New Hampshire K-12 schools paid out $17,133 per student in 2017-18, lower than Vermont

By The Center Square

Public schools in New Hampshire spent $17,133 per student based on average daily attendance (ADA) figures, the 11th highest expenditure level among the 50 states and the District of Columbia, according to a National Education Association report.

The change in public school expenditures per student based on ADA data from 2016-17 to 2017-18 stood at 3.05 percent, the NEA said.

Public education expenditures in the state would equal $16,694 per student based on fall 2017-18 enrollment totals, the NEA said. Nationwide, such education expenditures averaged $12,602 per student over the same time period.

Spending per child nationwide will rise by 2.5 percent to $12,920 this year, based on fall enrollment numbers, according to the analysis.

The NEA’s examination of ADA numbers showed that expenditures per student have risen 19 percent nationwide since 2010. But in inflation-adjusted dollars, average expenditures inched up 1.9 percent over the last 10 years, according to the NEA.

Public School Expenditures by State

State Expenditures per Student, Based on Fall Enrollments (2017-18) Expenditures per Student, Based on Average Daily Attendance (ADA) (2017-18) Change in ADA Expenditures From 2016-17 to 2017-18 Rank Based on ADA Expenses
New York $23,894 $23,919 2.19% 1
District of Columbia $21,001 $22,195 0.82% 2
Alaska $19,759 $21,907 -0.23% 3
New Jersey $20,171 $20,580 1.72% 4
Connecticut $18,616 $19,935 2.81% 5
Massachusetts $18,657 $19,801 4.15% 6
Vermont $17,164 $18,670 1.12% 7
Pennsylvania $16,838 $18,028 2.73% 8
Wyoming $16,529 $18,011 -1.02% 9
Rhode Island $16,046 $17,289 0.90% 10
New Hampshire $16,694 $17,133 3.05% 11
Illinois $15,426 $16,825 3.15% 12
Maryland $14,859 $15,963 0.94% 13
North Dakota $14,815 $15,801 3.80% 14
Maine $13,842 $15,721 -0.38% 15
Hawaii 14617 $15,142 2.81% 16
Delaware $13,873 $14,881 3.57% 17
Washington $13,077 $14,027 8.26% 18
West Virginia $12,613 $13,717 3.92% 19
California $13,239 $13,632 4.72% 20
Minnesota $13,166 $13,610 0.30% 21
Oregon $12,272 $13,378 5.98% 22
Nebraska $11,802 $13,095 0.14% 23
Ohio $11,713 $12,877 1.49% 24
Virginia $11,952 $12,761 0.39% 25
Iowa $11,273 $12,734 3.17% 26
Montana $11,540 $12,533 0.99% 27
New Mexico $10,636 $12,505 3.22% 28
Wisconsin $11,610 $12,337 0.68% 29
South Carolina $11,525 $12,333 3.68% 30
Louisiana $11,391 $12,200 1.69% 31
Kansas $11,266 $12,145 10.78% 32
Colorado $11,128 $12,026 2.65% 33
Missouri $11,222 $11,744 1.87% 34
Kentucky $10,694 $11,493 1.47% 35
South Dakota $10,557 $11,223 0.19% 36
Georgia $10,670 $11,220 2.16% 37
Arkansas $10,042 $10,845 3.15% 38
Texas $10,124 $10,783 5.91% 39
Florida $9,579 $10,489 5.60% 40
Michigan $10,393 $10,481 4.45% 41
North Carolina $9,645 $10,275 3.28% 42
Alabama $9,762 $10,204 1.59% 43
Nevada $9,548 $10,178 5.32% 44
Tennessee $9,225 $10,089 1.15% 45
Mississippi $9,027 $9,808 2.61% 46
Indiana $8,496 $9,090 -2.11% 47
Arizona $8,123 $8,873 1.57% 48
Oklahoma $8,177 $8,769 3.54% 49
Idaho $6,809 $7,298 0.97% 50
Utah $7,187 $7,257 6.48% 51

Source: National Education Association

Image courtesy of Flickr/401kcalculator.org
Spread the love

8 thoughts on “New Hampshire K-12 schools paid out $17,133 per student in 2017-18, lower than Vermont

  1. I’m sure big public education monopoly puppet Will Mathis will have some great “data driven” explanations. His conclusions are known ahead of time and he selects only the data that furthers his self serving agenda. He reminds me of the kids toy, pull out the string and hear the same garble.

  2. Local school boards of parents and tax payers, running their own schools for their own children, with no federal or state doo- goody mandates, based on what the local taxpayers can afford. AND no subsidies, excepting only gifts to the school,
    NO GIANT Education Blobs to pay and maintain, with their endless mandates.
    NO state or federal taxes for education.
    Love and common sense would prevail. Would work especially well for the rural towns here in Vermont.
    Could work in Burlington, Montpelier. Etc

  3. Another interesting comparison between states would be to see the average paid out per employee of the school system. That figure could then be further separated into the average paid out to teachers and the average paid out to administration personnel. Labor cost usually is the highest line item on a school’s budget and a good figure to compare and correlate to student assessment scores in each state.

    • Good point.

      Vermont’s student/teacher ratio is about 12 to 1.
      Idaho’s student/teacher ratio is about 21 to 1.

      But Staff/Student ratios are more telling. Here’s the list of Vermont’s education staff categories.
      • 13.8 students per general education teacher,
      • 61 students per special education teacher,
      • 46.8 students per support staff, and
      • 182.5 students per principal.

      This translates to a 5 to 1 student per staff ratio in VT. But in Vermont, fewer than half of school staff are teachers. In Idaho, almost 60% of school staff are teachers. If my math serves me, Idaho’s student/staff ratio is about 12.5 to 1. Therefore, Idaho’s labor costs, based on the number of staff, is less than half Vermont’s labor costs…which correlates with the cost/student comparisons.

      Vermont’s average annual teacher pay is $38,449. In Idaho it’s 10% less at $34,801. I suspect the benefits in Idaho are, therefore, less as well.

      But beware the weeds of economic analysis. For example, I can’t determine whether or not Vermont’s student enrollment data is ‘actual’ students, or the ‘equalized’ student enrollment used in cost per student ratios, the later artificially increasing enrollments by about 20%. If the ratios are based on equalized enrollments, Vermont’s ratios could be even lower.

      In looking at these numbers we will certainly hear that cost of living index is higher in Vermont (114.5) than it is in Idaho (92.1), thereby justifying Vermont’s higher salaries and benefits. But this is chicken and egg logic, because one of the significant reasons it costs more to live in Vermont is because Vermonters spend so much more tax revenue to pay for its higher education costs. In other words, the more we invest in our public education monopoly, the more we should invest in the public-school monopoly. It’s a self-fulfilling methodology…i.e. a Pyramid Scheme.

  4. What’s curious is the minimal differential in student performance scores.

    Vermont’s 8th grade NAEP math scores, for example, declined from 295 in 2013 to 287 in 2019.
    Idaho’s 8th grade NAEP math scores were 286 in 2013 and 286 in 2019.

    The critical difference, however, is that Vermont taxpayers spent $18,670 per student in 2019 while Idaho taxpayers spent only $7,298 per student. Can anyone not imagine how much more competitive Vermont’s cost of living would be if its education property taxes declined 60%?

    If Idaho can do it, why can’t Vermont?

Comments are closed.