San Jose, these mistakes have resulted in a sharp drop in number of public employees per 1000 residents:

(click on chart to enlarge)

Equity & Excellence (E&E) scores.

Equity & Excellence is “the percentage of grapduates who passed at least one college-level test [AP or IB] during their high school career.”

New York
high schools

(131 schools)

2012
Equity and Excellence:
% passing at least 1
AP exam by graduation
Bronxville  95.9%
Rye  91%
Horace Greeley
2011
 79%
Edgemont  78%
Yonkers  77% (IB program)
Dobbs Ferry  74% IB (52.8% in 2011)*
Adlai Stevenson
High School
Lincolnshire, IL
 70.8%
Pleasantville  66%
Rye Neck  65%
Briarcliff  61%
Irvington  55.6%
Croton Harmon  55%
Sleepy Hollow  39.8%

* With only 2 years of data, it’s not clear how to interpret Dobbs Ferry’s jump.

UPDATE 11/23/2013: According to the high school principal, our most recent “Equity and Excellence” score is 63%. Sixty-three percent of last year’s graduating class had passed at least one AP test.

AND SEE:
ELA scores – grades 3-8 & Regents (5/1/2012)
ELA scores compared (5/1/2012)
AP pass rates (5/1/2012)
Math scores (5/1/2012)
Math scores compared (5/1/2012)

Per pupil spending
What do home buyers want?

ALL STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT POSTS
INDEX of topics and posts

ADVANCED PLACEMENT
AP pass rates
55.6% I.H.S. pass at least 1 AP exam by graduation
Why the AP pass rate matters
What is the Equity and Excellence score?
College readiness scores (US News)

To meet school payroll and other expenses without layoffs or a cap on raises, we will arguably need something in the neighborhood of a 5% tax increase each year.

Unfortunately, very few people are experiencing 5% annual increases in household income.

Over time, that’s a problem.

Take a family earning $150,000 in 2012 paying $15,000 in school taxes. Assume property taxes increase by 5% each year, while household income increases by the national average of 2%.

Here’s what happens in 10 years time:

Year Household 
Increases
2%/year
Total
%
Change 
School Taxes
Increase
5%/year
Total
%
Change
 % of
Income to
School 

Taxes
 Year 1  $150,000  $15,000 10%
 Year 10  $182,849  22%  $24,433  63% 13%

In Year 1, this family spends 10% of income on school taxes. Over the next decade taxes rise by a total of 63% while income rises by only 22%, so now this family is spending 13% of household income on school taxes (and their children are taking out loans to pay for college).

When people talk about school spending and taxes being “unsustainable,” this is what they mean. The only way to fund Irvington schools at the level we are funding them is to gentrify: the “big rich” will have to move in, and the “little rich” will have to move out. It seems to me that this process has been taking place for some time now.

The “big poor,” a term coined by my friend D., need to move to Connecticut.

Or Riverdale. #SENDOUT

compound calculator
percent change
division calculator

AND SEE:
What people who do not have children in the schools pay
to educate the children of people who do

How we got here
4 is not 2
Budget vote
Core Knowledge: curriculum & property values

It seems that the share of our economy devoted to information technology is plunging, whereas the share devoted to primary metals production is soaring.  In 2000 IT was 2 1/2 times larger than primary metals.  Now primary metals is far bigger.  We desperately need to retrain Silicon Valley engineers on how to dig up copper in the Arizona desert; otherwise Silicon Valley will soon look like Detroit.
The Money Illusion


source: Modeled Behavior

In public education, it is an article of faith that 21st century students need 21st century skills, and 21st century skills are the skills you need to invent Facebook: “technology.”

Students need to learn “technology,” and to learn “technology,” students need to attend schools that buy lots of “technology.”

Maybe not.

AND SEE:
what people who do not have children in the schools pay to educate the children of people who do
how we got here
4 is not 2
budget vote
Core Knowledge: curriculum & property values

  VOTES, VOTERS, AND BULLET VOTES
  ROBYN KERNER  797
  MARIA KASHKIN  732
  ROBYNE CAMP  705
  JOHN DAWSON  391
  DELLA LENZ  320
 TOTAL  2945
 TOTAL # INDIVIDUAL VOTERS  1578
 TOTAL # POTENTIAL VOTES FOR 2 SEATS (2 X 1578)  3156
 TOTAL # (possible) BULLET VOTES (3156 – 2945)   211

People hate to bullet vote.


AND SEE:
what people who do not have children in the schools pay to educate the children of people who do
how we got here
4 is not 2
budget vote
Core Knowledge: curriculum & property values

 BUDGET
 YES   904  57%
 NO   425  27%
 ABSTAIN   249  16%
 TOTAL  1578

Election: May 15, 2012

The folks in the press can quote me. We will need to go over the tax cap next year.
– BOE member Bob Grados
meeting of the Board of Education
March 6, 2012
Tape #5
20:53:55


AND SEE:
What people who do not have children in the schools pay
to educate the children of people who do

How we got here
4 is not 2
Budget vote
Core Knowledge: curriculum & property values

Here’s a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation to estimate the shortfall we face in 2013-2014.

Assuming no change to “Other” expenses (which is probably unrealistic), I come up with a $610,000 shortfall. Personnel is 80% of the budget, so If the union does not agree to cap raises at 2%, that would mean roughly 6 teachers laid off in order to fund 4% raises.

(6 teachers because under LIFO the teachers earning the lowest salaries are laid off first. You have to lay off more of them to make up the shortfall.)

Obviously, these are very rough calculations, but they’re not a bad place to start.

FTE = full-time equivalent Essentially, 1 FTE = 1 teacher.

2012-2013 BUDGET
Personnel $40,800,000
All other $10,200,000
TOTAL $51,000,000
 2013-2014 BUDGET
 4% increase Personnel  $42,432,000
 All other (0% no increase)  $10,200,000
TOTAL  $52,632,000
PERCENT INCREASE   3%
 budget w/2% increase $52,020,000
SHORTFALL  $612,000
 # FTEs POTENTIALLY LOST  ~ 6

AND SEE:
4 is not 2

My sister says that a bar graph is much clearer than the line graphs I used in my first post. I think she’s right.

This chart shows the average size of three hypothetical employees’ annual rise:

BLUE: average Irvington teacher
RED: average employee of state and local government
YELLOW: average employee in private sector

The issue here isn’t the absolute amount of IUFSD compensation — but, rather, the speed with which it is increasing.

Every year for many years Irvington teachers have had a higher percent-increase in compensation than the average in the private sector and in state and local government. This is the difficulty, and this is what people are talking about when they say school spending is “unsustainable.”

Employee compensation can’t go up faster than taxpayer compensation forever. It’s unsustainable.

DATA:
Wages & Salaries: Private Industry Workers (FRED)

Wages & Salaries: State and Local Govt (FRED)
AND SEE:
4 is not 2

click image to enlarge

3 employees with some but not all salaries

Data used in chart

What’s important to notice here is that Irvington teacher wages, which will increase at an average rate of 4% a year for the next 4 years, are likely to pull away from taxpayer wages.

NOTE: In the chart above, I have assumed the following percent increase in wages each year:

  • 4% for Irvington teachers
  • 1.1% for  state and local government employees
  • 1.9% for private sector employees

If that assumption holds true, the gap between the blue line on top and the green and red lines down below will grow wider.

AND SEE:
Average teacher compensation IUFSD

Wages & Salaries: Private Industry Workers (FRED)
Wages & Salaries: State and Local Govt (FRED)

AND SEE:
4 is not 2

(click on images to enlarge)

Quick note for people who feel they’re not good at math: These graphs show the percent change in people’s wages from the year before.

The figure 7.5%, on the left side of both graphs, means that in 2006 the “average” Irvington teacher received a 7.5% increase in salary over what he or she earned in 2005. That same year, the “average” employee of state and local government received a pay increase of 2.8%, while the “average” private sector employee received an increase of 2.5%.

To make things simple (I tutor pre-algebra – !):

Suppose it’s 2005, and we have three workers: a teacher in Irvington, a person working in the private sector, and another person working for state and/or local government.

Let’s say that each worker earns $100,000 for that year’s labor.

Here’s how things change the next year, 2006:

  • Irvington teacher now earns: $107,500.
  • State and local government worker now earns: $102,800
  • Private sector worker now earns: $102,500

The year after that (2007), here’s the situation:

  • Irvington teacher now earns: 115,562.50
  • State and local government worker now earns: $106,706.40
  • Private sector worker now earns: $106,087.50

After just two years, the Irvington teacher is pulling decisively ahead of both the private sector and the government employee – and this difference continues to compound over time.

The gap gets wider.

+++++

Arguably, the two graphs above tell our story.

First of all, by way of background, until very recently no one knew what the average teacher compensation actually was. Proposed budgets were extremely difficult to decipher, and the district flatly refused to tell voters – or the one board member who asked – what the average teacher was being paid. Contracts had to be FOILed, and the salary schedule was not published.

Average teacher salary was the one figure many people needed in order to make sense of the situation. Most of us aren’t accountants, and the arithmetic of percent increases and compounding over time isn’t intuitive.

All of that said, here is the story I think these charts tell:

  1. Prior to the crash, the district was paying salary increases to teachers that were in all likelihood far above the salary increases many or most Irvington taxpayers were receiving.
  2. After the crash, in a depressed economy, the district is still paying salary increases at least double what workers in the private sector are receiving (assuming they still have jobs) and nearly 4 times as large as the increases government workers are receiving (again, assuming the government worker still has a job).
  3. Irvington voters may have failed to notice just how large the district’s annual pay increases were in part because the annual increase in home value was even higher. We were in the midst of a boom, and (almost) everyone was getting richer. The financial reality of district budgets failed to register on voters (and the details of the budget were obfuscated by the administration).
  4. The crash changed everything. Home prices are now far below the level they were when voters were funding 7.5% wage increases and voting ‘yes’ on bonds.
  5. For their part, although Irvington teachers are still receiving annual raises double that of most taxpayers’ annual raises, they also, between 2008 and 2009, suffered a far steeper drop in their annual wage increase than private or government workers: from 7.5 to 4.5 on the day the 2006-2009 contract expired. Their increase decreased more. That matters greatly. People make financial decisions on the basis of projected future income, and suddenly, virtually overnight, teachers’ projected future income changed dramatically.
  6. Thus teachers feel they have made unprecedented concessions during negotiations for the new contract, while taxpayers feel they can’t afford to fund 4% pay increases when they themselves aren’t receiving anything close to 4% pay increases and the value of their homes has tanked.

Both are right.

Wages & Salaries: Private Industry Workers (FRED)
Wages & Salaries: State and Local Govt (FRED)

AND SEE:
4 is not 2

Average pension for new retirees: 2011
Compare and contrast: IBM raises & benefits

Hamilton Project Jobs Gap Calculator