After 15 years as an employee of the Clark County School District, Gayane Gulyan received news this month that she had never expected: Filling a funding void to educate the district's poorest students would cost her a portion of her salary.
The 72-year-old instructional assistant at Spring Valley High School will see her salary decrease by more than 18 percent, from approximately $17.72 an hour to $14.50 starting this fall. As an hourly wage employee, Gulyan already struggles to find short-term employment during the summer months when she is not in the classroom. Now, the stakes are even higher.
Gulyan’s anticipated salary demotion is one effect of the proposed changes in federal Title I funding allocations in Clark County schools, which Superintendent Jesus Jara announced in early February. For at least four years, the district distributed these federal monies, which aim to close achievement gaps for low-income students, to schools where at least 40 percent of students were eligible for free or reduced lunch. Last year, 279 schools received a combined $64 million in Title I funds, with the most funds going to schools with the highest percentage of low-income students.
But starting in the 2019-2020 school year, the district’s Title I funds will only go toward schools where at least 60 percent of students are eligible for free or reduced lunch. That will force 55 schools with a free and reduced lunch rate between 40 and 60 percent to cut services, employees or, in Gulyan’s case, salaries.
“It’s too much. I understand that they want to save money, but for us nine-month working people ... they want to kill us,” Gulyan said.
The funding allocation changes aim to offer additional support to schools with the most low-income students, said Mike Barton, the CCSD’s chief college, career and equity officer.
“We know that at schools that have higher free and reduced lunch rates, there are more complexities, more challenges,” Barton said. "This was a decision made that was based on supporting our students and schools who are the highest need.”
The announcement has divided parents, teachers and administrators, many of whom acknowledge the demand for more services and staff at the district’s highest-need schools but worry about the impact of funding cuts for schools where close to — or more than — half of students are low-income.
Even employees at schools that stand to gain from the changes, such as Eldorado High School Principal Dave Wilson, are unsure if it is the best use of limited funds. With over 70 percent of students eligible for free or reduced lunch, Eldorado will receive close to $100,000 more in Title I funds next year, which Wilson says will go toward hiring a new teacher.
“It’s good and bad,” Wilson said. “It really impacted a lot of schools.”
Vicki Kriedel, a second-grade teacher at Fredric Watson Elementary, said that while her school will receive an extra $71,745 in Title I money through the changes, she worries about the impacts for schools losing funds.
“What it seems to be breeding is resentment, that pits schools against other schools, teachers against other teachers, when I think now is a time for collaboration,” Kriedel said.
Nevada consistently ranks among the worst states for public education, has some of the largest class sizes in the nation and falls in the bottom 20 percent of states when it comes to spending per pupil. It also relies on a funding formula that allocates money per pupil, without taking into consideration high-needs populations such as English language learners or students with special needs, which critics say is outdated.
But the district hopes that things could change by the end of the legislative session in June, and that the 55 schools bracing for Title I funding cuts will receive additional funds from the state to make up the difference. Democratic lawmakers, who control the House, Senate and executive branch for the first time since 1992, have pledged to prioritize improving public education, including transitioning to a “weighted” funding formula that would consider schools’ high-needs populations in its funding criteria.
John Vellardita, executive director of the Clark County Education Association, said that the new Title I funding model is the best use of these funds, which should be reserved for schools facing the biggest challenges. He is optimistic that CCSD will secure more funding from the state for all schools, including those with the most high-needs students and comparably middle-of-the-road schools that are losing Title I designation.
“Is there some downsides [for] the buildings that are losing the funding? Obviously,” Vellardita said. “But that’s what happens when you’re dealing with an underfunded system.”
Nonetheless, others remain skeptical that cutting off funds for schools without a guarantee of additional state funds is best for the district. CCSD School Board Trustee Danielle Ford has been one of the most vocal critics of the Title I changes, which she said came as a surprise to board members.
“The part that I didn’t like with this whole ordeal was how quickly it happened, how none of the board was notified about it and how we hadn’t and still haven’t heard any type of reasoning for it other than that schools with greater need, need more money,” Ford said. “We haven’t heard any type of data that suggested this was the correct percentage to go to at this time.”
Ford’s daughter attends Sierra Vista High School, which will lose approximately $300,000 in Title I funds next year, while her son attends Kenny Guinn Middle School, which will gain almost $50,000 in Title I funds. Although Kenny Guinn has a higher poverty rate, Ford said that because the school already gets more Title I funding, it has resources not available at Sierra Vista, such as iPads for every student.
“I see firsthand the resources my daughter doesn’t have at her school,” Ford said.
Class sizes at Sierra Vista are already in the 40s, said Principal John Anzalone, and the loss of Title I funds could have put class sizes into the 50s. Anzalone plans to take money from the school’s general funds to keep class sizes stable, although this will lead to cuts elsewhere in the budget.
“We’re going to have to be very careful on supplies, and any type of upgrades to the facilities this year. There will be a lot of tightening up in other areas,” Anzalone said.
Spring Valley, meanwhile, will lose $275,310 in Title I funds next year, which Principal Tam Larnerd said will surely lead to larger class sizes. Approximately 20 instructional assistants, like Gulyan, will be forced to choose between moving to a higher-needs school or accepting a pay cut.
Since the district announced the Title I changes, 11 schools with a free and reduced lunch rate between 57 and 59 percent have appealed their proposed federal funding losses, Barton said. The district has not yet determined whether to grant those appeals.
In addition, in response to concerns raised by principals about the changes, Barton announced Monday that CCSD will attempt to assist some of the affected schools, according to an email obtained by the Sun. No details regarding specific schools nor dollar amounts were provided.
“In an attempt to assist schools during this transition time with Title I funding, eligible schools will be notified of additional funds to assist with the transition,” Barton wrote in the email. “More information will be provided very soon, and all of your efforts are always greatly appreciated.”
In the meantime, Vellardita hopes that CCSD staff, as well as lawmakers, understand that the new Title I funding model is not a solution to CCSD’s funding problems.
“That’s part of the narrative that we’re sharing in Carson City during this legislative session when we advocate for additional dollars: that it’s decisions like this that we should not have to make,” he said.