A research group that arrived last year to examine the Butler School District's budget reported that the district is using its money well but needs more cash to thrive.

The Butler School District was one of three throughout the state selected by the Philadelphia education nonprofit Research for Action. The group contracted with Picus Odden and Associates, a small consulting group that uses academic research on education and school case studies to create a model on how districts ought to allocate their cash.

The consulting group's Allan Odden, a professor emeritus from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said academics in the Butler schools don't have enough money to do everything research says they ought to. However, he also had a lot of praise to give.

“There wasn't really anything material that I could say to the superintendent,” Odden said. “All of his ideas of what he could do, and what he would do if he could, align with what we would advise.”

Odden said that was unusual, and isn't the case in most school districts they dissect. Part of their report is making direct recommendations about staffing changes, shifts such as adding assistant principals or reducing the number of instructional aides to hire more teachers.

But in Butler's case, their recommendations are largely in line with what the district is already doing. In some areas, the district is exceeding those recommendations.

One section of the report states: “Thus, the (evidence-based) model and Butler provide close to a similar level of extra resources for students needing extra academic help, with Butler actually providing modestly more staffing for these students, including students with mild and moderate disabilities.”

Staffing recommendations

Their model would propose several large staffing increases in specific roles, though. Odden would increase the 15-person team of non-academic support staff — like guidance counselors, social workers and psychologists — to a 44-person team. More staff of this type are among additions the school board plans to fund with a proposed tax increase.

Odden also called for the elimination of the district's instructional aide staff. Their model suggests the district does not need the 109 paraprofessionals who were working during the study. School board members noted the consulting group was likely using differing job descriptions than the school board when defining paraprofessionals.

Asked for his overall take, Superintendent Brian White pointed to the differences in the report compared to the district's actual budget.

“The mandates of the state do not match the resources provided by the state,” White said. “Our community has expectations for a high-quality education. This model is different than how we are currently staffed. I hope that the information gleaned from this review provides insights for policymakers across the state to make decisions that our best for students.”

Budget numbers

The top-line proclamation for all three studied districts is a deficit.

In Butler's case, the researchers say the district needs its budget to increase by about $7.6 million to do everything the model says is proven to work well. That would be a spending increase of about $1,225 per pupil, according to the report.

They only studied the portion of the budget directly related to teaching. The group excluded things like transportation, food services, construction, high-cost special education, the central office and student activities. That means they only examined about $48 million of a $103 million budget.

Last October, the group held a community meeting in Butler to gather input to add to their report.

Suzie Bradrick was one of several school board members present at that meeting. Today, she said the report confirms what she pointed to back then: state underfunding of public schools.

“Somebody from the outside came in and objectively looked at our district and gave us some real information that we can work with,” Bradrick said. “When we say, this is how much it costs to educate our kids, we can point to this.”

The extra funding, both she and White argue, needs to come from the state, not local taxpayers.